PDA

View Full Version : Mt. B. .. A Repeatable Process?



Pages : [1] 2

ursogr8
25-09-2004, 05:16 PM
I have been requested to seek advice from some prospective ACF officials (given that nominations close on 8/10 for ACF positions).

1 Has any expectation been assumed by the Mt B. hotel chain re being awarded the Australian Junior subsequent to next January 2005?

2 Is it the expectation of the current ACF Executive that the next President would run a further complex of tourneys after 2005 at Mt B.?

starter

Garvinator
25-09-2004, 05:31 PM
I have been requested to seek advice from some prospective ACF officials (given that nominations close on 8/10 for ACF positions).

1 Has any expectation been assumed by the Mt B. hotel chain re being awarded the Australian Junior subsequent to next January 2005?

2 Is it the expectation of the current ACF Executive that the next President would run a further complex of tourneys after 2005 at Mt B.?

starter
why are you asking this on the website wish list thread?

ursogr8
25-09-2004, 08:49 PM
why are you asking this on the website wish list thread?

gagg''y

The cute answer > because I wish to know the answers.

The pragmatic answer > because I opened a few other Mt B. threads only to find them locked......and working from a dial-up...I got impatient.

The AR answer >.... because this is where I am posting.


starter

Garvinator
25-09-2004, 08:54 PM
gagg''y
The cute answer > because I wish to know the answers.
The pragmatic answer > because I opened a few other Mt B. threads only to find them locked......and working from a dial-up...I got impatient.
The AR answer >.... because this is where I am posting.
starter
i have sent you a pm.

ursogr8
25-09-2004, 09:02 PM
i have sent you a pm.

And I have sent you a return PM indicating that what you know should be in the public forum.

starter

Garvinator
25-09-2004, 09:06 PM
And I have sent you a return PM indicating that what you know should be in the public forum.

starter
and i have sent you a pm in reply to your pm :P

Alan Shore
26-09-2004, 07:37 AM
You gits, if you're sending PM's there's no need to post about it.. talk about redundancy!

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 08:10 AM
You gits, if you're sending PM's there's no need to post about it.. talk about redundancy!
BD

He sent me info. in a PM that I felt should be in a public forum since candidates for the ACF Executive positions are wondering if there are deals/expectations by the hotel chain about tourneys subsequent to 2005.
Does each future ACF Pres. have to take 3 months off work just to become a tournament manager?

gg'' is willing to pass on detail in PMs and I will respect that privacy. But I have the opinion that others would be interested in the detail. That was what my post #5 said to encourage gg'' to share.

starter

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 09:09 AM
Does each future ACF Pres. have to take 3 months off work just to become a tournament manager?
no.

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 09:20 AM
You gits, if you're sending PM's there's no need to post about it.. talk about redundancy!

Originally Posted by starter
Does each future ACF Pres. have to take 3 months off work just to become a tournament manager?


no.

BD
As you can now see, we are likely to only find out the details of gagged'' 's PM details by playing '20 questions' via posts here. :wall: :rolleyes:
starter

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 09:25 AM
As you can now see, we are likely to only find out the details of gagged'' 's PM details by playing '20 questions' via posts here. :wall: :rolleyes:
starter
recommends electrical currents and wires, also whips might help ;)

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 09:30 AM
1 Has any expectation been assumed by the Mt B. hotel chain re being awarded the Australian Junior subsequent to next January 2005? All details relating to any future accor/mercure deal will be released at the national conference on January 6 and the state delegates will decide what path we take.


2 Is it the expectation of the current ACF Executive that the next President would run a further complex of tourneys after 2005 at Mt B.?
the current situation was highly unusual and hopefully will not be repeated in the future. There is no expectation as far as i know, that the next president will have to run a further complex of tournaments after 2005 at mt buller.

If the deal gets up, it would be more likely that some of the current organisers run the 2006 championships/juniors.

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 09:34 AM
recommends electrical currents and wires, also whips might help ;)

I was thinking more along the lines of an emoticon that had 'pulling teeth'. :uhoh: :hand:

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 09:53 AM
All details relating to any future accor/mercure deal will be released at the national conference on January 6 and the state delegates will decide what path we take.


the current situation was highly unusual and hopefully will not be repeated in the future. There is no expectation as far as i know, that the next president will have to run a further complex of tournaments after 2005 at mt buller.

If the deal gets up, it would be more likely that some of the current organisers run the 2006 championships/juniors.

gg''
Does that mean that the 2006 Juniors venue is within the deal?
starter

jenni
26-09-2004, 11:50 AM
I think it is reasonably general knowledge that if the Open and Juniors are successful, then there will be a 5 year sponsorship deal proposed at the National conference. I have been told on at least 2 occasions by Roman, that he understands that the ASC is a separate issue and must be run by the States in a school environment.

The Junior organisations have already taken the position that no decision can be made at the national conference, as the 2005 Juniors will not have taken place and thus no evaluation of the success or otherwise of the Juniors can take place.

I think worrying about all this is a bit premature, as if the events are not successful, it is unlikely that more sponsorship money will be forthcoming. In particular I think the Mercure would want to see some return for their money in terms of bed nights booked.

While I think the Mercure works for the open (and I have every intention in the next couple of weeks of booking a room for Shannon at the Mercure - just trying to find a (female :) ) room mate for her at the moment), I am not so sure that families going to the juniors find it suitable. It is not that the accommodation isn't really good value for money, just that families work in absolutes, not "value for money". In other words it doesn't matter how good the deal is, if your budget doesn't run to that level of accommodation, you just can't make it stretch. Also kitchens are another big issue for families.

On current numbers the ACT has 34 definite kids going and another 4 or 5 considering going. This is a huge contingent - by comparison when the Aus Juniors was held in Canberra in 2001, 38 ACT players took part. If other states do their part in encouraging juniors to go, then the Aus Juniors in Mt Buller will be a fantastic success. Whether the Mercure will be happy with bed numbers I am not sure. ACT parents have been offered a choice of lodge accommodation or the Mercure. While some have opted for the Mercure - we currently have at least 4 kids booked in there (maybe a few more), most are preferring to stay somewhere where they have access to cooking facilities.

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 11:59 AM
I think it is reasonably general knowledge that if the Open and Juniors are successful, then there will be a 5 year sponsorship deal proposed at the National conference.

Thanks jenni for taking the time to give us detail.
Actually, I have not met anyone who knew this was to be a 5 year offer; is that by money or venue?


The Junior organisations have already taken the position that no decision can be made at the national conference, as the 2005 Juniors will not have taken place and thus no evaluation of the success or otherwise of the Juniors can take place.

As you know, there are Melbourne based folk who would like to bid for this.



I think worrying about all this is a bit premature, as if the events are not successful, it is unlikely that more sponsorship money will be forthcoming.

It became relevant in this time-frame for those contemplating responding to the ACF calling for nominations by 8/10/4.

starter

jenni
26-09-2004, 12:31 PM
Thanks jenni for taking the time to give us detail.
Actually, I have not met anyone who knew this was to be a 5 year offer; is that by money or venue?
I am not aware of the details, just the basic info. At the risk of sounding like GG, I think probably only George really knows all the details. I really believe that as much info as possible should be in the open domain as soon as possible. People can only support something if they feel part of it. However I am not sure that all the details have been sorted out as yet - I think it very much depends on what happens at the Open.



As you know, there are Melbourne based folk who would like to bid for this.

Absolutely - obviously states need to be able to have local based Aus juniors, so that juniors whose parents are reluctant to travel have the opportunity to compete (and perhaps be prepared to travel in the future). However the 2 are not necessarily incompatible.



It became relevant in this time-frame for those contemplating responding to the ACF calling for nominations by 8/10/4.



Well I would have thought anyone planning to nominate should just do it. If they are keen to make things happen, then they need to be part of the process. If the people standing for office don't agree with the sponsorship deal, then the best way to change it is to take office.

eclectic
26-09-2004, 04:09 PM
perhaps if it was a long term contract with accor rather than mercure in particular so that championships etc could still go to different population centres each year but with accor making accomodation available depending on what hotels etc they owned

i know they own the victoria hotel cnr of little collins and swanston streets in melbourne next to the melbourne town hall where championship events were held some years ago

not sure if similar cosy arrangements exist in other states but it would seem that this is the direction in which a long term arrangement should go

eclectic

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 05:30 PM
perhaps if it was a long term contract with accor rather than mercure in particular so that championships etc could still go to different population centres each year but with accor making accomodation available depending on what hotels etc they owned

i know they own the victoria hotel cnr of little collins and swanston streets in melbourne next to the melbourne town hall where championship events were held some years ago

not sure if similar cosy arrangements exist in other states but it would seem that this is the direction in which a long term arrangement should go

eclectic

Ah, my friend eclectic, you must have been in the circle of conversation, last Friday night, that speculated on just this point. And so what did you think of the question in regard to whether it is the off-season for hotels in Capital cities, in January-February? We can all see how Mt B gets
> new cash-flow from chess tenants, in Jan-Feb, starting from what previously might have been zero
>> takes 50% of this and gives it back to chess promoters in the form prize-money contribution, brochure costs, management fee, or whatever,

but, does the same financial model apply on the corner of Little Collins and Swanston?

Hence the thread title...Mt B. .. A Repeatable Process?


starter

eclectic
26-09-2004, 05:44 PM
Ah, my friend eclectic, you must have been in the circle of conversation, last Friday night, that speculated on just this point.

starter

no,

i do not have the gift of astral travel

eclectic

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 05:54 PM
no,

i do not have the gift of astral travel

eclectic

Yes, but, ........

what do you think about the financial model question, eclectic.

eclectic
26-09-2004, 06:11 PM
Yes, but, ........

what do you think about the financial model question, eclectic.

the model seems ok but what will be tested this year is whether or not the venue is too isolated thus deterring repeat interest from players

repeat events might need to contain more rest days (perhaps in 2 day blocks) so that anyone who wants to travel to melbourne to do other things can

for a permanent venue varying degrees of subsidies for interstate players might be need to be considered as they would not have future events in their home turf where they could compensate for outlay

i don't think anyone put in a bid to have mt buller as one of the world championship reunification match venues

poor kirsan would have been too sick as his limo driver speeded around the tortuous trail from mansfield

eclectic

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 07:24 PM
I am not aware of the details, just the basic info. At the risk of sounding like GG, I think probably only George really knows all the details. I really believe that as much info as possible should be in the open domain as soon as possible. People can only support something if they feel part of it. However I am not sure that all the details have been sorted out as yet - I think it very much depends on what happens at the Open.

jenni, you dont sound anything like me- my line is ask George at georgeshoward@hotmail.com ;)

Ok since Jenni has opened up about the deal, i will reveal a lot more, minus the financial stuff as that really is commercial in confidence (the amounts are rather large, in my opinion).

The deal as i know it is-

A five year deal. This year is part of the deal, but is a trial. The whole details etc will be detailed at the acf national conference, with the vote to be taken at a later stage after the juniors by the sounds of it, which i think is fair enough.

Sponsorships and other funds are available each year for the five years. This then provides any new organisers with a ready made sponsorship fund. Also the new organisers would have a ready made model to use if they wish.

The 2005 open and juniors, 2007 open and juniors, 2009 open and juniors are to be run at mt buller.

The 2006 championships, 2006 juniors, 2008 championships and 2008 juniors can be run in any capital city of the acf's choice.

My thoughts are that for the 2006 championships and juniors, some of the current organisers should run these two events. This would provide continuity for the first two years.

I dont know if the 2006 championships and juniors must be run in the same city? I think this would be advisable, but may not be necessary.

Us organisers keep saying mercure and as eclectic has noted, there is a mercure hotel in melbourne. There is also one in Brisbane and so i suspect there is one in each city. The deal is actually with accor hotels if i remember correctly. We keep saying mercure because the main accommodation venue is mercure grand chalet.

The australian schools chess championships will no longer be part of any of these deals. It is only part of the 2005 deal.

My personal vision is-

2005 open and juniors at buller

2006 championships and juniors in brisbane. the acf rotation schedule lists caq has having bidding rights for 2006. I think it would make a bit of sense to have myself involved in the running of the 2006 championships and juniors to provide continuity between the first and second years.

2007 open and juniors at buller

2008 championships and juniors in melbourne.

2009 open and juniors at buller.

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 08:31 PM
jenni, you dont sound anything like me- my line is ask George at georgeshoward@hotmail.com ;)

Ok since Jenni has opened up about the deal, i will reveal a lot more, minus the financial stuff as that really is commercial in confidence (the amounts are rather large, in my opinion).

The deal as i know it is-

A five year deal. This year is part of the deal, but is a trial. The whole details etc will be detailed at the acf national conference, with the vote to be taken at a later stage after the juniors by the sounds of it, which i think is fair enough.

Sponsorships and other funds are available each year for the five years. This then provides any new organisers with a ready made sponsorship fund. Also the new organisers would have a ready made model to use if they wish.

The 2005 open and juniors, 2007 open and juniors, 2009 open and juniors are to be run at mt buller.

The 2006 championships, 2006 juniors, 2008 championships and 2008 juniors can be run in any capital city of the acf's choice.

My thoughts are that for the 2006 championships and juniors, some of the current organisers should run these two events. This would provide continuity for the first two years.

I dont know if the 2006 championships and juniors must be run in the same city? I think this would be advisable, but may not be necessary.

Us organisers keep saying mercure and as eclectic has noted, there is a mercure hotel in melbourne. There is also one in Brisbane and so i suspect there is one in each city. The deal is actually with accor hotels if i remember correctly. We keep saying mercure because the main accommodation venue is mercure grand chalet.

The australian schools chess championships will no longer be part of any of these deals. It is only part of the 2005 deal.

My personal vision is-

2005 open and juniors at buller

2006 championships and juniors in brisbane. the acf rotation schedule lists caq has having bidding rights for 2006. I think it would make a bit of sense to have myself involved in the running of the 2006 championships and juniors to provide continuity between the first and second years.

2007 open and juniors at buller

2008 championships and juniors in melbourne.

2009 open and juniors at buller.

Well, well, well, Mr Un-ga''gged
At 9.09 this morning you were giving me one word (two letters, rhymes with po) responses on this topic.
Bit by bit during the day you have become a bit more responsive. Obviously a post-count strategy eh? Could not have anything to do with 'jenni' upstaging you. I will watch with interest Amiel's reaction in the morning when he sees your flip-flop.

Thanks for the detailed response. It really is a big step forward in our understanding. It was not all that tough for you to type more than one line, for a change, was it?

No comment from me for the moment while I ring those who commissioned the thread in the first place. Your revelations will put their plans up the spout.

Good post of yours btw...thanks.

starter

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 08:57 PM
No comment from me for the moment while I ring those who commissioned the thread in the first place. Your revelations will put their plans up the spout.

Good post of yours btw...thanks.

starter
remember, some of the plans i posted were my thoughts and i have stated so in the relevant areas. For instance, the location of the 2006 and 2008 championships/juniors.

Anyways, what were the plans of those who commissioned this thread? All may not be lost for everyone.

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 08:59 PM
At 9.09 this morning you were giving me one word (two letters, rhymes with po) responses on this topic. Bit by bit during the day you have become a bit more responsive. i didnt post after 10am anywhere, i wasnt even at home or near a computer till i got home at about 630pm. so i am not sure how i become more responsive during the day :uhoh:

peanbrain
26-09-2004, 09:53 PM
My thoughts are that for the 2006 championships and juniors, some of the current organisers should run these two events. This would provide continuity for the first two years.


given your conflict of interest in this matter you should keep your opinion to yourself. Besides who cares what your think?! :whistle:

Mercure will not to want to know you after this year's event because most of their rooms are left empty while whole lot of die hard chess players set up camps on their front lawn. :uhoh:

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 10:09 PM
given your conflict of interest in this matter you should keep your opinion to yourself. Besides who cares what your think?! :whistle:

Mercure will not to want to know you after this year's event because most of their rooms are left empty while whole lot of die hard chess players set up camps on their front lawn. :uhoh:
i think starter could have run a good market on when the first troll would appear.

peanbrain
26-09-2004, 11:42 PM
i think starter could have run a good market on when the first troll would appear.

ggray - how much are you getting paid as the mouthpiece for mt bull 3? I am interested because I think george is not getting good value for his money and even arosar is doing a better job than you. :eh:

Garvinator
26-09-2004, 11:48 PM
ggray - how much are you getting paid as the mouthpiece for mt bull 3? I am interested because I think george is not getting good value for his money and even arosar is doing a better job than you. :eh:
do you actually have anything sensible to contribute?

Kevin Bonham
27-09-2004, 02:06 AM
ggray - how much are you getting paid as the mouthpiece for mt bull 3?

My guess would be nothing. Maybe the trolls would like to pass a hat around?

eclectic
27-09-2004, 05:06 AM
My guess would be nothing. Maybe the trolls would like to pass a hat around?

why not wait for one of the "gooses" to lay a golden egg instead ?

eclectic

arosar
27-09-2004, 09:39 AM
The deal is actually with accor hotels if i remember correctly.

gray, I've got a piece of advice for you mate - since you seem like a good bloke (or so that's the feedback I hear about you). Quit playing Johhny 'Rodent' Howard's style of deceiving the public by hiding the truth. Just out with it. jenni's just made you look dumb and stupid.

Now about the highlighted text: do you think or do you know?

The chess public won't mind a 5-year deal with Accor mate. But they'll surely mind about a 5-year deal with Mt-nowhere.

AR

arosar
27-09-2004, 09:41 AM
My guess would be nothing. Maybe the trolls would like to pass a hat around?

Your ploy is well and truly familiar to us all now Kevo. Anyone whom you dislike is either a troll or a goose. But it ain't workin' mate. The question is a perfectly legitimate one.

AR

arosar
27-09-2004, 09:42 AM
Here's another question: where's them promised brochures?

AR

Garvinator
27-09-2004, 11:41 AM
Here's another question: where's them promised brochures?

AR
all printed and being put together tonight by George, Andrew and Alex. George has been away on Kangaroo lsland last week for work matters and only returned last night. They will then be sent out to all state associations and clubs on about Wednesday or thursday.

Garvinator
05-10-2004, 04:23 PM
Hello Everyone,

The brochure mail out is almost complete from the adelaide end, i have recieved the boxes that are for qld players/clubs and will be sending them out in the next couple of days here in qld.

For the other states, can i have an indication from representatives of clubs, states etc of those that have recieved theirs or those who want brochures and have not recieved them yet.

Cheers,

Garvin Gray
Mt Buller Chess Tournaments Organiser

P.S. Please be aware that some boxes/mailouts may still be on their way.

Brian_Jones
05-10-2004, 05:26 PM
Australian Chess Enterprises (ACE) and Koala Chess Club received their forms in Riverstone (North West Sydney) today!

george
13-10-2004, 01:49 AM
Hi All,

Garvin is replying to your questions with all the information possible. He was recruited to the Organising group because of his enthusiasm for the project - his desire to work hard and his general understanding of Event Management. I am generally very loyal to people who try their best - there are plusses and minuses with all of us organisers but such is life and generally I go with the flow and adapt situations as best as possible to achieve the desired outcome.

The 5 year deal whatever it will be , will be delivered to ACF on January 6th - ACF with a new President can then take as much time as it needs and is acceptable to Mercure Grand Chalet to make a decision - time frames for decisions would I suspect be negotiated between ACF Council/Accor or whomever is the negotiating vehicle.

Certainly what has been shown is that Mercure Grand Chalet can get a group of sponsors together to support such an undertaking.

Jenny and Garvin are right when they say the number of bednights at Mercure will be important from Mercure's point of view - how much is enough I really dont know. There is a lot more information re attitudes from key Mercure Grand Chalet / Grollo Corporation people which are commercial in confidence.

If we had 18 months to prepare for this thing consultations and negotiations with key interest groups could have been prolonged and detailed but we did not have the time but my analysis of the situation was that I was prepared to do everything I could to salvage the proposal.

Back to the thread topic - is it repeatable - YES it certainly is and no the new President doesnt have to take 3 months off work to make it happen because a good template ( time will judge this but at this stage I say it is a very good template) would have been established and hopefully the set of Organisers needed for any future Mt Buller Tourneys will not have to reinvent the wheel. I and the team of Organisers have been helped by advice from a group of experienced players and organisers. We have listened to advice given and problems of various proportions have been circumnavigated as a result.

I am positive that the tournaments will be successful and that players in both tournaments will be pleasantly surprised as perceived problems dont materialise and an enjoyable time is had by all.

Kindest Regards TO ALL
George Howard

Kevin Bonham
13-10-2004, 10:42 PM
Your ploy is well and truly familiar to us all now Kevo. Anyone whom you dislike is either a troll or a goose. But it ain't workin' mate. The question is a perfectly legitimate one.

Asked with the best of intentions too. Suuuuuure. :lol:

cincinnatus
15-10-2004, 03:45 PM
#29

ggray - how much are you getting paid as the mouthpiece for mt bull 3? I am interested because I think george is not getting good value for his money and even arosar is doing a better job than you.

Isn't it obvious.

The various administrators, mouthpieces and hangers-on will receive "free" accommodation and meals at the Mercure. The expense of this will be offset by the sponsorship monies provided by the Mercure, inflating the nominal figure for Mercure sponsorship without actually hurting them too much.

This munificence is either more administrators with their paws in the honey-pot at the expense of the players (as always) or, forthelongtermgoodofAustralianchess (to recall the mantra) ... you decide.

Garvinator
15-10-2004, 04:03 PM
#29


Isn't it obvious.

The various administrators, mouthpieces and hangers-on will receive "free" accommodation and meals at the Mercure. The expense of this will be offset by the sponsorship monies provided by the Mercure, inflating the nominal figure for Mercure sponsorship without actually hurting them too much.

This munificence is either more administrators with their paws in the honey-pot at the expense of the players (as always) or, forthelongtermgoodofAustralianchess (to recall the mantra) ... you decide.
hey cinny me good mate, care to tell everyone who you are if you want to claim that everyone is on the take. How about you provide some decent evidence of your claims. Otherwise we will just ignore you and ask for your posts which are incorrect to be deleted.

