Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 82
  1. #46
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,075
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    There is usually between 0 and a dozen onlookers to a GM game.
    This is true for a normal tournament where there is very limited to no room for viewing. Also take into account how many ppl are in the tournament to start. Then combine that with how many are still playing and it doesnt leave many to watch a gm game.

    The Australian championship/open is very different as ppl can watch the top 5 boards at least in the comfort of their own homes. Also combined with this is that there is usually been some area set aside for at least one monitor so that the dgt board games can be viewed in the tournament hall.


    On average it is about 4 of the usual suspects. The vast majority don't give a stuff.
    answered above I believe.

    Not quite right. Without big prizes there would not be a top end. I am saying that that prize monoey should ONLY come from sponsorships, not by milking the ordinary players.
    The prize money is coming from both ordinary players and sponsorships. When the prize funds were first allocated, there was no clue as to how much sponsorship money would be attained.

    I am not going to defend or criticise how the prize pools have been allocated as I wasnt the one who was potentially having to pay out of my own pocket to finance the events if they ran at a large loss.

    This is no longer just a discussion about the minor and the fields and therefore should be moved to a different/new thread.

  2. #47
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    I am saying that that prize monoey should ONLY come from sponsorships, not by milking the ordinary players.
    And if sponsorship money cannot be secured, you gut Australia's premier event? Nice one.

  3. #48
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthasar
    pax
    CC Grandmaster


    Join Date: June 2004

    Mate, that's only since Chesschat. I've been reading and posting on the various incarnations of this board since long before I moved back to Australia at the end of 2003.

  4. #49
    CC Grandmaster Alan Shore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Crane, Poole & Schmidt
    Posts
    3,871
    Quote Originally Posted by pax
    Mate, that's only since Chesschat. I've been reading and posting on the various incarnations of this board since long before I moved back to Australia at the end of 2003.
    Did you ever read this BB?

    http://www.chessnetwork.com/ncn/bb/oldbb4/00000002.htm

    I found a post where Matt applied to be a Mod, hehe.
    "I can't go back to yesterday because I was a different person then."
    - White Queen, Alice through the Looking-Glass

  5. #50
    Account Permanently Banned PHAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    4,254
    Quote Originally Posted by pax
    And if sponsorship money cannot be secured, you gut Australia's premier event? Nice one.

    If an organiser cannot get sponsorship for the Australia's premier event, they should not have been granted the bid. If that organiser stuffs up, then the it is they who have done the gutting. It would be them who has to wear the social aprobriation for having done so.

    Your insistance that the majority be milked is only so organisers can get away with being slack lazy incompetents. If Australian chess is to go ahead, it needs its main organisers to actually do more than organise the tournament per se. They need to get media attention and hence sponsorship.

    Your status quo attitude is a receipy for virtual extinction.

  6. #51
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,075
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    If an organiser cannot get sponsorship for the Australia's premier event, they should not have been granted the bid. If that organiser stuffs up, then the it is they who have done the gutting. It would be them who has to wear the social aprobriation for having done so.

    Your insistance that the majority be milked is only so organisers can get away with being slack lazy incompetents. If Australian chess is to go ahead, it needs its main organisers to actually do more than organise the tournament per se. They need to get media attention and hence sponsorship.

    Your status quo attitude is a receipy for virtual extinction.
    nice attitude, not while the status quo attitude sucks, this is no better. This is what the organisers get in the majority, criticism for putting up their hand by parties unhappy with how things are being done and not hearing enough praise.

    Is it any wonder that there is no bid for 2007 australian open. There is no national direction at all and the acf buck passes hoping that someone else will do it and someone else is to blame.

    Also why would an organiser want to put up there hand when all it causes is heartache and getting pissed off. An organiser decides that they will make some money out of donating their time, then get punished for that. An organiser does it for the hell of it and because they want to and they get criticised for that.

    Rarely do you hear public support for an organiser and everyone wonders why the two big australian tournaments struggle for organisers

    You offer nothing but criticism Matt.
    Last edited by Garvinator; 24-12-2005 at 06:01 PM.

  7. #52
    Account Permanently Banned PHAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    4,254
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    nice attitude, not while the status quo attitude sucks, this is no better.
    Yes it is.
    There is no national direction at all and the acf buck passes hoping that someone else will do it and someone else is to blame.
    Agreed

    Also why would an organiser want to put up there hand when all it causes is heartache and getting pissed off.
    Because we organisers think it is right and proper thing to do - to help out our chess community.
    An organiser decides that they will make some money out of donating their time, then get punished for that.
    While ever Australian chess remains an amatuer sport run but voluteers like us, profitting should be eschewed.
    An organiser does it for the hell of it and because they want to and they get criticised for that.
    Nope, I do not agree that that is what happens.
    Rarely do you hear public support for an organiser
    True
    and everyone wonders why the two big australian tournaments struggle for organisers
    Name just three people who do this wondering. You won't find them. the whole universe knows it is because the ACF is a toilet floater

    You offer nothing but criticism Matt.
    Cut it out. I also give plenty of suggestions that are net labour nuetral or plain uncommon sence. Stop behaving like a prima donna. If you put your hand up to do something or say something be aware that you will always cop more abuse than praise - it is normal and natural. I wear it, so you wear it too.

  8. #53
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,075
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    While ever Australian chess remains an amatuer sport run but voluteers like us, profitting should be eschewed.
    Chess will always remain a volunteer amateur sport while almost everyone has to do everything for nothing. This means it will always be a second priority.
    People should be paid for their time when this is possible.

    Stop behaving like a prima donna.
    Add it to the list of names I have been called. It is a long list, so you better had use small font to remain on one page

    If you put your hand up to do something or say something be aware that you will always cop more abuse than praise - it is normal and natural. I wear it, so you wear it too.
    and it is the reason why I am giving a lot of things in ACF chess a big miss.

