PDA

View Full Version : Olympiad fundraising



Paul S
17-09-2004, 09:16 PM
:hmm: :doh:

Maybe I have a completely wrong perspective on things with regard to the Olympiad? Maybe I should be so absorbed in Olympiad selections like everybody else appears to be?

With the Olympiad, I notice that there are endless posts on selections, but NOTHING has been said about things like sponsorship. Why is this the case? I would have thought that by now someone like Jason Lyons would have secured sponsorship for the 2004 Olympiad team (like what happened in 2002), yet I have heard nothing in this regard.

Prior to the 2002 Bled Olympiad, there were regular updates via the ACF email Bulletin (about once every 5 issues) of a list of donors who had contributed to the Olympiad Fund. Yet I have seen NOTHING this year in the ACF email Bulletins! Its not that I want to "see my name up in lights", rather I think there should be a recognition (a way of saying "thankyou") of people who have contributed (which in turn would encourage others to make contributions).

Why does the NSWCA (and presumably other State Organisations) have on their Membership Renewal form the option of donating to the Olympiad Fund?

Six months ago I sent a cheque for $50 payable to the ACF for them to use this $50 in any way they sought fit (with a strong suggestion that it be put towards the Olympiad Fund). I did not send it to the ACF Treasurer, but made the mistake (as it turns out) of posting it to someone else in the ACF. Needless to say, this cheque has STILL not yet been deposited by the ACF (despite 3 email reminders from me to get it banked).

I suggest that the ACF make the most of the $75 ($125 in the unlikely event that the $50 cheque I posted in March and sent 3 email reminders about ever gets deposited) that I have contributed to the 2004 Olympiad, as it will almost certainly be the LAST contribution I make towards the Olympiad Fund! :(

arosar
18-09-2004, 12:49 PM
I would have thought that by now someone like Jason Lyons would have secured sponsorship for the 2004 Olympiad team (like what happened in 2002), yet I have heard nothing in this regard.

Why do you have this expectation? As far as I know, jase doesn't work for the ACF.

AR

Paul S
19-09-2004, 12:53 AM
Why do you have this expectation? As far as I know, jase doesn't work for the ACF.

AR

I was using Jason as an example, rather than specifically "picking on him". I used Jason as an example because of his success in getting sponsorship for the 2002 Olympiad team.

If sponsorship was obtained in 2002, I can't see why there shouldn't be sponsorship for the 2004 Olympiad team. I am surprised that there has been no mention of 2004 Olympiad sponsorship by now.

Also, if in 2002 a regularly updated list of chess players who donated to the Olympiad would be listed in the ACF Bulletin (ie publicly thanked and act as an encouragement for others to contribute, which I think is important given the stinginess of a lot of chess players) then I can't see why this has not been done for 2004.

I was under the impression that the 2002 sponsorship was of great assistance in sending the team to Bled. If this is the case, then where is the money coming from to enable Australia to send the 2004 team to Spain? :hmm: An increase in ACF rating fees for 2005? :hmm:

Kevin Bonham
19-09-2004, 01:46 AM
I was under the impression that the 2002 sponsorship was of great assistance in sending the team to Bled. If this is the case, then where is the money coming from to enable Australia to send the 2004 team to Spain? :hmm: An increase in ACF rating fees for 2005? :hmm:

I believe the usual practice is that the Olympiad Appeal is distributed among the players and then any shortfall is paid by the players themselves, including through any individual sponsorships they obtain (I know at least one player has one of these). I'm not sure if it's normal for ACF capital to be broken into, but others might know better.

jase
19-09-2004, 01:46 PM
I would have thought that by now someone like Jason Lyons would have secured sponsorship for the 2004 Olympiad team (like what happened in 2002), yet I have heard nothing in this regard.



I suggest that the ACF make the most of the $75 ($125 in the unlikely event that the $50 cheque I posted in March and sent 3 email reminders about ever gets deposited) that I have contributed to the 2004 Olympiad, as it will almost certainly be the LAST contribution I make towards the Olympiad Fund!

Paulie I am sorry that you feel this way. The Olympiad is my favorite chess event and the teams always greatly appreciate the support they receive from the chess community.

Amiel and Kevin are correct when they write that I am not involved this time around. My application to continue as Captain of the Women's team was unsuccessful, so the task of raising funds and managing the teams falls to Leonid and Manuel this time.

Whilst I was very successful in securing sponsorship in 2002, it is a difficult thing and there is no guarantee that I would have been able to match or better those efforts of 2 years ago. I am sure that the appropriate people are doing their best to ensure that we are able to send our strongest team.

The Women's team especially looks very strong on paper - I think they have the potential to challenge some of the top 10 teams.

I have instead thrown my energies into theatre, and am performing down at the Bondi Pavillion this month. Some chess players have been threatening to get a group together but they are yet to materialise. Info on this thread: http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=1034

So don't be too despondent Paul - the teams really do appreciate your contributions and hopefully the captains will ensure due recognition and updates of team preparations, updates from the venue, and all that jazz.

Paul S
20-09-2004, 02:29 AM
Paulie I am sorry that you feel this way. The Olympiad is my favorite chess event and the teams always greatly appreciate the support they receive from the chess community.

.................................................

So don't be too despondent Paul - the teams really do appreciate your contributions and hopefully the captains will ensure due recognition and updates of team preparations, updates from the venue, and all that jazz.

:hmm: In light of Jason's comments I will reconsider my position early next year (when the NSWCA membership forms come out with the option/opportunity to make a contribution to the Olympiad Fund).

Upon reflection I was probably being a bit harsh in my earlier posts. The apparent sloppiness/disinterest regarding Olympiad sponsorship and lack of official appreciation/recognition for chessplayers' contributions is probably a symptom of "the biggest problem in chess" (not enough people doing the chess Admin work) as much as anything else. Also, I guess having our ACF President (and other ACF officials and people associated with the ACF) tied up with Mt Buller obviously means that they cannot spend as much time as they should on their "normal" chess admin duties.

arosar
24-09-2004, 05:30 PM
. . . the task of raising funds and managing the teams falls to Leonid and Manuel this time.

Well mate, I - for one - acknowledge your tremendous skill in acquiring sponsorships. Let's pray that this new bloke who replaced you can equal your talents in this regard. The decision to install Sandler came as a bit of a shock to a great many people actually. I wonder what the selectors based their decision on.

AR

Kevin Bonham
24-09-2004, 08:42 PM
Well mate, I - for one - acknowledge your tremendous skill in acquiring sponsorships. Let's pray that this new bloke who replaced you can equal your talents in this regard. The decision to install Sandler came as a bit of a shock to a great many people actually. I wonder what the selectors based their decision on.

The selectors don't pick the captains - the captains are selected by Council after seeing the stated preferences from the players (which Council tends to follow but is not at all bound to). The applicants are also permitted to lobby Council if they wish.

Rhubarb
06-10-2004, 10:36 AM
Well mate, I - for one - acknowledge your tremendous skill in acquiring sponsorships. Let's pray that this new bloke who replaced you can equal your talents in this regard. The decision to install Sandler came as a bit of a shock to a great many people actually.

So has either anointed captain made any progress on the sponsorship front? I doubt it.

On a matter of principle, like Paul S, I won't be contributing to the Olympiad Appeal this time. If the players are too stupid that they can't vote in the one captain who can help them, then I refuse to lift a finger to help them.

Kevin Bonham
06-10-2004, 03:14 PM
On a matter of principle, like Paul S, I won't be contributing to the Olympiad Appeal this time. If the players are too stupid that they can't vote in the one captain who can help them, then I refuse to lift a finger to help them.

The Open team had a choice between Weeks and Sandler. The Women's team had a choice between Sandler, Lee Jones, Drummond and Lyons.

arosar
06-10-2004, 03:33 PM
So who selected the captains then - the players?

I'm gonna be like kegless. There's no way I'm contributing anything to this mob. Why turn your back on a fella who made you, how much was it (?), $15k?

AR

Rhubarb
06-10-2004, 03:41 PM
$15k?

I believe it was $17k spread across both teams.

shaun
06-10-2004, 03:47 PM
There is no ACF regulation (as far as I know) that requires the team captains to raise money for the team. Jason, or anyone else, could have volunteered to raise money for the team, even if they hadn't been picked as captain. Of course being a team captain would probably be a strong motivating factor to raise money for the appeal, but the two aren't tightly connected.
The only attempt that I am aware of to link fund raising with captaincy was a proposal in the late 80's to automatically appoint the Olympiad Fund Co-ordinator to the position of the Womens team captain. This proposal was strongly opposed by both the AWCL and the players themselves, and the ACF did not pursue the idea.

Rhubarb
06-10-2004, 04:18 PM
There is no ACF regulation (as far as I know) that requires the team captains to raise money for the team.

This is rich, coming from the ridiculous traitor to his country.

You have no right to talk about ACF regulations, you charlatan!

You are an absolute running joke, so GF!!

Rincewind
06-10-2004, 04:26 PM
This is rich, coming from the ridiculous traitor to his country.

You have no right to talk about ACF regulations, you charlatan!

You are an absolute running joke, so GF!!

Have you been drinking? Or still celebrating the Power's win?

arosar
06-10-2004, 04:35 PM
What was kegless so upset about?

AR

Rhubarb
06-10-2004, 04:38 PM
Have you been drinking? Or still celebrating the Power's win?
yo blazza youre very perschleptive (hic!) ggf!!!

shaun
06-10-2004, 04:50 PM
This is rich, coming from the ridiculous traitor to his country.

You have no right to talk about ACF regulations, you charlatan!

You are an absolute running joke, so GF!!

Dang, you've got me!
Instead of helping chess in Papua New Guinea, I turned my back on the country of my birth and: Published a national chess magazine, organised plenty of tournaments, established the ACF Grand Prix, worked as ACF Ratings Officer, served on the ACF council for a number of years, coached junior chess for 20+ years plus a whole lot of other evil and nasty things I can't seem to remember.
I'm not sure how I'll cope with all this guilt, but 3 weeks at the olympiad may help my sense of well being
:D

Rhubarb
06-10-2004, 05:04 PM
That's a fantastically excellent reply, and I can't deny the truth of any of it. I think it would be an absolute travesty if you somehow didn't get knighted by QEII (but more likely it would it happen in Port Moresby, not Canberra, eh?)

skip to my lou
06-10-2004, 05:41 PM
Have you been drinking? Or still celebrating the Power's win?

Anonymousness.

Kevin Bonham
07-10-2004, 01:25 AM
So who selected the captains then - the players?

Already explained this to you before on this thread - the captains are formally selected by ACF Council, but the players are asked to express their views and Council then takes that into account. Council is not bound to follow the players' wishes but usually does so unless there is a strong reason not to do so. Note that only the Open team express a view to Council regarding who should captain the Open team, and only the Women's team express a view to Council regarding who should captain the Women's team.

Garvinator
07-10-2004, 01:27 AM
pedantic point which i will delete after answer is given, should your post Kevin say captain, not coach :confused:

Trent Parker
07-10-2004, 11:42 AM
hmmmm.... :hmm:
Does anyone know who kegless is???

A relative of Sweeney Perhaps??? :lol: :owned:

Bill Gletsos
07-10-2004, 11:47 AM
hmmmm.... :hmm:
Does anyone know who kegless is???
Yes.


A relative of Sweeney Perhaps??? :lol: :owned:
No.

Look thru all his posts and it will soon become obvious who he is. :doh:

antichrist
08-10-2004, 02:47 PM
[QUOTE=shaun]Dang, you've got me!
Instead of helping chess in Papua New Guinea, I turned my back on the country of my birth and:

In PNG did you come across a Casim Grapilion, a Filipino who may have represented them in an Olympaid, years ago?

shaun
08-10-2004, 04:22 PM
[QUOTE=shaun]Dang, you've got me!
Instead of helping chess in Papua New Guinea, I turned my back on the country of my birth and:

In PNG did you come across a Casim Grapilion, a Filipino who may have represented them in an Olympaid, years ago?

I left when I was 10 years old (1977) but I can ask others on the team when I get to Spain.

jase
11-10-2004, 06:14 PM
There is no ACF regulation (as far as I know) that requires the team captains to raise money for the team. Jason, or anyone else, could have volunteered to raise money for the team, even if they hadn't been picked as captain. Of course being a team captain would probably be a strong motivating factor to raise money for the appeal, but the two aren't tightly connected.

Nor does the ACF Constitution require a captain to provide coaching, make team selections, travel arrangements, deal with hotel or venue staff etc etc, as far as I'm aware.

Team captains have always played a strong role in raising finances for the team[s]. The term "captain", to my mind, is a dual role: what you can do before the event, and what you can do during the event, to achieve the best outcomes.

The ACF Constitution does say:

c. Approximately 10 months prior to the Olympiad, the ACF Council will appoint a sub-committee who will actively pursue funds for the appeal (ref: National Conference '85, minute 9.4.2. and appendix 3, motion 24A). This sub-committee will co-ordinate the activities of all parties engaged in fundraising activities for the Olympiad. Some of the responsibilities of the sub-committee follow.

i. Set the appeal target.

ii. Prepare the appeal letters.

iii. Organize the official launching of the appeal, which should be approximately 8 months prior to the Olympiad.

iv. Organize raffles and other fund raising ventures. In addition, the sub-committee could give advice and assistance to State associations and other interested parties on such matters.

v. Make recommendations to the Federation concerning applications to obtain grants from the Federal Government.

vi. Encourage State Members to assist in the raising of funds by whatever means they are able.

vii. Attempt to obtain commercial sponsorship.

viii. Prepare press releases and generally obtain as much publicity as possible.

ix. Arrange to produce or purchase mementos for donors of $50 or more to the appeal.

x. Organize the travel arrangements for all team members. If an individual team member wishes to make his/her own arrangements, then he/she must submit those arrangements at least 5 weeks prior to the commencement of the Olympiad, for approval by the sub-committee.

xi. Determine the place of residence of each team member, in cases where agreement cannot be reached.

Such committees do not exist. The team captain has a responsibility here, in conjunction with the Olympiad Appeal co-ordinator. The above points are where a captain can be effective before the event.

At the venue there are matters such as team selection, preparations for matches, administrative matters relating to hotels, venues, transport, dining, and the like, and the need to foster a co-operative, and positive spirit within the team.

Whether you view a captain as the team manager or the team coach will have a strong bearing on your notion of what makes a good team captain. Manuel Weeks is an oustanding captain - at the venue. Prior to registration day he is a lame duck. Vladimir Feldman went beserk after losing out to me for the position of Women's Captain in 2000, citing his superior playing strength. Being a strong player helps. You are better able to prepare players for specific openings, or styles of players. As an 1800 strength chess player, the likes of Feldman and Sandler, as 2300 players, have a significant advantage over me in this regard.

I'd argue that I have it over them in every other facet of the job, but if what you want in a captain is a strong player, then the IMs are the way to go. If you want a leader and a manager, then you might go a different way.

I am a bit biased towards the Women's team because of my affiliations over the past 4 years, however I do think they can do at least as well as Istanbul 2000 and Bled 2002 [both top 30 finishes] and I think they are a chance for a top 20 finish. The Open team I anticipate finishing around their seeding [mid 40s].

Bill Gletsos
11-10-2004, 06:27 PM
The ACF Constitution does say:
Actually it says no such thing jase.
What you quoted is part of a By-Law, not the Constitution.

Ian_Rogers
13-10-2004, 09:29 PM
I was very surprised to read Jason's comment that:

"Team captains have always played a strong role in raising finances for the team[s]."

This is simply untrue.

In the past 26 years, if there has been any serious fund-raising for the Olympiad, apart from the Appeal, it has usually been initiated by the poorer players or, more rarely, the ACF. The Women's Chess League and some State Associations have also raised funds for various members of the team on occasion.

The only time I can remember a captain being a principal in fund-raising was Jason's wondeful effort in securing sponsorship for the team in 2002, from Ansell and the NSW government.

However noone (except apparently Jason) believed that this was an obligation for Jason because he was captain.

Curiously, Jason has been decidely unhelpful in raising funds for the 2004 team. Both myself and Cathy asked him on separate occasions for a contact within Ansell so that Ansell could be approached with a view to continuing the 2002 Olympiad sponsorship. He agreed to email the information but never did so.

Ian

Brian_Jones
14-10-2004, 08:56 AM
Having fielded the initial approach from Ansell in 2002, I can provide their contact details on request. So can Graeme Gardiner.

Just for the record, Australian Champion IM Gary Lane is sponsored at the 2004 Olympiad in Calvia by Australian Chess Enterprises (ACE).

Brian Jones

arosar
14-10-2004, 08:58 AM
Just for the record, Australian Champion IM Gary Lane is sponsored at the 2004 Olympiad in Calvia by Australian Chess Enterprises (ACE).

Is he also not your son-in-law?

AR

pax
14-10-2004, 10:07 AM
Does anyone know if Olympiad donations can be made by direct deposit or credit card? Most bank accounts don't come with cheque books these days, and money orders are a bit of a pain.

Pax

Kevin Bonham
14-10-2004, 01:08 PM
Does anyone know if Olympiad donations can be made by direct deposit or credit card? Most bank accounts don't come with cheque books these days, and money orders are a bit of a pain.

Yes I made a donation by direct deposit a few days ago. Contact Norman Greenwood at normg@bigpond.com if you would like to do this. I actually have the ACF's bank account no. but I'm not sure if I'd be allowed to give it out publicly.

Garvinator
15-10-2004, 12:25 PM
Hello Gareth,

there is already a thread in the general chess section: http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=1401

Lucena
15-10-2004, 12:35 PM
Hello Gareth,

there is already a thread in the general chess section: http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=1401

Ok thanks didn't realise

Paul S
16-10-2004, 12:40 AM
I have read the latest ACF email Bulletin (#286 dated 13/10/04).

I am pleased that the ACF appears to have taken my advice (refer post numbers 678 and 680 in this thread) and finally decided to do an update on Olympiad appeal finances and publish a list of donors (something that used to happen frequently during the lead up to the 2002 Olympiad). The ACF has left it extremely late to do this (one day before the Olympiad), but better late than never, I suppose. I'm also pleased to see that my $50 has at long last been (apparently) banked (refer post number 678 in this thread).

I am surprised at the paltry amount of $1630 collected. I had expected at least double that amount, given the posts by certain BB members over the last year supporting the Olympiad appeal. However, apart from one person (who made a miserly contribution of $10) I could not see any BB regular on the list (apart from myself), although it appears that Kevin recently made a donation. Looks like many people on this BB are just full of hot air - al talk and no action.

Looks like I have been misled about the importance/relevance of the Olympiad Fund. Apart from the near total absence of BB regulars contributing, I notice that no State Association (eg NSWCA, CAQ etc) made a contribution to the Olympiad Appeal. Most disillusioning of all is the attitude of the ACF with its half hearted promotion of the Olympiad Appeal (and are now apparently trying to "make up for it" by giving the Olympiad Appeal some publicity "after the horse has almost bolted" in the latest ACF email Bulletin #286 dated 13/10/04).

I have just looked at the ACF website (and ACF email Bulletin #286 dated 13/10/04) and noticed that the people in the following ACF positions have made NO contribution toward the Olympiad Appeal - President (+ Olympiad Apeal Co-Ordinator!), Deputy President, Vice-President (and Webmater), Vice-President (and Junior Selection Co-Ordinator), Secretary, Treasurer, Archivist/Historian, Auditor, Corporate Relations Officer, Director of Coaching, FIDE Ratings Officer, Grand Prix Supervisor/Recorder, both Ratings Officers, Public Officer, Publicity Officer, Tournament Co-Ordinator and Coaching Co-Ordinator!!! The only person on the ACF who has made a contibution (whose name appears on the list of donors) is the FIDE Delegate (and I understand that the Senior Selection Co-Ordinator recently made a donation after the list was printed).

Hypocritically the ACF in Bulletin #286 calls on chess players to urgently make donations to the Olympiad Appeal, yet (apart from 2 of its members) nobody in the ACF is prepared to make a donation themselves! What about leadership? Shouldn't leaders (the ACF) set the example for everyone else (the Australian chess community) to follow?! What hypocrisy!

No doubt as a result of the ACF's half-hearted promotion of its Olympiad Appeal (eg it seems to me that people can only make donations via cheque to a PO Box - this is fine for people like me, but what about those who do not have cheque accounts or who find it more convenient to do electronic funds transfer, thus preventing/obstructing some people from contributing), it looks like the ACF will have to use some of its own funds to make up the shortfall. No doubt there will be a hefty increase in the ACF's rating fee tax next year to pay for this! Just what Australian chess needs - a large increase in rating fee tax to act as a disincentive to have games rated (and thereby promote chess)!

Bill Gletsos
16-10-2004, 12:53 AM
I have read the latest ACF email Bulletin (#286 dated 13/10/04).

I am pleased that the ACF appears to have taken my advice (refer post numbers 678 and 680 in this thread) and finally decided to do an update on Olympiad appeal finances and publish a list of donors (something that used to happen frequently during the lead up to the 2002 Olympiad). The ACF has left it extremely late to do this (one day before the Olympiad), but better late than never, I suppose. I'm also pleased to see that my $50 has at long last been (apparently) banked (refer post number 678 in this thread).

I am surprised at the paltry amount of $1630 collected. I had expected at least double that amount, given the posts by certain BB members over the last year supporting the Olympiad appeal. However, apart from one person (who made a miserly contribution of $10) I could not see any BB regular on the list (apart from myself), although it appears that Kevin recently made a donation. Looks like many people on this BB are just full of hot air - al talk and no action.

Looks like I have been misled about the importance/relevance of the Olympiad Fund. Apart from the near total absence of BB regulars contributing, I notice that no State Association (eg NSWCA, CAQ etc) made a contribution to the Olympiad Appeal. Most disillusioning of all is the attitude of the ACF with its half hearted promotion of the Olympiad Appeal (and are now apparently trying to "make up for it" by giving the Olympiad Appeal some publicity "after the horse has almost bolted" in the latest ACF email Bulletin #286 dated 13/10/04).

I have just looked at the ACF website (and ACF email Bulletin #286 dated 13/10/04) and noticed that the people in the following ACF positions have made NO contribution toward the Olympiad Appeal - President (+ Olympiad Apeal Co-Ordinator!), Deputy President, Vice-President (and Webmater), Vice-President (and Junior Selection Co-Ordinator), Secretary, Treasurer, Archivist/Historian, Auditor, Corporate Relations Officer, Director of Coaching, FIDE Ratings Officer, Grand Prix Supervisor/Recorder, both Ratings Officers, Public Officer, Publicity Officer, Tournament Co-Ordinator and Coaching Co-Ordinator!!! The only person on the ACF who has made a contibution (whose name appears on the list of donors) is the FIDE Delegate (and I understand that the Senior Selection Co-Ordinator recently made a donation after the list was printed).

Hypocritically the ACF in Bulletin #286 calls on chess players to urgently make donations to the Olympiad Appeal, yet (apart from 2 of its members) nobody in the ACF is prepared to make a donation themselves! What about leadership? Shouldn't leaders (the ACF) set the example for everyone else (the Australian chess community) to follow?! What hypocrisy!

No doubt as a result of the ACF's half-hearted promotion of its Olympiad Appeal (eg it seems to me that people can only make donations via cheque to a PO Box - this is fine for people like me, but what about those who do not have cheque accounts or who find it more convenient to do electronic funds transfer, thus preventing/obstructing some people from contributing), it looks like the ACF will have to use some of its own funds to make up the shortfall. No doubt there will be a hefty increase in the ACF's rating fee tax next year to pay for this! Just what Australian chess needs - a large increase in rating fee tax to act as a disincentive to have games rated (and thereby promote chess)!
Sometimes I really wish people would put their brain in gear before they put their mouth into drive.

The vast majority of those in official positions on the ACF already contribute significant amounts to the ACF in the way of their time and energy.
Based on your outburst perhaps we should all start charging the ACF for our time and effort.

As for the ACF increasing the admin fee I just dont see that happening.

Paul S
16-10-2004, 01:28 AM
Sometimes I really wish people would put their brain in gear before they put their mouth into drive.

Surely you mean fingertips and not mouth? ;) :lol:

Rest assured, Bill, my brain WAS working properly when I made that post.

Sounds like you are trying to find a new "whipping boy" now that your mate Matt has left the BB. :P


The vast majority of those in official positions on the ACF already contribute significant amounts to the ACF in the way of their time and energy.

I am well aware of this, and in the past I have made posts acknowledging this.

Be that as it may, the Olympiad Appeal (and efforts to get sponsorship) in 2004 has been woeful. As someone who has made a significant contribution to the Olympiad Appeal ($125 MORE than you, Bill!) I feel I am entitled to express my thoughts on it!

Why haven't YOU contributed to the Olympiad Fund, Bill? Heck, with your financial situation you could even pay for the entire Olympiad team's expenses without making any impact on your lifestyle!

You obviously feel that ACF officials should not contribute to the Olympiad Fund, yet at the same time they (ACF officials) should tell others to do so. Well, I believe in the saying "practice what you preach" and that "leaders should set the example". Well, I reckon on the issue of the 2004 Olympiad Appeal the ACF has done a very sloppy and unsatisfactory job (and I believe that most BB viewers would agree with me).


Based on your outburst perhaps we should all start charging the ACF for our time and effort.

I am different to your mate Matt. When I make criticisms, they are justified criticisims and/or constructive criticisms.

Perhaps you would prefer we be like ostriches burying our heads in the sand?


As for the ACF increasing the admin fee I just dont see that happening.

You may be correct on that. We will have to wait and see.

arosar
16-10-2004, 01:19 PM
Paulie mat....you're an OK bloke, I have told you this many times. But the way you express yourself mate . . . you're . . . you're . . . a friggin' drama queen!! What shall I call this - a kind of 'chess moralism'? It's your choice to donate. It's others' not to. What the hell's the problem? Hec you even had a go at someone who donates a "miserly sum of $10".

You're a SINK as you've told us many times - so you can afford $75!

AR

Bill Gletsos
16-10-2004, 03:56 PM
Surely you mean fingertips and not mouth? ;) :lol:

Rest assured, Bill, my brain WAS working properly when I made that post.
It certainly didnt appear that way to me.


Sounds like you are trying to find a new "whipping boy" now that your mate Matt has left the BB. :P
You are deluding yourself.
If I was going to treat you like Matt you would have not been treated as mildly as I did.


I am well aware of this, and in the past I have made posts acknowledging this.
Yes, but you are missing the point.
Many members of the ACF Council and its office bearers have contributed with their time and effort far in excess of any $125 they could have contributed to any Olympiad fund.


Be that as it may, the Olympiad Appeal (and efforts to get sponsorship) in 2004 has been woeful. As someone who has made a significant contribution to the Olympiad Appeal ($125 MORE than you, Bill!) I feel I am entitled to express my thoughts on it!
Based on that logic perhaps the ACF office bearers should just have all made a $125 contribution and exited from administration alltogether.

As someone who has spent well in excess of $125 not only on software for the development of the ACF rating system (as has Graham Saint) but have also attended ACF National conferences at my own expense and have never once asked for recompense by the ACF for any work I have done then I feel I am entitled to express my view on your comments. As far as I am concerned they are shortsighted.


Why haven't YOU contributed to the Olympiad Fund, Bill? Heck, with your financial situation you could even pay for the entire Olympiad team's expenses without making any impact on your lifestyle!
Indeed my monthly car loan repayments may exceed most peoples mortgages repayments but as you have no clue as to what my financial commitments may be then I would suggest you should not speculate on matters of which you have absolutely no knowledge.


You obviously feel that ACF officials should not contribute to the Olympiad Fund, yet at the same time they (ACF officials) should tell others to do so. Well, I believe in the saying "practice what you preach" and that "leaders should set the example".
I think your view is very narrow.
On that basis perhaps every chess player should have be a chess administrator.


Well, I reckon on the issue of the 2004 Olympiad Appeal the ACF has done a very sloppy and unsatisfactory job (and I believe that most BB viewers would agree with me).
The ACF advertised for an ACF Appeals Co-ordinator. No one put there hand up.

If you feel so strongly about it why didnt you volunteer for it.


I am different to your mate Matt. When I make criticisms, they are justified criticisims and/or constructive criticisms.
Mostly thats true.
However in some cases you seem to me to be wide of the mark.


Perhaps you would prefer we be like ostriches burying our heads in the sand?
No, I'd prefer people make informed and reasoned comment.


You may be correct on that. We will have to wait and see.If admin fees did change it would have nothing to do with the Olympiad Appeal as there is no requirement to top it up.
However as I said I can see no reason why the admin fee should be increased. There certainly has been no discussion or even hint of this being considered by the ACF Council.

Kevin Bonham
16-10-2004, 10:34 PM
The ACF advertised for an ACF Appeals Co-ordinator. No one put there hand up.

If you feel so strongly about it why didnt you volunteer for it.

I think this is an important point - no-one volunteered despite repeated requests and it got left to an already heavily burdened President who had already had to pick up another rather large ball dropped by somebody else (Mt Buller). So as I see it the only people who have any right to complain at all are the players and captains. I think it's absolutely amazing that they all chose to and managed to get over in spite of the obvious shortfall in sponsorship. In previous years even when the sponsorship picture has been much better we have still been blighted with withdrawals, some of which made me wonder why the applicant bothered consuming the selectors' time in the first place.

For the record I donated $50. I would like to have donated considerably more but my financial position is rather less sound than the Elephant Gambit right now.


What shall I call this - a kind of 'chess moralism'? It's your choice to donate. It's others' not to.

And then it's his choice to criticise them for it. ;)

The matter of ACF direct funding to the Olympiad was raised at Council but received little support. A problem is that chess fans will be even less inclined to contribute if they figure that the ACF will do it for them.

Paul S
17-10-2004, 01:54 AM
What the hell's the problem?


Read my posts in this thread!


You're a SINK as you've told us many times - so you can afford $75!

Yes, I acknowledge that my financial situation is better than a lot of other peoples'. In my book a $50 donation from someone who is not all that well off financially is morally worth more than a $125 ($75 + $50) donation from someone like myself.

Yet at the same time I remember copping a lot of flak from others on this forum around March over my suggestion that the ACF have a prize for best BB
post of 2003, with many people suggesting that this money be spent on the Olympiad Appeal instead, which in turn led to posts along the lines of "the Olympiad Appeal is a great cause that everyone should support" etc. As a result of these posts I decided to donate a bit more in 2004 than I have in previous years to the Olympiad Fund. It was disappointing to find out recently that most of these so-called "Olympiad Fund enthusiasts" had made no contribution whatsoever, which makes me wonder just how important/necessary this cause is.

Garvinator
17-10-2004, 01:57 AM
It was disappointing to find out recently that most of these so-called "Olympiad Fund enthusiasts" had made no contribution whatsoever, which makes me wonder just how important/necessary this cause is.
i think that could be more a case of the usual bb pundits being all mouth and no action most of the time. :(

Kevin Bonham
17-10-2004, 02:07 AM
Yep. Who wants to go digging and see who has some form from that thread that we should know about? :whistle:

Paul S
17-10-2004, 02:11 AM
Yes, but you are missing the point.
Many members of the ACF Council and its office bearers have contributed with their time and effort far in excess of any $125 they could have contributed to any Olympiad fund.


I think you are the one who is missing the point!



The ACF advertised for an ACF Appeals Co-ordinator. No one put there hand up.

I wasn't aware of this (I had thought this was done by George Howard, as this is what is listed on the ACF website for Office Bearers).



If you feel so strongly about it why didnt you volunteer for it.


I don't feel strongly enough about it to volunteer for the job myself (although I have been prepared to commit financially to the cause).

Kevin Bonham
17-10-2004, 04:20 AM
I wasn't aware of this (I had thought this was done by George Howard, as this is what is listed on the ACF website for Office Bearers).

The advertisement ran in the ACF email bulletin/newsletter through February, March and April, appearing in no fewer than ten consecutive issues. This is what it looked like:


Wanted: Olympiad Appeal Co-ordinator: The ACF is calling for interested persons wishing to fulfill the role of Olympiad Appeal Co-ordinator. The tasks involved can be flexible but the occupant must fulfil or arrange to have fulfilled the ACF Olympiad By-Laws, specifically para 2.
This is obviously a very important task this year and available resources will be allocated to assist the occupant of this position to carry out this important function. The ACF Treasurer will obviously assist in the usual manner with accounting tasks if required.
The success of the Olympiad Squads depend not only on their abilities but our (Australian Chess Community) ability to financially support the players, captains etc.
Persons interested should not hesitate to send applications to
George Howard
ACF President
at georgeshoward@hotmail.com or call me on 0414841575 for a confidential discussion.

Brian_Jones
17-10-2004, 08:53 AM
Why do we have an Olympiad Appeal at all? This old fashioned concept seems unique to Australia. Most countries and sports seek direct corporate or government sponsorship. Why should we have a "begging" system? Why don't we just drop the appeal for ever and think about how we get real sponsorship for the future!!

ursogr8
17-10-2004, 09:18 AM
Why do we have an Olympiad Appeal at all? This old fashioned concept seems unique to Australia. Most countries and sports seek direct corporate or government sponsorship. Why should we have a "begging" system? Why don't we just drop the appeal for ever and think about how we get real sponsorship for the future!!

Brian

From an individual Club point of view there has been a significant change in the call on our funds. Ten years back the only APPEAL I ever heard about was the Olympiad appeal, and I enjoyed supporting the appeal because it often was rewarded with an informative copy of the bulletins of the games by the Australians.

But 10 years on, we find our Club supporting this year
Denis Bourmistrov and Casey Hickman to the World Junior
and
Darrel Johansen to the recent Libyan event.

In addition, parents are called on to finance travel etc to Aus Junior events as well as private-and-group coaching.

All good causes, but the changes do mean there is now competiton for funds.

Perhaps you are correct, when the competion-for-funds gets fierce it may be time to turn to corporate sponsorship. Obviously the KSF will be an experienced fund-raiser; a challenge for the incoming ACF President to find one.

starter

Garvinator
17-10-2004, 01:45 PM
Why do we have an Olympiad Appeal at all? This old fashioned concept seems unique to Australia. Most countries and sports seek direct corporate or government sponsorship. Why should we have a "begging" system? Why don't we just drop the appeal for ever and think about how we get real sponsorship for the future!!
this has been discussed so many times before Brian, we are not even regarded as a sport in Australia, so we have no real media appeal, especially in the adult scene. As we are not regarded as a sport, we cant get sponsorship there. We could get it under a community development grant, but that is a bit difficult when the players are travelling overseas.

Brian_Jones
17-10-2004, 04:39 PM
Very negative comment Garvin. What about all those chess fans out there who would love to donate some of their excess wealth to help Australian Chess. Don't know any? Just think about the people behind Stockland Trust, Westfield, Pratt Foundation etc. etc. You may even get to know them as you get older and wiser!

jenni
17-10-2004, 06:13 PM
this has been discussed so many times before Brian, we are not even regarded as a sport in Australia, so we have no real media appeal, especially in the adult scene. As we are not regarded as a sport, we cant get sponsorship there. We could get it under a community development grant, but that is a bit difficult when the players are travelling overseas.
ACT Sport and Rec give grants for people (juniors and adults) who are part of an Australian team competing in a recognised world event. The grant is a maximum of $750 per person and there is a cap of $2,500 per event.

Chess is recognised as a sport in the ACT for the purposes of this grant. (and for a number of other things as well e.g. school sports calendars)

All of our juniors going to the world youth receive assistance and if we ever have an Olympiad team member again ( :eek: ) then they will get assistance as well.

All states would run similar programs, but it is a matter of doing the lobbying to get recognised. It took a lot of whining and press items to get it, but once you do get it they get used to chess being part of it and it becomes automatic. WHile $750 is not huge, it does go a long way towards an airfare.

Spiny Norman
17-10-2004, 06:42 PM
Just think about the people behind Stockland Trust, Westfield, Pratt Foundation etc. etc. You may even get to know them as you get older and wiser!

Perhaps start by picking up a copy of the BRW "Rich 200" list for the minor investment of $5.95 ? Now we've got a list to work from. I happen to have a subscription, so that bit is done already! That's 200 people we can target, plus wealthy families as well. That will also give us the names of related companies to talk to. How about the Fast 100 companies? Or the Top 500 companies lists that are published.

But the REALLY hard bit: What is in it for THEM ?

How're you going to give them a return on their investment? They don't just do this for nothing. They want to feel good about their contribution. Companies want a public relations benefit as the quid-pro-quo. So lets get creative about this. What are we prepared to do for them that will attract them.

If someone is prepared to do the hard part (the thinking about what we could offer them in/around the chess scene) then I would be prepared to help out by trying to find a way to reach them. Its who you know, and its who knows who that will make this a reality. You NEVER just walk into someone's office and expect them to donate. You must get a referral from someone they know and trust. After that its a numbers game.

I know only 2 of the Rich 200, but I'm sure we could find other people who know them and could get to far more than that.

And with a recently returned Government who will be feeling cock-a-hoop, now would be a good time for those of us who helped them get re-elected to get into the ear of our local members and help them develop a good news story around chess.

There's a lot of chat here ... both from people who think something more should be done ... and from the hard-working volunteers who know that more should be done but are already heavily committed and can't do everything.

I have limited time to offer to this process (I work a regular job, consult to other companies out-of-hours, am trying to start a chess club, and spend considerable time helping my local church), but the offer is there.

If someone from the ACF or from VicChess or whoever is appropriate would like to contact me I would be happy to talk things through with them and see whether I (along with others) can help make this a reality.

Send me a private message and we'll take the discussion off-line.

arosar
18-10-2004, 08:53 AM
Talk to Richard Farleigh also.

AR

Paul S
19-11-2004, 05:21 PM
I have been surprised that there have been no complaints from players or people close to the 2004 Olympiad team (eg Olympiad Captains, friends/partners/spouses of players etc) regarding the small $1630 amount collected from the Olympiad Fund. I have noticed on occasions that Ian Rogers and Manuel Weeks have looked at this Chess Chat Forum in recent days (and I suspect there are other Olympiad players/organisers/partners who regularly read this forum but are either unregistered or who have a user name that is not easily identifiable), but have not said anything on this topic.

The impression I get from this is that the players are quite content to pay all their expenses themselves. That is fine, but if this is the case, then why have an Olympiad Fund? For instance, if the players were interested in the Olympiad Fund, I would have thought that they would have voted for Jason Lyons as one of the 2004 team captains, given his success in raising funds for the 2002 Olympiad.

I was in Peter Parr's shop a few weeks ago (relax, Brian :hand: it was only to cash in my $50 Grade Matches Board Prize voucher for getting over 70% score in U1400 division - Peter's shop is convenient for me to get to as I change trains at Central each day). While there, me and Peter talked about the Olympiad (amongst other things). Peter told me that in his day the players would actively participate in the fund raising by playing in simuls and attending functions. In 2004 however (to my knowledge) none of the players participated in any fund raising activities (correct me if I am wrong, but I can't recall there being any simuls or functions for Olympiad Fund Raising in 2004).

It has been acknowledged that the 2004 ACF Olympiad Fund Appeal has been abysmal with many flaws. As Kevin Bonham correctly pointed out, a considerable part of this is due to there being no Olympiad Appeal Co-Ordinator (and this role being dumped on an already over-burdened ACF President). However, it seems to me that as the players cannot be bothered to spend any of their time doing any fund raising themselves (attend simuls, functions etc) and would prefer that a proven Olympiad fund raiser in Jason Lyons was not a captain (they did not vote for him) that they are quite content to pay all their Olympiad expenses themselves.

I'm curious as to whether the ACF ever bothered to follow up on the 2002 $10k sponsorship from Ansell and the $7k sponsorship from the NSW Premiers Department? I mean, at the least thankyou letters, bulletins etc during the 2002 Olympiad? Was contact maintained between the ACF and these two organisations after the 2002 Olympiad with a view to getting them to sponsor the 2004 team?

After contributing to the 2004 Olympiad (and seeing that a lot of so-called "Olympiad Fund supporters" have contributed absolutely nothing to the fund), I feel somewhat disillusioned with this whole 2004 Olympiad Fund experience.

Do we need an Olympiad Fund for the 2006 Olympiad? I am inclined to think not!

Rincewind
19-11-2004, 05:50 PM
The impression I get from this is that the players are quite content to pay all their expenses themselves. That is fine, but if this is the case, then why have an Olympiad Fund? For instance, if the players were interested in the Olympiad Fund, I would have thought that they would have voted for Jason Lyons as one of the 2004 team captains, given his success in raising funds for the 2002 Olympiad.

Wasn't this point answered already by our board one? It is not the job of the captain to raise funds for the team. Perhaps if a suitible person was willing to volunteer in the position of Olympiad Appeal Coordinator we would have raised more funds. I guess money doesn't raise itself, but I wouldn't lay the blame at the feet of the captain.

pax
20-11-2004, 11:43 AM
I have been surprised that there have been no complaints from players or people close to the 2004 Olympiad team (eg Olympiad Captains, friends/partners/spouses of players etc) regarding the small $1630 amount collected from the Olympiad Fund. I have noticed on occasions that Ian Rogers and Manuel Weeks have looked at this Chess Chat Forum in recent days (and I suspect there are other Olympiad players/organisers/partners who regularly read this forum but are either unregistered or who have a user name that is not easily identifiable), but have not said anything on this topic.

The impression I get from this is that the players are quite content to pay all their expenses themselves. That is fine, but if this is the case, then why have an Olympiad Fund? For instance, if the players were interested in the Olympiad Fund, I would have thought that they would have voted for Jason Lyons as one of the 2004 team captains, given his success in raising funds for the 2002 Olympiad.


I suspect the players are probably quite disappointed with the result of the appeal, but are too dignified to complain about it.

I can't imagine that the players are at all "quite content" to pay their own way, just that they would rather pay to go, than not to go at all.

arosar
20-11-2004, 02:01 PM
Do we need an Olympiad Fund for the 2006 Olympiad? I am inclined to think not!

Know what you are mate? Fatalistic!

Kill the GP! Now kill the Olympiad Fund Appeal. WTF!

AR

Paul S
20-11-2004, 02:57 PM
Know what you are mate? Fatalistic!

Kill the GP! Now kill the Olympiad Fund Appeal. WTF!

AR

That's just great coming from you! :mad: I mean, hello, hello, is this the same Arosar who did just about everything possible on this forum to sabotage the Mt Buller Australian Open? :hmm:

You may be happy with the shemozzle the GP has been for the last two years, but I am not. I won't rehash my reasons here for feeling the way I do - all I will say is go read through the thread "Grand Prix Concerns". As far as I am concerned, the GP has become an embarrassment to Australian Chess and needs to cease at the end of this year. If you feel that the GP should continue in 2005, then fine - why don't you post in the thread "Grand Prix Concerns" the reasons why you think there should be a 2005 GP? :hmm: And while you are at it, also post the reasons as to why you disagree with my arguments in that thread! IMHO Garvin's time would be better spent doing other things for chess admin, rather than wasting it on the GP, which in its present format (ie with no sponsorship) is just a redistribution of existing prize money and does not bring in one extra cent for Australian chess! And while on the subject of Garvin, at least he is in there HAVING A GO at trying to improve Australian Chess, which is more than I can say for YOU, Amiel!

You profess concern about the Olympiad Appeal. So, Amiel, tell me how much have YOU contributed this year? According to the ACF Bulletin #287 of October 13 you contributed ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!! Well, I contibuted $125 MORE than you (as it turned out $125 is a significant percentage of the $1630 total), and as such I feel entitled to ask questions about the Olympiad Fund. Amiel, while I find you OK in person, I gotta say that your BB behaviour is very irritating at times! If you feel so strongly about the Olympiad Fund, then WHY have you made NO contribution?! I'll tell you what gives me the s***s more than anything else on this issue - those people who profess "concern" and "support" for the 2004 Olympiad Appeal but have made NO contribution whatsoever themselves!!! :mad: And this goes for others too - criticise me for my views on this issue by all means - but BEFORE criticising me ask yourself how much have YOU contributed to the 2004 Olympiad Fund - if your answer is NOTHING then FO and don't waste my time!!!

Paul S
20-11-2004, 03:35 PM
......................... It is not the job of the captain to raise funds for the team........................................, but I would lay the blame at the feet of the captain.

:confused: I am confused! :confused:

Bill Gletsos
20-11-2004, 04:09 PM
:confused: I am confused! :confused:
Its clear from the context of his post that the last sentence should be "but I wouldn't lay the blame at the feet of the captain.".

Bill Gletsos
20-11-2004, 04:11 PM
if your answer is NOTHING then FO and don't waste my time!!!
You are starting to sound a lot like Sweeney who would tell those he was arguing with to FO.
Not a wise move in my opinion and does you no service Paul.

Paul S
20-11-2004, 04:19 PM
You are starting to sound a lot like Sweeney who would tell those he was arguing with to FO.
Not a wise move in my opinion and does you no service Paul.

I'll take your advice on board. :cool:

It's just that I get irritated by hypocrisy and sometimes overraeact a little, that's all! May also be due to a bit of Irish temper in me (I am 1/8 Irish).

Rincewind
20-11-2004, 05:16 PM
:confused: I am confused! :confused:

Bill has it right (it really wasn't that hard to work out). Original post fixed.