If you think i am treating you absolute contempt, you are right. :hand:

arosar
15-10-2004, 04:21 PM
. . . Otherwise we will ... ask for your posts which are incorrect to be deleted.

You seem to have dictatorial tendencies gray. The course of action you suggest would not be wise.

AR

Garvinator
15-10-2004, 04:35 PM
You seem to have dictatorial tendencies gray. The course of action you suggest would not be wise.

AR
and neither is blatant defamation.

arosar
15-10-2004, 04:57 PM
and neither is blatant defamation.

cinny didn't defame anyone gray.

He was merely suggesting that the sponsorship is inflated.

The question for you is, is it inflated?

AR

jenni
15-10-2004, 05:04 PM
#29


Isn't it obvious.

The various administrators, mouthpieces and hangers-on will receive "free" accommodation and meals at the Mercure. The expense of this will be offset by the sponsorship monies provided by the Mercure, inflating the nominal figure for Mercure sponsorship without actually hurting them too much.

This munificence is either more administrators with their paws in the honey-pot at the expense of the players (as always) or, forthelongtermgoodofAustralianchess (to recall the mantra) ... you decide.

Well this is a poisonous little post isn't it?

Getting "free" accommodation and food is such a big lure - don't know why I don't give up my business and just become a permanent chess organiser.

I can't speak for the organisers of the other tournaments, as I have not been very involved with their arrangements.

However for the schools

Charles Zworestine is being employed as a DOP and I am the main organiser.

Charles is getting paid $200. Out of this he has to pay the cost of his and my transport. Given the current cost of petrol that will barely cover his travel to and from Sydney. He is also stopping in Canberra, staying the night at my house and then transporting me and 50 chess sets and digitals, trophies and various other things to Mt Buller.

Yes we are getting free accommodation and food and why not? Surprise surprise - we wouldn't be there if we weren't running the damn tournament so why shouldn't we be given accommodation?

In case you are thinking we are going to be living it up in some suite at the Mercure, we are staying in something called the Heli house. Don't know what it is, but I understand it is dormitory accommodation with shared facilities. I am currently thinking of paying for my own accommodation, as not sure if I could cope with that.

So for $200 plus dormitory accommodation and el chepo meals, you get 2 experienced people to run a tournament. I do not get any reimbursement for postage or phonecalls and have already spent money on both. I am an e-mail junkie, so am hoping to keep that to a minimum.

I have already lost count of the hours I have spent on admin work for the schools and my work load hasn't even really started.

rob
15-10-2004, 06:07 PM
Well this is a poisonous little post isn't it?

Getting "free" accommodation and food is such a big lure - don't know why I don't give up my business and just become a permanent chess organiser.

I can't speak for the organisers of the other tournaments, as I have not been very involved with their arrangements.

However for the schools

Charles Zworestine is being employed as a DOP and I am the main organiser.

Charles is getting paid $200. Out of this he has to pay the cost of his and my transport. Given the current cost of petrol that will barely cover his travel to and from Sydney. He is also stopping in Canberra, staying the night at my house and then transporting me and 50 chess sets and digitals, trophies and various other things to Mt Buller.

Yes we are getting free accommodation and food and why not? Surprise surprise - we wouldn't be there if we weren't running the damn tournament so why shouldn't we be given accommodation?

In case you are thinking we are going to be living it up in some suite at the Mercure, we are staying in something called the Heli house. Don't know what it is, but I understand it is dormitory accommodation with shared facilities. I am currently thinking of paying for my own accommodation, as not sure if I could cope with that.

So for $200 plus dormitory accommodation and el chepo meals, you get 2 experienced people to run a tournament. I do not get any reimbursement for postage or phonecalls and have already spent money on both. I am an e-mail junkie, so am hoping to keep that to a minimum.

I have already lost count of the hours I have spent on admin work for the schools and my work load hasn't even really started.

Good onya Jenni! :clap:

Don't get disturbed by a tiny minority of non-organising whingers (ppl like to find anything they can to complain about - its not my fault I lost the game!).

I'm sure that most players and their families will appreciate your voluntary efforts. There seems to be a severe shortage of capable volunteers - chessplayers are lucky to have some real unselfish gems about.

I hope you find the tournaments satisfying.

jenni
15-10-2004, 06:13 PM
I hope you find the tournaments satisfying.

I am really looking forward to them - I love junior tournaments, they are always so exciting and unpredictable :)

george
16-10-2004, 12:46 PM
Hi All,

The free accomodation is to make sure we have good organisers and great arbiters in that they will not be out of pocket.

The free accomodation is on top of the sponsorship monies while I will take monies from the pool to pay for organisers food expenses for the same reason.

People will be paid varying amounts depending on what arrangements have been found acceptable to various parties and as the Main Organiser I am responsible for the bottom line but if a profit looks like being made it is my intention to put as much back into the tournament as possible but I think a profit may be a fanciful thought.

Any loss of course comes directly out of my pocket.

Regards
George Howard

Garvinator
16-10-2004, 01:10 PM
Any loss of course comes directly out of my pocket.
I think for everyone this is a key point, ppl might complain about certain arrangments financially, but i dont hear anyone saying they will accept responsibility for any losses incurred.

cincinnatus
04-11-2004, 10:25 AM
2004 ... Australian Schools Team Championship thread #56

Now that Roman has talked me into paying for a room ...
This thread #46

Yes we are getting free accommodation and food and why not?

:hmm:

jenni
04-11-2004, 10:50 AM
2004 ... Australian Schools Team Championship thread #56

This thread #46


:hmm:

It is actually quite obvious I would have thought?

I can stay for free if I stay in lodge accommodation, known as the Heli house. (this is where all the helpers, such as George, Charles Z etc are staying).

I have chosen to stay in the Mercure for the schools comp, so I am paying $120 per night (or whatever the single occupancy rate is for a room). My kids team is competing (they finally managed to win their playoff!) and they will be in the Mercure as well on the Friday and Saturday night, but I will be there on my own on the Thursday and Sunday nights (coming early, leaving late in order to set up and pack up).

Roman didn't think I would enjoy being in a lodge with a whole lot of guys and I have to agree (not that I don't really like Charles etc).

Quote from e-mail to them breaking the sad news.

"Incidentally I am afraid I am deserting you for the competition. I
>thought seriously of staying with you in the Heli house, but I think I
>am a bit old and need my comfort, so I have booked a room at the
>Mercure. (Actually Roman talked me into it, and it seemed worth it for
>the bit of extra money). I am quite happy to have meals with you, so I
>am not being totally anti social!"

ursogr8
16-11-2004, 09:12 PM
Hi All,

The 5 year deal whatever it will be , will be delivered to ACF on January 6th - ACF with a new President can then take as much time as it needs and is acceptable to Mercure Grand Chalet to make a decision - time frames for decisions would I suspect be negotiated between ACF Council/Accor or whomever is the negotiating vehicle.

Certainly what has been shown is that Mercure Grand Chalet can get a group of sponsors together to support such an undertaking.

Jenny and Garvin are right when they say the number of bednights at Mercure will be important from Mercure's point of view - how much is enough I really dont know. There is a lot more information re attitudes from key Mercure Grand Chalet / Grollo Corporation people which are commercial in confidence.

If we had 18 months to prepare for this thing consultations and negotiations with key interest groups could have been prolonged and detailed but we did not have the time but my analysis of the situation was that I was prepared to do everything I could to salvage the proposal.

Back to the thread topic - is it repeatable - YES it certainly is and no the new President doesnt have to take 3 months off work to make it happen because a good template ( time will judge this but at this stage I say it is a very good template) would have been established and hopefully the set of Organisers needed for any future Mt Buller Tourneys will not have to reinvent the wheel. I and the team of Organisers have been helped by advice from a group of experienced players and organisers. We have listened to advice given and problems of various proportions have been circumnavigated as a result.

I am positive that the tournaments will be successful and that players in both tournaments will be pleasantly surprised as perceived problems dont materialise and an enjoyable time is had by all.

Kindest Regards TO ALL
George Howard

George
Thanks for this post addressing whether Mt B. can be repeatable.

It was always clear that if the deal was successful for Mecure that they would wish to repeat.
The question was, are we in a position to resource a repeat given that the effort takes place away from a populatuion centre.

I think you have a valid point that you have now templated an approach and this is a good platform for our next event.

starter

Garvinator
16-11-2004, 09:25 PM
George
Thanks for this post addressing whether Mt B. can be repeatable.

It was always clear that if the deal was successful for Mecure that they would wish to repeat.
The question was, are we in a position to resource a repeat given that the effort takes place away from a populatuion centre.

I think you have a valid point that you have now templated an approach and this is a good platform for our next event.

starter
are you asking a question that might require an answer? I am just unclear about what you are exactly asking?

ursogr8
16-11-2004, 09:30 PM
are you asking a question that might require an answer? I am just unclear about what you are exactly asking?

gg;;

No. Just thread maintenance because I was the initiator.

In the first post I asked some questions.
A few following posts were sensible, a few were not.

Then George gave a definitive answer...which I just thanked him for.

starter

Garvinator
16-11-2004, 09:32 PM
gg;;

No. Just thread maintenance because I was the initiator.

In the first post I asked some questions.
A few following posts were sensible, a few were not.

Then George gave a definitive answer...which I just thanked him for.

starter
ok then :D

ursogr8
24-11-2004, 08:41 AM
George
Thanks for this post addressing whether Mt B. can be repeatable.

It was always clear that if the deal was successful for Mecure that they would wish to repeat.
The question was, are we in a position to resource a repeat given that the effort takes place away from a populatuion centre.

I think you have a valid point that you have now templated an approach and this is a good platform for our next event.

starter





24 November 2004

So george is at Mt Buller, already.
gg'' is getting ready to go to Mt Buller.

Even though George says he has templated all arrangements, I am still having trouble imagining how we are to repeat this labour effort, in this location.

The thread title was
Mt. B. .. A Repeatable Process?

starter

Garvinator
24-11-2004, 08:48 AM
24 November 2004

So george is at Mt Buller, already.
gg'' is getting ready to go to Mt Buller.

Even though George says he has templated all arrangements, I am still having trouble imagining how we are to repeat this labour effort, in this location.

The thread title was
Mt. B. .. A Repeatable Process?

starter
Mr starter sir,

I think George is there a little bit early, but that is up to him :D Remember though that we are going to be there for the astc on December 4/5. This is the only year that the astc will be any part of any possible accor deal. This will mean for the accor deal that there will not be any need for any future organisers to be committed in early december to running the astc.

So the labour effort is less than it is this year. Any further questions?

P.S did you decide to ask now cause you know i am around the bb atm ;) :lol:

arosar
24-11-2004, 08:49 AM
Mt. B. .. A Repeatable Process?

Any dang process is repeatable. The question is: should it be repeated? What's my net present value? My cost benefit? ROI?

I'm sure, being our resident metrics guy, that'd be what you're looking for.

AR

ursogr8
24-11-2004, 10:25 AM
Mr starter sir,

I think George is there a little bit early, but that is up to him :D Remember though that we are going to be there for the astc on December 4/5. This is the only year that the astc will be any part of any possible accor deal. This will mean for the accor deal that there will not be any need for any future organisers to be committed in early december to running the astc.

So the labour effort is less than it is this year. Any further questions?

P.S did you decide to ask now cause you know i am around the bb atm ;) :lol:

GG''

I asked the question for the reason I put in my post. No hidden agenda by me.
I wish Mt B. good luck, and I recognise the huge effort being put in by George et al.
I simply posted at this time because I noted the date and the announcements by GH and GG re location now and in the short term.
"Is the labour effort repeatable", is the question that crosses my mind.

starter

ursogr8
24-11-2004, 10:36 AM
Any dang process is repeatable.


Good morning Amiel

A process is only repeatable if the labour is available. Most chess labour is volunteer and is a challenge to harness. The process may not be repeatable unless there is an attraction for others to volunteer in future Mt B.'s.




The question is: should it be repeated? What's my net present value? My cost benefit? ROI?

I'm sure, being our resident metrics guy, that'd be what you're looking for.

AR


Well, Amiel. If those are the questions that you want to ask; then go right ahead and ask. You don't need my imprimatur.

But personally, I don't think you have put your finger on the key questions.

starter

Garvinator
24-11-2004, 11:05 AM
A process is only repeatable if the labour is available. Most chess labour is volunteer and is a challenge to harness. The process may not be repeatable unless there is an attraction for others to volunteer in future Mt B.'s.

yes labour is required. that is always the case. You say 'challenge to harness' and I agree. Being able to recieve some financial compensation for your time has to help with harnessing administration help.

Remember with this deal, the organisers are paid (not a full time wage, but a decent amount compared to the normal state of affairs). This means that some ppl might be able to take a couple or so weeks off from work (paid leave, unpaid leave etc) to run Mt Buller.

Also for others, maybe some of the younger ppl with a get out there attitude, it presents an opportunity to get some experience dealing with an international company and to potentially get a good reputation for running sporting events, which could then lead to more employment opportunities.

ursogr8
21-12-2004, 07:28 AM
yes labour is required. that is always the case. You say 'challenge to harness' and I agree. Being able to recieve some financial compensation for your time has to help with harnessing administration help.

Remember with this deal, the organisers are paid (not a full time wage, but a decent amount compared to the normal state of affairs). This means that some ppl might be able to take a couple or so weeks off from work (paid leave, unpaid leave etc) to run Mt Buller.

Also for others, maybe some of the younger ppl with a get out there attitude, it presents an opportunity to get some experience dealing with an international company and to potentially get a good reputation for running sporting events, which could then lead to more employment opportunities.

Good morning gg''

Now that another month has gone by, are we any closer to knowing the proposal to be put to the national conference re a repeat of Mt B. in that locale? I note in the interim, george has declared this was a one-off for him. Has any other candidate paid-administrator emerged to learn from you guys?

regards
starter

jenni
21-12-2004, 10:35 AM
Good morning gg''

Now that another month has gone by, are we any closer to knowing the proposal to be put to the national conference re a repeat of Mt B. in that locale? I note in the interim, george has declared this was a one-off for him. Has any other candidate paid-administrator emerged to learn from you guys?

regards
starter

I can't see how it can be repeatable, as even if the Mercure/Accor want to repeat it (and that seems unlikely given the bed nights being sold??), I think the juniors will vote against it.

While I am trying to keep an open mind until after the event, I have been approached by large numbers of parents all with the same message. "We will put up with this once, but NOT every 2 years."

Garvinator
21-12-2004, 11:04 AM
how about we just cancel it now then and just give up? We have the opportunity for a large sponsorship deal, something that we have not had before. The chance to get a foothold with a large international player, Grollo Industries and just because some parents noses are out of joint cause they have to travel a bit and it may not be ideal for them, the junior associations are going to vote against the deal.

Well actually how is that the junior associations are going to vote against the deal? yes act has a junior association and because you dont seem to be in favour of it, you are going to vote against it, but i am only aware of nsw being another state that has a formal state junior association.

I am well aware that things are perfect with the current arrangement and I certainly would like to have seen a few things changed or restructured and they will be if we go back in to mt buller in two years time. But that is the point, some parts of the deal can be re worked if mercure/accor are told about it, but that isnt exactly in the nature of some of the parents is it, as recent events have shown :hand:

And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. I will probably tell my opinion as well to some parents during the junior if I hear some bitching going on, more than usual will be my limit.

With more preparation time, we can make some changes which with more time this time, could have happened and we could have arranged more activities.

Maybe also a slightly different organising team will also be able to organise more play activities for all concerned ;)

I just dont think most ppl have seen what is truly possible out of this deal. Remember we are talking about Grollo Industries, so maybe if this goes well, they might want to help with other tournaments in chess and flight deals. All this is possible if junior associations vote for the deal. If not then everyone is no further advanced and our sport remains in the 19th century.

arosar
21-12-2004, 11:15 AM
. . . just because some parents noses are out of joint cause they have to travel a bit and it may not be ideal for them, the junior associations are going to vote against the deal. . .

Perhaps we ought to work on our PR skills. Pissing off your constituents like that? Hhmmm....


And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. I will probably tell my opinion as well to some parents during the junior if I hear some bitching going on, more than usual will be my limit.

Good luck!

I'll place my bets on the parents.


I just dont think most ppl have seen what is truly possible out of this deal. Remember we are talking about Grollo Industries, so maybe if this goes well, they might want to help with other tournaments in chess and flight deals.

You and these flight deals man. You got airline stocks or something?

What was it that our two resident-moms said: "reality check"?


All this is possible if junior associations vote for the deal. If not then everyone is no further advanced and our sport remains in the 19th century.

Why should we, the people of chess, be dictated to?

AR

ursogr8
21-12-2004, 11:32 AM
gg''

Back up a bit mate, and cool off.

Now we have been on this topic of 'repeatibility' for a while. And you and I calmly agreed back around post #61 and #62 that the key part of repeatability is the attraction of a paid resource to be head honcho.

Points raised by 'jenni' and 'Amiel' may be interesting, but they are not the key.
As we approach the national conference, has a candidate emerged to learn from you guys and the template, given that george has declared that he is a one-off only?

You might be busy at the moment, but this question of honcho-succession needs some consideration.

starter

pax
21-12-2004, 11:49 AM
how about we just cancel it now then and just give up? We have the opportunity for a large sponsorship deal, something that we have not had before. The chance to get a foothold with a large international player, Grollo Industries and just because some parents noses are out of joint cause they have to travel a bit and it may not be ideal for them, the junior associations are going to vote against the deal.

Look, it's quite simple. If a proposed deal is good for the juniors, then on the whole they will support it. If it isn't, they won't. I don't think you should be expecting parents to support future MtB events for the general good of chess.

If there is a big sponsorship deal, and it results in significant benefits for the juniors, then in all likelihood they will support it. What you shouldn't expect is junior support for a package deal which delivers big benefits for the open (in terms of prizemoney, appearance money etc) and limited benefit for the junior event.

Garvinator
21-12-2004, 12:45 PM
If there is a big sponsorship deal, and it results in significant benefits for the juniors, then in all likelihood they will support it. What you shouldn't expect is junior support for a package deal which delivers big benefits for the open (in terms of prizemoney, appearance money etc) and limited benefit for the junior event.
agreed.

Libby
21-12-2004, 02:12 PM
how about we just cancel it now then and just give up? We have the opportunity for a large sponsorship deal, something that we have not had before. The chance to get a foothold with a large international player, Grollo Industries and just because some parents noses are out of joint cause they have to travel a bit and it may not be ideal for them, the junior associations are going to vote against the deal.

Well actually how is that the junior associations are going to vote against the deal? yes act has a junior association and because you dont seem to be in favour of it, you are going to vote against it, but i am only aware of nsw being another state that has a formal state junior association.

I am well aware that things are perfect with the current arrangement and I certainly would like to have seen a few things changed or restructured and they will be if we go back in to mt buller in two years time. But that is the point, some parts of the deal can be re worked if mercure/accor are told about it, but that isnt exactly in the nature of some of the parents is it, as recent events have shown :hand:

And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. I will probably tell my opinion as well to some parents during the junior if I hear some bitching going on, more than usual will be my limit.

With more preparation time, we can make some changes which with more time this time, could have happened and we could have arranged more activities.

Maybe also a slightly different organising team will also be able to organise more play activities for all concerned ;)

I just dont think most ppl have seen what is truly possible out of this deal. Remember we are talking about Grollo Industries, so maybe if this goes well, they might want to help with other tournaments in chess and flight deals. All this is possible if junior associations vote for the deal. If not then everyone is no further advanced and our sport remains in the 19th century.

Actually it wasn't my understanding that we have a vote - that being part of our problem from go to whoa. We can certainly chat to our delegates from the ACT but we don't really get a say in whatever is voted for. We can just express the view that is not our personal position, rather the position expressed to us by the players & parents we represent and try not to alienate.

And if everyone is getting a bit hot under the collar I'm sorry about that. Perhaps if we posted some of the emails sent privately to some of us - in response to reasonable requests for help, information, clarification or assistance, our presumed "belligerence" might be given some context. Sometimes we even asked questions that are asked of us - by our players and (sometimes) by representatives from other state groups. I got the impression my question on who to make cheques out to was viewed as daft or trivial, but it seems to have troubled a few people. Coming from me, it looks more like Libby being a nit-picker again.

It seems to me that the Juniors are VERY supportive of Mt Buller in 2004. It may not be the 160+ people hoped for but it is not far off. Vent in the direction of the adult player population if you must. :evil: Is everybody still angry because a parent organised a group meal booking at the Arlberg during the Schools? Because this is just crap OK. This was not as a result of anyone holding a grudge or trying to make any kind of silly point. It was just a booking made in a different place like I might make one at the local Chinese down the road and ask others if they want to come to.

Most of the people there for the Schools were not even AWARE of the crap on this BB. They do not read the announcements thread. If you want them to eat somewhere in particular or whatever, then advertise the fact to them and most will probably oblige if it falls within their tastes and budget. But don't assume that because I annoy you, or any other parent annoys you, that we are broadcasting a negative perspective to the wider audience. Many people will have a bitch all of their own accord if they find a fly in the soup etc - will it do much good to fly off at any or all of them and see them all as part of a big "anti-Buller" conspiracy?

Good luck with selling this multi-year deal to the Council. That's not actually sarcastic, although I assume it will be read that way. But that's what you need to do - sell the deal. Like bed nights at the Mercure - people will take the deal if it meets their needs but we are not all individually placed to make personal sacrifices (time or financial) to make any of this work just because you or I or anyone might want it to. It has to be good enough to stand on it's own. It needs the people able to take it on and run it, and it needs the broad support of your major player associations (Junior & Senior) and their membership. :)

bobby1972
21-12-2004, 02:14 PM
why would anyone want to repeat this LEMON

Bill Gletsos
21-12-2004, 02:49 PM
Unlike last time when the decision was rushed, any decision regarding a future deal (if one is put forward) will not be made at the National Conference but will be decided after the Junior is finished, so that the input from the respective junior bodies is available.

I would suspect any such motion would likely be treated as a special motion under clause 6a of the constitution allowing all states to exercise their full voting rights.

Garvinator
21-12-2004, 03:08 PM
Unlike last time when the decision was rushed, any decision regarding a future deal (if one is put forward) will not be made at the National Conference but will be decided after the Junior is finished, so that the input from the respective junior bodies is available.

I would suspect any such motion would likely be treated as a special motion under clause 6a of the constitution allowing all states to exercise their full voting rights.
this is how i understood this issue of future deals was going to be handled as well. After all the tournaments are over.

Garvinator
21-12-2004, 03:10 PM
Good luck with selling this multi-year deal to the Council. That's not actually sarcastic, although I assume it will be read that way. But that's what you need to do - sell the deal. Like bed nights at the Mercure - people will take the deal if it meets their needs but we are not all individually placed to make personal sacrifices (time or financial) to make any of this work just because you or I or anyone might want it to. It has to be good enough to stand on it's own. It needs the people able to take it on and run it, and it needs the broad support of your major player associations (Junior & Senior) and their membership. :)
yes I know it will have to be sold ;) I am fully aware that for the mt buller ie open/junior that some reworking of the sleeping arrangements at the mercure will have to change. I would like to get some idea of Peter and Romans thoughts on this matter, but at least one of the current organising team is willing to negotiate new terms regarding certain matters :D

I will reply tonight to the rest of your post Libby as I am short of time :cool:

Libby
21-12-2004, 03:35 PM
yes I know it will have to be sold ;) I am fully aware that for the mt buller ie open/junior that some reworking of the sleeping arrangements at the mercure will have to change. I would like to get some idea of Peter and Romans thoughts on this matter, but at least one of the current organising team is willing to negotiate new terms regarding certain matters :D

I will reply tonight to the rest of your post Libby as I am short of time :cool:
To be honest Garvin, I don't think any kind of major restructure of the Mercure accommodation arrangements will fill loads more beds there. It's certainly worth examining, and you can certainly do things to make the deal more attractive than it is for long stays for parents & children HOWEVER it will always be competing with much, much cheaper options and there will always be a significant number of people for whom that is the determining factor. Can you find me the $900 difference in value for what it would cost me to stay there under the current deal? I mean, you are not talking about $50 or even $100 difference. $900 is a big chunk of the holiday budget in our house.

Is it at all possible for future negotiations to be around a "Mt Buller" deal rather than a Mercure/Mt Buller deal? I find it very odd that I am still speaking to accommodation providers, entertainment providers etc IN MT BULLER who know NOTHING about us coming? Our local version of Mt Buller (Thredbo) has a Jazz Festival coming up in January and all the summer providers open, offer deals etc - not just the main 4 star hotel. I know this complicates things in the sponsorship sense but wouldn't it make more sense to do things - even slightly - that way when you go to a place like this? And we were told at the ACF meeting that it didn't matter if we all didn't stay at the Mercure as they wanted to fill beds in Mt Buller itself - why did that change?

Anyway - don't worry about responding to all of this right now. I imagine you guys are all flat out with Christmas and then everything kicking-off so soon afterwards. Good luck with the Open & Minor.

jenni
21-12-2004, 03:44 PM
how about we just cancel it now then and just give up? We have the opportunity for a large sponsorship deal, something that we have not had before. The chance to get a foothold with a large international player, Grollo Industries and just because some parents noses are out of joint cause they have to travel a bit and it may not be ideal for them, the junior associations are going to vote against the deal.

Well actually how is that the junior associations are going to vote against the deal? yes act has a junior association and because you dont seem to be in favour of it, you are going to vote against it, but i am only aware of nsw being another state that has a formal state junior association.

I am well aware that things are perfect with the current arrangement and I certainly would like to have seen a few things changed or restructured and they will be if we go back in to mt buller in two years time. But that is the point, some parts of the deal can be re worked if mercure/accor are told about it, but that isnt exactly in the nature of some of the parents is it, as recent events have shown :hand:

And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. I will probably tell my opinion as well to some parents during the junior if I hear some bitching going on, more than usual will be my limit.

With more preparation time, we can make some changes which with more time this time, could have happened and we could have arranged more activities.

Maybe also a slightly different organising team will also be able to organise more play activities for all concerned ;)

I just dont think most ppl have seen what is truly possible out of this deal. Remember we are talking about Grollo Industries, so maybe if this goes well, they might want to help with other tournaments in chess and flight deals. All this is possible if junior associations vote for the deal. If not then everyone is no further advanced and our sport remains in the 19th century.
I must admit I had to take a few deep breaths after reading this. However I am not going to respond to it. (Although like Libby, I am tempted to respond with a few examples and details).

However I think you and George are great guys who have worked hard for something you view as important.

Good Luck with the Open and Minor and I will see you in January for the Juniors.

Garvinator
21-12-2004, 03:50 PM
I must admit I had to take a few deep breaths after reading this.
cant resist this one, taking a few deep breaths hey, getting in your altitude training already for the dawn sunrise summit walk hey :owned: ;) :lol:

jenni
21-12-2004, 03:52 PM
cant resist this one, taking a few deep breaths hey, getting in your altitude training already for the dawn sunrise summit walk hey :owned: ;) :lol:
eek no. :hand:

arosar
21-12-2004, 03:52 PM
cant resist this one, taking a few deep breaths hey, getting in your altitude training already for the dawn sunrise summit walk hey :owned: ;) :lol:

Oh you so did not want to do that!

AR

arosar
21-12-2004, 03:53 PM
eek no. :hand:

Lucky . . .

AR

jenni
21-12-2004, 03:55 PM
Lucky . . .

AR

I keep on telling you guys - its Christmas. :)

Denis_Jessop
21-12-2004, 07:23 PM
\

Good Luck with the Open and Minor and I will see you in January for the Juniors.


I thought you were going down for the Open/Womens' Champ. to keep Shannon company and maybe even play :lol: or is that all off for Plan C?

Denis Jessop

jenni
21-12-2004, 07:52 PM
I thought you were going down for the Open/Womens' Champ. to keep Shannon company and maybe even play :lol: or is that all off for Plan C?

Denis Jessop

No - I have no intention of embarrasing myself - I think I am just about in retirement - the excitement of coming 3rd in the ACT Women's and Girls was too much for me :)

Trent Parker
21-12-2004, 09:15 PM
No - I have no intention of embarrasing myself - I think I am just about in retirement - the excitement of coming 3rd in the ACT Women's and Girls was too much for me :)

Play in the minor jenni. You wouldn't embarrass yourself with the guys i'm bringing along. :lol: :owned:

Trent Parker
21-12-2004, 09:18 PM
I just dont think most ppl have seen what is truly possible out of this deal. Remember we are talking about Grollo Industries,

Out of curiosity what is grollo industries?

Garvinator
21-12-2004, 09:40 PM
Out of curiosity what is grollo industries?
Grollo Group website http://www.grollo.com/.

Regarding Mt Buller: http://www.hoteljobresource.com/menu/article6493.html

Interested people would have noticed that the mcg field was just completed. For those with a keen eye would have noticed that the main developer that helped to get it finished was Grollo Group.

It is joked at mt buller that the Grollo Group owns half of mt buller. Even though an exaggeration, it is closer to fact than fiction.

jenni
21-12-2004, 10:12 PM
It is joked at mt buller that the Grollo Group owns half of mt buller. Even though an exaggeration, it is closer to fact than fiction.

Well then he should be happy with the amount of accommodation that has been booked in Mt buller - even if it is non-mercure?

bobby1972
22-12-2004, 09:16 AM
yes accommodation is a big problem ,but as pointed out to me by jenny (a million thanks) there is plenty of cheap lodges around.i was in the same boat but i followed jenny`s advice and it turns out one of them was managed by a work mates relative so even better ,a whole place to myself what are the odds i wonder

george
22-12-2004, 09:34 AM
Hi All.

To the original topic - is this a repeatable process??

Grollo / Mercure Grand Chalet are keen to sponsor to the tune of about $500,000 for the next five years cash and inkind but only if the bookings at the Chalet for both Lidums and Junior are good this year. This included having the Championships and accompanying Juniors in a capital city.

Although the accomodation bookings are reasonable my gut feeling at this stage is that we the chess community have blown it! Who knows the bookings may be sufficient but all along it has been dependent on a full Chalet for both tourneys.

I dont really care for reasons or excuses - the whole deal was put before the chess public and they have responded in the way they have - fine no problems but then people cant have huge sponsorships without using the sponsors - such is life.

For all those who have entered in any of the tourneys we will have a fantastic time - for all players who have booked at the Chalet - A BIG THANKYOU - I will try my best to keep the deal alive but I'm not hopeful.

Kindest Regards
George Howard

bobby1972
22-12-2004, 11:05 AM
is it true that there are NO ozy IM`s thats incredible this must be the first open ever with NONE,but its going to be a GREAT turny

Bill Gletsos
22-12-2004, 11:21 AM
is it true that there are NO ozy IM`s thats incredible this must be the first open ever with NONE,but its going to be a GREAT turny
But there is an Aussie GM playing. ;)

Garvinator
22-12-2004, 11:24 AM
But there is an Aussie GM playing. ;)
and David Smerdon has now agreed to play in the Lidums Australian Open.

Libby
22-12-2004, 12:26 PM
Hi All.

To the original topic - is this a repeatable process??

Grollo / Mercure Grand Chalet are keen to sponsor to the tune of about $500,000 for the next five years cash and inkind but only if the bookings at the Chalet for both Lidums and Junior are good this year. This included having the Championships and accompanying Juniors in a capital city.

Although the accomodation bookings are reasonable my gut feeling at this stage is that we the chess community have blown it! Who knows the bookings may be sufficient but all along it has been dependent on a full Chalet for both tourneys.

I dont really care for reasons or excuses - the whole deal was put before the chess public and they have responded in the way they have - fine no problems but then people cant have huge sponsorships without using the sponsors - such is life.

For all those who have entered in any of the tourneys we will have a fantastic time - for all players who have booked at the Chalet - A BIG THANKYOU - I will try my best to keep the deal alive but I'm not hopeful.

Kindest Regards
George Howard

Hi George

I respect totally the trade-off that comes with sponsorship and the need for the "sponsored" to reciprocate in some way. Any business will be expecting some kind of return. That's part of what they must take into account when they enter into a sponsorship agreement and no great outcomes are ever guaranteed.

However I have no respect for the blame game here. As one of those who must be seen to have "blown it" I can only tell you we could not have competed at Mt Buller and stayed at the Chalet - my daughter would not have played. That's my "excuse." Sorry it clearly cuts no ice with you.

We have sold chocolates, run stalls and run fundraising events this year to get Kayleigh to the schools & juniors - even though we are staying in somewhere relatively cheap. We just don't have the pennies left over each week to set aside for things like this because I choose to work 30 hrs/wk ++ as a volunteer mostly for chess rather than choose to provide a second family income. I'm not whinging, I live with that choice but I really, really object to be made feel small or spiteful because of what that choice means to Kayleigh's participation.

We went to Perth Juniors in January because a family member contributed $500 towards the air fares and my accommodation was subsidised because I took on supervision of our unaccompanied players. Don't wonder why I'm not going with Kayleigh this year, for the first time. Don't wonder why I spent 4 years developing a school club and didn't come and share their win at the Aus Schools. I don't like being made to feel like this because I make choices to meet my family circumstances.

Everyone makes these choices for their own reasons. Maybe the sponsorship is "blown". Perhaps if beds at the Chalet were a requirement you needed to make it compulsory. I wouldn't have been there :clap: and I guess a number of others wouldn't have been either but it would have been full, the sponsor would have been happy and the future of Australian Chess secure.

Or maybe any sponsorship deal, irrespective of the dollars, has to be tailored to meet the needs of your whole consituency. And maybe a big injection of money is not the single biggest remedy to the problems in Australian Chess. I don't have the answers. I'm not even a player. I'm a parent and I don't like the way the fingers are being pointed - or why.

Libby

jenni
22-12-2004, 02:18 PM
And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. I will probably tell my opinion as well to some parents during the junior if I hear some bitching going on, more than usual will be my limit.

.

Actually this is hard to resist. I know Garvin and George have just about had it with Libby and myself (continually whinging and trying to get things for the juniors :) ). However we really are sweetness and light compared to some other parents around the traps.

I really think I am going to have to bring Garvin face to face with some of the other parents around and let them loose on him. :lol:

Libby
22-12-2004, 02:48 PM
Actually this is hard to resist. I know Garvin and George have just about had it with Libby and myself (continually whinging and trying to get things for the juniors :) ). However we really are sweetness and light compared to some other parents around the traps.

I really think I am going to have to bring Garvin face to face with some of the other parents around and let them loose on him. :lol:

they might just work out we are actually the buffers ...

DoroPhil
22-12-2004, 03:38 PM
Although the accomodation bookings are reasonable my gut feeling at this stage is that we the chess community have blown it!

Success or otherwise of the tournament is up to the tournament organizers, not a "chess community"! Period. Stop blaming others. Accept your responsibility.


I dont really care for reasons or excuses - the whole deal was put before the chess public and they have responded in the way they have

You can't just blame customers for not wanting your product! Either the product itself isn't good enough or you marketed it the wrong way. Period. Stop blaming others. Accept your responsibility.


I will try my best to keep the deal alive but I'm not hopeful.

This is just ridiculous. No wonder that leadership like this produces followers like gray.

On the whole, it is not the lack of volunteers that is a big problem, but the lack of capable volunteers.

If it wasn't for those Mt.Buller-2 clowns, we would've had a great tournament here in Melbourne.

DoroPhil
22-12-2004, 03:42 PM
how about we just cancel it now then and just give up? We have the opportunity for a large sponsorship deal, something that we have not had before. The chance to get a foothold with a large international player, Grollo Industries and just because some parents noses are out of joint cause they have to travel a bit and it may not be ideal for them, the junior associations are going to vote against the deal.

Well actually how is that the junior associations are going to vote against the deal? yes act has a junior association and because you dont seem to be in favour of it, you are going to vote against it, but i am only aware of nsw being another state that has a formal state junior association.

I am well aware that things are perfect with the current arrangement and I certainly would like to have seen a few things changed or restructured and they will be if we go back in to mt buller in two years time. But that is the point, some parts of the deal can be re worked if mercure/accor are told about it, but that isnt exactly in the nature of some of the parents is it, as recent events have shown :hand:

And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. I will probably tell my opinion as well to some parents during the junior if I hear some bitching going on, more than usual will be my limit.

With more preparation time, we can make some changes which with more time this time, could have happened and we could have arranged more activities.

Maybe also a slightly different organising team will also be able to organise more play activities for all concerned ;)

I just dont think most ppl have seen what is truly possible out of this deal. Remember we are talking about Grollo Industries, so maybe if this goes well, they might want to help with other tournaments in chess and flight deals. All this is possible if junior associations vote for the deal. If not then everyone is no further advanced and our sport remains in the 19th century.

You are one ridiculous monkey, you know that gray?

Please don't get involved in chess administation. Consider getting a job/ life or something along those lines maybe?

Trent Parker
22-12-2004, 06:59 PM
Hi George

I respect totally the trade-off that comes with sponsorship and the need for the "sponsored" to reciprocate in some way. Any business will be expecting some kind of return. That's part of what they must take into account when they enter into a sponsorship agreement and no great outcomes are ever guaranteed.

However I have no respect for the blame game here. As one of those who must be seen to have "blown it" I can only tell you we could not have competed at Mt Buller and stayed at the Chalet - my daughter would not have played. That's my "excuse." Sorry it clearly cuts no ice with you.

We have sold chocolates, run stalls and run fundraising events this year to get Kayleigh to the schools & juniors - even though we are staying in somewhere relatively cheap. We just don't have the pennies left over each week to set aside for things like this because I choose to work 30 hrs/wk ++ as a volunteer mostly for chess rather than choose to provide a second family income. I'm not whinging, I live with that choice but I really, really object to be made feel small or spiteful because of what that choice means to Kayleigh's participation.

We went to Perth Juniors in January because a family member contributed $500 towards the air fares and my accommodation was subsidised because I took on supervision of our unaccompanied players. Don't wonder why I'm not going with Kayleigh this year, for the first time. Don't wonder why I spent 4 years developing a school club and didn't come and share their win at the Aus Schools. I don't like being made to feel like this because I make choices to meet my family circumstances.

Everyone makes these choices for their own reasons. Maybe the sponsorship is "blown". Perhaps if beds at the Chalet were a requirement you needed to make it compulsory. I wouldn't have been there :clap: and I guess a number of others wouldn't have been either but it would have been full, the sponsor would have been happy and the future of Australian Chess secure.

Or maybe any sponsorship deal, irrespective of the dollars, has to be tailored to meet the needs of your whole consituency. And maybe a big injection of money is not the single biggest remedy to the problems in Australian Chess. I don't have the answers. I'm not even a player. I'm a parent and I don't like the way the fingers are being pointed - or why.

Libby


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

If staying at the chalet was compulsory the costs would force me, LC and RC to not enter the minor.

Trent Parker
22-12-2004, 07:02 PM
You are one ridiculous monkey, you know that gray?

Please don't get involved in chess administation. Consider getting a job/ life or something along those lines maybe?

Being a bit harsh aren't we?

Wheres your evidence of Admin that you have done in aus dorophil?

Dont go criticising others until you show your attempts at admin. :hand:

Garvinator
22-12-2004, 07:11 PM
Being a bit harsh aren't we?

Wheres your evidence of Admin that you have done in aus dorophil?

Dont go criticising others until you show your attempts at admin. :hand:
it just continues his usual line of dribble from an anonymous poster. I dont expect anything different from him and I would suggest that no one replies to his posts and better still, put him on ignore.

chessgeek
22-12-2004, 08:21 PM
Every so often I see George's posts "begging" people to attend his tournament. Then when people do not respond to him begging he blames tghe chess community for not supporting chess. I agree completely with Dorophil. It is up to the organisers to ensure that they organise a tournament that encourages people to attend. Don't blame the chess community - if you want more people to attend, stop begging and provide some value for money. Put up or shut up. :wall:

Canning
22-12-2004, 09:17 PM
This is my first, last and only post on this forum which I have visited as a guest many times.

I'm a parent ggrayggray. However, you will not need to worry yourself about meeting either myself or my husband face to face to voice your opinion.

Given the distain you, as an apparent organiser of this event, have shown towards juniors on this forum by your comments, we have now decided that we have better things to do than to attend an event where organisers have displayed utter contempt for participants and their parents.

With fondest regards

Canning

george
22-12-2004, 09:27 PM
Chessgeek.

You goose dont you understand what I was saying. The Mt Buller tourneys are offered as they are and they will be great tourneys.

What I was alluding to I will put it very simply for you - the five year deal was and is dependent on getting sufficient numbers to stay at the Chalet.
There are more than sufficient players to do just that and then some - are you following me Chessgeek - people however chose to stay elsewhere in numbers that puts the 5 year deal at risk - that is fact Chessgeek.

I am sure that there are not too many people Chessgeek who would expect to get large cash sponsorship and inkind sponsorship then be surprised if the Sponsors Facilities are not used but Cheaper versions found elsewhere and there is not a negative reaction from the Sponsors.

Are you still with me Chessgeek - its my responsibility to encourage people to play in the tourneys - they choose where to stay and the Spnsors then analyse what return they got on their dollar. They will basically assess whether the chess community is worthwhile investing in - are you following me Chessgeek.

Folks have been wanting me to do everything for everybody and most people have recognised the value of the sponsorship and appreciated it and decided to stay at the Mercure.

Chessgeek why dont you have a go at doing anything worthwhile after picking up the pieces midstream or are you such a gutless wonder that you will forever hide behind anonymity.

George Howard

jenni
22-12-2004, 09:33 PM
This is my first, last and only post on this forum which I have visited as a guest many times.

I'm a parent ggrayggray. However, you will not need to worry yourself about meeting either myself or my husband face to face to voice your opinion.

Given the distain you, as an apparent organiser of this event, have shown towards juniors on this forum by your comments, we have now decided that we have better things to do than to attend an event where organisers have displayed utter contempt for participants and their parents.

With fondest regards

Canning

Dear Canning

Please reconsider.

This tournament is for our kids - it is a great experience for them and in spite of some silliness on Garvin's part, this will be our tournament and we will make it a good one. It is not Garvin's tournament or even the Mercure's but the Aus Juniors.

If Garvin gets silly there will be enough sensible parents and juniors to get him under control.

He's actually quite nice face to face and works hard, but has a tendency to go off a bit on the BB.

I think the kids will have a great time and will come away from it thinking it was one of the nicer ones. Mt Buller is a lovely safe environment, the kids will be able to walk around, meet at various points and socialise with each other. We are getting social tennis going and a trivia evening and some other stuff.

We'll just ignore any irritating people and make this a good event for our kids.

Jenni

george
22-12-2004, 09:46 PM
Hi All,

The numbers of players are what they are. As per my previous post if the five year deal doesnt go ahead because of insufficient bednights because the charges were too dear or some other reason ITS IMMATERIAL WHY.

Excuses or reason do NOT EFFECT THE BOTTOM LINE - simple economics harsh accountancy practice - the sponsors expect a certain return even for a first Event - if for any reason it doesnt work to the Sponsors satisfaction they throw money at a different community who may be in a better position to give them a return they desire - again harsh economics.

I will do my best to sell to the Sponsors what we will have at Mt Buller as a good result and hope the bottom line is good enough for them to proceed with the five year deal. I have tried to make the whole thing as cheap and as comfortable as possible but in the end you stand back and say OK now its up to the chess players they will vote with their feet and at the moment its a nail biting cliffhanger (from a sponsor need perspective).

Personally as the Main Organiser Im happy with the numbers given all the nonsense that went down in first part of the year about Mt Buller etc. etc.

This is the last post Im doing until the tourneys start - have fun and for those who arent coming watch the live games on mtbullerchess.com

Having previously sold real estate for 13 years I have come across many types of people some nice and some users who would rip off their own mother - so abuse me as much as you like I dont give a toss!!! I AM MORE INTERESTED IN RUNNING TWO FANTASTIC TOURNAMENTS THAT THE CHESSPLAYERS WILL NEVER NEVER FORGET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kindest Regards
George Howard

chessgeek
22-12-2004, 09:50 PM
George Howard

$120 per night, George, is the what I would expect to pay staying at Mount buller during PEAK ski season. Do you follow George, PEAK period.
I would have thought, George, that if the sponsors George, REALLY cared about chess, George, they could offer a better discount to encourage people to stay - Do you follow me George.

I did a quick google search"Mount Buller accomodation". I found links to many places with much cheaper options - even for peak ski season.
If you check there rates George, are you still following me George, you will see what I mean.

Simple economics: higher prices, lower demand = less revenue
I am sorry if neither you or the sponsors can understand that.

I also don't understand your comment that there are enough players staying at the Chalet and then some, and yet you complain that people are chosing to stay elsewhere? :wall:

While I agree that its wonderful that Mecure chooses to support chess, it's a pity that you seem to think that the entire chess comminuty owes them a financial favour and has to stay at the Chalet.

Chessgeek

george
22-12-2004, 09:56 PM
Chessgeek,

You really are very very silly arent you!

I personally dont mind where people stay so long as they enter the tournament but the SPONSORS care.

Two different issues try to differentiate them.

The Mercure accomodation cost is $120 per room per night - that covers two adults with full breakfasts or one adult two kids where the kids only get Continental Breakfasts. Extra people to above pay more. Three kids on their own pay $90 with Continental breakfasts.

Basically I have been pushing using the Sponsor not for the good of these particular tournaments as it makes no difference but for the five year deal.

George Howard

chessgeek
22-12-2004, 10:07 PM
So what you are saying is "Don't do it for George Howard, do it for the Sponsors".

You say that Sponsors only care about the BOTTOM LINE. I have a news flash for you, George: parents, children and other participants in the chess community have a lot LESS MONEY than the sponsors.

Please don't blame the Chess community for not staying at the Chalet. It might be more constructive if you stopped blaming everyone and find ways, other than begging, to attract more people to stay with the sponsors.

In fact, didn't I see someone who looked like you begging for 20cents at Central Station this morning? :wall:

george
22-12-2004, 10:12 PM
Chessgeek,

Now I know you are a dill.

George Howard

JimF
22-12-2004, 10:54 PM
Pretty high level discussion here. Shall I put the buckets and spades away or does one or a number of you still wish to play in the sandpit?

Kevin Bonham
23-12-2004, 01:24 AM
Success or otherwise of the tournament is up to the tournament organizers, not a "chess community"! Period. Stop blaming others. Accept your responsibility.

Yes and no.

I don't think G+G can really be rightfully blamed for the attitudes of some lazy Melbourne players who decided that if the event wasn't going to be held on their own block of the street then they weren't going to travel to it, even though there were plenty of players from other states who were happy to not only travel to Vic but also then on to Mt Buller as well. We've been through this before - from way back in this process, you never showed any intention of going to Mt B no matter how well (or not) it was marketed. Fortunately some of your fellow Victorians have much better attitudes than you.


If it wasn't for those Mt.Buller-2 clowns, we would've had a great tournament here in Melbourne.

How curious that you did not see fit to convince Mr Cordover of that before he lodged his initial bid for an event at Mt Buller, but arrived at this genius conclusion only at the point where we would have had to pike on a deal for no good reason to fulfill your wishes.

All very well in hindsight, isn't it? :hand:

My view on what I've seen so far -

* strength of foreign players - average but could have been worse given the initial breakdown of the event.
* strength of top Australian players - disappointing.
* field size - mediocre; not a disaster but slightly smaller than would have been hoped for.

Worth trying? Definitely. Repeatable? I doubt it. That said I reckon the tournament will be great fun for those competing, and all the better for the absence of whingers like you. :owned: :hand: :hand:

WhiteElephant
23-12-2004, 06:14 AM
[QUOTE=Kevin Bonham]Yes and no.

I don't think G+G can really be rightfully blamed for the attitudes of some lazy Melbourne players who decided that if the event wasn't going to be held on their own block of the street then they weren't going to travel to it, even though there were plenty of players from other states who were happy to not only travel to Vic

Hello Mr Bonham,

Why are you labelling Melbourne players who do not play at Mount Bulller lazy?

I am sure everyone has their own reasons for not playing. I would say that predominantly the reason for such low entries is the cost of accomodation, and people are simply making a financial decision. The numbers of Victorian players are NOT low in comparison with other states, but low in comparison with entries of usual home-state players.

This is bcause the cost of the Mount Buller Tournament is the same as an Interstate Tournament to Victorians, while the cost to other-staters is pretty much the same whether the Tournament is at Buller or Melbourne.

In summary:

Tournament at Buller:

Cost to 'lazy' Melbourne players = $1200 + Entry Fee + expenses

Tournament in Melbourne:

Cost to 'lazy' Melbourne players = Entry Fee

Mr Bonham, perhaps if you would like to sponsor my accomodation costs, I won'r be so 'lazy' any more and play at Buller. Thank you in advance.

W.E.

arosar
23-12-2004, 07:54 AM
This is bcause the cost of the Mount Buller Tournament is the same as an Interstate Tournament to Victorians, while the cost to other-staters is pretty much the same whether the Tournament is at Buller or Melbourne.

Exactly! It all comes down to value. For Mexicans it's a case of being too near yet also too far. It's not a real chess holiday, so to speak; more like an overpriced weekender.

I tell youse what, I reckon this tournament will be a complete catastrophe particularly considering the organisers' hostility towards players - the 'chess community'. What a joke!

AR

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 07:54 AM
Yes and no.

I don't think G+G can really be rightfully blamed for the attitudes of some lazy Melbourne players who decided that if the event wasn't going to be held on their own block of the street then they weren't going to travel to it, even though there were plenty of players from other states who were happy to not only travel to Vic :


Yes and no.


Hello Mr Bonham,

Why are you labelling Melbourne players who do not play at Mount Bulller lazy?

I am sure everyone has their own reasons for not playing. I would say that predominantly the reason for such low entries is the cost of accomodation, and people are simply making a financial decision. The numbers of Victorian players are NOT low in comparison with other states, but low in comparison with entries of usual home-state players.

This is bcause the cost of the Mount Buller Tournament is the same as an Interstate Tournament to Victorians, while the cost to other-staters is pretty much the same whether the Tournament is at Buller or Melbourne.

In summary:

Tournament at Buller:

Cost to 'lazy' Melbourne players = $1200 + Entry Fee + expenses

Tournament in Melbourne:

Cost to 'lazy' Melbourne players = Entry Fee

Mr Bonham, perhaps if you would like to sponsor my accomodation costs, I won'r be so 'lazy' any more and play at Buller. Thank you in advance.

W.E.

WhiteElephant

Sensational post of yours mate.
Very rare that Mr Bonham will bowl a ball that can be scored off, but you seem to have it sweetly. I will watch with great interest his response.

Can I show my bias and suggest two things
1 Add a bit of metrics mate. Say, like count up how many VICS as a % of the field and then compare with the ACF % it uses to charge federation fees. You will be on stronger ground if they match.
2 Think again about your last sentence. The ball is headed for a 6, why sledge while it is in the air. On second thoughts...it is a good sledge, leave it in.

regards
starter

DoroPhil
23-12-2004, 08:31 AM
Yes and no.

I don't think G+G can really be rightfully blamed for the attitudes of some lazy Melbourne players who decided that if the event wasn't going to be held on their own block of the street then they weren't going to travel to it, even though there were plenty of players from other states who were happy to not only travel to Vic but also then on to Mt Buller as well.

Please see WhiteElephant's post for a simple refutation of your ridiculous gambit. On that note, while WhiteElephant is indeed on the mark in his post, one would have thought that it didn't have to be explained to the likes of you as it's all just common sense really.

Additionally, the "opportunity cost" of Mt.Buller tournament also includes time and social components, not just money.


We've been through this before - from way back in this process, you never showed any intention of going to Mt B no matter how well (or not) it was marketed.


Marketing's primary goal is to sway customers' attitudes. I did indeed believe that Mt.Buller-2 offers no value to me whatsoever, and the ridiculous clown duo just confirmed that.

Elsewhere on the board people decide not to come to Mt.Buller because of gray's effort. I thought gray was unemployable, but now I see a great potential for him doing some black PR :)

arosar
23-12-2004, 08:43 AM
Excuses or reason do NOT EFFECT THE BOTTOM LINE - simple economics harsh accountancy practice - the sponsors expect a certain return even for a first Event - if for any reason it doesnt work to the Sponsors satisfaction they throw money at a different community who may be in a better position to give them a return they desire - again harsh economics.

I will do my best to sell to the Sponsors what we will have at Mt Buller as a good result and hope the bottom line is good enough for them to proceed with the five year deal. I have tried to make the whole thing as cheap and as comfortable as possible but in the end you stand back and say OK now its up to the chess players they will vote with their feet and at the moment its a nail biting cliffhanger (from a sponsor need perspective).

It may have been a long dry spell for us george - lack of sponsorship, that is - but we ain't just shaggin' anyone who comes along. You seem to be under the impression that we should just acccept any $500K deal on offer. This is not so. It may be that a particular sponsor's goals do not fit with ours as a chess community. It may also be that our chess community as a whole just does not have the market qualities sought by the sponsor. For example, are we of certain income leves? Are we the type to take long breaks on some Mt Nowhere? Do we like to spend 'x' amount of dollars, etc? Are you following me?

Since you're the organiser, you have a responsibility to two lots of stakeholders: your sponsors and we, the people of chess. I know you actually hate us george, but bear with me. You have to be realistic to both stakeholders. You cannot promise Accor/Grollo that they'll be making money off us. And you cannot force us, we the good folk of chess, to just go with any sponsor costing us lotsa dough. You get my meaning mate?

Look, if this deal goes down, it goes down. It's probably for a good reason.

AR

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 09:02 AM
WhiteElephant


Can I show my bias and suggest two things
1 Add a bit of metrics mate. Say, like count up how many VICS as a % of the field and then compare with the ACF % it uses to charge federation fees. You will be on stronger ground if they match.

regards
starter

Oohh ohh lets do that for the Minor too hey?

Garvinator
23-12-2004, 09:06 AM
Cost to 'lazy' Melbourne players = $1200 + Entry Fee + expenses
The accommodation prices you list are incorrect. Interesting that you use accommodation cost levels as a factor, but didnt when David Cordover was running the show.

Anyways, as the chess nut has shown, you can stay at a lodge for as little as $12 per night approx. $12 x 13 nights = $156. $156 is alot cheaper than $1200.
Could have been worse, we could have made staying at the mercure compulsory for playing in the tournament like the previous organiser did :hand:

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 09:13 AM
Oohh ohh lets do that for the Minor too hey?

tcn

I thought this got resolved to the following explanation
> most VICS entered the OPEN, or the JUNIOR, instead of the Minor
> ratings inflation pushed a few above 1600 (Bas. was but one example).

There is no boycott for any reason. Just people electing/qualified for other events.

starter

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 09:36 AM
Starter. you cant have one but not the other....

If your % of entries applies to the open it'll still apply to the minor.

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 09:44 AM
Starter. you cant have one but not the other....

If your % of entries applies to the open it'll still apply to the minor.


tcn

Yes I can have both; as a theory; until someone sits and adds up the figures.

Now, from memory VIC = 24.5% of the Commonwealth (if not 24.5% then someone in the know can tell us).

If juniors VIC % is running at 28.7%, and OPEN VIC % is running at 28.8% then the unders in the MINOR are explained by the overs in the two others.

Instead of updating your signature line today, spend the time going through gg'' 's list and find the actual %'s, and compare to the VIC population % used by the ACF.

starter

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 10:04 AM
BTW starter of course there is going to be more vics because the tourney is in Vic. Victorians dont have the cost of flying/driving a long trip.

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 10:06 AM
I wish all those u1600 people were playing in the minor :(

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 10:11 AM
, and compare to the VIC population % used by the ACF.

starter

Where can i find these stats?

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 10:12 AM
BTW starter of course there is going to be more vics because the tourney is in Vic. Victorians dont have the cost of flying/driving a long trip.

:rolleyes:
tcn
I don't think you have been reading what appears on this thread.
Quite a few Mexicans said they were knocked out by the accom. cost, not the travel cost.

starter

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 10:14 AM
I wish all those u1600 people were playing in the minor :(
Does this post of yours mean that 'the penny has dropped'?


Btw....I hope you have an enjoyable tournament; and good luck with the prize opportunity.

regards
starter

jenni
23-12-2004, 10:14 AM
:rolleyes:
tcn
I don't think you have been reading what appears on this thread.
Quite a few Mexicans said they were knocked out by the accom. cost, not the travel cost.

starter

He's paying $11 a day, so he probably doesn't think that is a reason.....

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 10:17 AM
Where can i find these stats?

tcn

When Helpful_BILL comes on line he will know to look.
In the mean-time...gg'' is probably already looking.

starter

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 10:25 AM
Hey starter. If accom costs were a problem the U1600's in the Open would be playing in the minor. Would they not?

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 10:29 AM
Hey starter. If accom costs were a problem the U1600's in the Open would be playing in the minor. Would they not?


tcn

The accom. costs that have caused your problem is U1600 and not attending Mt B..................not those who have gone to the Junior or OPEN options.

starter

Trent Parker
23-12-2004, 10:34 AM
tcn

The accom. costs that have caused your problem is U1600 and not attending Mt B..................not those who have gone to the Junior or OPEN options.

starter

Huh?????

I have no problem with accomodation....

Garvinator
23-12-2004, 11:25 AM
tcn

When Helpful_BILL comes on line he will know to look.
In the mean-time...gg'' is probably already looking.

starter
gg stepped out to do other buller stuff that i needed to do up here, so i wasnt even near a puter. i might look later.

jenni
23-12-2004, 11:31 AM
And if you think I am rather pissed off, damn right I am. .

On the current lists posted for the Aus Juniors there are 154 kids playing - and I know of a couple more kids still to come. Very close to the 160 the organisers were aiming for.

This is huge - much bigger than Perth last year and equivalent to the Juniors in major centres.

Maybe it is time for the organisers to stop bagging parents and junior organisers (yes I know we are a demanding bunch :) ), and admit we are the only group who has really supported this event..........

Bill Gletsos
23-12-2004, 11:31 AM
1 Add a bit of metrics mate. Say, like count up how many VICS as a % of the field and then compare with the ACF % it uses to charge federation fees.
The ACF doesnt charge Federation fees based on any percentage since the state levies were abolished a few years back.
The revenue now comes from the ACF admin fee and the schools levy.

Garvinator
23-12-2004, 11:35 AM
Maybe it is time for the organisers to stop bagging parents and junior organisers (yes I know we are a demanding bunch :) ), and admit we are the only group who has really supported this event..........
no disagreement here :eek: yeah i know, shocking isnt it :lol: We have 154 juniors by your calculations and we are still a week away from the final closing date. So i would say 160 should reached :D.

Something that maybe the adult chess states need to think about for future chess events is group organisation like the juniors have :hmm: Perhaps there is an expectation that adults can do things on their own and organise themselves that there is no group organisation from the adult side. I think this would help in getting ACCURATE information out to the adult masses.

arosar
23-12-2004, 11:39 AM
Perhaps there is an expectation that adults can do things on their own and organise themselves.

Well, yeah .... they're adults after all.

Just focus on the event gray.

AR

ursogr8
23-12-2004, 11:41 AM
The ACF doesnt charge Federation fees based on any percentage since the state levies were abolished a few years back.
The revenue now comes from the ACF admin fee and the schools levy.

Well tcn, it looks like you will have to rely on old data if you want to pursue this. It is just the Australian population % if I remember correctly.
Off you go to the Bureau of Whatever and Census.
Or perhaps Bill can tell what the % was when last levied?

starter

arosar
23-12-2004, 12:01 PM
no disagreement here :eek: yeah i know, shocking isnt it :lol: We have 154 juniors by your calculations and we are still a week away from the final closing date. So i would say 160 should reached :D.

Oh by the way, when all this is done maybe you two, GH and you gg, can do a bit of a chorus like so: "Thank you Mrs Oliver. Thank you Libby". Then sort of exit quietly.

AR

JimF
23-12-2004, 12:43 PM
This little black duck is a tad confused and may be someone can enlighten me. No hassels. I am just interested.

According to jenni there are about 160 players for the juniors. And there are about 70 or so players in the Open. How many juniors are also playing in the open and doesn’t this junior/open combination mean that the juniors are actually financially subsidising the open in some way? If this is the case, what are the juniors getting out of it - apart from competition and prize money for some?

Libby
23-12-2004, 12:50 PM
I think this would help in getting ACCURATE information out to the adult masses.

Perhaps in the form of an information booklet with information in it perhaps? Or perhaps by not being so determined to promote a single accommodation deal as if it is exclusive? Many people just don't seem to be aware of alternatives and it took a long time for anyone to actually acknowledge they were there. Hey - even that old b*tch Libby actually tried to keep her mouth shut for a long time to avoid the appearance of promoting alternatives to the sponsor. In the end, when she discovered that EVEN PLAYERS FROM OTHER STATES were being REFERRED to her for advice on accommodation she decided to post some details rather than just keep sending PMs & emails.

If Grollo owns half of Mt Buller why couldn't we be sold (now, or for the future) a selection of accommodation options at different price points? Even with different facilities? The Mercure did pretty well out of ACT people until they ran out of rooms with kitchens. Then, nobody really wanted to stay there and the remaining family groups are mostly at Avalanche where they have a small apartment each. We opened our mouths and said all of this back in July and nobody wanted to listen. From day one, every time we raised a concern we were slammed as negative, nit-picking or sulking because we didn't get the Schools event in Canberra. Or worse, we wanted DETAILS. I mean, who has time for DETAILS when we can all just work it out when we arrive on Monday 10/1. Fancy silly me wanting to actually know what time the road closed on Saturday 22/1 so I could get a charter bus up there to collect players!!

And while we're at it - how about those repeated suggestions that the information and announcements appear on the OFFICIAL website. Seems a little more appropriate than this UNOFFICIAL forum populated by (some) people who need to brush up on their PR and ability to sell the wholesome and constructive nature of the Australian chess community. I did warn that you probably didn't want to refer the "average-Joe" parent to this site and it seems to have been proven correct with the posting of new member "Canning."

You know what - I know the organisers are doing their best and I expect it will probably all go pretty well overall for those who play. But I don't believe there is a conspiracy amongst the Australian chess community to see it fail, or to lose the sponsorship etc. I don't know that anybody loved David's deal either and I was already fighting him over issues like the exhorbitant entry fee penalty for not staying at the Mercure (no Garvin, it wasn't even compulsory back then, he just used a different whip). What I'm fed up with is nobody giving a s**t when I raise a valid issue or offer to help organise something. I wanted to help and kept getting crap so yes - I guess I turned into a bit of a sarcastic cow as a result but there is no way I haven't done my best to get players there and support this bloody event.

160-ish entries is $8800 the Juniors are directly contributing themselves with entry fees alone. More than the (advertised) value of their prizes and trophies combined. Like I said - finger point and complain elsewhere if you must.

jenni
23-12-2004, 01:34 PM
and people used to call me blunt....... (she also uses a lot more words :) )

However I guess we have felt all along that we were trying to contribute, and help, not be difficult. It just wasn't always perceived in that light.....

shaun
23-12-2004, 01:46 PM
This little black duck is a tad confused and may be someone can enlighten me. No hassels. I am just interested.

According to jenni there are about 160 players for the juniors. And there are about 70 or so players in the Open. How many juniors are also playing in the open and doesn’t this junior/open combination mean that the juniors are actually financially subsidising the open in some way? If this is the case, what are the juniors getting out of it - apart from competition and prize money for some?

One obvious reason is that chess doesn't stop when you turn 18. To me it seems sensible that a profitable Junior championship subsidises a less profitable open championship as that is where the juniors will end up sometime in the future. And when they get there I'm guessing they don't want to find a barren wasteland.

bobby1972
23-12-2004, 02:22 PM
so thats why junior chess is going so well in this country,it seems to be the only way money comes into chess,he he he i know its not for the money its for the future of chess he he he he

Ian Rout
23-12-2004, 02:28 PM
Perhaps in the form of an information booklet with information in it perhaps? Or perhaps by not being so determined to promote a single accommodation deal as if it is exclusive? Many people just don't seem to be aware of alternatives and it took a long time for anyone to actually acknowledge they were there. Hey - even that old b*tch Libby actually tried to keep her mouth shut for a long time to avoid the appearance of promoting alternatives to the sponsor. In the end, when she discovered that EVEN PLAYERS FROM OTHER STATES were being REFERRED to her for advice on accommodation she decided to post some details rather than just keep sending PMs & emails.
I must agree with Libby on this. Let me bore you with what I was doing a few months back ...

I was thinking about trying to persuade my wife that Mt Buller in summer would be a good place to go for a holiday and waiting for some announcements to appear about available packages. Suddenly. almost immmediately after the first announcement, another appeared that rooms with kitchens would be booked out in the near future, before I would be able to make a commitment. This was not helped by earlier misinformation (not sure where this came from) that the number of such rooms was about twice the reality, which implied, taking into account the likely attendance, there was no urgency.

Since staying in a kitchenless room in a place with only a couple of eating options was not attractive, I looked up the Mt Buller websites to see what other options were available. Nobody was offering anything for January - it was then peak ski season. It became apparent that if nobody was making up a list I would need to contact any number of places one by one (many of which I didn't have e-mail addresses for) and make a choice on fairly cursory information, if indeed anything at all was available after the 85 phone calls.

Unsurprisingly I decided to wait and see what was happening in 2005/06.

I think every year about attending the Aust Open/Reserves, and eventually I probably will. If possible I would prefer to support the sponsor's product if it's reasonable, and I am no longer at an age where sleeping eight to a broom cupboard and washing my clothes in the drain is a competitive alternative to the sponsor, unless it's the Salvation Army.

On the other hand if the sponsor's product in the category sought is booked out then I would have thought the best thing to do for the sponsor is to at least get people out to the event to give them the publicity value for their sponsorship. By all means encourage people to stay at the venue and give it top billing, but a blackout on everything else doesn't help the sponsor or the event.

These comments are not meant to be critical, the organsiers have done a lot of work in difficult conditions (and frankly in their position I would refuse to participate on a bulletin board where people are allowed to snipe behind pseudonyms, some registered solely for that purpose), but are made in the hope that they will be taken on board for next time.

Libby
23-12-2004, 05:35 PM
Excuses or reason do NOT EFFECT THE BOTTOM LINE - simple economics harsh accountancy practice - the sponsors expect a certain return even for a first Event - if for any reason it doesnt work to the Sponsors satisfaction they throw money at a different community who may be in a better position to give them a return they desire - again harsh economics.

I will do my best to sell to the Sponsors what we will have at Mt Buller as a good result and hope the bottom line is good enough for them to proceed with the five year deal. I have tried to make the whole thing as cheap and as comfortable as possible but in the end you stand back and say OK now its up to the chess players they will vote with their feet and at the moment its a nail biting cliffhanger (from a sponsor need perspective).

I'll try not to bore everyone with another blunt or wordy post but don't forget to differentiate between EXCUSES and REASONS George. They are very different and any chess administrator worth their salt will pay careful attention to reasons before they start pushing any particular line on behalf of a sponsor. Maybe we are not a perfect fit with this sponsor & this package. I'm not asserting that, just saying we have to be open to that possibility and not just see ourselves as at fault - organisers, participants & non-participants alike.

Canning
23-12-2004, 10:42 PM
My "last" post is seemingly my penultimate post but have no fear I will not be back.

The only reason I got to this forum is because of what is apparently the official Mount Buller web-site. It is totally devoid of any useful information. I could not find any details what amenities were available for families who may be attending the juniors. It appears there are really none. No supermarkets to purchase food; no sports facilities in the true understanding of that word; no tourist information. Nothing. Heavens, it seems that the organisers cannot even be bothered to place on the web-site the results of the schools competition which has already been held but then given the attitude towards juniors (and their parents) by some organisers that is understandable. Overall a totally useless web-site.

Consequently I used the link to this place. It has only been here that I have been able to gain any worthwhile information on some services that a family needs. A short walk to the playing venue turns out to be a mini mountain climb (very useful for my daughter's asthma). Food, unless eating at an expensive (for a family) resturant, has to be brought in. Washing facilities for clothes unknown unless you stay at a lodge. Very little to do for non-chess playing members of the family.

So jenni while I can appreciate that the junior competition is for children and some organisers may work very hard - and may need to work even harder on their PR skills - the fact remains that the location is not "family friendly". And although my daughter would be oblivious to any of the politics and outlook of some towards juniors, there is one who is not oblivious. Me.

Adieu

Alois Canning

jenni
23-12-2004, 11:28 PM
My "last" post is seemingly my penultimate post but have no fear I will not be back.

The only reason I got to this forum is because of what is apparently the official Mount Buller web-site. It is totally devoid of any useful information. I could not find any details what amenities were available for families who may be attending the juniors. It appears there are really none. No supermarkets to purchase food; no sports facilities in the true understanding of that word; no tourist information. Nothing.

This is true - unfortunately the organisers have chosen to use this forum as their main way of disseminating info. It is useful for getting up info quickly, but it should then be put up on the website as well.



Heavens, it seems that the organisers cannot even be bothered to place on the web-site the results of the schools competition which has already been held but then given the attitude towards juniors (and their parents) by some organisers that is understandable. Overall a totally useless web-site.



I should have hassled Karthick to do this, but he has been busy and I was grateful to him for all the work he did in putting up photos and profiles for the schools- have you read those? - they really look great and I think are the most exciting part of the the website currently.



Consequently I used the link to this place. It has only been here that I have been able to gain any worthwhile information on some services that a family needs.


Libby is almost finished putting together a fabulous handbook on facilities available. If you wanted to send me a pm with your e-mail address, I could e-mail it to you when it is finished, just in case you change your mind.




A short walk to the playing venue turns out to be a mini mountain climb (very useful for my daughter's asthma).


That might be me carrying on about the hill - I really am fat, fifty and unfit. I think the average person wouldn't have too much trouble with it. It actually isn't that bad. I was whipping up and down it after 3 days.




Food, unless eating at an expensive (for a family) resturant, has to be brought in. Washing facilities for clothes unknown unless you stay at a lodge.

These are problems, which is why a large number of parents have elected to stay either in apartments or in lodge accommodation. Once again if you wanted to find something with cooking facilities, pm either me or Libby and we might be able to help.




Very little to do for non-chess playing members of the family.



This is another problem. However many are in the same boat and we are planning all sorts of activities. Libby has detailed a lot of them in her handbook. We are planning tennis competitions, rock-climbing, archery, movie nights and trivia nights.




So jenni while I can appreciate that the junior competition is for children and some organisers may work very hard - and may need to work even harder on their PR skills - the fact remains that the location is not "family friendly". And although my daughter would be oblivious to any of the politics and outlook of some towards juniors, there is one who is not oblivious. Me.



I really think the BB should come with a user's warning and to be letting your average parent wander on here and see the chess community at its worst, is probably not doing anything for the image of chess.

The location is not family friendly - we have been saying that since the ACF voted for the package last January.

I guess we are making the best of a situation that couldn't be changed. Possibly the isn't the best time to come to the Aus Juniors for the first time. (I am assuming it is the first time your daughter has played?) It will be in Brisbane next year (probably) and that might be a better experience.

However please don't think that there will be rampant politics going on. I know George and Garvin well enough to know they will be fine face to face. More important they will be in the background. The arbiters who will be running the comp will be Roly Eime and Charles Zworestine and they are just fabulous. They really like kids (and parents) and do everything possible to make competitions enjoyable.

Garvinator
23-12-2004, 11:41 PM
More important they will be in the background.

Geez thanks Jenni :(

jenni
23-12-2004, 11:51 PM
Geez thanks Jenni :(

Well you will - you haven't seen the Roly - Charles team in action. No-one will even know you are there.

ursogr8
24-12-2004, 07:23 AM
One obvious reason is that chess doesn't stop when you turn 18. To me it seems sensible that a profitable Junior championship subsidises a less profitable open championship as that is where the juniors will end up sometime in the future. And when they get there I'm guessing they don't want to find a barren wasteland.

This is a gem of a post from Shaun.
It succinctly identifies a a key decision to be faced by the ruling chess bodies. And Shaun takes a personal position on the issue.
The post shows clarity and courage.

Now, have the rest of us got the courage to drill down and scope the 'charge' that should be levied on the Junior community so that there is a guarantee of an Adult Infrastructure in existence when they graduate?

The mods might like to consider moving Shaun's key post, and the few existing responses, to a new thread. (Possible title > What is the deal between junior and senior chess?...split from Mt B. A repeatable process?).


starter

arosar
24-12-2004, 08:35 AM
Well you will - you haven't seen the Roly - Charles team in action. No-one will even know you are there.

And with that gray, mate, you can consider yourself told.

Merry Chrismas and may you have a safe tourney. Please don't piss Mrs. I off.

AR

jenni
24-12-2004, 01:06 PM
. Please don't piss Mrs. I off.

AR

We've got 1 or 2 from the ACT (NOT Libby and I :) ), who would give Mrs I a run for her money. :whistle:

Anyway Merry Christmas everyone - time to make trifles, decorate hams and make sure the pudding doesn't boil dry. :)

Paul S
01-01-2005, 04:28 PM
Can someone put up the details of the dollar (cash and "in kind") Mt Buller package? This would assist BB viewers in determining whether or not Mt Buller should be repeated or not.

For example:
$A = money (and "cash in kind") given to visiting GMs/IMs to play at Mt B.
$B = reduction in room rates at Mercure (for non GMs/IMs).
$C = money given to Australian Junior chess

etc etc

Once we get all the $ amounts, we may be able to determine if it is "in the interests of Australian chess" to repeat Mt B.

That is, we could weigh up:
1) The Mt B sponsorship package with previous Australian Open/Championship packages.
2) Whether the inconvenience (and extra expense) incurred by chessplayers in playing at a remote resort facility (and therefore lacking in basic services like shops etc) is worth it.
3) etc etc

Don_Harrison
01-01-2005, 04:45 PM
I believe I know where your coming from Paul S but it is more than likely not a matter for a vote on a BB.

If I understand the issue correctly (and I will without a doubt be corrected if I am wrong), the competitions are "owned" by the ACF. So it it a matter for the ACF, and the delegates elected to the ACF, to consider the matter. Properly, it is not in my simplistic view, a question of having a vote on a BB.

However, it is probably essential that delegates to the ACF, seek and obtain detailed information on any sponsorship and provide that to their respective State bodies.

This all presumes that the ACF is a democracy; there are no conflicts of interests which have not been disclosed and adequately managed; where there are "commercial-in-confidence" arrangements they are respected (and actually there should not be if one thinks, ie such an arrangements should NOT go ahead); and all information is accurately fed back to state bodies so proper consideration can be given to the issues.

Only then should the matter be given due thought and the decision published with reasons in order to maintain proper transparancy of process.

Amazing how simple things can be sometimes. It is only people and their respective hubris which stuff things up.

Spiny Norman
01-01-2005, 05:51 PM
Given the circumstances leading up to the event, I'd like to propose:

1. That a big "thank you" be given to those organisers that put their necks on the line and dragged the event back from the brink (thank you George, Garvin, et al, I don't know you all but you deserve a medal for courage); and

2. That a bit of time be spent on a post-tournament review with appropriate documentation/notes being made for future reference. I'm sure there are lots of lessons learned that are extremely valuable.

Garvinator
01-01-2005, 06:23 PM
Thank you Frosty.

Regarding future deals, alot of the general details will be revealed at the national conference by accor as to what they are going to contribute. From there, there will be probably alot of questions/ discussions about certain aspects that the delegates see fit to raise.

Then the acf vote will be deferred so the whole deal can be properly evaluated after the juniors have finished.

During this time, the complete specifics will be revealed by accor, ie $$$ etc. That will take about three weeks from the time of the national conference. When this has been completed and revealed in full, the acf council et al can begin email and other discussions regarding whether we go ahead with the 5 year deal or not.

ursogr8
01-01-2005, 08:16 PM
Given the circumstances leading up to the event, I'd like to propose:



2. That a bit of time be spent on a post-tournament review with appropriate documentation/notes being made for future reference. I'm sure there are lots of lessons learned that are extremely valuable.

Frosty
George has already indicated on this thread that he will template the 'How to do it' kit, for use by the next organiser. I feel confident this will happen.
starter

Don_Harrison
02-01-2005, 09:04 AM
....the complete specifics will be revealed by accor, ie $$$ etc.

As it is mooted that Accor et el will be taking over the management of Great Kepple Island from Contiki but, of course, nobody will know that until it happens yet there is always a chance that an event will be held in those climes. Yipiee.

Of course the ACF will need to issue appropriate warnings to all concerned, ie possibility of drowning, the need to swim between the flags, sun burn, tape worm, dengue, cyclones. And that's only for the adults. The warnings for the junior's would be more extensive as the ACF are not child minders according to recent information. (Never knew or assumed it was actually)

Garvinator
02-01-2005, 09:12 AM
As it is mooted that Accor et el will be taking over the management of Great Kepple Island from Contiki but, of course, nobody will know that until it happens yet there is always a chance that an event will be held in those climes. Yipiee.

Of course the ACF will need to issue appropriate warnings to all concerned, ie possibility of drowning, the need to swim between the flags, sun burn, tape worm, dengue, cyclones. And that's only for the adults. The warnings for the junior's would be more extensive as the ACF are not child minders according to recent information. (Never knew or assumed it was actually)
If the accor deal goes ahead and the 2006 tournaments are held in qld, they will be in brisbane at mercure brisbane.

Paul S
02-01-2005, 03:03 PM
I believe I know where your coming from Paul S but it is more than likely not a matter for a vote on a BB.

Hi Don

Yes, I am aware that it is a matter for the ACF to decide.

Yet at the same time, myself (and others on this BB) want to get some facts (NOT spin doctoring) so that we can make up our own minds about the repeatability/viability of future Mt Bullers.

At present I lean towards not repeating Mt Buller, but I am open to persuasion/argument.

I think the key issue to the repeatability/viability of future Mt Bullers will be the feedback from those players currently playing in the Open and those players who will be playing in the upcoming Juniors (and the views of the Juniors' parents) once these two tournaments have finished later this month.

Paul S
02-01-2005, 03:08 PM
1. That a big "thank you" be given to those organisers that put their necks on the line and dragged the event back from the brink (thank you George, Garvin, et al, I don't know you all but you deserve a medal for courage)

Yes, George Howard in particular deserves praise for "sticking his neck out" (and putting his "time and effort where his mouth is" so to say) and going ahead with Mt Buller.

Whatever the shortcomings of Mt Buller, I admire George for getting stuck in and having a go (and following his convictions/belief that a Mt Buller Open is in the best interests of Australian chess).

Oepty
02-01-2005, 03:57 PM
The full organising committe is
George Howard, Garvin Gray, Kerry Stead, Andrew and Alex Saint, Jenni Oliver (Schools Competition) and Karthick as webmaster.

ursogr8
05-01-2005, 08:03 AM
The full organising committe is
George Howard, Garvin Gray, Kerry Stead, Andrew and Alex Saint, Jenni Oliver (Schools Competition) and Karthick as webmaster.

I know that george has indicated that organisational arrangements are being 'templated' for use in the future; and we look fwd to that.
In the mean-time, what is the scaling of the management of the 70+ field at this remote location? I know gg'', and some arbiter's are on site.
How many are running this tournament? (Excluding the JUNIOR to come).

starter

peanbrain
06-01-2005, 08:43 PM
If the accor deal goes ahead and the 2006 tournaments are held in qld, they will be in brisbane at mercure brisbane.

we are still waiting for the TV coverage of this year's event that was promised. care to tell us when?! :whistle:

eclectic
06-01-2005, 08:52 PM
we are still waiting for the TV coverage of this year's event that was promised. care to tell us when?! :whistle:

Hello peanbrain,

You're waiting for TV coverage ?

Wait until there's still pics on the official site before asking for moving ones courtesy of a free to air or pay TV provider !!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Mark

(Skaro)

Garvinator
07-01-2005, 06:22 AM
we are still waiting for the TV coverage of this year's event that was promised. care to tell us when?! :whistle:
there will be no free to air coverage due to the dealings of the previous organiser :doh:

jenni
07-01-2005, 08:56 AM
there will be no free to air coverage due to the dealings of the previous organiser :doh:

You are, I presume, stilll doing regular media releases? Having a women (albeit a foreign one), leading the Australian Open, should generate a bit of news (even if not TV). Who is in charge of media?

Trent Parker
07-01-2005, 11:13 AM
BTW peoples. It appears that the mercure deal might not be for only the aus open or champs but sponsorship for australian chess as a whole. Eg Perhaps the possibility of the Australian Olympiad team staying for free at an accor hotel. There could also be other various benefits. The mount buller part of it is just a part of the deal.

DoroPhil
07-01-2005, 12:20 PM
Quote from some other thread:


especially rescuing the mt buller bid and making it a success

How can Mt.Buller be considered a success???

Look how it was supported by top Australian players. Only 3 top players played. Count them: 3! Johansen, Smerdon, Bjelobrk. That's it! That's bloody it. Maybe add Xie and Jordan just in case. That would make 5. Count them: 5! That's it!

Compare that with the number of top players who entered last time it was in Melbourne. Or any other time that it was held in Melbourne! It could have been that many this time around!

Whoever was doing stakeholder analysis for this nonsense forgot the most important stakeholder there is - Australian chess players.

PhilD707
07-01-2005, 02:44 PM
You are, I presume, stilll doing regular media releases? Having a women (albeit a foreign one), leading the Australian Open, should generate a bit of news (even if not TV). Who is in charge of media?

My feeling is that the 1st port of call for a media release is the actual Mt Buller web site itself. If anyone is throwing a few words together then its a straightforward task to post them on the Homepage whereby the site gets attention and hits and the event bathes in good live publicity.

This seems so obvious to me that I am sure that I must be missing something?

In the meantime the Burnie Page, (which is getting a lot of hits), doggedly continues to post brief reports and pictures however really this should be happening on the mount Buller site- don't you think?

ursogr8
07-01-2005, 03:00 PM
My feeling is that the 1st port of call for a media release is the actual Mt Buller web site itself. If anyone is throwing a few words together then its a straightforward task to post them on the Homepage whereby the site gets attention and hits and the event bathes in good live publicity.

This seems so obvious to me that I am sure that I must be missing something?

In the meantime the Burnie Page, (which is getting a lot of hits), doggedly continues to post brief reports and pictures however really this should be happening on the mount Buller site- don't you think?

hi Mr Chess,

A time-efficient alternative for Mt B and K. would be to put a prominent link to your Page. :uhoh:

starter

PhilD707
07-01-2005, 03:46 PM
hi Mr Chess,

A time-efficient alternative for Mt B and K. would be to put a prominent link to your Page. :uhoh:

starter

Thanks Starter.

That might be an improvement!!
But better still some one on the ground could usefully be reporting with analysis and summary info etc.
MtBuller is a professional web site (unlike the BCC pages) - seems a shame to see it selling itself short for the sake of a few well chosen words and a photo or two each day.
I am sure if someone asked nicely Kevin would oblige.
He's really good at that sort of thing :)

jenni
07-01-2005, 03:49 PM
My feeling is that the 1st port of call for a media release is the actual Mt Buller web site itself. If anyone is throwing a few words together then its a straightforward task to post them on the Homepage whereby the site gets attention and hits and the event bathes in good live publicity.

This seems so obvious to me that I am sure that I must be missing something?

In the meantime the Burnie Page, (which is getting a lot of hits), doggedly continues to post brief reports and pictures however really this should be happening on the mount Buller site- don't you think?

I've had to keep smacking my fingers to stop myself putting negative posts up over the last few days. But yes - the coverage on the web has been ordinary to say the least. I think the organisers operate on the principle that if you produce a good mousetrap the world will beat a path to your door. However I think even the best mousetrap needs to be shown off......

PhilD707
07-01-2005, 05:37 PM
You are, I presume, stilll doing regular media releases? Having a women (albeit a foreign one), leading the Australian Open, should generate a bit of news (even if not TV). Who is in charge of media?

There's no denying it - Elena Sedina is doing it in style.
Looks like Hecht will be the latest casualty.....

Can anyone tell me - when was the last time a female won the Australian Open??

Leonid Sandler
07-01-2005, 06:01 PM
Sedina is doing very well and it just shows you guys the strenghts of ladies chess.Please remember that she is a product of Soviet chess school .She is originally from Kiev and she attended primary school together with Mikhail Gluzman.It is still two rounds to go...

Trent Parker
07-01-2005, 10:15 PM
Quote from some other thread:



How can Mt.Buller be considered a success???

Look how it was supported by top Australian players. Only 3 top players played. Count them: 3! Johansen, Smerdon, Bjelobrk. That's it! That's bloody it. Maybe add Xie and Jordan just in case. That would make 5. Count them: 5! That's it!

Compare that with the number of top players who entered last time it was in Melbourne. Or any other time that it was held in Melbourne! It could have been that many this time around!

Whoever was doing stakeholder analysis for this nonsense forgot the most important stakeholder there is - Australian chess players.

Dero phil.....

Build a bridge and get over it!!!!!!!

If the unmentionable one hadn't stuffed it up in the first place it could have been a more successful tournament. And to add to that comment.... any tournament that would have been held in Melbourne, I think wouldn't have had much more IM's or Gms either, due to the lateness of the event's announcement. It is my understanding that mercure that paid for the italians and perhaps other international players.

It is my belief that In the future there will be much more successful tournaments up at mount buller, with more international gm's/im's

Axiom
07-01-2005, 10:37 PM
Count them !
- please chessnut, why the belief that there will future buller tournaments , let alone successful ones?
Why make it harder for chess players(especially victorian/australian) to play in the national open, by playing it miles away from major cities?
chess is not formula1 or yachting, most players could not afford the extra expense of the trek. It is a major commitment of time, we dont need the extra weight of expense as well.The poor quality turnout this year must send the signal to future organisers

Trent Parker
07-01-2005, 10:55 PM
Axiom are you not reading properly???????

this mount buller tournament is not as successful as it could have been because of the late notice of details about this tournament. The details were late coming out about the Mt buller tournament because the unmentionable one stuffed up.

From what i hear Mercure and/ or maybe accor want to build the Australian open into a very prestigeous event. Perhaps in the future it may attract the likes of some of the best players in the world.

I originally was hugely skeptical about the Mt buller events. But slowly i was converted. The presentation that the guy from the mercure gave at the national conference gave has made me a little bit excited about the possibilities for australian chess in the future. Sure there will be some skeptics.... there always will..... but i think that there has to be a bit of a trade off for sponsorship....... and that trade off is holding the Australian open at Mount Buller.

Axiom
07-01-2005, 11:19 PM
i hope youre right chessnut, but a national open should make it easy for its own nation's players to attend,............maybe have some other prestige event there, call it "the buller international" or "the mercure chess masters" or something, but dont hijack our national open!

WhiteElephant
07-01-2005, 11:25 PM
Axiom are you not reading properly???????

this mount buller tournament is not as successful as it could have been because of the late notice of details about this tournament. The details were late coming out about the Mt buller tournament because the unmentionable one stuffed up.

From what i hear Mercure and/ or maybe accor want to build the Australian open into a very prestigeous event. Perhaps in the future it may attract the likes of some of the best players in the world.

I originally was hugely skeptical about the Mt buller events. But slowly i was converted. The presentation that the guy from the mercure gave at the national conference gave has made me a little bit excited about the possibilities for australian chess in the future. Sure there will be some skeptics.... there always will..... but i think that there has to be a bit of a trade off for sponsorship....... and that trade off is holding the Australian open at Mount Buller.

Hi chessnut,

If you were initially skeptcal about Buller than it is understandable others would be as well. Maybe you can tell us what it was specifically that changed your mind. What was it that the guy from the Mercure said that convinced you? How is he planning to justify the travel expense to players in the future? What are the Mercure's plans?

Also, it sounds as if you really enjoyed the playing experience - what was it about Buller that might be better than playing in a capital city? I have to admit I am a little unsure about future possibilities as well but that may be just because of a lack of information.

W.E.

arosar
08-01-2005, 08:44 AM
Let me just add that this Mt Buller business has been a topic of convos here in NZ between meself and some kiwis. Lemme tell youse, there woulda been lotsa more kiwis going had it not been for the complete stupid stuff-up earlier. People were just fearful of making bookings, etc, only then to have the tourn cancelled for a third time.

AR

PhilD707
08-01-2005, 10:58 AM
I went to the championship at Adelaide last year and played in the reserves.
It was my 1st time at an Aus Championsip event and I was blown away by the event and the City itself. It was great because there were so many other things to do during the fortnight so if your chess wasn't going brilliantly or you had a day off you could watch the cricket or the tennis at Memorial Drive or visit the botanical gardens or go shopping etc etc.
I came very close to entering at Mt. Buller but ultimately I couldn't get past the fact that other than playing chess and tramping around hillsides in the middle of nowhere there didn't seem much else to do so I cancelled my plans.

Maybe I don't take my Chess seriously enough :) but it does seem to me that if you are going to invest half your annual leave and a small fortune in food and accommodation, to participate in a Chess event, then it really needs to be in a fun location.
In my view a venue where you have to drive for an hour to get to a supermarket just doesn't qualify, no matter how good the views are or how much it snows. :(

jenni
08-01-2005, 12:38 PM
In my view a venue where you have to drive for an hour to get to a supermarket just doesn't qualify, no matter how good the views are or how much it snows. :(

Not to mention the danger :evil: I understand Robert Song's car was almost pushed over the edge recently and Tony nearly had a head on crash when driving up for the schools - fortunately was going really slowly, so the other car had time to get back onto the correct side of the road. Anyone driving up for the juniors, please drive slowly when going up the mountain and watch out for locals speeding down on the wrong side of the road, because they think it is summer and there won't be any traffic.

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 12:41 PM
Not to mention the danger :evil: I understand Robert Song's car was almost pushed over the edge recently and Tony nearly had a head on crash when driving up for the schools - fortunately was going really slowly, so the other car had time to get back onto the correct side of the road. Anyone driving up for the juniors, please drive slowly when going up the mountain and watch out for locals speeding down on the wrong side of the road, because they think it is summer and there won't be any traffic.

I am driving up on Tuesday morning with a 7am start and I am not usually awake before lunchtime so watch out for me on the wrong side of the road too.

Trent Parker
08-01-2005, 01:14 PM
Hello White elephant


Hi chessnut,

If you were initially skeptcal about Buller than it is understandable others would be as well. Maybe you can tell us what it was specifically that changed your mind.

I was initially skeptical about mt buller because of its location and the fact that i cannot drive. In a way it was a bit of a superficial skepticism. When i found the opportunity to play in the minor with someone else driving me up there the skepticism turned into a bit of excitement.


What was it that the guy from the Mercure said that convinced you? How is he planning to justify the travel expense to players in the future? What are the Mercure's plans?

The guy from the mercure told us that he and mercure/accor??? want to increase the profile of the sport in australia. If i remember correctly the guy also said that if the sponsorship deal goes ahead then the Australian Open could become part of an international Grand prix of some sort that is in fide's plans.

Mate..... to me there appears to be hundreds of benefits and only one burden (if it could be called a burden). The burden being that the Australian Open be played at Mount Buller.

In regards to travel expenses, i believe that there could be package deals organised for the chess at mount buller in future. This could possibly include the flights, accomodation and entry as well as the transport from and to the airport and Mt buller.

I cannot actually say for certain what the plans are. The acf council has to discuss with accor/mercure as to any plans.


Also, it sounds as if you really enjoyed the playing experience - what was it about Buller that might be better than playing in a capital city?

I did!! I did! I did enjoy Mount buller!!!!!! Mate there is no venue in a capital city where you can look out of the window and see a beutiful view as you can at Mount buller.


I have to admit I am a little unsure about future possibilities as well but that may be just because of a lack of information.

W.E.

Yes i think that minimal information has come out because DC left quite a bitter taste with the mercure/accor. the Mercure decided to have a "wait and see" type attitude. If the ACF can adequately mend things between the Australian chess community and Accor/mercure then i think in coming months there may be more information released about the possibilities that this deal may bring. However it was made clear that if DC had anything to do with the ACF and or organising the event...... they will pull the plug on the deal.....

I have to say Well Done to those that salvaged the Mt buller tournament this year. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Trent Parker
08-01-2005, 01:19 PM
Let me just add that this Mt Buller business has been a topic of convos here in NZ between meself and some kiwis. Lemme tell youse, there woulda been lotsa more kiwis going had it not been for the complete stupid stuff-up earlier. People were just fearful of making bookings, etc, only then to have the tourn cancelled for a third time.

AR

Thank you!!!!

Confirmation of my theory that there would have been more entries had info been available much more before the event and/ or had the unmentionable one not stuffed up.

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 01:40 PM
Thanks for the informative response TCN.

I think that since one of the major issues for many people (particularly Victorians) is cost - if there are some package deals organised, it would change many people's minds about Buller.

Also, if the views/ scenery are as beautiful as everyone is saying, that might compensate for the fact that there is not much to do up there - I would imagine dinner in front of an open fireplace with snow outside would be a nice change from your usual chess tournament.

I have to say I am looking forward to going there myself and making up my own mind.

W.E.

jenni
08-01-2005, 01:53 PM
I am driving up on Tuesday morning with a 7am start and I am not usually awake before lunchtime so watch out for me on the wrong side of the road too.

We'll be safe - we're driving up tomorrow :) Where are you staying?

jenni
08-01-2005, 01:56 PM
Also, if the views/ scenery are as beautiful as everyone is saying, that might compensate for the fact that there is not much to do up there - I would imagine dinner in front of an open fireplace with snow outside would be a nice change from your usual chess tournament.
W.E.

The views are stunning - I spent the first morning I was up there for the schools exploring and it is exceptionally beautiful.

jenni
08-01-2005, 01:59 PM
The guy from the mercure told us that he and mercure/accor??? want to increase the profile of the sport in australia.
:

I have to say I think there is a genuine fascination with chess. I was discussing food arrangements for the schools with Peter and did my usual little rant about where I would like to see the schools comp end up (part of the school sport systems, Pan Pacific games etc). He seemed to find it genuinely exciting that there could be these development opportunities for chess.

I was very demanding (as I tend to be :) ) about what I wanted provided for the schools comp in the way of food and the Mercure did a fantastic job with it on the whole.

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 02:02 PM
We'll be safe - we're driving up tomorrow :) Where are you staying?

Preston Lodge.

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 02:03 PM
The views are stunning - I spent the first morning I was up there for the schools exploring and it is exceptionally beautiful.

Hopefully I can find some time away from those pesky kids and do some walking around myself.

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 02:05 PM
I have to say I think there is a genuine fascination with chess. I was discussing food arrangements for the schools with Peter and did my usual little rant about where I would like to see the schools comp end up (part of the school sport systems, Pan Pacific games etc). He seemed to find it genuinely exciting that there could be these development opportunities for chess.

I was very demanding (as I tend to be :) ) about what I wanted provided for the schools comp in the way of food and the Mercure did a fantastic job with it on the whole.

I got my car serviced yesterday and happened to mention to the manager of the place that chess is being taught as a compulsory subject at some primary schools. He then spent the next half an hour asking me questions about it!

jenni
08-01-2005, 02:11 PM
Preston Lodge.

Hope you like walking uphill :)

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 02:14 PM
Hope you like walking uphill :)

I plan to lose at least 5 kilos by the time I get back :owned:

jenni
08-01-2005, 02:17 PM
I got my car serviced yesterday and happened to mention to the manager of the place that chess is being taught as a compulsory subject at some primary schools. He then spent the next half an hour asking me questions about it!

I really think there is a very hidden interest and participation in chess. We built a house a few years ago (or rather had one built) and it ran way over time, so we moved in and it was finished around us. Obviously we have a lot of chess trophies and stuff and almost every tradesperson who came in told us how much they enjoyed playing chess. The electrician said he had a friend who came around weekly for a game. I don't think he would ever go near a club or anything like that. It is a pity we can't really measure how many people play chess in Australia - we can only measure elite level. much easier to quantify tennis for e.g., where you can fairly easily acquire numbers of people playing tennis socially at clubs.

Libby
08-01-2005, 03:13 PM
I went to the championship at Adelaide last year and played in the reserves.
It was my 1st time at an Aus Championsip event and I was blown away by the event and the City itself. It was great because there were so many other things to do during the fortnight so if your chess wasn't going brilliantly or you had a day off you could watch the cricket or the tennis at Memorial Drive or visit the botanical gardens or go shopping etc etc.
I came very close to entering at Mt. Buller but ultimately I couldn't get past the fact that other than playing chess and tramping around hillsides in the middle of nowhere there didn't seem much else to do so I cancelled my plans.

Maybe I don't take my Chess seriously enough :) but it does seem to me that if you are going to invest half your annual leave and a small fortune in food and accommodation, to participate in a Chess event, then it really needs to be in a fun location.
In my view a venue where you have to drive for an hour to get to a supermarket just doesn't qualify, no matter how good the views are or how much it snows. :(

With due respect to Trent, who obviously had a great time - the jury is very much out for me also until a whole bunch of kids are there and having a great time - and the detail of the deal is spelt out.

David C (and I am not affiliated) seems to be carrying the can on this BB for every fault to be found with the existing event. He may certainly have generated a level of ill-will with the Accor people. The on-again, off-again nature of the tournament seems possibly to have affected entries. However, this is not the case for the Juniors where the entries are as strong as ever. Significantly (perhaps) DC and the ACT (another bunch of evil-doers) are contributing more than 80 junior players to the event - about half the actual entries.

Not every Australian Junior, but certainly the majority I have been involved in attending, have been held at private schools. At such a venue you automatically have a range of playing fields and facilities on-site for the kids. You mostly have the option of cheap, on-site accommodation for people who are either looking for cost-effective options, OR who are without transport and want to stay on site.

In Mt Buller, no matter how great the views are, everything except a chairlift ride and a bushwalk costs money. There is nowhere to go if you don't have your own transport (no bus or tram to get to the beach and an "everyday" shuttle transformed into 3 days only).

What's more - the only accommodation package anyone put together this time was solely focussed on the Mercure. If that is to be the case with future deals, I doubt if the dollars will still cut it for many people. I didn't see Trent taking on the existing special at the Mercure. Goodness, he's even talked about getting cheaper beers elsewhere!

I'd be quite receptive to hearing that a range of deals will be packaged, incorporating the different levels of Accor accommodation. And taking into account the sorts of things people have repeatedly told the organisers they need - self catering accommodation, proximity to transport etc.

We've been promised the world several times - not by DC always (free buses from Melbourne, free shuttle everyday, free DVDs in the Apres Bar, no buy-a-meal attached). We've been told facilities won't be available, only to find they will be (pool etc). We've had the current committee placing significant negative pressure on people to stay at the Mercure - to contribute an extra $900 or so from their own pocket in the interests of Australian chess.

So I'm waiting to get even the slightest bit excited. I'm waiting to see if I can follow the event from home (without going to the Burnie chess website). I'm waiting to see how much publicity can be generated for the events in Mt Buller. I'm waiting to hear from the players when they come home and their parents. I'm waiting to see if the special "Today Show" deal of $130/night is the sort of deal we can get for the Mercure Brisbane in 2006. And I'm waiting to see if things will be investigated and costed before they are promised to us, and then adhered to once they are.

I'll give credit to anyone who is out there doing their best. I know what it is like to bust a gut as a volunteer and get sniped at from the stalls. But sell me on the deal - not the view. And sell me on the way Australian chess will run things to gain publicity, growth and professionalism in the game.

jenni
08-01-2005, 03:24 PM
I plan to lose at least 5 kilos by the time I get back :owned:

You should easily do it - I lost 2 kgs during the schools weekend and the Mercure is half up the hill compared to you. Unfortunately Christmas has seen it all back on again. :evil:

Bill Gletsos
08-01-2005, 03:29 PM
You should easily do it - I lost 2 kgs during the schools weekend
In which case imagine how much you will lose over the juniors. ;)

arosar
08-01-2005, 04:18 PM
Some of youse shoulda just come with me here to Wanganui. There's plenty to do here. It's actually a city of some 50K people. Quite hip and arty. Plenty of upmarket to cheapo restaurants. This Mt Buller business must never be repeated again. OK.

AR

Trent Parker
08-01-2005, 04:25 PM
What's more - the only accommodation package anyone put together this time was solely focussed on the Mercure. If that is to be the case with future deals, I doubt if the dollars will still cut it for many people. I didn't see Trent taking on the existing special at the Mercure. Goodness, he's even talked about getting cheaper beers elsewhere!




mmmm i've made myself look like a bit of a hypocrite :doh: :eek: :uhoh:

But i was speaking to George Howard and he was saying that if there is a next time the entry fee will be quite an amount higher than this time.... but free if you stay at the Mercure. After all the Sponsors have to be supported.

Oh and by the way.... didn't someone complain about not having somewhere to go for dinner?.... hmmmm making myself feel less of a hypocrite .... :lol:

BTW No i did not stay at the mercure. But Yes if the deal is good enough next time i will!!!

arosar
08-01-2005, 04:31 PM
Maybe I don't take my Chess seriously enough :) but it does seem to me that if you are going to invest half your annual leave and a small fortune in food and accommodation, to participate in a Chess event, then it really needs to be in a fun location.
In my view a venue where you have to drive for an hour to get to a supermarket just doesn't qualify, no matter how good the views are or how much it snows. :(

Too bloody right mate! I'm already looking for people to stay with for Queenstown 2006. It'll be a hoot mate.

AR

WhiteElephant
08-01-2005, 04:40 PM
Some of youse shoulda just come with me here to Wanganui. There's plenty to do here. It's actually a city of some 50K people. Quite hip and arty. Plenty of upmarket to cheapo restaurants. This Mt Buller business must never be repeated again. OK.

AR

New Zealand is the most beautiful place I haver ever visited and I've travelled quite a lot. We'll see how Buller stacks up when I get there.



But i was speaking to George Howard and he was saying that if there is a next time the entry fee will be quite an amount higher than this time.... but free if you stay at the Mercure. After all the Sponsors have to be supported.

Hmmm don't know if I like the sound of that. Chess for the rich. The Mercure is beyond the price range of many people so putting up the entry fee for those who stay elsewhere is simply an extra expense for them without any option. This is going down a very divisive path. Not a good idea.

Libby
08-01-2005, 04:42 PM
mmmm i've made myself look like a bit of a hypocrite :doh: :eek: :uhoh:

But i was speaking to George Howard and he was saying that if there is a next time the entry fee will be quite an amount higher than this time.... but free if you stay at the Mercure. After all the Sponsors have to be supported.

Oh and by the way.... didn't someone complain about not having somewhere to go for dinner?.... hmmmm making myself feel less of a hypocrite .... :lol:

BTW No i did not stay at the mercure. But Yes if the deal is good enough next time i will!!!

OK Trent - tell me how good the deal needs to be. Because the example you are giving here doesn't address that. All you are telling us is that we are going back to the Guru deal of financially penalising people who don't stay at the Mercure because it is not an affordable option for them. Gee - goodwill abounds!

So will that make you go next time? If you think the Mercure rates are too expensive will you bite the bullet and stay there anyway because you are going to pay some massive penalty rate to enter the tournament if you don't? Or does that potentially make BOTH options unattractive?

And I costed that back when it was the Guru deal and I was still saving about $600. The saving was less if you had multiple players in your family, but the saving was greater if you had more accompanying non-players like siblings or parents.

And so we're hiking up the entry fees are we? I hope there will be 150% increase in prizemoney and/or benefits if there is to be 150% increase in the entry fee.

For the record, the kids are not all playing the lowest entry fees ever this year. It is not the lowest rate ever in the U12 - not even in recent history. The kids are there in droves and still there has been quibbling over the provision of prizes across all events.

No-one has addressed on the BB, us repeatedly raising the fact that we were TOLD that staying at the Mercure was not make or break on the deal. Obviously it is.

Maybe the organisers could support the sponsors by also doing a bit of legwork on the publicity side of things. That's very popular with sponsors in my experience. What sort of publicity is being done? Regular contact with media outlets reporting scores, providing updates? Regularly mentioning the sponsors? Garvin tells us the media fell through with DC but I heard all about media from George?

Because the website isn't a very good advertisement for the effort being put into promoting the event.

Saw noidea's Deaf Olympics on the news the other night. How much more of a niche activity are we?

Bill Gletsos
08-01-2005, 05:01 PM
It should be pointed out that Georges view on future entry fees is just that, Georges view.

In fact the ACF Council has formed a committee to investigate any future sponsorship deals with Mecure and report back to the ACF Council with a recommendation.

That committee consists of:
Denis Jessup, Jey Hoole, Shaun Press, Kevin Bonham, George Howard and Charles Zworestine.

Don_Harrison
08-01-2005, 07:57 PM
But i was speaking to George Howard and he was saying that if there is a next time the entry fee will be quite an amount higher than this time.... but free if you stay at the Mercure. After all the Sponsors have to be supported.

What an odious approach. Support the sponsors or we will impose a penalty whether you can afford it or not! What next? You will eat in this resturant and nowhere else? You will be served this item from the menu because the sponsor makes the most money from it? But don't you worry about that (wonder where I have heard that phrase before?) as it is all for the good of Oz Chess.

Strewth.

I am a 58 yo Victorian. I am not a rated player (only play socially) so anything I do in chess will merely equate to a sigh on the wind. Be that as it may, I would stongly object to any bastard dictating to me where I slept or ate on pain of having a penalty imposed. I'd be raising the middle digit towards that person and telling them to rotate.

Mischa
08-01-2005, 10:26 PM
At the risk of upsetting all on the BB and with appologies to many who are financially stretched [and I am one of them], I initially thought I couldn't afford the Mecure...given the info available to me.

I finally talked directly to Roman and as a result have a HUGE room that sleeps six with two televisions a bathroom with two private entrances, a dressing room, heaps of storage and a balcony that goes on forever. We have also been promised a FULL buffet breakfast for whoever is in the room that normally costs $22 a head, they are providing a microwave for our use and letting us bring a BBQ to use and have suggested that we order our food from Mansfield though them with a cost of $3.30 a box for delivery. It was even suggested that we could get together and order from a few people, let the Mecure know the order and they would arrange the whole thing. We have use of a gym, in house moves, DVD connection, and the heated swimming pool{which, after speaking to Roman about it, was finally released to the public.]

All this for a cost of $150 a night...for 6 people...adding it up it seemed a reasonable deal to me. What do you think?

Trent Parker
08-01-2005, 11:38 PM
I am not a rated player (only play socially) so anything I do in chess will merely equate to a sigh on the wind.

Wellthank you Don Harrison. This comment shows me that you are not willing to support Australian chess in any case. Join a club, play in a tournament....

:hand: :hand: :hand:

Spiny Norman
09-01-2005, 07:00 AM
Wellthank you Don Harrison. This comment shows me that you are not willing to support Australian chess in any case. Join a club, play in a tournament....

I'm sure Don will feel really encouraged to join a club and play in a tournament now ... :eek:

There's nothing wrong with "just playing socially". There's also nothing wrong if people prefer just to watch others play, or to read books about chess. I don't think he should be accused of not being willing to support Australian chess just because of that.

Maybe we should ask him WHY he chooses not to play at a club or in a tournament. I think we'd probably all learn a lot from that.

Don ... do you want to share that info? I, for one, would like to know and would consider the information valuable.

Libby
09-01-2005, 07:20 AM
At the risk of upsetting all on the BB and with appologies to many who are financially stretched [and I am one of them], I initially thought I couldn't afford the Mecure...given the info available to me.

I finally talked directly to Roman and as a result have a HUGE room that sleeps six with two televisions a bathroom with two private entrances, a dressing room, heaps of storage and a balcony that goes on forever. We have also been promised a FULL buffet breakfast for whoever is in the room that normally costs $22 a head, they are providing a microwave for our use and letting us bring a BBQ to use and have suggested that we order our food from Mansfield though them with a cost of $3.30 a box for delivery. It was even suggested that we could get together and order from a few people, let the Mecure know the order and they would arrange the whole thing. We have use of a gym, in house moves, DVD connection, and the heated swimming pool{which, after speaking to Roman about it, was finally released to the public.]

All this for a cost of $150 a night...for 6 people...adding it up it seemed a reasonable deal to me. What do you think?

Yep - that's a good deal with 6 people in the room. Of course, it's always been a bit frustrating that this was all set up as "please call Roman and everyone can negotiate their own special arrangement." When I rang I couldn't actually get a "rate" but I was told they could do deals if I didn't want my room serviced, didn't want breakfast, etc etc. But not actually what that price would be. Everyone was expected to ring and haggle themselves? Seemed a very odd thing. Also open to people wondering why they got a broom cupboard and no breakfast for $120/night and someone else gets a penthouse for the same price.

Anyway, we are only talking 2 people - and we are paying $45/night. Difference for my family $900. That is significant for us but I accept, not for everyone. That's why people choose things to suit their own needs. One size does not fit all, no matter how you spin it.

We also have a lodge which (from my past experience in the dorms) provides a fantastic communal atmosphere that those kids who enjoy that sort of thing, really enjoy.

And the cheapest Roman ever quoted me for Kayleigh & myself was $120/night.

We are used to holidays without nice views from balconies, in-house movies and buffet brekky. It means (for us) - spending money so we get beyond the hotel room.

Your post illustrates how different things suit different budgets & different families. Six people would cost (assuming 2 adults, 4 kids) $120/night in the lodge we are using. For a smaller saving - it is nice to choose a fancier option. But you could also have a fully self-catering apartment at another lodge (sleeps 8) for $560/wk.

I have no problem with the Mercure being the main, most promoted option. But why not get together with a few alternative providers so you can promote a variety of options with different prices & facilities to suit the mix of people who attend?

And as the Mercure was filled to capacity for the schools event, what happens when it can't accommodate everyone? Do people forced to stay elsewhere still incur the entry fee penalty? I'd imagine not. But how to distinguish between them, and people who choose to stay elsewhere? Gets a bit messy.

arosar
09-01-2005, 07:23 AM
Wellthank you Don Harrison. This comment shows me that you are not willing to support Australian chess in any case. Join a club, play in a tournament....

You seem like a bright fellow. But maybe spending time with gray where the air is thin has sucked the grey matter out of you. That really is a stupid thing to say.

And oh, your spin doctoring ain't workin'. Believe me, you're not very good at it.

Now apologise to Mr Harrison.

AR

Don_Harrison
09-01-2005, 08:31 AM
Heavens above, it is most amusing. Many things are said in the heat of the moment. I have done that and on reflection have regretted hitting the send button on the email. The same may well apply to the submit button on forums.

From my observation, there seems to be a general concept that only if one is a 'competative' chess player can any contribution to chess be made. If I have read a number of posts correctly Libby and jenni are not a chess player yet it seems that they have given more to chess, especially juniors, than a number of so called 'competative' players.

The following comments will draw fire but so be it. The organisational aspects behind the actual playing of the sport (yes, I do think it is a sport) is really no different from any other endeavour and that is the aspect which interests me and, apparently, others. It is the suggested dictitorial approach, ie you will stay in this location and pay this price on pain of $x penalty, which I find most offensive. In associations I have been involved with over the years, the idea of the committee and organisational structure is to encourage and foster participation in an all inclusive way. The big-stick approach normally has the opposite effect and for good reason; people hate, without having been asked, to be told to lump it or leave it.

There are I admit, some oddies with chess. First the structure is, as far as I can see, voluntary. That generally leads to ordinary members of the organisation viewing issues on a mutual society basis. A nice friendly clubby atmosphere.

Yet chess is also a professional sport for some participants. This requires a need to provide prize money and so it is understandable that anything to attract sponsorship and thus money is explored or adopted. Whenever money is involved in a generally amatuer sport, things can get grubby. Sad but true. It results in the very dichotomies which have been expressed in a number of posts. The hard part for chess in Australia will be achieving the Golden Mean. The ACF committee will have its work cut out resolving those issues and being prepared, if it should come to that, in advising the current sponsor of this wonderful event "Thanks but no thanks" .

By the way, I play chess on a social basis because I enjoy the game and I find it interesting. I didn't know that it was obligatory or mandatory to be obsessive about it.

Also just to say I have been to Mount Buller on a few occassions in both winter and summer. Simply a gorgeous place. However, in summer, relaxing as it may be, it is certainly cooler than the lower reaches, it is isolated and can be expensive (for me).

Cheers all

Cat
09-01-2005, 11:37 AM
Heavens above, it is most amusing. Many things are said in the heat of the moment. I have done that and on reflection have regretted hitting the send button on the email. The same may well apply to the submit button on forums.

From my observation, there seems to be a general concept that only if one is a 'competative' chess player can any contribution to chess be made. If I have read a number of posts correctly Libby and jenni are not a chess player yet it seems that they have given more to chess, especially juniors, than a number of so called 'competative' players.

The following comments will draw fire but so be it. The organisational aspects behind the actual playing of the sport (yes, I do think it is a sport) is really no different from any other endeavour and that is the aspect which interests me and, apparently, others. It is the suggested dictitorial approach, ie you will stay in this location and pay this price on pain of $x penalty, which I find most offensive. In associations I have been involved with over the years, the idea of the committee and organisational structure is to encourage and foster participation in an all inclusive way. The big-stick approach normally has the opposite effect and for good reason; people hate, without having been asked, to be told to lump it or leave it.

There are I admit, some oddies with chess. First the structure is, as far as I can see, voluntary. That generally leads to ordinary members of the organisation viewing issues on a mutual society basis. A nice friendly clubby atmosphere.

Yet chess is also a professional sport for some participants. This requires a need to provide prize money and so it is understandable that anything to attract sponsorship and thus money is explored or adopted. Whenever money is involved in a generally amatuer sport, things can get grubby. Sad but true. It results in the very dichotomies which have been expressed in a number of posts. The hard part for chess in Australia will be achieving the Golden Mean. The ACF committee will have its work cut out resolving those issues and being prepared, if it should come to that, in advising the current sponsor of this wonderful event "Thanks but no thanks" .

By the way, I play chess on a social basis because I enjoy the game and I find it interesting. I didn't know that it was obligatory or mandatory to be obsessive about it.

Also just to say I have been to Mount Buller on a few occassions in both winter and summer. Simply a gorgeous place. However, in summer, relaxing as it may be, it is certainly cooler than the lower reaches, it is isolated and can be expensive (for me).

Cheers all


Don I share your sentiments entirely and you have articulated the issues beautifully. The hopes that the ACF can come to its collective senses and beat out something purposeful with direction rests on Dennis being able to corral some of the more intransigent luddites on the committee into the 21st century, a task sadly that may be beyond him.

However, you may be a little unware of some of the history surrounding this event which may alter you perspective a little. The initial Mt Buller bid was put together by David Cordover. As this was signalled clearly as a business venture, once the bid was approved by the ACF, he was basically (it would seem) left to his own devices to stitch up the deal with Accor.

When he realised the venture was not commercially viable, he rescinded his bid (understandably so) and left the ACF with a number of unpallatable choices, including options where he continued his management in an altered set up. Now this episode occurred relatively late in the piece and essentially the ACF were left with 3 simple choices;
1. Accept David Cordover's offer.
2. Rebuild the event at another venue.
3. Take over the Mt Buller venture and communicate directly with Accor.

At this point George Howard stepped in, showed some real leadership and made the decision to manage the Mt Buller event directly himself, giving up his professional committments to do so. Now this was an excellent piece of brave decision making in my opinion, given his trust in Cordover had understandably been shaken, there was little time to secure and plan a new event - this would have been very risky given the little time available and besides the nuts and bolts of the Mt Buller event were already in place, planning was pretty advanced and he was probably recieving reassuring messages from the Accor management team.

On top of that he had to quickly cobble together a team of fairly inexperienced volounteers (finding willing helpers would not have been easy) one of which in particular has been especially determined to sabotage every pr opportunity he gets. Really poor George has been on the back foot from the start and given the difficulties he was presented with, he's done pretty well - I reckon he should be forgiven his occasional outburst, by & large he's negiogated some dangerous channels remarkably well. I know he will eventually recognise that the manner his touting for Accor was one of his mistakes, but don't we all make mistakes? I think the manner of his leadership and his integrity has won him widespread admiration.

What went wrong? The mistake was made at the beginning, when the ACF committee awarded the bid to David Cordover. It was not necessarily that this was wrong, but where they failed was in not properly recognising the potential for a conflict of interest and in not ensuring they were kept more closely in the loop during the Accor negotiations. They should also have put more definite deadlines in place to ensure the bid was on track, which would have allowed more time for an alternative arrangement when the thing tripped up.

Now you could rightly say that George as president was partly responsible for the fiasco, but in the manner of his rescue attempts he has shown that he has accepted responsibility and acted courageously in the wider interest for Australian Chess.

Make no mistake, when George took action the situation was a mess. What he has done has been remarkable. What it serves to show is the naivity of the ACF in the management of their affairs and this is something Dennis must address. He was a strong advocate for the ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess earlier this year but was beaten down by the State. He must now take a leaf out of George's book, demonstrate decisive leadership and put this issue back on the agenda. Without structure, as you rightly state, Australian Chess will continue to drift.

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 12:57 PM
As usual things you say are incorrect. All you are stating is an opinion, not actual facts.


However, you may be a little unware of some of the history surrounding this event which may alter you perspective a little. The initial Mt Buller bid was put together by David Cordover. As this was signalled clearly as a business venture, once the bid was approved by the ACF,
The ACF awarded the bid to CV. It was CV that recommended that the ACF accept the bid.

he was basically (it would seem) left to his own devices to stitch up the deal with Accor.
I suspect CV may hold a different view.


When he realised the venture was not commercially viable, he rescinded his bid (understandably so)
The bid was always awarded by the ACF to CV. It was CV that informed the ACF that it was planning on walking away from Mt Buller and changing the venue to around Melbourne.


What went wrong? The mistake was made at the beginning, when the ACF committee awarded the bid to David Cordover.
Incorrect.
The ACF awarded the bid to CV.


It was not necessarily that this was wrong, but where they failed was in not properly recognising the potential for a conflict of interest and in not ensuring they were kept more closely in the loop during the Accor negotiations.
Perhaps it was CV that did not keep a tight enough reign on DC.


They should also have put more definite deadlines in place to ensure the bid was on track, which would have allowed more time for an alternative arrangement when the thing tripped up.

Now you could rightly say that George as president was partly responsible for the fiasco, but in the manner of his rescue attempts he has shown that he has accepted responsibility and acted courageously in the wider interest for Australian Chess.

Make no mistake, when George took action the situation was a mess. What he has done has been remarkable. What it serves to show is the naivity of the ACF in the management of their affairs and this is something Dennis must address.
I suspect many would suggest CV did not monitor DC sufficiently.
No problems were highlighted at the April ACF Council meeting. The first indication of a problem was only when CV informed the ACf of their intention to switch venues.
Prior to that all communications that I am aware of between CV by the ACF Council did not highlight a problem.


He was a strong advocate for the ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess earlier this year but was beaten down by the State.
Since this certainly wasnt the failed ACF Commission plan then what ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess would it be.

ursogr8
09-01-2005, 01:04 PM
Don I share your sentiments entirely and you have articulated the issues beautifully. The hopes that the ACF can come to its collective senses and beat out something purposeful with direction rests on Dennis being able to corral some of the more intransigent luddites on the committee into the 21st century, a task sadly that may be beyond him.

However, you may be a little unware of some of the history surrounding this event which may alter you perspective a little. The initial Mt Buller bid was put together by David Cordover. As this was signalled clearly as a business venture, once the bid was approved by the ACF, he was basically (it would seem) left to his own devices to stitch up the deal with Accor.

When he realised the venture was not commercially viable, he rescinded his bid (understandably so) and left the ACF with a number of unpallatable choices, including options where he continued his management in an altered set up. Now this episode occurred relatively late in the piece and essentially the ACF were left with 3 simple choices;
1. Accept David Cordover's offer.
2. Rebuild the event at another venue.
3. Take over the Mt Buller venture and communicate directly with Accor.

At this point George Howard stepped in, showed some real leadership and made the decision to manage the Mt Buller event directly himself, giving up his professional committments to do so. Now this was an excellent piece of brave decision making in my opinion, given his trust in Cordover had understandably been shaken, there was little time to secure and plan a new event - this would have been very risky given the little time available and besides the nuts and bolts of the Mt Buller event were already in place, planning was pretty advanced and he was probably recieving reassuring messages from the Accor management team.

On top of that he had to quickly cobble together a team of fairly inexperienced volounteers (finding willing helpers would not have been easy) one of which in particular has been especially determined to sabotage every pr opportunity he gets. Really poor George has been on the back foot from the start and given the difficulties he was presented with, he's done pretty well - I reckon he should be forgiven his occasional outburst, by & large he's negiogated some dangerous channels remarkably well. I know he will eventually recognise that the manner his touting for Accor was one of his mistakes, but don't we all make mistakes? I think the manner of his leadership and his integrity has won him widespread admiration.

What went wrong? The mistake was made at the beginning, when the ACF committee awarded the bid to David Cordover. It was not necessarily that this was wrong, but where they failed was in not properly recognising the potential for a conflict of interest and in not ensuring they were kept more closely in the loop during the Accor negotiations. They should also have put more definite deadlines in place to ensure the bid was on track, which would have allowed more time for an alternative arrangement when the thing tripped up.

Now you could rightly say that George as president was partly responsible for the fiasco, but in the manner of his rescue attempts he has shown that he has accepted responsibility and acted courageously in the wider interest for Australian Chess.

Make no mistake, when George took action the situation was a mess. What he has done has been remarkable. What it serves to show is the naivity of the ACF in the management of their affairs and this is something Dennis must address. He was a strong advocate for the ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess earlier this year but was beaten down by the State. He must now take a leaf out of George's book, demonstrate decisive leadership and put this issue back on the agenda. Without structure, as you rightly state, Australian Chess will continue to drift.

What a wonderful pair posts from DH and DR.
The quality of posts seems to gone up in recent days with jenni and Libby having elbow room as well. Well done you four in particular.

Now Doc, where you say, "What went wrong? The mistake was made at the beginning, when the ACF committee awarded the bid to David Cordover. It was not necessarily that this was wrong, but where they failed was in not properly recognising the potential for a conflict of interest and in not ensuring they were kept more closely in the loop during the Accor negotiations. They should also have put more definite deadlines in place to ensure the bid was on track, which would have allowed more time for an alternative arrangement when the thing tripped up.", you might be right on the button.
Can I summarise to
> conflict of interest
>> poor tracking of progress?

The conflict of interest is new, and is growing year by year. Essentially, the junior community is providing the funds, and the senior community is providing the infrastructure. The seniors main negotiating leverage comes from the titles they own.
However, make no mistake that the dilemma arises not from a privateer/single-commercial-interest promoting the event. No! The dilemma was identified when Don said "It results in the very dichotomies which have been expressed in a number of posts. ". I took this to mean that

an ever increasing number of junior coaches will want the Austalian Junior to be the high-point of their financial year
The senior strong players will want high prize money
Some senior players will be junior coaches


So we see the potential for a conflict-of-interest, was centralised when DC was the promoter, but will still be in existence when decentralised promotion (or other alternatives) is discussed. Thorny indeed.
(Perhaps it is time for DOROPHIL's long-awaited stakeholder analysis).

starter

ursogr8
09-01-2005, 01:13 PM
As usual things you say are incorrect. All you are stating is an opinion, not actual facts.


.....

Bill

You analysed the good doctor's post which identified two root-causes
(poor tracking of progress, and the downside of conflict of interest), but only commented on the first factor.
Will you be commenting on the second?

starter

Cat
09-01-2005, 01:14 PM
[QUOTE=Bill Gletsos]As usual things you say are incorrect. All you are stating is an opinion, not actual facts.


The ACF awarded the bid to CV. It was CV that recommended that the ACF accept the bid.

I suspect CV may hold a different view.


The bid was always awarded by the ACF to CV. It was CV that informed the ACF that it was planning on walking away from Mt Buller and changing the venue to around Melbourne.


Incorrect.
The ACF awarded the bid to CV.


Perhaps it was CV that did not keep a tight enough reign on DC.


At the end of the day, the responsibility ultimately rests with the ACF. It was David Cordover's bid, as you well know - even if by proxy through CV. Why else did the ACF take responsibilty for clearing up the mess?

If CV, along with the ACF, failed to keep a tight enough rein (not reign, which is an unfortunate Freudian slip on your part), then perhaps it was because everyone was looking in different directions - the thing fell through the gaps, which I guess is inevitable with the cumbersome structure currently in place. It only serves to further illustrate the need for centralised co-ordination.


I suspect many would suggest CV did not monitor DC sufficiently.
No problems were highlighted at the April ACF Council meeting. The first indication of a problem was only when CV informed the ACf of their intention to switch venues.
Prior to that all communications that I am aware of between CV by the ACF Council did not highlight a problem.

What questions did the ACF ask? What deadlines did they put in place? How much did they know of the negiotations? If you don't ask the questions, you won't find the answers.


Since this certainly wasnt the failed ACF Commission plan then what ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess would it be.

Yes, that's right!

Cat
09-01-2005, 01:30 PM
What a wonderful pair posts from DH and DR.
The quality of posts seems to gone up in recent days with jenni and Libby having elbow room as well. Well done you four in particular.

Now Doc, where you say, "What went wrong? The mistake was made at the beginning, when the ACF committee awarded the bid to David Cordover. It was not necessarily that this was wrong, but where they failed was in not properly recognising the potential for a conflict of interest and in not ensuring they were kept more closely in the loop during the Accor negotiations. They should also have put more definite deadlines in place to ensure the bid was on track, which would have allowed more time for an alternative arrangement when the thing tripped up.", you might be right on the button.
Can I summarise to
> conflict of interest
>> poor tracking of progress?

The conflict of interest is new, and is growing year by year. Essentially, the junior community is providing the funds, and the senior community is providing the infrastructure. The seniors main negotiating leverage comes from the titles they own.
However, make no mistake that the dilemma arises not from a privateer/single-commercial-interest promoting the event. No! The dilemma was identified when Don said "It results in the very dichotomies which have been expressed in a number of posts. ". I took this to mean that

an ever increasing number of junior coaches will want the Austalian Junior to be the high-point of their financial year
The senior strong players will want high prize money
Some senior players will be junior coaches


So we see the potential for a conflict-of-interest, was centralised when DC was the promoter, but will still be in existence when decentralised promotion (or other alternatives) is discussed. Thorny indeed.
(Perhaps it is time for DOROPHIL's long-awaited stakeholder analysis).

starter

If Chess is to grow in Australia it must welcome commercial enterprise. All sports benefit from commercial interest running alongside an independant governing body. Codes of practice and clear ethical guidelines are necessary to permit fair and equal opportunity.

David Cordovers energies are an asset to Australian Chess, which I don't think we were quite ready for. But David's & Graeme's models are really the blueprints for growth. More consideration needs to be given to consider how these things can be harnessed and controlled for everyone's benefit.

Cordover's current unpopularity has resulted from the simple fact the lines of communication that exist are poor and have broken down. The anger and hurt that was felt when David made his announcement was understandable, but the ACF can have no one to blame but themselves. They were apparently oblivious to the potential conflicts of interests that arose and the fact that David choose to make his accouncement on the Bulletin Board underlines the distance that existed between himself and the ACF - In his eyes, there must have been no other way to do it, no one to talk to, no liaison, zilch! And it came to them like a bolt from the blue!

Libby
09-01-2005, 01:53 PM
At this point George Howard stepped in, showed some real leadership and made the decision to manage the Mt Buller event directly himself, giving up his professional committments to do so. Now this was an excellent piece of brave decision making in my opinion, given his trust in Cordover had understandably been shaken, there was little time to secure and plan a new event - this would have been very risky given the little time available and besides the nuts and bolts of the Mt Buller event were already in place, planning was pretty advanced and he was probably recieving reassuring messages from the Accor management team.

On top of that he had to quickly cobble together a team of fairly inexperienced volounteers (finding willing helpers would not have been easy) one of which in particular has been especially determined to sabotage every pr opportunity he gets. Really poor George has been on the back foot from the start and given the difficulties he was presented with, he's done pretty well - I reckon he should be forgiven his occasional outburst, by & large he's negiogated some dangerous channels remarkably well. I know he will eventually recognise that the manner his touting for Accor was one of his mistakes, but don't we all make mistakes? I think the manner of his leadership and his integrity has won him widespread admiration.


Can I make one, I think significant, point in rebuttal.

I accept the very great task that George took on. Well done. He is clearly passionate (and possibly correct) in his belief that this deal will be the best thing for Australian chess.

But look at Trent's post and the (somewhat premature) announcement of George's way to settle the issue with chess players staying at the Mercure. Let's just take an unpopular deal and whack everyone who doesn't like it with a financial penalty. That will bring all those recalcitrant players and administrators into line. That definitely demonstrates that George has learnt how to temper the manner in which he touted on behalf of the sponsor - not!

It's all a learning curve and I'm not suggesting I have the perfect model or the capacity to do better. What has disappointed me is that I have made many phone calls into Mt Buller and found very few people there who even knew we were coming. I see the Porsche Sprint advertised on the front page of the website but no chess. I can't find results. I can't see pictures. I can't get the gossip on the event.

You want this to be the best thing since sliced bread next time? Well the PR starts this time! People need to be jealous of the good time being had down there. Show them shots of the New Year's Eve Party, the scenery and frolicing chess players. Show them pictures of the international players with a bit of an "60 seconds with Garvin" type snapshot interview.

This isn't just another state-run Championship which everyone hopes will go well. This is a step into professionalism with big $$$s and the sense that it wants to go somewhere. So take it there.

Cat
09-01-2005, 02:24 PM
[QUOTE=Libby]Can I make one, I think significant, point in rebuttal.

I accept the very great task that George took on. Well done. He is clearly passionate (and possibly correct) in his belief that this deal will be the best thing for Australian chess.

But look at Trent's post and the (somewhat premature) announcement of George's way to settle the issue with chess players staying at the Mercure. Let's just take an unpopular deal and whack everyone who doesn't like it with a financial penalty. That will bring all those recalcitrant players and administrators into line. That definitely demonstrates that George has learnt how to temper the manner in which he touted on behalf of the sponsor - not!

It's all a learning curve and I'm not suggesting I have the perfect model or the capacity to do better. What has disappointed me is that I have made many phone calls into Mt Buller and found very few people there who even knew we were coming. I see the Porsche Sprint advertised on the front page of the website but no chess. I can't find results. I can't see pictures. I can't get the gossip on the event.

Sadly Libby, the way George has dealt with your comments has definitely been the low point. I suspect he has been hampered by not having a great communicator on his team, and his responses to you have sounded rushed, terse and plain wrong. Better liaison between Accor and the punter was necessary and so far it hasn't been forthcoming.

As for the web-site, I think it hasn't been too bad. We expect high levels of electronic communication these days, 5 years ago I reckon we would have thought it fantastic. Also I reckon 1 or 2 people just need to go out & have a walk, they're spending too much time plugged in! So if the results don't appear too quickly, it ain't the end of the world.