  9. #54
    CC Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9

    Australian Minor Prize fund

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    I am saying that that prize money should ONLY come from sponsorships, not by milking the ordinary players.
    what do you mean, milking the ordinary players? its the players' choice to play in the tournament, and so they should be winning the money from the tournament.

    It's the organisers' jobs to use that money in the prize fund and also recieve some profit. Thats what jobs are about, balance.

    For what reason can we guarantee that sponsors will sponsor the tournament? It makes more sense for the players to contribute to the prize fund than a separate source. It doesn't do the sponsor any good for it to contirbute to something that has nothing to do with itself.

    So I think that the advertised guaranteed prizes should come only from the entry fees, but if the organiser can find sponsors than he may increase the prize fund if he wishes.
    The Ruy Lopez and the Sicillian Defence rule!!

  10. #55
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,075
    Quote Originally Posted by RuyLopez
    It's the organisers' jobs to use that money in the prize fund and also recieve some profit. Thats what jobs are about, balance.

    So I think that the advertised guaranteed prizes should come only from the entry fees, but if the organiser can find sponsors than he may increase the prize fund if he wishes.
    oh dear, are you going to cop it or what from sweeney. You mentioned naughty words ie profit from a chess tournament

    One of the difficulties of running the australian open/champs is that sponsorship levels are very uncertain when the organisers start out, therefore they dont have much of an idea what to budget for and how many prizes to award and to what level.

    Factor into this that you have appearance money for some players and other deals and it starts to become very much a guessing game.

  11. #56
    Account Permanently Banned PHAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    4,254
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Add it to the list of names I have been called. It is a long list, so you better had use small font to remain on one page
    GREy , MATe I am so sorr ythat ypou thing i'm calling you names . I am not reelydoing that. I know your are tryin g reely hard and doing what you can. Thanks from alloff us who understsnd. :-=) i con cider you one of the goog gyus.

  12. #57
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,075
    sweeney is posting drunk again

  13. #58
    Account Permanently Banned PHAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    4,254
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    sweeney is posting drunk again
    And that means exactly what? You get the trutyh? or you ignore it >?.

  14. #59
    CC International Master ElevatorEscapee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Although my September rating will enable me to easily qualify for the u1800 event if I was to play I think I'd prefer the Major as it has a longer time control and only one game per day. ...
    A friend of mine has chosen to play in the Minor because of the same reason! (ie the two games per day)!

    By being held over only one week rather than two, competing in the Minor means less of a commitment of time and energy to the event (and therefore less time away from home, lesser accommodation costs, etc). This may be an attraction to those players who could not commit to the entire two weeks for the Major.

    It will be interesting to see the size of the fields for both the Major and Minor this year.
    "On my chess set, all the pawns are Hamburglers" ~ Homer Simpson.

  15. #60
    CC International Master four four two's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    DeltaQuadrant4...
    Posts
    1,771

    Exclamation Look what others do...

    Ruy Lopez,do you understand how most tournaments ,like the australian championship/open, are organised overseas?

    The first thing the organisers do is GET the sponsorship organised,THEN work out how much prize money is to be allocated after all the organising costs.
    They dont rely on getting x amount of entries in the supporting tournament to guarantee the prizes for the championship.

    Lets look at this years British championship and the major section.

    The entry fee for this years British major section was 80 pounds,the prizes were as follows...1st 1,000pounds, 2nd 500 pounds, 3rd 250 pounds ,4th 150 pounds, and 5th 100 pounds. The main difference between the structure of their prizes and ours is that they have no rating groups,the prize money is a little higher for the british players.

    Now the entry fee for the British championship is twice the amount of Australia's championship[165 pounds],but the prize money[22,000 pounds] is over 5 times the amount. This is ONLY possible because of well organised sponsorship,the entries for the british major section could never hope to provide such a prize fund.

    I dont expect the Australian championship to get that level of sponsorship anytime soon,it takes quite a few years to build that kind of relationship with potential sponsors. I also dont have a problem with an organiser taking a REASONABLE fee for organising an annual national event.

    But the point here is ,that the british organisers are enhusiastic amatuer organisers not unlike people in australia,they are not full time professional chess organisers/business people. They do however realise that it takes MONTHS OF PLANNING to get good and reliable sponsorship.

    Potential organisers of Australian championships/opens should be giving themselves at least 6 months preparation time in order to get a good and reliable sponsorship deal,only then should they present their proposal to the ACF. It seems crazy to me that a tournament should be awarded to any organiser without the sponsorship deal already GUARANTEED,half baked promises which dont occur shouldnt be enough to award someone an annual tournament.

    And relying on high entry fees from the "middle" players to provide the prize fund for the top group because you dont have a well organised sponsorship deal is in my opinion counter productive. Surely all organisers should be trying to INCREASE the participation rate in their tournaments. While the entry fee is not the the biggest concern for potential entrants,to say it is of no concern would be misleading at best.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2006 Queenstown Chess Classic
    By Brian_Jones in forum New Zealand Chess
    Replies: 349
    Last Post: 28-05-2006, 11:25 AM
  2. Australian & Junior Championships 2006
    By WhiteElephant in forum Australian Chess Championships 2006
    Replies: 210
    Last Post: 11-01-2006, 04:58 AM
  3. 2006 Australian Chess Grand Prix
    By Brian_Jones in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-08-2005, 12:16 PM
  4. Mt Buller Australian Minor Chess Championships
    By cincinnatus in forum Mt Buller Chess
    Replies: 202
    Last Post: 24-01-2005, 02:44 PM
  5. Australian chess wheel reinvented again!
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 20-02-2004, 04:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •