PDA

View Full Version : Mt Buller Australian Minor Chess Championships



cincinnatus
04-09-2004, 11:04 PM
I wouldn't normally consider yet another poorly thought out ggraygray comment enough to inspire a new thread, but most of the Mt. Buller threads seem to have been locked in the last few days (ostensibly because they were getting too long).

Australian Chess/Mt. Buller Chess/ Mt. Buller - ACF announcement #125

Why has the Mt. Buller Organising Committee failed to observe Clause 35 of the By-laws for ACF Tournaments concerning entry fee concessions.

"35. A concession entry fee is to be offered in all ACF events. The minimum concession shall be a reduction of 25per cent of the full entry fee. Persons eligible for a concession entry fee are juniors, full-time students and holders of a Commonwealth Government healthcare card. "

Australian Chess Federation Newsletter No.280 (1 Sept. 2004):

"The Mt Buller Australian Minor Chess Championships
...
Prices: $60 adult (by December 1). $80 adult (after december 1 and before december 15).
Concession and junior entry fee: $50 early, $70 late.
Entries close: December 15.
Contact: Garvin Gray, ph 0422993062
garvingray@mtbullerchess.com"

Australian Chess/Mt. Buller Chess/ Mt. Buller - ACF announcement #126

the minor tournament is not an official acf event. We dont have to run it, there are no by laws about it or how it is to be run, so we are free to set our conditions for it.

I now expect this sort of facile, after-the-fact justification from the Mt. Buller team to justify their planning failures.

Anyway ... if "The Mt Buller Australian Minor Chess Championships" is not actually an ACF event, it shouldn't carry the "Australian" moniker.

Garvinator
04-09-2004, 11:25 PM
Anyway ... if "The Mt Buller Australian Minor Chess Championships" is not actually an ACF event, it shouldn't carry the "Australian" moniker.

I posted the following quote in the no- reply announcement thread:



The Mt Buller Minor Tournament

Dates: Sunday 2nd January- Wednesday 5th January 2005

Details: 8 round Swiss draw, 2 round per day, 90 minutes + 30 seconds

Prizes: 1st-3rd place + rating prizes. Top prize is $500!

Prices: $60 adult (early bird fees). $80 adult (late). Concession and junior entry fee: $50 early, $70 late.

Contact: Garvin Gray, ph 0422993062 garvingray@mtbullerchess.com

you see that it does not contain any mention of the word Australian in the heading. The edit i made on 24/8 was to add my mtbuller email addy.

I then copied the above advertising to Paul B to add to the bulletins. I dont know how the word Australian got into the title as i did not put it there. I have since emailed Paul and asked him to withdraw the word Australia from the minor heading.


I now expect this sort of facile, after-the-fact justification from the Mt. Buller team to justify their planning failures.

A few questions for you since you seem so able to ask questions, lets see if you can answer them, i doubt you can:hand:

1) Planning failures, please inform me, in your opinion, how we have made planning failures?
2) Who are you? Surely this is an easy enough question for you to answer. You claimed stuff about mcc/cv/acf previously.
3) Why would anyone want to try and organise events when they have to deal with other people trying to scuttle the organised events


A piece of advice for you mr who ever you are: I take it you are from victoria, probably aligned in some way with cordover. Therefore, i would be very careful about the accusations and dispersions you make about planning failures. Because it will come back to bite you on the backside very hard and painfully.

Question Numbers 4 to 6 for you: Why dont you ask your questions in George Howard's direction? whats wrong, havent got the guts to do it? Afraid you might not get the answer that suits your agenda? Here is his email address: georgeshoward@hotmail.com. Go annoy him instead of me:hand:

Question Number 7:
Where was that detailed description you were going to give of the previous problems with cv/mcc/acf? Not that it really matters cause this bid has nothing to do with cv organisational wise. But since you were so keen to throw that situation at me, you might as well answer my question now.

If you fail to answer all my questions, then you will start getting the same response that amiel gets to his questions: email George Howard at georgeshoward@hotmail.com

Bill Gletsos
05-09-2004, 12:42 AM
It should also be noted that the word Australian does not appear in the title of the Mt Buller Minor in the advert in Brian's Sept/October issue of Australian Chess.

Garvinator
05-09-2004, 12:57 AM
also cinny has used the word australian in his thread title :P

ursogr8
05-09-2004, 08:56 AM
A few questions for you since you seem so able to ask questions, lets see if you can answer them, i doubt you can:hand:


2) Who are you? Surely this is an easy enough question for you to answer. You claimed stuff about mcc/cv/acf previously.
The identity of Cin. has taxed a few of us. But clearly his main beef so far has been the mcc/cv/acf dispute re one particular tournament, run by the MCC. I believe one party in this dispute really feels dudded and hence Cin.'s focus on accuracy of contracts. He seems to have picked up an inconsistency in the description of the Minor tournament; I think it was a legitimate issue for him to raise. (Particularly so given the Welshmen's treatment of the GURU for using the 'Australian' tag.)

So, you tell us, the resolution was just an error in 'communications'. That was the GURU's claim also.




A piece of advice for you mr who ever you are: I take it you are from victoria, probably aligned in some way with cordover.

I don't know Cin.'s identity but have been guessing. I would not place my money on any connection with Cordover. I think you are wrong.


Therefore, i would be very careful about the accusations and dispersions you make about planning failures. Because it will come back to bite you on the backside very hard and painfully.
And I think you will proved wrong on this too.


Question Numbers 4 to 6 for you: Why dont you ask your questions in George Howard's direction? Here is his email address: georgeshoward@hotmail.com.

Requesting us to ask questions by private e-mail is just a tactic to stifle debate gg''.



Go annoy him instead of me:hand:

But you are the publicised contact. :confused:




If you fail to answer all my questions, then you will start getting the same response that amiel gets to his questions: email George Howard at georgeshoward@hotmail.com

Harsh treatment for a poster who picked up an error in the printed copy of your advertising and helped you by bringing it to your attention early.

starter

arosar
05-09-2004, 01:14 PM
There is clearly a concerted effort to hide everything under the table that is related to this fiasco. Where is Mr Howard? Why does he not come out of hiding instead of relying on his whipping boy?

AR

Garvinator
05-09-2004, 03:59 PM
There is clearly a concerted effort to hide everything under the table that is related to this fiasco. Where is Mr Howard? Why does he not come out of hiding instead of relying on his whipping boy?

AR
cause he has had a gutful of your trash and trolling and doesnt either bother reading here anymore. And i dont blame him. We all have better things to do with our time than reply to your trash amiel. If you think i am not being civilised to you anymore, you are right :hand:

Bill Gletsos
05-09-2004, 06:43 PM
He seems to have picked up an inconsistency in the description of the Minor tournament; I think it was a legitimate issue for him to raise. (Particularly so given the Welshmen's treatment of the GURU for using the 'Australian' tag.)
For your information the issue with Guru using the Australian tag for the minor was because the Victorian contingent (jammo and G.W.) on the ACF back oin 2002 had raised the exact same issue with Brian Jones use of the word in his running of the Minor at Penrith. Thats why it was changed and called the Penrith Minor.

AES
05-09-2004, 07:50 PM
Hi all,

I would like to officially apologise for the word Australian getting into the title of the tournament. I take full responsiblity for this as i wrote the advertisement for the bulletin and emailed it to Paul B.

It certainly wasn't intentional, and i will ensure it does not get into any future advertisements.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Cheers,
Alex Saint.

PHAT
05-09-2004, 10:25 PM
Hi all,

I would like to officially apologise for the word Australian getting into the title of the tournament. I take full responsiblity for this as i wrote the advertisement for the bulletin and emailed it to Paul B.

It certainly wasn't intentional, and i will ensure it does not get into any future advertisements.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Cheers,
Alex Saint.

Hey, no probs! I think a few more people around here could take a leaf out of your book. Simple human mistake->Simple acknowledgement of it->Simply move on.

Kevin Bonham
06-09-2004, 05:29 AM
cause he has had a gutful of your trash and trolling and doesnt either bother reading here anymore.

My impression was that it was the trolling and trash from the Victorian hotheads that drove George away, rather than AR being the culprit. Though I suspect it would not have made much difference. AR is far more skilled at the game than the lot of them put together.


I wouldn't normally consider yet another poorly thought out ggraygray comment enough to inspire a new thread, but most of the Mt. Buller threads seem to have been locked in the last few days (ostensibly because they were getting too long).

No "ostensibly" about it. I had actually been considering locking the big one myself for the same reason, but hadn't got around to it. Splitting a thread with over 600 posts on it, for instance, is an incredibly tedious business.


He seems to have picked up an inconsistency in the description of the Minor tournament; I think it was a legitimate issue for him to raise.

I agree. I would like to congratulate cincinnatus on actually raising a legitimate issue on this board, a giant step in his posting career. There really is a first time for everything. :clap: :clap: :clap: :lol:


Hey, no probs! I think a few more people around here could take a leaf out of your book. Simple human mistake->Simple acknowledgement of it->Simply move on.

Well said.

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 07:58 AM
My impression was that it was the trolling and trash from the Victorian hotheads that drove George away, rather than AR being the culprit. Though I suspect it would not have made much difference. AR is far more skilled at the game than the lot of them put together.


Oi KB,

You can't just leave it at 'from the Victorian hotheads '.
Am I in that?
And since it is plural...who?

starter

jeffrei
06-09-2004, 08:56 AM
Surely not me, cause George kept posting here long after I was placated. I was happy with the fact that he gave a personal financial guarantee and that he set aside a considerable sum of money from the tournament for the juniors, instead of merely running it as a slush fund for the Open (could someone remind me exactly how much it was? $9000?).

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 09:19 AM
For your information the issue with Guru using the Australian tag for the minor was because the Victorian contingent (jammo and G.W.) on the ACF back in 2002 had raised the exact same issue with Brian Jones use of the word in his running of the Minor at Penrith. Thats why it was changed and called the Penrith Minor.

hi Bill

This was news to me that jammo and GW had an issue with the naming of the Minor (in Penrith).
I had not noticed if the GURU used the AUS tag when he advertised his now aborted Mt B. Minor. Did he?

starter

Ian Rout
06-09-2004, 10:12 AM
Well I've said it before and I'll say it again - there is going to be a problem with stupid anonymous trolls and Victorian hotheads when the only requirement to post on this board is to register a user name. If people were required to disclose their names, and IP addreses were identified on messages, the problem would be considerably reduced.

People may complain about AR's performance but he is doing it openly and taking responsibility, and he can be called to account - for instance when his club is organising a major event and wants support, or at least not sabotage, from other people. People who are able to post under pseudonyms with little prospect of having their identities (and motivations and vested interests) uncovered have no incentive to behave in a constructive and mature manner.

While this is not an official ACF bulletin board, it has some connections in that ACF officers post announcements here (often before or instead of on the ACF website) and a number of current and past moderators have had official ACF duties. I can see it being a problem getting volunteers to run events like the Australian Open in future if they have to put up with endless anonymous grizzling and abuse on what is a least a quasi-ACF bulletin board.

Of course it's true that the really smart trolls will find a way to get around any system, but at least some rudimentary controls would screen out a lot of the nonsense. And having smart trolls on here would be a considerable advance.

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 10:29 AM
Well I've said it before and I'll say it again - there is going to be a problem with stupid anonymous trolls and Victorian hotheads when the only requirement to post on this board is to register a user name. If people were required to disclose their names, and IP addreses were identified on messages, the problem would be considerably reduced.

People may complain about AR's performance but he is doing it openly and taking responsibility, and he can be called to account - for instance when his club is organising a major event and wants support, or at least not sabotage, from other people. People who are able to post under pseudonyms with little prospect of having their identities (and motivations and vested interests) uncovered have no incentive to behave in a constructive and mature manner.

While this is not an official ACF bulletin board, it has some connections in that ACF officers post announcements here (often before or instead of on the ACF website) and a number of current and past moderators have had official ACF duties. I can see it being a problem getting volunteers to run events like the Australian Open in future if they have to put up with endless anonymous grizzling and abuse on what is a least a quasi-ACF bulletin board.

Of course it's true that the really smart trolls will find a way to get around any system, but at least some rudimentary controls would screen out a lot of the nonsense. And having smart trolls on here would be a considerable advance.

Ian

I had not actually seen this point of view (re discipline is related to non-anon.) on the BB previously. I am inclined to agree with your post.

It is a pity you picked-up and re-used the disparaging term 'Victorian hotheads', without saying which posters.

I can assure you there are a number of Victorian players and parents who are disappointed that 'their turn' at hosting the event has turned out to involve unexpected travel-and-holiday costs running into the 000's of dollars. These people may also be hotheaded; but most don't post here.

starter

Ian Rout
06-09-2004, 10:41 AM
My concern isn't people expressing contrary or even hotheaded views but doing so in an unaccountable manner, which doesn't apply to you (starter being a nickname rather than a pseudonym, which is not difficult to trace).

For the record, I would be much more likely to go if the event was in Melbourne.

arosar
06-09-2004, 10:41 AM
I can assure you there are a number of Victorian players and parents who are disappointed that 'their turn' at hosting the event has turned out to involve unexpected travel-and-holiday costs running into the 000's of dollars.

This must surely be a slap in the face for our Mexican friends. A monumental insult. Tell us starter mate, what's the feeling in Mexico: half-hearted or they just won't go?

You going?

AR

jenni
06-09-2004, 10:44 AM
Surely not me, cause George kept posting here long after I was placated. I was happy with the fact that he gave a personal financial guarantee and that he set aside a considerable sum of money from the tournament for the juniors, instead of merely running it as a slush fund for the Open (could someone remind me exactly how much it was? $9000?).

The Development fund is $4,000. However the Juniors did get a better deal under MB3, as entry fees were reduced and the compulsion to stay at the Mercure was removed, while still keeping the prize fund the same (not that the prize fund is an enomous issue for the kids).

I know there has developed some personal animosity between AR and GG, but I am not quite sure why AR (and others) keeps attacking the organisers. It is not the fault of the current organisers that MB2 collapsed. George stepped in and rescued a very large amount of sponsorship money - something in pretty short supply in Australian chess.

There is a shortage of details at the moment, but the entry forms will be at the clubs very soon and Jeo should have the website up soon. George and his people seem to have achieved more in the 2 months since they took it over, than Cordover did in the 6 months he had it.

Obviously there are disenchanted factions - I have enormous sympathy with the Melbourne parents who have not had a home juniors for as long as I have been involved in chess. However it is really not the fault of the current organisers.

I have to admit reading some of the posts, I am reminded of my kids - when they behave like this I have a tendency to tell them to go to their rooms and come back when they can talk to each other in a mature way and with courtesy.

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 11:03 AM
This must surely be a slap in the face for our Mexican friends. A monumental insult. Tell us starter mate, what's the feeling in Mexico: half-hearted or they just won't go?

You going?

AR

AR
You are on my black-list you contrarian you.

I am not going to extrapolate beyond my previous post where I said that some have expressed disappointment at cost and travel for a 'home final'.

My guess is that most Vics would approach the decision in same frame of mind as if the event was at Quakers Hill. :uhoh:


And, am I going? No. But then I rarely play in January Championships,so don't read any crit. of Mt B. into this.

starter

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 11:06 AM
I have to admit reading some of the posts, I am reminded of my kids - when they behave like this I have a tendency to tell them to go to their rooms and come back when they can talk to each other in a mature way and with courtesy.

And my guess is that Matt will ask for a name names so that not all are tarred by this brush.

AES
06-09-2004, 11:08 AM
Hey, no probs! I think a few more people around here could take a leaf out of your book. Simple human mistake->Simple acknowledgement of it->Simply move on.

Yeah i just wanted to make sure it was clear who was at fault here as some of you may have been trying to tease out. It appeared as if Garvin was starting to be blamed for this, which was unfair.

I will be more careful in future :)

arosar
06-09-2004, 11:09 AM
I know there has developed some personal animosity between AR and GG . . .

S'cuse me! I'm gonna start calling you a Drama Queen from now on.

I feel no animus. I know exactly what I'm doing and it ain't personal. How me mate GG takes it is his problem.

In fact, I've been quite charitable towards him where I saw he deserved it.

AR

AES
06-09-2004, 11:15 AM
Arosar,

This quote from you in the other thread:

Still, I don't blame me mate gray. He clearly didn't know. I feel quite sorry for the bloke - very much a lamb to the slaughter.

This is very wrong. He knew everything about the Lidums sponsorship. He was just sworn to secrecy like the rest of us. You didn't hear me saying anything to you either! :)

It may not be personal arosar, but make sure you get your facts right. :owned:

arosar
06-09-2004, 11:18 AM
. . . some have expressed disappointment . . .

We all sympathise with your people. The way I see it, it's a double whammy ain't? Not only is there no home final, the organisers are all gringos - a NSWelshman, a toad, South Australians, and someone who seems to be an eternal ring-in. What message is that saying to our Mexicans brothers and sisters?

AR

arosar
06-09-2004, 11:27 AM
He was just sworn to secrecy like the rest of us.

Or, more correctly, gagged.

Pity gray.

AR

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 11:40 AM
We all sympathise with your people. The way I see it, it's a double whammy ain't? Not only is there no home final, the organisers are all gringos - a NSWelshman, a toad, South Australians, and someone who seems to be an eternal ring-in. What message is that saying to our Mexicans brothers and sisters?

AR
No AR, it is not a double whammy.
Not one Mexican (I have spoken to) is put out by the organising committee being composed as it is.
Just the single whammy, mate. No 'home final'.
starter

arosar
06-09-2004, 11:45 AM
Not one Mexican (I have spoken to) is put out by the organising committee being composed as it is.

Well, d'uh! That's cos you're not making the right subliminal messages.

AR

Bill Gletsos
06-09-2004, 12:11 PM
hi Bill

This was news to me that jammo and GW had an issue with the naming of the Minor (in Penrith).
I had not noticed if the GURU used the AUS tag when he advertised his now aborted Mt B. Minor. Did he?

starter
He advertised it as such in Brians magazine on page 44 of the May/June issue.

jenni
06-09-2004, 12:11 PM
and someone who seems to be an eternal ring-in. AR

??????

jenni
06-09-2004, 12:28 PM
I feel no animus. I know exactly what I'm doing and it ain't personal. How me mate GG takes it is his problem.

In fact, I've been quite charitable towards him where I saw he deserved it.

AR

You seem to be at him all the time - criticise ideas and outcomes rather than people!

Garvinator
06-09-2004, 12:48 PM
We all sympathise with your people. The way I see it, it's a double whammy ain't? Not only is there no home final, the organisers are all gringos - a NSWelshman, a toad, South Australians, and someone who seems to be an eternal ring-in. What message is that saying to our Mexicans brothers and sisters?

AR
it says that cv had their chance with mb2 and blew it.

arosar
06-09-2004, 12:52 PM
it says that cv had their chance with mb2 and blew it.

So, CV, which is the clubs, which is the loyal chess fans, are incompetent?

They "blew it"! That's what you're saying. What arrogance!

AR

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 01:08 PM
So, CV, which is the clubs, which is the loyal chess fans, are incompetent?

They "blew it"! That's what you're saying. What arrogance!

AR

AR
There is a fundamental difference at play here.
Your Welshers structure has led to a very strong coherent STATE association that appears able to run many tournaments and fill many executive tasks. I pass no comment on whether your strong State Ass'n disempowers Clubs to be equally strong; but I do note Paul S's lament about the strong NZ Club in relation to his experience.
Mexico has the opposite. A CV so weak they can't fill the Committee. Can't get the most important Club to join. Can't get half the non-affilates to join. Can't stop privateers joining and having COI.
But we have got some strong Clubs.

In the context of Mexico CV, we probably couldn't run Mt B.
So why would we feel put out when some-one else (wearing flags of convenience) has a GO? (Except as I said earlier...the loss of a 'home final').

starter

ps Do you like Quakers Hill?

arosar
06-09-2004, 01:11 PM
Do you like Quakers Hill?

FMD mate . . . I must admit, I don't even bloody know where it is!

AR

ursogr8
06-09-2004, 01:19 PM
FMD mate . . . I must admit, I don't even bloody know where it is!

AR

Well AR aka Metro-man
Get out your Gregory's (or hit one of those Internet whereis sites) and expand you view. Then you will have an idea where our 'home final' feels like to us.

starter

Oepty
06-09-2004, 01:22 PM
??????

This refers to me, I think because I seemed to say something Garvin was unprepared to say.

Anyway this is my last post on the organising of the MT Buller tournaments. The last straw was Amiel continual refering to me as though I have something to do with the organisers despite the fact Garvin and I have repeatedly denied it. I will not even be replying to replies to the message. If you really want a response private message me and I might reply.

I will leave the childish behavour of some behind and hopefully they will let the organisers continue their efforts without the continual unfair criticism.

Scott

Garvinator
06-09-2004, 01:24 PM
Then you will have an idea where our 'home final' feels like to us.

starter
clarification: even though mt buller is in victoria, it is not a home final for victoria. There is no home state for these mt buller tournaments. CV made it very clear at the acf council meeting that they were not to be regarded as the home state.

arosar
06-09-2004, 01:26 PM
This refers to me . . .

I was referring to jenni you Jesus Freak.

I shoulda added a smiley then, especially since everyone seems to be in a drama queen mood today. Must be the weather.

AR

jenni
06-09-2004, 03:58 PM
I was referring to jenni you Jesus Freak.
AR

Why "eternal ring in" - or did it just sound nice at the time? I don't think I've ever been dragged into something like this before? Or is it asking too much to have some logic behind descriptions. :)

Garvinator
06-09-2004, 04:00 PM
Why "eternal ring in" - or did it just sound nice at the time? I don't think I've ever been dragged into something like this before? Or is it asking too much to have some logic behind descriptions. :)
amiel and logic :hmm: they are mutually exclusive arent they :doh:

arosar
06-09-2004, 04:11 PM
Why "eternal ring in" - or did it just sound nice at the time?

:lol:

Hehehe . . . yes! Of course, I had in mind you being a ring-in in tourns too, etc, etc. plus this organising team.

AR

Kerry Stead
06-09-2004, 04:18 PM
Starter makes a good point about CV. His concerns about a 'home final' however seem a little odd when you look at the recent history of the Australian Juniors and location. Last time CV hosted the Australian Junior (1999 if memory serves), it was held in Morwell ... another for the whereis search - hardly the most convenient of locations for the Melbournians. So one could get the feeling that you Mexicans were accustomed to travelling to the Australian Juniors ... hence another year of travel and accomodation expense is simply par for the course.
Obviously it would be nice for those in Melbourne to play a tournament where they could sleep in their own bed, etc, however none of the current Victorian juniors would have had such an experience anyway!

As for Ian's comments about anonymity and criticism, I'd have to say that there would (I imagine) be a little less criticism of the organisers if such criticism could be pinpointed to a particular person. Yes, people like Amiel would still have their gripes (but he is rarely taken seriously anyway! ;) ), but the less-visible posters would have to put their name to their posts, which some (I imagine) wouldn't be so willing to do.

arosar
06-09-2004, 04:28 PM
. . . he is rarely taken seriously anyway!

This is just the sort of uncaring attitude we have come to expect. When I canvassed some chess players at the NSW States Ch if they were going to Mt Buller - one question I got was, "what state is that in?"

In fact, when I told a well-known chess personality about this, whose name we have seen here, his reply was, "It wouldn't surprise me."

Yesterday, a strong player encouraged me to tell another strong player about the NZ Congrees.

So let me ask you this Kerry: when are you going to take this seriously?

And how about this:


So one could get the feeling that you Mexicans were accustomed to travelling to the Australian Juniors ... hence another year of travel and accomodation expense is simply par for the course.

READ: We don't care about you lot. Get used to it. Deal with it!

My heart surely goes out to my Mexican brothers and sisters.

AR

jenni
06-09-2004, 04:30 PM
:lol:

Hehehe . . . yes! Of course, I had in mind you being a ring-in in tourns too, etc, etc. plus this organising team.

AR

Ah! I am happy - there is logic :) Yes I am often the ring in for tournaments to avoid the bye.

jeffrei
06-09-2004, 04:41 PM
I asked a question about prizes at the Australian Juniors, but then I withdrew it because I remembered reading in the newsletter that there were going to be $5,800 in prizes (total). It's all good.

But I was still wondering about this ==> are there any plans yet about what to do with that $4,000 set aside for the development fund?

jenni
06-09-2004, 05:04 PM
I asked a question about prizes at the Australian Juniors, but then I withdrew it because I remembered reading in the newsletter that there were going to be $5,800 in prizes (total). It's all good.

But I was still wondering about this ==> are there any plans yet about what to do with that $4,000 set aside for the development fund?

I don't believe it has been discussed at all, so if you have any ideas please put them forward.

I was hoping this was something the ACF Junior sub-committee would deal with. Denis Jessop has been given all the parameters for the sub-committee and he is putting together a proposal to go to the ACF. Unfortunately he has been very busy and it is not finished - I was hoping it would go up to the next ACF meeting.

Kevin Bonham
06-09-2004, 09:22 PM
You can't just leave it at 'from the Victorian hotheads '.
Am I in that?
And since it is plural...who?

It wasn't you. It wasn't jeffrei. I'm not sure I should attempt to "name" all of their aliases, it would be such a shame to forget any and leave them out. Suffice to say that all were anons.

Thunderspirit
07-09-2004, 08:03 AM
As have been commented on this site, the ACF is not obligied to run any side events at an Open or Championships, but it does serve in the event's best interest to do so.

Most players hate doing the yo-yo. Winning one and then loosing the next, and minors/majors help players out in this regard. It also gives improving players the chance to win an event against their peers. Then there are the players who are close to 1600, who wouldn't play without such an event. It's better to offer them something, than give them no chance all.

As for how much the entry fee should be, I am big believer that some subsidity should be made from lower tournaments to help find the many costs relating to the event as a whole. (The Doeberl Minor, does this well.) It's not acceptable to argue that all money collected in the minor, must be spent there, as it is because minor helps out tournament finance as a whole that these are so sucessful.


Lee Forace (Liberaci)

Forace's Legacy: Swap off when your down.

Garvinator
07-09-2004, 12:14 PM
As have been commented on this site, the ACF is not obligied to run any side events at an Open or Championships, but it does serve in the event's best interest to do so.

Most players hate doing the yo-yo. Winning one and then loosing the next, and minors/majors help players out in this regard. It also gives improving players the chance to win an event against their peers. Then there are the players who are close to 1600, who wouldn't play without such an event. It's better to offer them something, than give them no chance all.

As for how much the entry fee should be, I am big believer that some subsidity should be made from lower tournaments to help find the many costs relating to the event as a whole. (The Doeberl Minor, does this well.) It's not acceptable to argue that all money collected in the minor, must be spent there, as it is because minor helps out tournament finance as a whole that these are so sucessful.


Lee Forace (Liberaci)

Forace's Legacy: Swap off when your down.


Hello Lee,

If you want those two lines including your name to appear on every post, go to user cp then click on signature and put it in there. Then it will appear automatically in every post you make :D

Regarding your post, sounds very much like the competitiveness argument starter makes :hmm: which i agree with. There is a thread dedicated to that too. http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=229&page=1 have fun :uhoh:

doc
07-09-2004, 05:27 PM
Hi all,

I would like to officially apologise for the word Australian getting into the title of the tournament. I take full responsiblity for this as i wrote the advertisement for the bulletin and emailed it to Paul B.

It certainly wasn't intentional, and i will ensure it does not get into any future advertisements.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Cheers,
Alex Saint.

This does not cut it buddy. You and your organising team are just plain disorganised.

Why didn't you get the WHOLE committee to check it first before quickly sending it off???? Check! You will hopefully come to learn from these costly mistakes.

Kevin Bonham
07-09-2004, 07:49 PM
This does not cut it buddy.

He made a mistake, he corrected it, and no actual harm has been done. If you've never made a similar mistake in organising a chess tournament yourself it's probably because you're just another armchair whinger/troll and have never actually done it yourself. :hand:

Yet again your rubbish is not constructive.

Garvinator
07-09-2004, 08:25 PM
He made a mistake, he corrected it, and no actual harm has been done. If you've never made a similar mistake in organising a chess tournament yourself it's probably because you're just another armchair whinger/troll and have never actually done it yourself. :hand:

Yet again your rubbish is not constructive.
:hmm: wasnt doc one of the anons who you fired a salvo at :uhoh:

Paul S
07-09-2004, 11:36 PM
Hi all,

I would like to officially apologise for the word Australian getting into the title of the tournament. I take full responsiblity for this as i wrote the advertisement for the bulletin and emailed it to Paul B.

It certainly wasn't intentional, and i will ensure it does not get into any future advertisements.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Cheers,
Alex Saint.



This does not cut it buddy. You and your organising team are just plain disorganised.

Why didn't you get the WHOLE committee to check it first before quickly sending it off???? Check! You will hopefully come to learn from these costly mistakes.

This is a harsh response. What about a fair go?

What Alex has done is a MINOR mistake! I think it was good of Alex to acknowledge his mistake and he seems the sort of person who learns from his mistakes. Its all very well to criticise, but one thing I know is that "the person who has made no mistakes is the person who never did any work"!

By all means make critcisms where it is justified. However they should be in proportion to the error/mistake made.

Who are Doc and the other anonymous Victorians and what are their motives for being so nit picky towards Mt Buller?

Lets move on, everybody!!!

jenni
08-09-2004, 07:36 PM
Who are Doc and the other anonymous Victorians and what are their motives for being so nit picky towards Mt Buller?

Lets move on, everybody!!!

I am not sure I understand the spite that seems to be directed towards the whole Mt Buller thing.

Ok - we would rather be in a capital city and I would rather everyone had kept their paws off the Junior competitions.

However as far as I can see George, Kerry and the others are motivated by trying to make a succesful competition with big sponsorship.

I've spoken to Roman from the Mercure a number of times now and he is just lovely. He genuinely wants to put money into chess. Of course he wants to see people stay at his hotel, but is offering pretty good value for money. There is no obligation to stay there, so people who want cheaper accommodation can find it easily. The lodge accommodation doesn't seem any different to the Backpackers hotel in Canberra or Victor's lodge and people on a budget seem quite happy to stay there for Doeberl. He and the Mercure are not some evil bunch luring people off to Mt Buller for fiendish purposes of their own.

I just can't understand why there seems to be a desire to put the boot into the whole thing?

Next year and the year after, people who want to bid for the Juniors/Open/Championships can do so. Why not pull together for this year? It just seems so often in chess there are more people to destroy and pull down than people to create.

Kevin Bonham
09-09-2004, 07:20 PM
I just can't understand why there seems to be a desire to put the boot into the whole thing?

Most of it seems to be because a bunch of little sooks in Melbourne don't think they should have to travel for chess, even though the rest of Australia has to travel whether the event is in Melbourne or Mt B. Some of the sooks have vested interests, some apparently do not.

I omit jeffrei and starter from the above reckoning. Other Victorian posters from these threads and wishing to be considered for omission can apply in writing with a $50 deposit. :lol:

Gringo
10-09-2004, 06:21 PM
Keep this up Kevo' and you'll be like Napolon Roy - in exile on a tiny Island.

Garvinator
10-09-2004, 08:49 PM
Keep this up Kevo' and you'll be like Napolon Roy - in exile on a tiny Island.
another fantastic contribution of an anonymous poster.

bobby1972
11-09-2004, 10:11 PM
i have a very serious question is there any accomodation non share for under or close to $100 on the mountain,i ask because i know someone who works there and its 16 km on driving zigzag up/down mountain thats just up down we rung 12 places ansd they all were very much over $100 per night.

Garvinator
11-09-2004, 11:35 PM
i have a very serious question is there any accomodation non share for under or close to $100 on the mountain,i ask because i know someone who works there and its 16 km on driving zigzag up/down mountain thats just up down we rung 12 places ansd they all were very much over $100 per night.
hello and thank you for your question regarding accommodation. Just want to make it clear firstly that we organisers do NOT have an exclusivity deal with mercure, even though we recommend that ppl stay there. Also we organisers have been told that ppl wanting to make bookings are to organise the accommodation themselves, we are to not handle accommodation bookings.

Ok, now to help you bobby1972 ;) Here is a website that might be more help http://www.mtbuller.com.au/accommodation/ it lists the accommodation available on and off the mountain. Also listed is the places that are open during summer.

I suspect without further information that you received the winter or spring prices, not the prices that they might charge during summer.

I am sure that Jenni and Libby can give more information regarding accurate accommodation information as they have rung alot of the places themselves.

what i can say for certain is- unless you take your car, off mountain is NOT an option.

jenni
12-09-2004, 12:13 AM
try this one

http://www.skivictoria.com.au/accommodation/index.html


"The Whitt
Location ... just off Bourke Street, the 'Whitt' is the hub of the SCV. It offers motel style accommodation, exceptional dining options including 'The Club' restaurant & bar, and 'The Dump Inn' with its unique indoor grill restaurant. All rooms include ensuite bathrooms, a comfortable queen size bed and a tiered bunk bed, heating, tea and coffee making facilities.

Convenience … Transit Room for guests arriving before check-in and departing after check-out times so you can make the most of your time in the mountains.

Relaxation… The Governors Lounge, a cosy guest lounge with an open fire.

Kids … A games room will entertain your children"

The summer tariffs are listed as $40 per night twin share, with a single supplement payable. Still going to be a fair bit less than $100 per night.

Some lodges have 2 person with ensuite accommodation and at around $30 per night per person, even with single occupancy it won't be more than $60 per night. Try the Benmore Lodge - it is booked out by the ACTJCL for the juniors, but shouldn't have too many in for the Open.

When talking to places always make sure they know it is for summer and a week or more as you will get much cheaper rates. There is a huge difference in rates between summer and winter rates. Right at the moment I don;t think anyone is too interested in summer bookings as they are still very busy with the snow season, but give it a few more weeks and it will be starting to calm down.

Garvinator
12-09-2004, 12:16 AM
accommodation options

with how it is going for snow atm, it still might be snowing for the open ;)

jenni
12-09-2004, 12:09 PM
with how it is going for snow atm, it still might be snowing for the open ;)

Yes I know - I talked to a couple of places last week (I am still trying ot get summer rates for some apartments) and they pretty much told me to go away and not bother them for another month. They told me they were having a very good snow season.

arosar
12-09-2004, 01:45 PM
i have a very serious question is there any accomodation non share for under or close to $100 on the mountain,i ask because i know someone who works there and its 16 km on driving zigzag up/down mountain thats just up down we rung 12 places ansd they all were very much over $100 per night.

Signore Pecori . . . mate, save your money and stay in Melbourne. Or else, you could go on a real value holiday to NZ for the 112th Congress. It is a better organised event with brochures ready. Would you be interested in a brochure Signore Pecori?

AR

AES
12-09-2004, 03:58 PM
Brochures will be distributed to all clubs and associations, by next week probably.

Kevin Bonham
13-09-2004, 03:57 AM
Keep this up Kevo' and you'll be like Napolon Roy - in exile on a tiny Island.

Actually I think the exiles are those of you who failed to notice that the SS Cordover doesn't come with liferafts for the passengers. ;)

Garvinator
13-09-2004, 12:22 PM
Actually I think the exiles are those of you who failed to notice that the SS Cordover doesn't come with liferafts for the passengers. ;)
or refunds for failure to deliver ;)

Paul S
13-09-2004, 04:10 PM
or refunds for failure to deliver ;)

:hmm: I seem to remember that David only offered refunds to Mt Buller people (ie those who had already paid for Mt Buller accommodation etc) on the condition that his Glen Eira Australian Open bid was accepted and that those players were going to play in his "Guru" tournament.

Garvinator
13-09-2004, 04:45 PM
:hmm: I seem to remember that David only offered refunds to Mt Buller people (ie those who had already paid for Mt Buller accommodation etc) on the condition that his Glen Eira Australian Open bid was accepted and that those players were going to play in his "Guru" tournament.
i dont have a clue about this actually, but if its accurate, it might be because ppl who booked at mt buller under guru can still retain that booking for the current mt buller tournaments, i think. Therefore, no refund required.

I am just speculating. :doh:

Paul S
13-09-2004, 10:25 PM
i dont have a clue about this actually, but if its accurate, it might be because ppl who booked at mt buller under guru can still retain that booking for the current mt buller tournaments, i think. Therefore, no refund required.

I am just speculating. :doh:

Hi Garvin

Just for you, here is the relevant part of the post from the "Chess Guru" (David Cordover). It is the first post in the thread "Mt. Buller - Chess World letter to ACF" - refer to that post for fuller/further details.



................blah blah blah.................

As such Chess Victoria requests that the ACF accept an amendment to the current standing version of the “Authority to Conduct an Australian Chess Championship” document. Details included are as requested under By-Laws for ACF Tournaments section 19, 20 and 23.
• That the venue for the Australian Open Championships be changed to read “Glen Eira Town Hall, corner of Hawthorn and Glen Eira Rds, Caulfield.”
• That the venue for the Australian Junior Championships be changed to read “Brighton Grammar School (Junior School), Grosvenor St, Brighton.”

Both these venues are more than suitable for the purposes of the Championships with the venue for the Junior Championships having access to swimming pool, tennis courts, playgrounds, sports equipment and canteen facilities all within the school grounds.

................blah blah blah.........................

PS. Some concern has been expressed about the late change in venue and the possibility of individuals having booked accommodation or transport to Mt Buller. I request that the ACF make public the following statement:

“Due to the late notice provided in the change of venue for the Australian Open and Australian Junior Chess Championships, Chess World (at their sole discretion) will provide compensation to any person who is able to provide, in writing, evidence to the effect that a non-refundable deposit or other financial cost has been incurred by the change made at this time.”

Note that this is valid only if the ACF approves the venue change as requested in this letter.

................blah blah blah............................

Garvinator
13-09-2004, 10:50 PM
:hmm: I seem to remember that David only offered refunds to Mt Buller people (ie those who had already paid for Mt Buller accommodation etc) on the condition that his Glen Eira Australian Open bid was accepted and that those players were going to play in his "Guru" tournament.
ok, i think i should ask first, what are you actually trying to ask or what to know?

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2004, 10:51 PM
The Guru did however follow that up on the 02-07-2004 at 11:41 AM with:

Kevin and others. If what you want is unreserved compensation then I offer such, I invite anyone who has incurred costs becuase of this to apply to me for compensation. My email is compensation@chessworld.com.au

Paul S
14-09-2004, 12:05 AM
ok, i think i should ask first, what are you actually trying to ask or what to know?

I wasn't asking anything. I just thought it was relevant to mention earlier in this thread that David Cordover had offered refunds to Mt Buller people but only on the condition that his Glen Eira bid was accepted by the ACF.

However, Bill has pointed out that since David made that statement on this BB he modified his position considerably (which I was previously unaware of) - see Bill's post above.

Garvinator
14-09-2004, 12:10 AM
I wasn't asking anything. I just thought it was relevant to mention earlier in this thread that David Cordover had offered refunds to Mt Buller people but only on the condition that his Glen Eira bid was accepted by the ACF.

However, Bill has pointed out that since David made that statement on this BB he modified his position considerably (which I was previously unaware of) - see Bill's post above.
sorry, just wasnt sure how that related to the current bid :doh: hence why i answered the way i did :eek:

Trent Parker
11-10-2004, 08:11 AM
Look i have a few questions in regars to the Mt Buller Minor having picked up a brochure yesterday.....
1. Why is it that the minor is only over 4 days?
2. Is different rooms in the Restaurant being used for the 2 different tournaments that are to be held starting at 2.15 and 2.30?
3. is there to be transportation for the minor?

Garvinator
11-10-2004, 11:06 AM
1. Why is it that the minor is only over 4 days?
the minor is being held over four days to allow more ppl the opportunity to play. It was majority agreed by the organising committee that this format would allow the highest participation. What it does allow is for a person to come for the new years party, playing the rapid, then the 8 rounds of the minor, play the lightning and then leave mt buller the next day. So a nice cosy 7 days at mt buller.


2. Is different rooms in the Restaurant being used for the 2 different tournaments that are to be held starting at 2.15 and 2.30? I suspect that the tournaments will start at the same time. I will follow up on this.


3. is there to be transportation for the minor? Yes, shuttle buses from mansfield to mt buller retun just like for the other tournaments. There are shuttle buses going back and forth each day for the supermarket etc as well.

arosar
12-10-2004, 03:17 PM
Hello everyone,

A further five players have agreed to play in the Lidums Australian Open. These players include one latvian gm, one phillipines gm and three other national masters from the phillipines.

George Howard will have more information when he posts regarding names etc.

Cheers,

Garvin Gray
Mt Buller Chess Tournaments Organiser.

Great news gray! But what's the point of making this kinda announcement of you can't even name names (R)? As we all know you are the Mt Buller Chess Tournaments Organiser and Chief Contact.

Also, it's spelt "Philippines". Please capitalise names - even foreign ones OK, thanks.

AR

Garvinator
12-10-2004, 05:56 PM
Great news gray! But what's the point of making this kinda announcement of you can't even name names (R)? As we all know you are the Mt Buller Chess Tournaments Organiser and Chief Contact.

Also, it's spelt "Philippines". Please capitalise names - even foreign ones OK, thanks.

AR
Just keeping people as up to date as i can. The reason i cant give specific names is that George told me about the players and names and i couldnt write them down. Also George will give further information soon. I have to ring him tomorrow, so i should be able to get the names of everyone then.

Trent Parker
13-10-2004, 12:54 AM
Is the minor for players under a certain rating or all rating?

Garvinator
13-10-2004, 12:56 AM
Is the minor for players under a certain rating or all rating?
for players under 1600 on the september rating list.

Recherché
13-10-2004, 10:38 AM
the Mt Buller Minor

I've a few comments to add here. It seems to me as though the minor (which is in part intended to subsidise the main tournament?) is going to have a bit of trouble with entries. Since it's restricted to under 1600, I see three main categories of players:

1) Juniors - who will be busy with the Junior events, presumably. Sure, they're not run concurrently, but I'd be surprised if any parents would be willing to incur the time and cost of going to this one as well.

2) Students (including myself) - who will likely not be able to afford it. Staying at Mt Buller is forced (for five nights, it would seem). The only alternative is to drive (VLine services can't get you there on time, and can't get you home at all); and that requires leaving at 5am each day in order to make the starting time. Assuming you even have a car, which I don't. I've no idea what petrol costs might be, but I'm sure they'd be significant.

I can't see how anyone from Melbourne will be able to get away with paying less than $300 to attend, and that's concession. I don't know what the rates are at the sponsors hotel, but I'm sure it would push that figure significantly higher.

It starts to make the previously impressive prize pool look like a lot less of a drawcard, especially for anyone not close to the 1600 rating limit.

3) Semi-devoted adults - club players who don't have either the time or the inclination to work on their chess hard enough to break 1600 (I'm pretty sure nearly all chess players have the ability necessary). For some the money will be an issue, for some it won't, however I'd be surprised if there were many of them who have both the money, and the time (many will have families), and the interest levels to want to participate.

And naturally cost and time issues just increase for anyone not from Melbourne, with the exception of those living near(er) Mt Buller.

I'm not here to get involved in any of the politics about how or why this venue was chosen. And I really hope the tournaments are a success. But I can't see how you'll get much if any turnout for the Minor tournament. I'd love to enter it. It's just about the perfect tournament for me, except for the fact that it's inaccessible.

The idea seems to be that people will want to have a little "chess holiday" up there. Problem is, holidays are generally taken with friends or family, and for most people friends and family aren't going to be people also wanting to play in a chess tournament.

Note also that there doesn't appear to be any way to get home other than by car for the Lightning or Rapid Play tournaments either.

If it's a success, then all power to you, and good luck for any future plans. But if it's not, I hope you'll step back and remember that other than at the elite level, chess tournaments are almost always entirely player funded. It would seem to be common sense to stage them in places accessible to a moderate to large player base. I think you'd be lucky to find a player base of five people to whom Mt Buller could be described as accessible.

george
13-10-2004, 10:57 AM
Hi Recherche,

Yes accessibility vs sponsorship dollars was always a tradeoff.

Your comments about costs are really not quite valid except for any large participative group who might live near the venue.

Wherever the Open / Junior are held people have to come from all over Australia also they need to pay for accomodation travel etc etc.

That it is not held in a capital city please understand there are compensation by it not being in a capital city. Clean air for a start , great pristine country a few mins walk from your bed - no traffic snarls or traffic congestion when going from bed to playing venue etc etc. Im not going to go over again about the activities that are available they have been explained very well by Libby/Jenni on another Mt Buller thread.

We can debate about the tradeoffs forever but I feel its more a case of glass half full or half empty. Overseas players dont seem to have found the location any drag whatever , in fact quite the opposite.

Kindest Regards
George Howard

Recherché
13-10-2004, 11:06 AM
Your comments about costs are really not quite valid except for any large participative group who might live near the venue.

This is correct. The point I was making was that the Minor tournament, in particular, would appear to be reliant on the "large participative group who might live near the venue", namely Victorian chess players, who by virtue of population distribution, and the existence of chess clubs, mostly live in Melbourne.


Wherever the Open / Junior are held people have to come from all over Australia also they need to pay for accomodation travel etc etc.

The venue makes more sense for the Open / Junior championships. The Minor championships would seem to be depend on local (ie. mostly Melbourne) players. The Rapid and Lightning Championships will likely get a boost from the Open field, since they're on the rest days of the main tournament.

As I said in my previous post, I do hope it works out well. :)

Edit: Maybe a Minor Championship just doesn't fit within the mould of a tournament grouping like this? Though I suppose in the case of a capital city, or less distant rural center (say, Ballarat or Geelong in the case of Victoria), this might change. Unfortunately there are very few (if any) accessible areas which have such a pronounced off-season as the snowfields (and hence accompanying sponsorship opportunities), and in the holiday season, to boot.

Garvinator
13-10-2004, 01:09 PM
This is correct. The point I was making was that the Minor tournament, in particular, would appear to be reliant on the "large participative group who might live near the venue", namely Victorian chess players, who by virtue of population distribution, and the existence of chess clubs, mostly live in Melbourne.
The minor was designed to give those who want to play and have a week away a chance to play. There was considerable discussion when putting things together about whether to have the minor at all and then after deciding to have a minor, what format?

After more discussion, it was agreed to have it as the present format. The minor gives those who would not play in the Australian open a chance to come for the new years eve party, play the rapid, the eight rounds and then lightning, then go home if they wish.
I have already recieved a few phone calls from interested players for the minor.

Recherché
13-10-2004, 01:11 PM
^ Fair enough. I hope it works out. :)

Alan Shore
30-10-2004, 11:42 PM
I sas seriosuly cvopmnsidering playimng in this, but I remembered I hate chess... so there mat still be a chance but we'll see/.

Garvinator
30-10-2004, 11:44 PM
I sas seriosuly cvopmnsidering playimng in this, but I remembered I hate chess... so there mat still be a chance but we'll see/.
have another drink mr dickinson ;)

skip to my lou
30-10-2004, 11:55 PM
have another drink mr dickinson ;)
And then there might be a slight chance of convincing him to go.

Alan Shore
31-10-2004, 12:47 AM
And then there might be a slight chance of convincing him to go.

Seriously guys, I play tournbaments in the main respect to have chats/talks with mates.. so if it's economically viable, I'll play just for the social factor

P.S. Unless the GF wants to do something around that time... bitchwhipped is the word ;)

P.P.S When is tha earlybvird cutoff?

Garvinator
31-10-2004, 12:52 AM
P.P.S When is tha earlybvird cutoff?
whenever you want it to be ;) :lol: December 1 2004.

Trent Parker
02-12-2004, 12:09 PM
was the 1st of december the early entry date for the minor as well??????????

BTW i haven't found any info on the minor on the website. maybe i'm not looking hard enough.

george
02-12-2004, 05:46 PM
was the 1st of december the early entry date for the minor as well??????????

BTW i haven't found any info on the minor on the website. maybe i'm not looking hard enough.
Hello Trent,

Garvin here, my internet is not up and running here at mt buller yet. So i am replying under George's account.

You will be able to enter the minor for the early bird rate till sunday night as online entry has only been recent. If you wish to send a cheque, entries must be sent for early bird by sunday night.

Cheers,

Garvin

Bill Gletsos
02-12-2004, 05:49 PM
Garvin, whats not having your internet up and working got to do with logging into the board.

You can use Georges machine via his ISP but still login to the board using your own account.

george
02-12-2004, 06:10 PM
Garvin, whats not having your internet up and working got to do with logging into the board.

You can use Georges machine via his ISP but still login to the board using your own account.
Garvin here,
Because George and I cant work out how to log out of his account. We keep hitting log out up the right top side, but it wont log out, can someone help with this situation?

Trent Parker
02-12-2004, 06:37 PM
Garvin here,
Because George and I cant work out how to log out of his account. We keep hitting log out up the right top side, but it wont log out, can someone help with this situation?

Hey garvin

log out and then click on tools, internet options and then click clear cookies

Thanks for the info also. There might be a chance that i can still go. But i'm waiting to see if i have funds coming my way or not......

Garvinator
02-12-2004, 06:55 PM
Hey garvin

log out and then click on tools, internet options and then click clear cookies

Thanks for the info also. There might be a chance that i can still go. But i'm waiting to see if i have funds coming my way or not......
Matt Sweeney has entered if that means anything to you ;)

Trent Parker
02-12-2004, 07:02 PM
Its all about money money money.

i applied a couple of weeks ago to see whether i am eligible for disability payment from centrelink but i have not heard anything. If i am successful i will play.

PHAT
03-12-2004, 08:14 AM
There might be a chance that i can still go. But i'm waiting to see if i have funds coming my way or not......

That spare seat is still spare. Broooooooom

Bas
03-12-2004, 09:49 PM
Hi all,
For quite some time, I had been looking forward to playing at Mt Buller. Because I can’t justify spending two weeks playing chess around Christmas and New Year, I had set my mind on entering the Minor section.
Horror, it dawned only this week that I was not eligible for this tournament because my rating was too high! The Minor would have been perfect for me: four days of chess, in addition to the great Mt Buller environment, not too costly, and I could have even taken my family with me.

I was overseas at the time that the commotion around the organisation broke out, so I seem to have missed the relevant discussions and proposals (if any) on the formats of the tournaments. I remember to have seen a lot about the junior events, but nothing about the Minor, except some recent queries (Chess nut?).

Being very disappointed about not being able to play and therefore biased (!), it seems very unwise to organise such an event (the Minor) tournament under these particular circumstances. I fail to see what type of U1600 players would consider playing.
For example, from the perspective of Country Victoria, virtually all the club players below a rating of 1600 never play tournaments beyond their clubs, and they will certainly not change this habit when they are asked to travel (to Mt Buller) and pay extra money (on food and accommodation). The ratings of the more active/keen players are simply too high to enter the Minor.
Who do we hope to attract? Juniors and beginners? There will be enough chess organised for the juniors, I understand.
Unless someone has done some research/survey which could explain the rationale to me, I strongly feel that organising this section is simply a waste of time and an exercise in futility. Why not opening it up after all, and allowing others to play?

Not only from a pure selfish viewpoint (I desperately wish I could go!), I wonder seriously whether it still would be possible to increase the cut-off rating for those wanting to play in the Minor. Say, similar to the Doeberl Cup events.
George, Garvin could you still change things around at this (short?) notice? Please. Otherwise I am pretty sure that many will miss out on a wonderful experience.
Any hope that my (Xmas) prayers will be answered?

Bas

Garvinator
04-12-2004, 01:46 PM
Hi all,
For quite some time, I had been looking forward to playing at Mt Buller. Because I can’t justify spending two weeks playing chess around Christmas and New Year, I had set my mind on entering the Minor section.
Horror, it dawned only this week that I was not eligible for this tournament because my rating was too high! The Minor would have been perfect for me: four days of chess, in addition to the great Mt Buller environment, not too costly, and I could have even taken my family with me.

I was overseas at the time that the commotion around the organisation broke out, so I seem to have missed the relevant discussions and proposals (if any) on the formats of the tournaments. I remember to have seen a lot about the junior events, but nothing about the Minor, except some recent queries (Chess nut?).

Being very disappointed about not being able to play and therefore biased (!), it seems very unwise to organise such an event (the Minor) tournament under these particular circumstances. I fail to see what type of U1600 players would consider playing.
For example, from the perspective of Country Victoria, virtually all the club players below a rating of 1600 never play tournaments beyond their clubs, and they will certainly not change this habit when they are asked to travel (to Mt Buller) and pay extra money (on food and accommodation). The ratings of the more active/keen players are simply too high to enter the Minor.
Who do we hope to attract? Juniors and beginners? There will be enough chess organised for the juniors, I understand.
Unless someone has done some research/survey which could explain the rationale to me, I strongly feel that organising this section is simply a waste of time and an exercise in futility. Why not opening it up after all, and allowing others to play?

Not only from a pure selfish viewpoint (I desperately wish I could go!), I wonder seriously whether it still would be possible to increase the cut-off rating for those wanting to play in the Minor. Say, similar to the Doeberl Cup events.
George, Garvin could you still change things around at this (short?) notice? Please. Otherwise I am pretty sure that many will miss out on a wonderful experience.
Any hope that my (Xmas) prayers will be answered?

Bas
Unfortunately Baz, your prayers will not be answered. The minor is staying as u1600.

When the current organising team took over running of the mt buller events, we only had three events- astc, open and junior. After some discussion between us it was decided to hold a minor tournament. It was also agreed that u1600 should be the cut off as that is the commonly used rating cutoff.

We have offered larger prizes for the mt buller minor than for a normal u1600 division and have tried to make the dates as acceptable as possible for as many ppl as possible. It is possible under the current dates to come up for the New Years eve party, play in the rapid, then the minor, then the lightning and then go home that evening or the next day.

Another reason for the u1600 cut off is that we want to try and attract the players who wouldnt want to play in the open and would be more likely to come up for 'just' the week.

We cant raise the rating cutoff for two reasons:

1) It is already been advertised in the brochures and on websites/bulletins etc
2) We want as many ppl playing in the open as possible and we are trying to attract for the minor those who dont want to play in the open because they feel like they wont be competitive.

It is unfortunate that you have missed out Bas, but unfortunately the rating cutoff will not be changed, especially at this late stage. Had you asked alot earlier ie August/September, we might have been able to change it.

Bas
04-12-2004, 09:01 PM
Hi Garvin,

You must be busy at Mt Buller at the moment. I therefore appreciate your prompt reply to my queries with respect to the Minor tournament.

As I had feared, you confirmed that a change in the format (i.e. raise the cut-off maximum 1600 rating) apparently is impossible due to the short notice and due to the announcements having been sent out already. However, as we are still one month away from the actual tournament, and as I imagine that you are not yet flooded with entries for the Minor, I find the argument not very convincing. But then again, I can imagine that a change may create additional and unwelcome headaches for the organisers.
Perhaps it should be contemplated nevertheless, if we can argue that originally the wrong (or at least an unfortunate) decision was made in this respect.

I refer to my earlier arguments advocating a higher cut-off rating, so that more people would have the opportunity to play at Mt Buller. I must say, Garvin, that I found your reply to my queries lacking in substance and the justification of the chosen format even more so:

(you quote:)
“After some discussion between us it was decided to hold a minor tournament. It was also agreed that u1600 should be the cut off as that is the commonly used rating cutoff”.

I knew this already, but actually the question was about the rationale behind the decision. Commonly? At Penrith the Minor (<1600 rating) lasted 11 days (11 rounds) instead of the current 4 days (8 rounds). At the Doeberl Cup we have Open, Major (<2000) and Minor (<1600) sections, for instance. Hence, the formats seem to vary.

(you quote:)
“Another reason for the u1600 cut off is that we want to try and attract the players who wouldn’t want to play in the open and would be more likely to come up for 'just' the week.”

Does this argument not apply to everybody?

(you quote:)
“1)It is already been advertised in the brochures and on websites/bulletins etc
2) We want as many ppl playing in the open as possible and we are trying to attract for the minor those who don’t want to play in the open because they feel like they wont be competitive.”

Re1. Ok accepted, but not wholeheartedly.. (see above)
Re2. Sounds like pure non-sense to me. Why do you want as many ppl playing in the open? Don’t you want the maximum number of chess players coming to Mt Buller, full stop? Any specific reason why you want to cram them into the Open, in particular? Why not offer a wider choice, and get more people involved as a result? And what do you really know about the U1600 pple wanting to be competitive? The result of a survey perhaps? What about the competitiveness of others? Is it so much different?

In other words, I don’t believe that you have given much thought into your reply and I feel fobbed off… But perhaps you are right in saying that this discussion is too late and only serves as a distraction.
In Penrith (only) 38 or so players entered the Minor section. Not a great success in anybody’s language. The indications in my opinion (as argued previously) are that you probably will have not that many more at Mt Buller, and you could have done better by changing the rating conditions.
Having said that, and if indeed the decision is final, as you maintain, I will rest my case and wish you all the best of luck.

Bas

Trent Parker
05-12-2004, 07:14 PM
Hey there still might be a chance i can go. What is the cheapest means of accomodation??? If someone can tell me i might be able to enter tonight!!!!

Garvinator
05-12-2004, 08:28 PM
Hey there still might be a chance i can go. What is the cheapest means of accomodation??? If someone can tell me i might be able to enter tonight!!!!
Hello there mr the chess nut ;)

Ok the best I come across for a single person is probably

http://www.skivictoria.com.au/accommodation/tariffs.html (see more info
under lodges)

I think most of these places won't charge a single room supplement in
summer, particularly for a long booking.

The other one that looks good is

http://www.duckinnmtbuller.com/


For Lodge type stuff (and remember many of these do have rooms with
facilities), or rooms with shared facilities, they are not all big
dorms. Research done by Libby!

1. AESKI LODGE http://www.mtbuller.com.au/aeski/ &
http://www.aeski.com.au/aeskilodge.htm
Contact Person: Sue bookings@aeski.com.au

Cost $25 per person per night (incl continental breakfast) plus a $250
fee to open in Summer. Minimum booking 20 beds

Facilities -
Nine large comfortable rooms that accommodate 4 or 6 people in single
and king size bunks. Plenty of pillows and blankets are provided for
your comfort and each room has generous clothing storage facilities and
a sparkling en-suite. The lodge accommodates 46 guests in total.

A self-contained kitchen with extensive meal preparation facilities
including ovens, stoves, microwaves, dishwasher, hotplate, refrigerators
and food storage space.

A large well appointed dining room for meals adjacent to the kitchen.

A spacious lounge and reading area for relaxing and chatting

Two mezzanine areas with pool table and TV and stereo.

A games room with a table tennis table.

An additional shower block with sauna

A continental breakfast for guests is provided by the lodge.

2. SKI CLUB OF VICTORIA
http://www.skivictoria.com.au/accommodation/index.html &
http://www.mtbuller.com.au/skivictoria/

Contact Person: James Mac Reservations@skivictoria.com.au

The rate in summer is $40 per adult and $15 per child UNDER 15. This
rate includes breakfast and the rooms are one bunk, one queen and
private bathroom (four share). Kandahar is a
traditional lodge style of accommodation, modern and cosy with up to
date self catering facilities. It has lounge area, TV room and a kid
games room. The club offers a range of evening activities all
year round including; movie nights live bands, and weekly activity
nights. They also have motel-style accommodation at "The Whitt."

3. Mulligatawny Ski Club http://www.mtbuller.com.au/mulligatawny/

Contact: Michele Gunther michelegunther@bigpond.com.au

Cost per person is $22 per night. If you are interested a deposit would
be required. Cosy 60's style ski lodge, with six bedrooms sleeping 16
guests. Ideal for Multi family or group bookings. Just a short walk
from the village centre and Chamois ski lift. Set over two levels
Mulligatawny boasts a variety of room layouts, from double bedrooms to
bunk rooms, two separate living areas, and two separate fully functional
kitchens. There is a dining room with a large dining table that seats
twelve overlooking the main lounge room with a "jetmaster" open fire
place, stereo with plenty of couch space to lay back, relax, and perhaps
a little canoodling or sipping gluwein - Austin Powers eat your heart
out!!

Trent Parker
05-12-2004, 11:06 PM
Thank you ggray greatly appreciated :D

Trent Parker
06-12-2004, 09:15 AM
Its decided.... I'm going! Just need to get my mammy's credit card details and i will join online :D

Garvinator
06-12-2004, 09:39 AM
Its decided.... I'm going! Just need to get my mammy's credit card details and i will join online :D
that is good to hear, hope to see your entry soon and you on the mountain.

Trent Parker
12-12-2004, 10:55 PM
+'s
My mates Lance and Rory Chiddy are probables to play in the Minor

-'s
Talking to Tony Baldwin today.........he doesnt think he can do the drive all the way down to mount buller in one shot. so it looks like he might withdraw........ :confused:

Garvinator
12-12-2004, 10:59 PM
Talking to Tony Baldwin today.........he doesnt think he can do the drive all the way down to mount buller in one shot. so it looks like he might withdraw........ :confused:
my records from Alex Saint says that Tony Baldwin has entered the open, not the minor. $170 received.

Trent Parker
12-12-2004, 11:08 PM
Oh thats right..... looks like he might withdraw.

Garvinator
12-12-2004, 11:10 PM
Oh thats right..... looks like he might withdraw.
Tony will need to speak to George then regarding any possibility of refunds. I am not speculating either way, just saying that you should tell Tony to contact George Howard if he is going to withdraw.

Trent Parker
14-12-2004, 01:50 PM
Woohoo!!!!!!!

I'm in!!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

whats the chance of getting a list of players now, ggray???

Garvinator
14-12-2004, 02:18 PM
Woohoo!!!!!!!

I'm in!!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

whats the chance of getting a list of players now, ggray???
about the same as it was yesterday ;)

Trent Parker
14-12-2004, 02:31 PM
ok can you tell us how many people have joined thus far???

Garvinator
14-12-2004, 02:37 PM
ok can you tell us how many people have joined thus far???
about 8 :doh:

Trent Parker
14-12-2004, 02:42 PM
Does that include me and me mates? (who entered today)?

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 02:48 PM
No it's not including you trent.

Trent Parker
14-12-2004, 02:49 PM
Ok so there is now 11

Garvinator
14-12-2004, 02:50 PM
Does that include me and me mates? (who entered today)?
it includes you, hence why I said about eight. I wait for 'official' notification from either George Howard (mail) or STML (onine) before adding names to the lists.

Garvinator
22-12-2004, 10:26 PM
Mt Buller Minor:


No Name Feder Rtg Loc

1. KATNIC, Eddy NSW 1591
2. TAYLOR, Stephan James VIC 1573
3. SIMMONDS, Rex NSW 1550
4. PARKER, Trent NSW 1367
5. SWEENEY, Matthew NSW 1324
6. WHITE, Corey QLD 1208
7. CHIDDY, Lance NSW 932
8. KENMURE, Jamie VIC 909
9. CHIDDY, Rory NSW

Trent Parker
22-12-2004, 10:32 PM
Mt Buller Minor:


No Name Feder Rtg Loc

1. KATNIC, Eddy NSW 1591
2. TAYLOR, Stephan James VIC 1573
3. SIMMONDS, Rex NSW 1550
4. PARKER, Trent NSW 1367
5. SWEENEY, Matthew NSW 1324
6. WHITE, Corey QLD 1208
7. CHIDDY, Lance NSW 932
8. KENMURE, Jamie VIC 909
9. CHIDDY, Rory NSW

Hey......
Is it fair.........
Is it fair for 8 people to have a bye and for one to not have a bye??

In a hectic schedule would there be enough room to pop in an extra round somewhere?

Trent Parker
22-12-2004, 10:33 PM
Hey......
Is it fair.........
Is it fair for 8 people to have a bye and for one to not have a bye??

In a hectic schedule would there be enough room to pop in an extra round somewhere?

hmm and only one more victorian......

Garvinator
22-12-2004, 10:39 PM
I will speak to all nine/ten entrants about this matter and see what everyone wants to do. I would like to see a 9th round and it might be possible, but it would require one late night.

Kevin Bonham
23-12-2004, 12:21 AM
You would just about have to go for a nine-round round robin if you finish up with nine or ten entries. If you attempt an eight round swiss with nine or ten entries you run a risk of getting no legal pairing in round eight.

Trent Parker
29-12-2004, 01:09 AM
Can i ask how many entrants are there at the moment?

will this be the final number or is it still open for entries?

Recherché
29-12-2004, 11:45 AM
I am happy to play 9 rounds. I'm happy to play any number of rounds you can fit in, really - the more chess the better from my perspective. :)

Assuming we end up with the current entries (ten of us) as the final entries, I think a 9 round Round-Robin tournament would be perfect. When the field is small enough for them to be feasible, I think Round Robins are always superior to a Swiss. Plus, you get to play everyone!

Garvinator
29-12-2004, 12:57 PM
I am happy to play 9 rounds. I'm happy to play any number of rounds you can fit in, really - the more chess the better from my perspective. :)

Assuming we end up with the current entries (ten of us) as the final entries, I think a 9 round Round-Robin tournament would be perfect. When the field is small enough for them to be feasible, I think Round Robins are always superior to a Swiss. Plus, you get to play everyone!

If we have twelve or less players, the tournament will be round robin.


No Name Feder Rtg Loc

1. KATNIC, Eddy NSW 1591
2. TAYLOR, Stephan James VIC 1573
3. SIMMONDS, Rex NSW 1550
4. MCCULLOCH, Rob VIC 1442
5. PARKER, Trent NSW 1367
6. SWEENEY, Matthew NSW 1324
7. WHITE, Corey QLD 1208
8. CHIDDY, Lance NSW 932
9. KENMURE, Jamie VIC 909
10. CHIDDY, RORY

It looks like we have no more entries.

Recherché
29-12-2004, 01:11 PM
If we have twelve or less players, the tournament will be round robin.

Great! :)




No Name Feder Rtg Loc

1. KATNIC, Eddy NSW 1591
2. TAYLOR, Stephan James VIC 1573
3. SIMMONDS, Rex NSW 1550
4. MCCULLOCH, Rob VIC 1442
5. PARKER, Trent NSW 1367
6. SWEENEY, Matthew NSW 1324
7. WHITE, Corey QLD 1208
8. CHIDDY, Lance NSW 932
9. KENMURE, Jamie VIC 909
10. CHIDDY, RORY


Ooh, fourth seed! :D

Garvinator
29-12-2004, 01:13 PM
Ooh, fourth seed! :D
not that that means anything really in a round robin tournament ;)

Recherché
29-12-2004, 01:24 PM
not that that means anything really in a round robin tournament ;)

Well the last tournament I played in, I was ranked 15th out of 16 in my division, by rating. And I finished last with 1/5. Fourth seed is a nice change. ;)

Edit: Not that the ratings were a huge issue really; it was a pretty tight range, 1400-1700. I just had a bad tournament. :)

arosar
29-12-2004, 01:29 PM
Well the last tournament I played in, I was ranked 15th out of 16 in my division, by rating. And I finished last with 1/5. Fourth seed is a nice change. ;)

But don't finish last. That'd be the nicer change.

AR

Recherché
29-12-2004, 01:33 PM
But don't finish last. That'd be the nicer change.

Hah! Indeed. :D

My last couple of tournaments have been average, so I reckon I'm due for a good one at Buller. :)

ursogr8
29-12-2004, 01:36 PM
My last couple of tournaments have been average, so I reckon I'm due for a good one at Buller. :)

Maybe because you have moved from under-rated to average rated (on the competitve index scale)?

starter

Recherché
29-12-2004, 02:02 PM
Maybe because you have moved from under-rated to average rated (on the competitve index scale)?

I didn't mean average tournaments in terms of absolute results or finishing place. I meant in terms of how well I actually played. I didn't do well even against players close to my own rating. :)

The strongest field I've had to face so far was in the Box Hill Open this year (average opponent rating of 1671), but that was a good tournament for me. I finished 35th (on tiebreak) from a seeding of 55th.

DoroPhil
29-12-2004, 02:09 PM
Why would Victorian players go and play in the Minor, while not playing in W-enders (like recent MCC weekender, for example) in Melbourne? Could anybody enlighten me as to what kind of logic is being used in such a decision-making process?

Recherché
29-12-2004, 02:16 PM
Why would Victorian players go and play in the Minor, while not playing in W-enders (like recent MCC weekender, for example) in Melbourne? Could anybody enlighten me as to what kind of logic is being used in such a decision-making process?

The MCC weekender was only five rounds, and it was too expensive for an event that short, especially since the field would be too strong for me to be in prize contention. If they had run an under-1600 tournament like the Minor I almost certainly would have played.

DoroPhil
29-12-2004, 02:21 PM
Ah ok. So, prize/ tournament-winning possibility is more enticing than strong field-playing possibility?

Trent Parker
29-12-2004, 07:04 PM
Ooh, fourth seed! :D

Hmm i had a disappointing tournament in my last tourney (the fairfield Summer cup). But still managed a small prize :D

Damn you took my fourth seed. you'll pay for that..... :lol: :whistle:

Man i cannot wait to get down there......

Trent Parker
29-12-2004, 07:05 PM
BTW i reckon i have a safe bet with whom i think will get the wooden spoon.....

Trent Parker
29-12-2004, 07:23 PM
Hey ggray.....

When would that extra round be?

Garvinator
29-12-2004, 09:53 PM
Hey ggray.....

When would that extra round be?
9/10 players = 9 rounds = 2nd night.

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 07:24 AM
Ah ok. So, prize/ tournament-winning possibility is more enticing than strong field-playing possibility?

Good morning Phil O'Dor

You got an interesting reaction from Rob in regard to why play in the Mt B. Minor rather than the MCC week-ender, I see.
Perhaps the Minor is a unique opportunity that we should not draw too many conclusions from. We don't often see 10 U1600 entrants and a prize well in excess of normal offering.

But it does indicate that rating prizes can influence tournament numbers significantly. I still have your 2004 VIC OPEN post ringing in my ears >

Hi starter,

....

And another great innovation of Box Hill people - 8 rating groups!! Was that ever done before ? Will it include such hotly contested groups as under1250, under1050 and under850? Also probably more than 1 prize for each group, right? $60, $25, $15? So that every kiddy gets a prize ?

This is Victorian Open man. Supposed to be premier event. And I suspect it will be run just as another mass-participation, no-quality event Box Hill is known for...


You did not ever get back to me on your opinion on the quality of the joint winners, their prizes for a week-end of 'work', and the size of the field?

regards
starter

DoroPhil
30-12-2004, 08:16 AM
Good morning Phil O'Dor

But it does indicate that rating prizes can influence tournament numbers significantly. I still have your 2004 VIC OPEN post ringing in my ears >

You did not ever get back to me on your opinion on the quality of the joint winners, their prizes for a week-end of 'work', and the size of the field?

regards
starter

Well, I can see from elsewhere on this forum that you quite fond of numbers, Mr. Starter. Could you tell us this all-important number: rating of the 5th seed in VictorianOpen2004? And what kind of conclusions can you draw from this piece of numerical data?

Trent Parker
30-12-2004, 08:34 AM
Hey Dero phil

If there was a 5 round tournament in Sydney i would definitely not go due to value for money. I would prefer 7 rounds to get maximum games for my money. Therefore it is no wonder that Recherche does not go to MCC w/ender but comes to mt buller.

DoroPhil
30-12-2004, 08:44 AM
If there was a 5 round tournament in Sydney i would definitely not go due to value for money. I would prefer 7 rounds to get maximum games for my money. Therefore it is no wonder that Recherche does not go to MCC w/ender but comes to mt buller.

Eh? 7 rounds is preferable to 5 rounds, therefore Recherche comes to Mt.Buller? Logic?

Trent Parker
30-12-2004, 08:47 AM
For weekenders it is all about value for money mate... value for money.

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 11:39 AM
Well, I can see from elsewhere on this forum that you quite fond of numbers, Mr. Starter. Could you tell us this all-important number: rating of the 5th seed in VictorianOpen2004? And what kind of conclusions can you draw from this piece of numerical data?

hi Phil O'Dor

Just before I give you the answer to your question, can I get you to read this post of yours below >


Hi starter,

I really like how you manage to answer all the questions without actually answering them. Attack is the best defence, right?



You like my approach so much way back then that you are copying it now, eh? :uhoh: :rolleyes:

Seriously Phil, just respond to my post #141 on this thread first and then we can work through questions in the correct order. Over to you first.

regards
starter

Recherché
30-12-2004, 12:01 PM
Ah ok. So, prize/ tournament-winning possibility is more enticing than strong field-playing possibility?

No. The #1 factor (for me) is cost, and by extension, value for money. 5 games of chess is not worth the cost of entering the MCC weekender.

I like to play against a strong field, or more accurately, a competitive field. There's not much attraction for me in playing an entire tournament against 1900+ players at the moment, because I'm not yet strong enough to compete at that level.

From what I hear, the fields at MCC tend to be very "top heavy". Very few players in the mid-range (say, up to 1800) that would be within "striking distance".

The combination of high prize money and a field where I feel confident in my chances against every player makes the Minor somewhat more attractive on the value for money scale, not to mention the fact that it's 9 rounds of good long chess games.

In addition to all that, the Minor is unique, and "special". I get to play people from interstate, I get to meet new people and watch the Aus Open. There will always be MCC weekenders, and in the future I'm likely to be much better suited to playing in them than I am at the moment. The Minor is a tournament extremely well suited to me as a chessplayer right now, and an opportunity like this may not come again.


BTW i reckon i have a safe bet with whom i think will get the wooden spoon.....

Do you know something other than the bald rating statistics? Regardless, I don't think there's ever any certainties when it comes to the wooden spoon, in chess. The lower the ratings, the more unpredictable the games.


For weekenders it is all about value for money mate... value for money.

Exactly. :)

Recherché
30-12-2004, 12:06 PM
Eh? 7 rounds is preferable to 5 rounds, therefore Recherche comes to Mt.Buller? Logic?

I think he's implying that I'd be more inclined to play at the MCC weekender if it were 7 rounds instead of 5. And he's absolutely right. However, I still probably wouldn't play in it, because as I said, the field is likely to be top heavy, and without ratings-group prizes.

I prefer a weekender like the Victorian Open Championships, held at Box Hill in March this year. It had a very large, well-distributed field, and 7 rounds. It also had 8 ratings groups for prizes. Unfortunately I happened to be busy that weekend, and also rather broke, otherwise I would have entered.

DoroPhil
30-12-2004, 12:55 PM
Seriously Phil, just respond to my post #141 on this thread first and then we can work through questions in the correct order. Over to you first.

regards
starter

Oh come on now, starter. I think it's no secret, that just about anything can be proven to be successful, if you select the "appropriate" aspects to be measured.

But if you insist:

"the quality of the joint winners" - good.
"their prizes for a week-end of 'work'" - good.
"the size of the field" - good.

Now.
How about that 5th seed?
His rating?
The difference between his rating and the 4th seed's rating?
The amount of money that he originally would have won if he finished first in his rating group?
Would he be seeded lower than 5 if he chose to enter recent MCC w-ender?

Any conclusions?

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 01:11 PM
Oh come on now, starter. I think it's no secret, that just about anything can be proven to be successful, if you select the "appropriate" aspects to be measured.

But if you insist:

"the quality of the joint winners" - good.
"their prizes for a week-end of 'work'" - good.
"the size of the field" - good.

Now.
How about that 5th seed?
His rating?
The difference between his rating and the 4th seed's rating?
The amount of money that he originally would have won if he finished first in his rating group?
Would he be seeded lower than 5 if he chose to enter recent MCC w-ender?

Any conclusions?

Phil
I see how it works now. First you don't answer the questions, but throw in one of your own. Then you give three throw-away 1-word answers 5 months after your original mud-slinging at the event...and then escalate into 5 questions (4 of them new).

By the way Phil, you never did tell me which Club you are a member of in 2004?

OK. Your question 1.
In 2001 the fifth seed was Ascaro Pecori . The same Ascaro (rating in this years VIC OPEN 1997) that lost to the kid that you 'served' earlier on this year.
In 2002 the fifth seed was Doug Hamilton or Dimtri Partsi 2002, depending on whether you regard Scott Wastney as a regular VIC OPEN player.
In 2003 the fifth seed is not known to me unless Bill can post here. (I can't see the field on the DCC web-site).
In 2004 the fifth seed was John Nemeth, 2050.

starter

ps Nice to find another BBer that wants to look at data. ;)

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 01:19 PM
Oh come on now, starter. I think it's no secret, that just about anything can be proven to be successful, if you select the "appropriate" aspects to be measured.

But if you insist:

"the quality of the joint winners" - good.
"their prizes for a week-end of 'work'" - good.
"the size of the field" - good.



:eek: Phil

I am shocked. These are three aspects that you criticized when we first advertised the event. Phil., they were your "appropriate aspects", not mine.

starter

DoroPhil
30-12-2004, 02:47 PM
Phil

By the way Phil, you never did tell me which Club you are a member of in 2004?

Sorry, don't recall you asking that before. Anyway, I thought I mentioned that I haven't been active lately, so it is highly probable that I am not a member of any club.


OK. Your question 1.
In 2001 the fifth seed was Ascaro Pecori . The same Ascaro (rating in this years VIC OPEN 1997) that lost to the kid that you 'served' earlier on this year.
In 2002 the fifth seed was Doug Hamilton or Dimtri Partsi 2002, depending on whether you regard Scott Wastney as a regular VIC OPEN player.
In 2003 the fifth seed is not known to me unless Bill can post here. (I can't see the field on the DCC web-site).
In 2004 the fifth seed was John Nemeth, 2050.



Not sure why you chose to mention all those years and start with 2001. Doesn't really help your cause as I'm pretty certain that all the players mentioned above Mr. Nemeth-jr were higher rated than him.

In any case, if you go back in time a bit further you can arrive at a time where someone like Rujevic was not even the 5th seed being seeded behind people like Johansen, Chapman, West, Sandler, Nutu-Gajic, etc.


I am shocked. These are three aspects that you criticized when we first advertised the event. Phil., they were your "appropriate aspects", not mine.

Really? I don't think I ever doubted the field size. Remember that "no quality, mass participation" line? It does have the words "mass participation" in it, does it not?

I was more concerned about field strength. Hence all the 5th seed questions.

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 03:20 PM
Anyway, I thought I mentioned that I haven't been active lately, so it is highly probable that I am not a member of any club.

Thanks Phil, for the responses.
Not a member of a Club, eh. Well that explains your yelp when the VIC OPEN put a $10 registration fee on non-affliliated entrants.


Not sure why you chose to mention all those years and start with 2001.

I went back over those three years because of your post >

Hi,

So I see new club is organizing the Vic Open this year. They probably had a big meeting, a healthy discussion and abolished lots of things previous organizers done right.


which seemed to be referring to Dandenong's incumbency.
Neither you nor I have details of events before that time I suspect; we went looking for a list of former winners for our advertising and not even that was available.


Doesn't really help your cause as I'm pretty certain that all the players mentioned above Mr. Nemeth-jr were higher rated than him.

I will repeat again
Pecori 1997 (that is his rating, not a year)
Partsi 2002 (that is his rating, not a year)
Unknown
Nemeth 2050 (Box Hill event).


In any case, if you go back in time a bit further you can arrive at a time where someone like Rujevic was not even the 5th seed being seeded behind people like Johansen, Chapman, West, Sandler, Nutu-Gajic, etc.

Hard to see where you are going with this list Phil. I suspect we would need to find out why each did not play this year. For example, Johansen was an entrant, but pulled out a day before hand to go to an o/s invite. (Legitimately I could include Johansen in the 2004 field which would have made the 5th seed < Rujevic 2296 >. Still want to proceed on this 5th seed business Phil?




I was more concerned about field strength. Hence all the 5th seed questions.

Happy to pursue this question 1 Phil. But it sure does look like selective statistics on your part. And is not standing up under scrutiny. And when we noticed the 'hole' that Frosty talked about we added a prize.

starter

DoroPhil
30-12-2004, 03:29 PM
Thanks Phil, for the responses.

I will repeat again
Pecori 1997 (that is his rating, not a year)
Partsi 2002 (that is his rating, not a year)
Unknown
Nemeth 2050 (Box Hill event).


First off you said Hamilton not Partsi (why do you just exclude Wastney for no reason?). Also, you forgot to add 70 points. I.e., Pecori = 1997 + 70 = 2067.


And when we noticed the 'hole' that Frosty talked about we added a prize.

starter

Correct me if I'm wrong but you added that prize during the tournament, not before. Do you think that you would have got more entries if you advertised "those rated below 2296 will have rating prizes to play for"? Would that entice your Hacches, Chows, etc to enter? Would that be done next year?

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 03:56 PM
First off you said Hamilton not Partsi (why do you just exclude Wastney for no reason?). Also, you forgot to add 70 points. I.e., Pecori = 1997 + 70 = 2067.

I explained that Wastney was a once-off o/s entrant, and invited you to argue for him to come back into consideration.
Pecori is 2047 now.........which is below John Nemeth in June. I think all this just shows the arbitrariness of basing judgements on the 5th seeds rating.
Anyhow...now that you have forced me to drill down... I am sticking with
Legitimately I could include Johansen in the 2004 field which would have made the 5th seed < Rujevic 2296 >.




Correct me if I'm wrong but you added that prize during the tournament, not before.

You are correct...we added that prize during the tourney. That is what I said to Frosty, and repeated earlier today to you. We added it because of two reasons
> we noticed a hole in the ratings distribution
>> we had more entries than budget and so some more money to distribute.

But Phil, we did not know the 'hole' would appear.
And you, with all your advice, did not forecast the 'hole'.
Those just below the 'hole' got an extra prize to play for.


Do you think that you would have got more entries if you advertised "those rated below 2296 will have rating prizes to play for"? Would that entice your Hacches, Chows, etc to enter? Would that be done next year?

Phil
To be honest, I am none the wiser as to why less that 10 out of the top 50 rated Victorians do not front for INTERCLUB, The BOX HILL OPEN ($500 first prize), the Whitehorse FESTIVAL 1-day ($500 first prize), the VIC OPEN ($1000 first prize, $500 second prize) week-ender.

If it was simply a matter of putting a magic sentence in the tournament flyer then of course we would want the other 45 missing strong players to come out of 'retirement'. But so far no-one seems to know the 'sesame' words.

starter

Bill Gletsos
30-12-2004, 04:00 PM
In 2003 the fifth seed is not known to me unless Bill can post here. (I can't see the field on the DCC web-site).
The fifth seed was Malcolm Pyke rated 1940.

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 04:29 PM
The fifth seed was Malcolm Pyke rated 1940.

hi Bill

Thanks from me for this.
I don't think you will get the same from Phil O'Dor.

Now on a related matter....and I know this is a stupid place to ask for it........but the sting seems to have gone out of MINOR discussions..........there is something you might be able to help us on.

When Box Hill ran the VIC OPEN last year we wanted the flyer to have the names of past winners. And we were embarassed to not be able to find a consolidated list.
It has become clear to me that you have quite a good ratings database of tourneys there.
Could you help us out?
I could of course set it as Forensic Challenge #4 ;) .

starter

Bill Gletsos
30-12-2004, 06:09 PM
2003 - won by Solomon 7/7. Only 2 players over 2000. 66 players.

2002 - won by Fritz computer 6/7. =2nd was Scott Wastney, Milenko Lojanica, Bill Jordan and Paul Dozsa 5.5/7. 6 players over 2000 not including the computer, Solomon was the top seed. 62 players.

2001 - won by Chapman on 6/7. 6 players over 2000 not including the computer Shredder. Chapman was top seed. 75 players.

2000 - won by Chess Tiger computer 6/7. =2nd Igor Bjelobrk, Michael Baron and Mark Chapman 5.5/7. 4 players over 2000 not counting the computer (Bjelobrk was unrated). West was top seed. 55 players.

1999- won by Hiarcs Computer 7/7. =2nd Wayne Guy and Mark Chapman 5.5/7. Only 3 over 2000 not including the computer (Lojanica was unrated). 62 players.

1998 - won by Gluzman 6/7. 4 over 2000 not including the computer Fritz. Gluzman was top seed. 42 players.

1997 - event won by HIARCS computer 6/7, =2nd ErikTeichmann and Daniela Nutu-Gagic on 5.5/7, top seed Guy West rated 2300 ended with 5/7. Teichmann won the title on countback. 54 players.

1996 - =1st Johansen and Chapman 6/7. Note 10 players were rated over 2000 but the 11th seed was rated 1857. 67 players.

1995 - won by GM Johansen 6.5/7. 70 players.

1994 - won by GM Stefan Djuric 6.5/7. First prize was a massive $5,000. GM's Rogers and Johansen participated as did IM's Jamieson, West, Gluzman and Roeder from Germany. 99 players.

1993 - won by Guy West 6/7. Johansen, Gluzman, Jamieson, Depasqualle and Sandler participated. 58 players.

1992 - won by Depasqualle 6/7. Jamieson was the top seed. 46 players.

1991 - won by Johansen 6/7. Rogers, Depas, West, Jamieson and Reilly participated. 72 players.

1990 - won by IM Laszlo Hazai on 6/7. Rogers, West, Jamieson and Wohl and IM Alex Davidovic participated. 68 players.

ursogr8
30-12-2004, 06:39 PM
^^
Thanks Bill
I will fwd on to the flyer maestro.
starter

ursogr8
31-12-2004, 09:47 AM
2003 - won by Solomon 7/7. Only 2 players over 2000. 66 players.

2002 - won by Fritz computer 6/7. =2nd was Scott Wastney, Milenko Lojanica, Bill Jordan and Paul Dozsa 5.5/7. 6 players over 2000 not including the computer, Solomon was the top seed. 62 players.

2001 - won by Chapman on 6/7. 6 players over 2000 not including the computer Shredder. Chapman was top seed. 75 players.

2000 - won by Chess Tiger computer 6/7. =2nd Igor Bjelobrk, Michael Baron and Mark Chapman 5.5/7. 4 players over 2000 not counting the computer (Bjelobrk was unrated). West was top seed. 55 players.

1999- won by Hiarcs Computer 7/7. =2nd Wayne Guy and Mark Chapman 5.5/7. Only 3 over 2000 not including the computer (Lojanica was unrated). 62 players.

1998 - won by Gluzman 6/7. 4 over 2000 not including the computer Fritz. Gluzman was top seed. 42 players.

1997 - event won by HIARCS computer 6/7, =2nd ErikTeichmann and Daniela Nutu-Gagic on 5.5/7, top seed Guy West rated 2300 ended with 5/7. Teichmann won the title on countback. 54 players.

1996 - =1st Johansen and Chapman 6/7. Note 10 players were rated over 2000 but the 11th seed was rated 1857. 67 players.



Good morning Phil O'Dor
Have you had a chance to look at the detail Bill has provided us mate?

For the 8 years I can see a comparison, our (BHCC) first try in 2004 had 7 rated over 2000 and another 6 over 1900.

You look like a harsh marker when you say
""the quality of the joint winners" - good.
"their prizes for a week-end of 'work'" - good.
"the size of the field" - good."

but maybe a 'good' rating from you would equate to higher accolades from others?

However, when you say "no quality, mass participation", I think the quality goes close to exceeding each of those preceeding eight years.


starter

Garvinator
02-01-2005, 09:41 AM
12 players entered for the minor:


No Name Feder Rtg Loc

1. KATNIC, Eddy NSW 1591
2. TAYLOR, Stephan James VIC 1573
3. SIMMONDS, Rex NSW 1550
4. MARKS, Joe ACT 1481
5. MCCULLOCH, Rob VIC 1442
6. EIME, Roland SA 1434
7. PARKER, Trent NSW 1367
8. SWEENEY, Matthew NSW 1324
9. WHITE, Corey QLD 1208
10. CHIDDY, Lance NSW 932
11. KENMURE, Jamie VIC 909
12. CHIDDY, Rory


First Round pairings and results:


No Name Result Name

1 KATNIC, E (1) 1:0 PARKER, T (7)
2 SWEENEY, M (8) 0:1 TAYLOR, S (2)
3 SIMMONDS, R (3) 1:0 WHITE, C (9)
4 CHIDDY, L (10) 0:1 MARKS, J (4)
5 MCCULLOCH, R (5) 1:0 KENMURE, J (11)
6 CHIDDY, R (12) 0:1 EIME, R (6)

jenni
02-01-2005, 10:00 AM
Games as well!!!! We are spoilt - thank-you.

Thunderspirit
02-01-2005, 10:15 AM
The Mt Buller Minor started today with a modest 12 entries. 4 States and I Territory are represented in the event.

The players are

1. Eddie Katnic (NSW) 1591
2. Stephen Taylor (Vic) 1573
3. Rex Simmon (NSW) 1550
4. Joe Marks (ACT) 1450
5. Rob M'cCullogh (Vic) (1442)
6. Roland Eime (SA) 1434
7. Trent Parker (NSW) 1367
8. Matthew Sweeny (NSW) 1324
9. Corey White (Qld) 1208
10. Lance Chiddy (NSW) 932
11. Jamie Kenmure (Vic) 909
12. Rory Chiddey (NSW) - U/R

It's halfway through round one, so no results yet.

Garvinator
02-01-2005, 01:51 PM
All six first round games for the minor have been attached in previous post of mine.

Round 2 draw:


No Name Result Name

1 MARKS, J (4) : KATNIC, E (1)
2 TAYLOR, S (2) : MCCULLOCH, R (5)
3 EIME, R (6) : SIMMONDS, R (3)
4 PARKER, T (7) : CHIDDY, L (10)
5 KENMURE, J (11) : SWEENEY, M (8)
6 WHITE, C (9) : CHIDDY, R (12)

jenni
02-01-2005, 02:28 PM
Thank-you again. :)

Garvinator
02-01-2005, 05:15 PM
No Name Result Name

1 MARKS, J (4) .5:.5 KATNIC, E (1)
2 TAYLOR, S (2) 0:1 MCCULLOCH, R (5)
3 EIME, R (6) 1:0 SIMMONDS, R (3)
4 PARKER, T (7) 1:0 CHIDDY, L (10)
5 KENMURE, J (11) 1:0 SWEENEY, M (8)
6 WHITE, C (9) 1:0 CHIDDY, R (12)

games coming at end of open days play.

Provisional Pairings for round 3:


No Name Result Name

1 MCCULLOCH, Rob (5) : EIME, Roland (6)
2 KATNIC, Eddy (1) : TAYLOR, Stephan James (2)
3 SIMMONDS, Rex (3) : MARKS, Joe (4)
4 WHITE, Corey (9) : PARKER, Trent (7)
5 CHIDDY, Lance (10) : KENMURE, Jamie (11)
6 SWEENEY, Matthew (8) : CHIDDY, Rory (12)

Libby
02-01-2005, 05:38 PM
Thanks Garvin.

I'm absolutely not having a go OK - just a suggestion.

I prefer to change the display so it shows First Name/Surname in the pairings & results page on SP. One - because it's easier to call out when you've got 80+ kids to seat and Two - just 'cos it looks nice to have the full names displayed.

Not having a go - just making a suggestion. Also you don't seem to have any of those 90-letter indian-type or double-barrelled surnames that make it awkward.

It's a girl thing - I like it to look nice and (also) I don't always know the full name of players and have to go back to the start list to check who is actually who.

I'm sure some of you proper arbiter types can give me reasons why the display doesn't default to the full first name/surname option. It caused me untold stress as a beginner organiser trying to work out who was who as I called stuff out for little kids.

OK - I was also a bit slow working out how to change things ... :)

Garvinator
02-01-2005, 06:10 PM
Thanks Garvin.

I'm absolutely not having a go OK - just a suggestion.

I prefer to change the display so it shows First Name/Surname in the pairings & results page on SP. One - because it's easier to call out when you've got 80+ kids to seat and Two - just 'cos it looks nice to have the full names displayed.

Not having a go - just making a suggestion. Also you don't seem to have any of those 90-letter indian-type or double-barrelled surnames that make it awkward.

It's a girl thing - I like it to look nice and (also) I don't always know the full name of players and have to go back to the start list to check who is actually who.

I'm sure some of you proper arbiter types can give me reasons why the display doesn't default to the full first name/surname option. It caused me untold stress as a beginner organiser trying to work out who was who as I called stuff out for little kids.

OK - I was also a bit slow working out how to change things ... :)


is the above change better?

Bill Gletsos
02-01-2005, 06:13 PM
OK - I was also a bit slow working out how to change things ... :)
Is that a girl thing too. ;)

Libby
02-01-2005, 06:18 PM
is the above change better?

Ta. :clap:

Libby
02-01-2005, 06:20 PM
Is that a girl thing too. ;)

Perhaps now is when I sledge all those boys I've since had to demonstrate the "help" function to. You know - that bit whiich shows you how to do things in Swiss Perfect.

A bit like reading the instructions I guess - not a boy thing ... :P

Garvinator
02-01-2005, 06:21 PM
A bit like reading the instructions I guess - not a boy thing ... :P
or a map ;)

Libby
02-01-2005, 06:23 PM
or a map ;)

So boys can't read maps? I am one of those gals who holds it upside down myself - you know, just to have it going in the same direction as the car ... sigh

Bill Gletsos
02-01-2005, 06:26 PM
So boys can't read maps? I am one of those gals who holds it upside down myself - you know, just to have it going in the same direction as the car ... sigh
Men can read maps, we just never ask directions. :lol:

Libby
02-01-2005, 06:52 PM
Men can read maps, we just never ask directions. :lol:

and certainly don't follow them ...

Kaitlin
03-01-2005, 08:42 AM
and certainly don't follow them ...

Game set and match..... admit defeat on this one Bill. Yeah Libby :) :)

Bill Gletsos
03-01-2005, 11:03 AM
Game set and match..... admit defeat on this one Bill. Yeah Libby :) :)
You need too look at this logically.
1. Men do not believe women can read maps.
2. Therefore why would men take directions from women.

Note men know they dont ask for directions therefore other men know not to offer them.

jenni
03-01-2005, 11:30 AM
1. Men do not believe women can read maps.
.

Of course women can read maps - we just have our own way of doing it.

I too need to turn maps upside down (perfectly logical - why would you not want the map matching the terrain?). However I am 100% the navigator in the family and Tony leaves all journey planning and map reading to me (and I have never got him lost in 25 years of navigating - well almost never :) )

He has recently replaced me with a piece of software, although from time to time it gets its knickers in a knot, or loses signal or whatever and then it is back to me and my maps (albeit often upside down).

Spiny Norman
03-01-2005, 11:48 AM
There's hope for you yet Libby, et al, found this via a Google search:


Psychologist Prof Deborah Saucier, of the University of Saskatchewan, in Canada, decided to re-examine the assumption that men are superior to women in their ability to navigate. "Research into the field of spatial ability time and again concludes that men are superior," she says. "You get the impression that, for most of the time, women are wandering around lost, which is clearly not the case."

Prof Saucier set up a simple experiment using male and female students, assigning them two different ways of getting from one point to another. One set of directions followed the classic Euclidian method employed by map designers, based on compass directions and distances, such as "walk north for 400 metres, then turn east". The second set used landmarks, such as "carry on until you get to the large oak tree, then turn left and walk until you get to a house with a yellow door".

Having assigned men and women to both sets of instructions, she set the timer and waited at the destination. Her results will vindicate women who say that while they may not be able to read maps as well as men, they can find their way using physical landmarks. "While the men performed better using the map-reading techniques, women did far better using the more descriptive directions."

;) I tease my wife about this a fair bit. She battles away with the maps but sometimes struggled. e.g. "Turn right!" she says. So I start turning right and she says "Not that way, I said RIGHT" as she points to the left!.

Bill Gletsos
03-01-2005, 11:55 AM
Of course women can read maps - we just have our own way of doing it.
Thats why I said "men do not believe" rather than "women cannot read maps".


I too need to turn maps upside down (perfectly logical - why would you not want the map matching the terrain?). However I am 100% the navigator in the family and Tony leaves all journey planning and map reading to me (and I have never got him lost in 25 years of navigating - well almost never :) )

He has recently replaced me with a piece of software, although from time to time it gets its knickers in a knot, or loses signal or whatever and then it is back to me and my maps (albeit often upside down).
Yes, satnav is great, especially when it still knows where you are even if it loses GPS signal. Mine has the ability to also give verbal directions in a feminine voice (I have that disabled).