You want this to be the best thing since sliced bread next time? Well the PR starts this time! People need to be jealous of the good time being had down there. Show them shots of the New Year's Eve Party, the scenery and frolicing chess players. Show them pictures of the international players with a bit of an "60 seconds with Garvin" type snapshot interview.

This isn't just another state-run Championship which everyone hopes will go well. This is a step into professionalism with big $$$s and the sense that it wants to go somewhere. So take it there.

Because of all the problems, I reckon there's been a surprising upswell in interest in these Championships - all publicity is good publicity! As such a tremendous PR opportunity has been missed, not just once but repeatedly. But a proper PR machine can only be put together if planning comes together under 1 body - namely the ACF. It's time to recognise independant and sometimes antagonisitic state structures are hampering the development of chess. Good PR doesn't happen by accident, it needs strategic planning. But I like your saying, it should become the ACF soundbite.


SO TAKE IT THERE!

Libby
09-01-2005, 02:35 PM
Because of all the problems, I reckon there's been a surprising upswell in interest in these Championships - all publicity is good publicity! As such a tremendous PR opportunity has been missed, not just once but repeatedly. But a proper PR machine can only be put together if planning comes together under 1 body - namely the ACF. It's time to recognise independant and sometimes antagonisitic state structures are hampering the development of chess. Good PR doesn't happen by accident, it needs strategic planning. But I like your saying, it should become the ACF soundbite.


SO TAKE IT THERE!

Hmmm - I think a good - not perfect, but good - PR machine takes one person with sufficient professionalism & effort.

Don't underestimate what can be achieved with an extra 30mins effort by someone each day. Even better, an hour each morning putting together a couple of photos from the previous day, copying the DOPs write-up from the Bulletin (assuming there is one) and zipping it off on the email or just posting it here. All publicity is (perhaps) good publicity but really good publicity is just that - really good.

And before I get slapped down for telling people how to do stuff, and then sitting back on my hands, I did offer to do quite a bit of stuff. In the end I got so frustrated and (OK, pathetic girly statement) hurt :( , I didn't even accompany my daughter's school team - who I have worked with for 4 years - to Mt Buller for the Aus Schools. That's about how good the PR has been.

Strictly from my perspective, of course. I'm sure others may view things differently. :cool:

Cat
09-01-2005, 02:50 PM
Hmmm - I think a good - not perfect, but good - PR machine takes one person with sufficient professionalism & effort.

Don't underestimate what can be achieved with an extra 30mins effort by someone each day. Even better, an hour each morning putting together a couple of photos from the previous day, copying the DOPs write-up from the Bulletin (assuming there is one) and zipping it off on the email or just posting it here. All publicity is (perhaps) good publicity but really good publicity is just that - really good.

And before I get slapped down for telling people how to do stuff, and then sitting back on my hands, I did offer to do quite a bit of stuff. In the end I got so frustrated and (OK, pathetic girly statement) hurt :( , I didn't even accompany my daughter's school team - who I have worked with for 4 years - to Mt Buller for the Aus Schools. That's about how good the PR has been.

Strictly from my perspective, of course. I'm sure others may view things differently. :cool:

I should differentiate between publicity and PR (public relations). There have been plenty of publicity opportunities, which good PR could have exploited. I agree with you these opportunities have been missed. As for 30mins, 30mins can do a lot of damage as well, and that's whats been happening. The 30mins is there alright, just not always the best.

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 03:59 PM
At the end of the day, the responsibility ultimately rests with the ACF.
True but as in the past the ACF liases with the State Associations and not directly with any individuals. I am unaware of any previous circumstances that are similar to this one.


It was David Cordover's bid, as you well know - even if by proxy through CV.
In the recent past all Australian Open or Championship bids have come via the State Associations even if the bid was run by individuals. This was true for the last Open in Sydney run by Brian Jones. It was also true with the Mingara bid as well as the last event run in Melbourne.


Why else did the ACF take responsibilty for clearing up the mess?
THis has been explained previously at the time. One of many reasons was because the ACF wanted to salvage the sponsorship deal with Mevcure.


If CV, along with the ACF, failed to keep a tight enough rein (not reign, which is an unfortunate Freudian slip on your part), then perhaps it was because everyone was looking in different directions - the thing fell through the gaps,
Maybe nothing fell thru the gaps.
You can really only go by what information you are being told.


which I guess is inevitable with the cumbersome structure currently in place. It only serves to further illustrate the need for centralised co-ordination.
It serves to illustrate no such thing.
Some may suggest it illustrates a problem where an individual organiser has a financial interest in the event.
Brian Jones in concert with the NSWCA showed that such things are not necessarily a problem.


What questions did the ACF ask? What deadlines did they put in place? How much did they know of the negiotations? If you don't ask the questions, you won't find the answers.
The ACF believed the information coming to it from CV.
That would be no different to you organising an event on behalf of the Gold Coast club who are organising it on behalf of CAQ. Why would CAQ have reason to doubt assurances from the Gold Coast club.


Yes, that's right!
You can try an play smart with lines like this but you fail.
In reference to Denis you said "He was a strong advocate for the ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess earlier this year but was beaten down by the State."
Please back up this statement by showing a reference to said plan.

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 04:13 PM
Bill

You analysed the good doctor's post which identified two root-causes
(poor tracking of progress, and the downside of conflict of interest), but only commented on the first factor.
Will you be commenting on the second?
Only to the following extent.
Obviously the ACF recognised the potential conflict of interest but since CV had put a committee in place to handle the Mt Buller events, we believed CV would handle any conflict of interest that may have arisen..

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 04:18 PM
Cordover's current unpopularity has resulted from the simple fact the lines of communication that exist are poor and have broken down.
If you believe that then you are simply deluding yourself.


The anger and hurt that was felt when David made his announcement was understandable, but the ACF can have no one to blame but themselves. They were apparently oblivious to the potential conflicts of interests that arose
Now you are just being silly.
The ACF were aware of potential conflicts of interest.
We expected however that CV would manage that.


and the fact that David choose to make his accouncement on the Bulletin Board underlines the distance that existed between himself and the ACF - In his eyes, there must have been no other way to do it, no one to talk to, no liaison, zilch! And it came to them like a bolt from the blue!
Again this demosntrates that you have no clue what you are talking about.
A number of those on the ACF Council were aware a couple of days prior to David's announcement on this board that CV was planning on walking away from Mt Buller.

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 04:23 PM
Don't underestimate what can be achieved with an extra 30mins effort by someone each day. Even better, an hour each morning putting together a couple of photos from the previous day, copying the DOPs write-up from the Bulletin (assuming there is one) and zipping it off on the email or just posting it here.
I completely agree with you.

Information coming out and being posted on the website has been extremely disappointing. This ranges from availability of results to round reports to photos etc.

The US Championship website was excellent. One suspects because Mig took it upon himself to ensure that it was.

It is unfortunate that no Mt Buller organiser did the same.

Cat
09-01-2005, 08:46 PM
A number of those on the ACF Council were aware a couple of days prior to David's announcement on this board that CV was planning on walking away from Mt Buller.

A couple of days prior, as much as that! Well that makes all the difference, doesn't it? they had 2 days more to plan than I realised, more of a steamroller than a bolt!

Cat
09-01-2005, 08:57 PM
True but as in the past the ACF liases with the State Associations and not directly with any individuals. I am unaware of any previous circumstances that are similar to this one.

As Libby says Bill, were are entering a new age with commercial interest the new player in town. Don't look to the past, think to the future - its time for chess to grow up.


The ACF believed the information coming to it from CV.

On this we can agree. Bill, this isn't an excuse, it's an admission! It's patently obvious that it was the case, believed it hook, line & sinker, no questions asked! What I'm saying is that with the benefit of hindsight, I think we can all agree this was a mistake - that protocols should now be put in place in order that commercial interest can be properly harnessed for the good of Australian Chess, and we should be looking for the best model to deliver that.

Cat
09-01-2005, 09:03 PM
You can try an play smart with lines like this but you fail.
In reference to Denis you said "He was a strong advocate for the ACF plan to centralise control of the direction of Australian Chess earlier this year but was beaten down by the State."
Please back up this statement by showing a reference to said plan.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Denis_Jessop
As for its being the ACF's responsibility to bring more adults into chess or to see that ex-juniors keep on playing, I'm not so sure. Though favouring an active role for the ACF in such matters, I see the rejection of the ACF Commission proposal, which I supported, and the failure of anyone to second my proposals for Chess Co-ordinators at the April Council meeting as indicators that the prevailing view is for the ACF to stick to things that are National in character in that they are better, or necessarily, to be done by the ACF than by the States. We therefore need to see what the States can do about this matter. I distinguish this from, say, junior development such as is as undertaken by the NECG program where a national approach seems more appropriate.

Denis Jessop


DR
Surely its the only way to go, a centrally co-ordinated as exists in most other sporting bodies and most chess associations in other countries. If the States see development as their preserve, there should be some onus on the States to deliver, otherwise all we have is gridlock. Don't give up on the ideal Dennis, let it be the stamp of your Presidency. Who were the fools that voted against it? They should be dragged over the coals and flogged!
__________________
Nothing fades like the future or clings like the past

OK Bill?

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 09:07 PM
A couple of days prior, as much as that! Well that makes all the difference, doesn't it? they had 2 days more to plan than I realised, more of a steamroller than a bolt!
Dont try and twist what you originally said.
You said "and the fact that David choose to make his accouncement on the Bulletin Board underlines the distance that existed between himself and the ACF - In his eyes, there must have been no other way to do it, no one to talk to, no liaison, zilch!"

As I said there were those on the ACF Council aware of it prior to any announcement by David on this BB.

Cat
09-01-2005, 09:13 PM
Dont try and twist what you originally said.
You said "and the fact that David choose to make his accouncement on the Bulletin Board underlines the distance that existed between himself and the ACF - In his eyes, there must have been no other way to do it, no one to talk to, no liaison, zilch!"

As I said there were those on the ACF Council aware of it prior to any announcement by David on this BB.

Take comfort from this if you like Bill. A bigger man would recognise a problem.

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 09:23 PM
Take comfort from this if you like Bill. A bigger man would recognise a problem.
20 20 hindsight is a marvelous thing.

Cat
09-01-2005, 09:25 PM
20 20 hindsight is a marvelous thing.

I'll take 20 20, thanks! BTW 20 20 is Yankee-speak, it's 6/6 over here!

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 09:29 PM
I'll take 20 20, thanks! BTW 20 20 is Yankee-speak, it's 6/6 over here!
Yes, but undoubtedly posters would have questioned what I meant if I had said 6/6 hindsight is a marvelous thing.

Rincewind
09-01-2005, 09:32 PM
I'll take 20 20, thanks! BTW 20 20 is Yankee-speak, it's 6/6 over here!

Also most Americans don't like being called Yankees. It's like referring to all Australians as "Banana-benders". :D

ursogr8
09-01-2005, 09:51 PM
Yes, but undoubtedly posters would have questioned what I meant if I had said 6/6 hindsight is a marvelous thing.

Bill

Looking back in retrospect I don't know if I would have challenged 6/6. :confused:
I don't normally challenge your posts; especially those with metrics in them.

But, if my addiction to post had got the better of me I might have drawn attention to your spelling of the m word.
We will never know....this time has passed. ;)


starter

Bill Gletsos
09-01-2005, 10:06 PM
Bill

Looking back in retrospect I don't know if I would have challenged 6/6. :confused:
I don't normally challenge your posts; especially those with metrics in them.
I said "undoubtedly posters" not "undoubtedly starter".

Cat
10-01-2005, 09:53 PM
Also most Americans don't like being called Yankees. It's like referring to all Australians as "Banana-benders". :D

That's what us Canadians up here call you Yankees down there!

bobby1972,1/2
11-01-2005, 07:40 PM
mt buller is beautiful i mean it is fantastic, have the open their allways, man the view from board 9 to 13 was incredible i was almost sorry to move up to the high boards,that place is incredible ,doeas anyone know how to get the cd with the bulletins?thanks,also i can get to barry cox page but the ratings are the previus ones what am i doing wrong ?A.Pecori

Rincewind
11-01-2005, 10:38 PM
mt buller is beautiful i mean it is fantastic, have the open their allways, man the view from board 9 to 13 was incredible i was almost sorry to move up to the high boards,that place is incredible ,doeas anyone know how to get the cd with the bulletins?thanks,also i can get to barry cox page but the ratings are the previus ones what am i doing wrong ?A.Pecori

Seems a lot of the people who went really enjoyed themselves. Of course, you have more reasons for fond memories than just the view from boards 9-13.

Sorry about the website. I've been a bit busy and a bit slack. I'll post something here when I get a chance to put up the December ratings.

Rincewind
11-01-2005, 11:54 PM
Sorry about the website. I've been a bit busy and a bit slack. I'll post something here when I get a chance to put up the December ratings.

Ratings should now be up-to-date.

For those without the page bookmarked, the calculator can be accessed by clicking here (http://www.bjcox.com/modules.php?name=Glicko_Calc).

Kevin Bonham
12-01-2005, 12:07 AM
It should be pointed out that Georges view on future entry fees is just that, Georges view.

Exactly. And I will oppose any entry fee for those not staying at Mercure that I consider to be punitively high. I'm not saying we need entry fees this cheap again but I'm sure the issue can be solved without jacking it up to higher than it would be in any other city.

Kevin Bonham
12-01-2005, 02:58 PM
OK, I hope this is the right thread for this. A brief review of my experiences as a player in the Open in terms of its quality as an event.

Field: Smallish and with few very strong players but also very competitive. Most players serious about the game and keen to do well. Remarkably few easy points even down to the bottom half-dozen boards. A common comment was that the field was about a point out of 11 harder than previous Opens because the midfield was so strong. Not many troublemakers and hence not many incidents but a few UWDs.

Setting: Excellent for bushwalks, outdoor recreation, views, etc. Convenience for groceries etc has been discussed elsewhere - manageable but with effort. Restaurants and cafes decent when open and less pricey than I expected. Socially disappointing - eg unless you got into a private party, NYE was pointless.

Venue: Interesting setting with good views. Playing conditions mediocre to dreadful. Among the issues here:

* many tables wonky (they have a single central leg and hence wobble when leant on on the sides)
* heating uneven - could be too cold in places but also often too hot near the heaters.
* lighting uneven - some boards were very dark while others were too glarey. Light bulbs also functioned as heat bulbs - I'll put up with almost anything but in one case I actually had to have my game moved as I felt pinned like an insect under the heat and glare of three lights pointed right at my face. Players playing on some higher boards were affected by sunlight coming onto the board.

Analysis area: Excellent.

Arbiters: Competent and experienced team. I should note that in the Blitz and also in the Rapid playoffs some decisions were made, of a "commonsense" nature but outside the letters of the Laws, that would have certainly needed to be overturned on appeal had the players appealled. However the players were happy with these decisions and did not appeal.

Refreshments at venue: overpriced when available.

Bulletins: Excellent presentation in early stages. Very inexpensive. Good tone but marred by poor proofreading including numerous misspellings and sometimes reversed results of games. After a few days the bulletin situation descended into farce with the bulletins becoming unavailable through breakdowns between organisers and sponsors. Bulletins eventually appeared days late and sometimes in abbreviated form. This affected preparation and many players weren't delighted about it.

Bus to Mansfield: Broke down in the snow but otherwise ran reliably and in organised fashion with generally good advance info about availability. An excellent service that made the event run much better - well done Ralph.

Event information: Crosstables were not available in the playing area except for a small one posted on the final day. Coupled with lack of timely bulletins it was difficult to get a picture of players' progress.

Overall verdict: I think the event is repeatable and will attract a larger field with publicity further out but improvements are required, especially in the playing conditions and the timely availability of bulletins.

arosar
12-01-2005, 05:48 PM
Bulletins: . . . After a few days the bulletin situation descended into farce with the bulletins becoming unavailable through breakdowns between organisers and sponsors. Bulletins eventually appeared days late and sometimes in abbreviated form. This affected preparation and many players weren't delighted about it.

Bulletins for the NZ congress were very simple printouts of games from the two sections. Each issue appeared the following day, if not the same day. This was absolutely crucial for preparation.

There were also large cross tables and metrics, etc.

AR

ursogr8
12-01-2005, 06:56 PM
OK, I hope this is the right thread for this. A brief review of my experiences as a player in the Open in terms of its quality as an event. (Bold edit by starter)

Field:

Setting:
Venue:
* many tables
* heating uneven
* lighting uneven - Analysis area: Excellent.

Arbiters:
Refreshments at venue: .

Bulletins: .

Bus to Mansfield: Event information[/b
[b]Overall verdict: I think the event is repeatable and will attract a larger field with publicity further out but improvements are required, especially in the playing conditions and the timely availability of bulletins.

KB
(Apolgies if my multiple edits offend; clumsy attempt on my part to precise.)

I was rather looking forward to your assessment as an ACF decision-maker, rather than as a player.

From the promoters viewpoint the subheadings would have been quite different.
On this thread we have asked about repeatibilty covering
> template kit on how to run
>> need to take leave from work, for the chief organiser
>>> the deal with junior parents to allow funds to drift to the senior prizes
>>> and many other points

Can you comment on other issues in this thread?

regards
starter

PhilD707
12-01-2005, 09:21 PM
Bulletins for the NZ congress were very simple printouts of games from the two sections. Each issue appeared the following day, if not the same day. This was absolutely crucial for preparation.

There were also large cross tables and metrics, etc.

AR

.... and at Adelaide 2004 a superb bulletin was made available every day.
It included game scores , photos. ladders and a summary story on the round.
(I believe the "Saints" had a lot to do with it :)
The best thing about this was that you could book up on your opponents pet openings the morning before you actually played him. Probably didn't make a huge difference to the outcome of your game but added greatly to the fun of the event.

PhilD707
12-01-2005, 09:55 PM
As posted by KB at #243 above:

"Arbiters: Competent and experienced team. I should note that in the Blitz and also in the Rapid playoffs some decisions were made, of a "commonsense" nature but outside the letters of the Laws, that would have certainly needed to be overturned on appeal had the players appealled. However the players were happy with these decisions and did not appeal."

I disagree 150% with Kevin's "letter of the law" approach.
On the very first page of the FIDE Handbook there appears the following:

PREFACE

The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations, which are discussed in the Laws. The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors.

FIDE appeals to all chess players and federations to accept this view.

In my experience while some situations that are arise are clearly Black and White, many other disputes that arise at a Chessboard are "special cases" in which the judgement of the Arbiter, based on fairness, logic and special factors, is essential and will provide the wisest outcome.
It would perhaps make life easier for the arbiter if it were possible to devise a set of Chess "laws" that explicitly defined and gave judgement on every situation that might arise in a game of Chess, however this is patently impossible for if it weren't the FIDE laws of Chess would not carry the above PREFACE.

Rincewind
12-01-2005, 10:01 PM
I disagree 150% with Kevin's "letter of the law" approach.
On the very first page of the FIDE Handbook there appears the following:

In my experience while some situations that are arise are clearly Black and White, many other disputes that arise at a Chessboard are "special cases" in which the judgement of the Arbiter, based on fairness, logic and special factors, is essential and will provide the wisest outcome.
It would perhaps make life easier for the arbiter if it were possible to devise a set of Chess "laws" that explicitly defined and gave judgement on every situation that might arise in a game of Chess, however this is patently impossible for if it weren't the FIDE laws of Chess would not carry the above PREFACE.

I believe from Kevin's context it was clear that he was referring to situations which are precisely regulated by the laws and therefore the letter of the law must take precidence over the preface.

Bill Gletsos
12-01-2005, 10:37 PM
I believe from Kevin's context it was clear that he was referring to situations which are precisely regulated by the laws and therefore the letter of the law must take precidence over the preface.
You are 100% correct.
If the situation is covered by an actual Article or group of Articles then it must be followed.

A typical situation in a Blitz game might be something like K and B v K and Q and P.
Whilst trying to win the side with the Q loses on time.
Now common sense might rule this a draw but the laws of chess are quite explicit. It is a win for the side with the K and B.
If the arbiter rules it drawn but the player with K & B refuses to accept that and insists on claiming the win then the Arbiter has no choice but to award the win. If he does not and if the player appeals then any competent appeals committee should rule it as a win for the side with K and B.

Note that even if the above position was K and B (or Knight) V K and P and the side with the pawn loses on time then it is a win for the side with the B (or Knight) since a mating position can be created by underpromoting the opponents remaining pawn.

The main danger with an arbiter ruling the situation drawn is that it may have an impact on prizes later in the event.

Lets say the arbiter convinces player A to accept the draw (either because player A is a nice guy or does not know the rules) instead of claiming a win in round 3 in the above situation.
Now you get to the final round and player A ends up on 5.5/9 and is in contention for the U1800 prize. However Player B is on 5/8 and in the last round also reachs a similar position. Again the arbiter declares it drawn, however player B knows the rules and insists the arbiter follow the laws of chess and therefore B ends up on 6/9 and wins the U1800 prize. Player A would certainly feel hard done by.

This situation would/could not occur if the arbiter simply followed the law as written and declared the game won.

Kevin Bonham
13-01-2005, 02:02 AM
I believe from Kevin's context it was clear that he was referring to situations which are precisely regulated by the laws and therefore the letter of the law must take precidence over the preface.

Exactly. A decision that is subjective on a matter not precisely regulated would very rarely be overturned by an appeals committee.

I don't know who the players were but I believe that something like K+N vs K+P in blitz was ruled a draw after a flag fell, which is a commonsense solution but explicitly incorrect under the Laws as a helpmate is still possible.

I thought there was a second example but it's a bit less clearcut. In the Johansen-Kengis blitz playoff the game started with Johansen's king and queen reversed and the arbiters fixed this about six moves into the game. I'd thought that the Laws said you could only fix this in the first three moves in a rapid or blitz, but the actual wording is "Once each player has completed three moves, no claim can be made regarding incorrect piece placement, orientation of the chessboard or clock setting. In case of reverse king and queen placement castling with this king is not allowed." I am not totally sure whether the intent of this rule is to also prevent the arbiters from unilaterally fixing reverse king and queen placement (without any claim by either player) after more than three moves or not.