I'll be using satnav for the trip to Mt Buller, with a detour via Canberra.

ursogr8
03-01-2005, 12:14 PM
Of course women can read maps - we just have our own way of doing it.

I too need to turn maps upside down (perfectly logical - why would you not want the map matching the terrain?). However I am 100% the navigator in the family and Tony leaves all journey planning and map reading to me (and I have never got him lost in 25 years of navigating - well almost never :) )

He has recently replaced me with a piece of software, although from time to time it gets its knickers in a knot, or loses signal or whatever and then it is back to me and my maps (albeit often upside down).

jenni

Thanks for sharing all this.

When touring NZ (Nth is.) we tried a different method when entering regional towns. Put the map away entirely and deliberately get lost. Then use visual clues such as
> motels like to be on the side of lakes,
> wealthy folks like to occupy high vantage points
> docks are obviously at sea level

to just sort of wander around for 30 minutes appreciating the layout of the town (errr no, ......no kids in the back on that trip). Of course, all this time 'lost'.

Then, take the map out and navigate to the destination required.


starter

Denis_Jessop
03-01-2005, 05:31 PM
There's hope for you yet Libby, et al, found this via a Google search:


Psychologist Prof Deborah Saucier, of the University of Saskatchewan, in Canada, decided to re-examine the assumption that men are superior to women in their ability to navigate. "Research into the field of spatial ability time and again concludes that men are superior," she says. "You get the impression that, for most of the time, women are wandering around lost, which is clearly not the case."

Prof Saucier set up a simple experiment using male and female students, assigning them two different ways of getting from one point to another. One set of directions followed the classic Euclidian method employed by map designers, based on compass directions and distances, such as "walk north for 400 metres, then turn east". The second set used landmarks, such as "carry on until you get to the large oak tree, then turn left and walk until you get to a house with a yellow door".

Having assigned men and women to both sets of instructions, she set the timer and waited at the destination. Her results will vindicate women who say that while they may not be able to read maps as well as men, they can find their way using physical landmarks. "While the men performed better using the map-reading techniques, women did far better using the more descriptive directions."

;) I tease my wife about this a fair bit. She battles away with the maps but sometimes struggled. e.g. "Turn right!" she says. So I start turning right and she says "Not that way, I said RIGHT" as she points to the left!.

Does this mean that women would be better chess players if they used descriptive rather than algebraic notation?
:uhoh: :) :hmm:

Denis Jessop

jenni
03-01-2005, 05:42 PM
Does this mean that women would be better chess players if they used descriptive rather than algebraic notation?
:uhoh: :) :hmm:

Denis Jessop

I don't think which notation you use matters - in fact I think using notation is what helps the average women turn chess from a visual-spacial game into a logic game. i.e using symbols helps turn it into something which taps into the verbal processing bits of the brain, where we have no problems.

Don_Harrison
03-01-2005, 09:47 PM
He has recently replaced me with a piece of software, although from time to time it gets its knickers in a knot, or loses signal or whatever and then it is back to me and my maps (albeit often upside down).

With the greatest respect to your better half (remember I am a bloke), as if one needs a GPS to get from Canberra to Mount Buller or anywhere else. I mean if you don't know where you are on the Hume Highway - or how to get to that road from the ACT - you should not be behind the wheel of a car. That darn car at Mount Buller is a case in point. It has been there for so long that it is now a nav reference for the GPS in your hubby's car but who wants to travel from Canberra to Mt Buller to simply crash into a car through looking at the GPS instead of the road?

As for needing a GPS in a major city what a lot of tosh. One rarely travels to or in "newer" suburbs so a 20 year old UBS works OK.

jenni
03-01-2005, 10:18 PM
With the greatest respect to your better half (remember I am a bloke), as if one needs a GPS to get from Canberra to Mount Buller or anywhere else. I mean if you don't know where you are on the Hume Highway - or how to get to that road from the ACT - you should not be behind the wheel of a car. That darn car at Mount Buller is a case in point. It has been there for so long that it is now a nav reference for the GPS in your hubby's car but who wants to travel from Canberra to Mt Buller to simply crash into a car through looking at the GPS instead of the road?

As for needing a GPS in a major city what a lot of tosh. One rarely travels to or in "newer" suburbs so a 20 year old UBS works OK.

I have to admit when he bought the Navman a couple of years ago, I thought it was just a "toy for the boy" and sulked a bit, but it has proved useful on a number of occasions.

We do a lot of travelling for chess e.g we went to Perth earlier this year for the schools and juniors. We were flying in, hiring a car and then driving down to Mandurah for the first night. I was able to get in the car, key in Mandurah as a destination and zip off, without having to try and work out a route, or get into problems with one way streets or the like.

We never use the Navman in Canberra and won't need it for mt Buller - I have already navigated Charles Z down there and it was very simple.

Kaitlin
04-01-2005, 12:13 AM
Big boys toys ... if they could they would use a GPS to find their chess peices :|

Thunderspirit
05-01-2005, 07:47 AM
Getting lost is half the fun.... The other half is finding where you are again!

Recherché
06-01-2005, 09:22 PM
No results?

The Minor finished yesterday. Here are the results as best I recall them:



5.5 Rob McCulloch (=1st, winner on tiebreak)
5.5 Joe Marks (=1st, second on tiebreak)
5.5 Stephan Taylor (=1st, third on tiebreak)
5.5 Rex Simmonds (=1st, fourth on tiebreak)
5 Eddy Katnic
5 Trent Parker (1st under 1400)
4.5 Roland Eime
3 Matthew Sweeney (=2nd under 1400)
3 Corey White (=2nd under 1400)
3 Lance Chiddy (=2nd under 1400)
2.5 Jamie Kenmure
0 Rory Chiddy


The tie-break system was progressive, followed by sum of opponent's scores, I think. The second tie break was required to separate second and third place. I'm not certain about the placings for those on =1st, in particular the order of second and third, hopefully someone will come and correct me if I've got it wrong. :)

As you can see, it was a closely contested tournament, with the final placings decided in a nail-biting last round.

jeffrei
06-01-2005, 09:28 PM
Well done Rob! :clap:

Rincewind
06-01-2005, 09:29 PM
As you can see, it was a closely contested tournament, with the final placings decided in a nail-biting last round.

Aren't you Rob McCulloch?

Recherché
06-01-2005, 10:05 PM
Well done Rob! :clap:

Thanks! :)


Aren't you Rob McCulloch?

Outed again! Looks like the hat and sunglasses just weren't enough. Perhaps I'll wear a false beard next time.

Rincewind
06-01-2005, 10:11 PM
Outed again! Looks like the hat and sunglasses just weren't enough. Perhaps I'll wear a false beard next time.

Just checking before I echoed Jeffrei's sentiments.

Well done also to Trent for 1st in the u1400 divison.

Recherché
06-01-2005, 10:15 PM
Well done also to Trent for 1st in the u1400 divison.

Indeed, he had a very good tournament. He defended against an attack very well in his game against me, and went on to win it. :)

Trent Parker
06-01-2005, 10:51 PM
Thanks Barry and Rob!! :D

Congrats to Rob for the =1st!!!!

I (embarrasingly) had a bit of a scare in the last round against my mate Rory Chiddy. He had improved out of sight from the start of this tournament, taking in every piece of advice that i and his other opponents had given him. I think i was a little bit complacent and thought that he would just make a mistake soon...... but he didn't..... he actually won a pawn off me..... my pieces were a bit tied down.... but he fell for a cheapo. In later analysis we found an excellent move for him that would have forced off my bishop for his knight and secured a passed pawn ;)

Alan Shore
06-01-2005, 10:54 PM
Well, it was close after all, the winners all on 5.5/8...

Looks like I would have won by a clear margin of 2.5 pts had I played... :D

Trent Parker
06-01-2005, 11:37 PM
Well, it was close after all, the winners all on 5.5/8...

Looks like I would have won by a clear margin of 2.5 pts had I played... :D

OOOoooooohhhhh you reckon????????

Now... wheres my pin...... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Recherché
07-01-2005, 12:30 AM
Perhaps Bruce should put his BB correspondence chess where his mouth is, eh? ;)

Alan Shore
07-01-2005, 03:43 PM
Perhaps Bruce should put his BB correspondence chess where his mouth is, eh? ;)

Haha.. well I'm having a tough game against Frosty already... but in my defence I never play time controls this long.. as you can tell perhaps from my rapid rating, I prefer those quicker time controls ;)

Of course it's great to be able to say I could have done anything but it's ultimately meaningless since you're the winner Rob, hehe.

Perhaps some time in the future, when a major event is held in sunny QLD you'll get your chance to lose to me. :cool:

ursogr8
09-01-2005, 08:33 AM
No results?

The Minor finished yesterday. Here are the results as best I recall them:



5.5 Rob McCulloch (=1st, winner on tiebreak)
5.5 Joe Marks (=1st, second on tiebreak)
5.5 Stephan Taylor (=1st, third on tiebreak)
5.5 Rex Simmonds (=1st, fourth on tiebreak)
5 Eddy Katnic
5 Trent Parker (1st under 1400)
4.5 Roland Eime
3 Matthew Sweeney (=2nd under 1400)
3 Corey White (=2nd under 1400)
3 Lance Chiddy (=2nd under 1400)
2.5 Jamie Kenmure
0 Rory Chiddy


The tie-break system was progressive, followed by sum of opponent's scores, I think. The second tie break was required to separate second and third place. I'm not certain about the placings for those on =1st, in particular the order of second and third, hopefully someone will come and correct me if I've got it wrong. :)

As you can see, it was a closely contested tournament, with the final placings decided in a nail-biting last round.

First, well done Rob...1st place in the Minor. :clap:

Second, Rob has been able to win the event, pack his bags, find his way home from Mt B. to Melbourne, log-on to this bulletin board, post the results, have a sleep, go to his Club on Friday night, win another prize in the ALLEGRO, have a sleep, do things on Saturday, have a sleep.....and still the Mt B web-site does not have the results of the MINOR listed anywhere I have been able to find?

Hope it improves for the juniors. :(

starter

Libby
09-01-2005, 09:24 AM
First, well done Rob...1st place in the Minor. :clap:

Second, Rob has been able to win the event, pack his bags, find his way home from Mt B. to Melbourne, log-on to this bulletin board, post the results, have a sleep, go to his Club on Friday night, win another prize in the ALLEGRO, have a sleep, do things on Saturday, have a sleep.....and still the Mt B web-site does not have the results of the MINOR listed anywhere I have been able to find?

Hope it improves for the juniors. :(

starter

Goodness - how unreasonable! Why on earth would you expect to be able to find the RESULTS somewhere???? :doh:

Running an adult event like this is obviously far more difficult than managing 160 children at an inter-school competition. Sometimes (and OK - I'm tooting my own horn but I have to give some kind of example) that involves me arriving about 8am to set up most of the 80 or so boards and often shifting the tables & chairs alone. About 8.30 parents start arriving and want to leave their kids with you because they have important "jobs" to go to. Then, more kids/parents/teachers arrive and start pestering you with questions so you have to deal with that and still get things set up. If you're lucky, some will help set up boards but often not quite the right way around so not always, in the end, helpful.

Then I take money, enter and adjust what I pre-entered (the night before) the teams into the computer. Sometimes I have an experienced helper, and sometimes I am training on the go. I get to gather together all the players, explain to them how to play the competition. I seat the 160 children. I run around as the arbiter (sorting out near-fisticuffs over touch-move disputes, and children who cry when they lose). I get called back and forth to the score table, depending on the experience of my helper, to fix problems with results and entering scores into the computer.

I seat the next round and the next, 7 in total. Mostly I don't eat lunch. I deal with teachers, parents, politicians and media (yes we invite them and yes, they come).

At the end, we do all the presentations. Every child takes home a ribbon and a four page flyer promting future events and chess activities. Sometimes people help pack up and sometimes i get to do that too. I try to bolt by 3.30pm and pick up my children from wherever they are and then run them about until at least 5pm because there is ballet or gym or soccer or (lucky me) sometimes even the after-school chess club for me to run.

I get home. Dump the results from the laptop to my PC. Send basic results to our webmaster. Write up results for schools & dispatch email versions straight away. Write a media release, sent to all outlets via email and by fax (strike twice and maybe once will hit). Then it is time to start packing up team envelopes for the next school zone event, often 2 are run in a week. Following up entries for the next event and following up non-payment for events already run.

For the Primary Comps last year - 8 such zone events and 2 finals. Plus weekend events, development programs and oh - I write a weekly bulletin for ACTJCL incorporating the team standings and top individual scores for the schools events.

BTW - my salary = $0.00 My net personal gain = 0+0+0 and occasionally some bitching from some parent who didn't like the way I spoke to their child at the end of the sixth event and when I was lugging the tenth box of equipment into my car or similar.

So why can't we find out what's happening in Mt Buller? And remember, I don't want a medal. I'm just wondering why it can't be done.

WhiteElephant
09-01-2005, 10:01 AM
Libby and starter, you guys must be forgetting the busy life of the organisers up on My Buller. What, with having to fix up computer problems, looking for missing adaptors, playing in the Rapid Play, driving to Mansfield for supplies, logging in to the BB to put up posts, who has time to update the website?

Recherché
09-01-2005, 03:08 PM
Second, Rob has been able to win the event, pack his bags, find his way home from Mt B. to Melbourne, log-on to this bulletin board, post the results, have a sleep, go to his Club on Friday night, win another prize in the ALLEGRO, have a sleep, do things on Saturday, have a sleep.....and still the Mt B web-site does not have the results of the MINOR listed anywhere I have been able to find?

The final standings are up in the "results" area now. But yeah, it did take rather a while...

Bill Gletsos
24-01-2005, 02:44 PM
Hey, Libby with regards to that discussion earlier in this thread related to why women cant read maps this article might shed some light.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,12033956-13762,00.html