Why don't you answer this question, "why do you blame the captain?"

Paul S
20-11-2004, 11:21 PM
Why don't you answer this question, "why do you blame the captain?"

Where did I say that I blamed the captain?

I was merely asking why the players did not vote for Jason as captain after his fund raising success in 2002 and whether this meant that the players are content to pay all their expenses themselves (in which case why have an Olympiad Fund in the first place).

One more thing, Barry. Which of the following would have more success in obtaining sponsorship from sponsors:
1) Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) going up to a potential sponsor and saying "I am the 2004 Olympiad Captain and I would like to discuss your company sponsoring the 2004 Olympiad team".
2) Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) going up to a potential sponsor and saying "I have no official capacity with the 2004 Olympiad team, but I would like to discuss your company sponsoring the 2004 Olympiad team".

Somehow I don't think option 2) would get past the front door as far as negotiations with sponsors goes! Do you really think that Jason would have been able to secure the 2002 Olympiad sponsorship if he was not team captain? Do you think that Jason would have got air-time on Alan Jones' 2GB breakfast show if he was not the 2002 team captain (as I understand it this air-time on Alan Jones' show played an important role in getting that $10k sponsorship from Ansell and $7k from the NSW Premiers Department)!

Do you think that Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) would have been successful in securing sponsorship for the 2004 team if he had no official capacity with the 2004 Olympiad team (be it captain or some other position)?

Rincewind
21-11-2004, 10:24 AM
Where did I say that I blamed the captain?

You did so by way of negative inference.


I was merely asking why the players did not vote for Jason as captain after his fund raising success in 2002 and whether this meant that the players are content to pay all their expenses themselves (in which case why have an Olympiad Fund in the first place).

But not having Jason (or someone else) as captain does not preclude him or her from securing sponsorship. It is not an either/or proposition.


One more thing, Barry. Which of the following would have more success in obtaining sponsorship from sponsors:
1) Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) going up to a potential sponsor and saying "I am the 2004 Olympiad Captain and I would like to discuss your company sponsoring the 2004 Olympiad team".
2) Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) going up to a potential sponsor and saying "I have no official capacity with the 2004 Olympiad team, but I would like to discuss your company sponsoring the 2004 Olympiad team".

Somehow I don't think option 2) would get past the front door as far as negotiations with sponsors goes! Do you really think that Jason would have been able to secure the 2002 Olympiad sponsorship if he was not team captain? Do you think that Jason would have got air-time on Alan Jones' 2GB breakfast show if he was not the 2002 team captain (as I understand it this air-time on Alan Jones' show played an important role in getting that $10k sponsorship from Ansell and $7k from the NSW Premiers Department)!

Do you think that Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) would have been successful in securing sponsorship for the 2004 team if he had no official capacity with the 2004 Olympiad team (be it captain or some other position)?

But Olympiad Appeal Coordinator is an official position and the most appropriate role to approach potential sponsors. In fact, a captain knocking on doors with cap in hand would probably be viewed as amatuerish and it could be argued that option 2 would infact have a greater chance of success as it would convey a more professional image of the ACF and its Olypiad organisation.

Paul S
21-11-2004, 11:00 AM
You did so by way of negative inference.

Only in your opinion.


But not having Jason (or someone else) as captain does not preclude him or her from securing sponsorship. It is not an either/or proposition.

That is true. However, it makes it much easier for Jason (or anyone else) to secure sponsorship if they are the team captain for reasons I mentioned in my previous post. Also, if someone is Olympiad captain (or some other official capacity) they would have greater personal motivation to get sponsorship than if they are not captain.


But Olympiad Appeal Coordinator is an official position and the most appropriate role to approach potential sponsors.

Fair comment. Only problem with this is that in 2004 there was NOBODY in this position!


In fact, a captain knocking on doors with cap in hand would probably be viewed as amatuerish and it could be argued that option 2 would infact have a greater chance of success as it would convey a more professional image of the ACF and its Olypiad organisation.

An Olympiad team captain asking sponsors for sponsorship would have a far greater chance of success than someone like me or you who has no official capacity with the Olympiad team!

BTW, out of curiosity, did 2004 Olympiad team captains Manuel Weeks and Leonid Sandler make any efforts to secure sponsorship?

Bill Gletsos
21-11-2004, 12:36 PM
Only in your opinion.
Not true. I share Barry's opinion.

Paul S
21-11-2004, 01:04 PM
Not true. I share Barry's opinion.

Yeah, you would, wouldn't you! :P

Bill Gletsos
21-11-2004, 01:14 PM
Yeah, you would, wouldn't you! :P
Well its true.

Even in your last reply to Barry you imply it when you said:

An Olympiad team captain asking sponsors for sponsorship would have a far greater chance of success than someone like me or you who has no official capacity with the Olympiad team!

BTW, out of curiosity, did 2004 Olympiad team captains Manuel Weeks and Leonid Sandler make any efforts to secure sponsorship?

Paul S
21-11-2004, 01:24 PM
Well its true.

Even in your last reply to Barry you imply it when you said:

You can think what you like.

arosar
21-11-2004, 02:28 PM
Paulie is clearly very confused. That's what happens to simpletons. You're a big hero Paul.

Hey Bill, let's name a tourn after Paulie. It could be the "We Love Paul Sike weekender".

I told you once before Paulie: Amiel Rosario does not explain himself to Paul Sike.


Oh and here's news for ya - the Fund will still be here and the GP will continue. Are you mad?

AR

arosar
21-11-2004, 02:32 PM
One more thing, Barry. Which of the following would have more success in obtaining sponsorship from sponsors:
1) Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) going up to a potential sponsor and saying "I am the 2004 Olympiad Captain and I would like to discuss your company sponsoring the 2004 Olympiad team".
2) Jason Lyons (or Barry Cox or Paul S) going up to a potential sponsor and saying "I have no official capacity with the 2004 Olympiad team, but I would like to discuss your company sponsoring the 2004 Olympiad team".

All that shows is that you have no clue about survey design and no idea about fund raising.

AR

Paul S
21-11-2004, 04:45 PM
Paulie is clearly very confused. That's what happens to simpletons. You're a big hero Paul.


I disagree with these views of yours, but you are entitled to your opinion.


Hey Bill, let's name a tourn after Paulie. It could be the "We Love Paul Sike weekender".

No thanks. :hand: I would feel embarrased having a tournament named after me.


I told you once before Paulie: Amiel Rosario does not explain himself to Paul Sike.

I never suggested you had to.


Oh and here's news for ya - the Fund will still be here and the GP will continue. Are you mad?


They probably will continue. And no, I am not mad? Are you?

Paul S
21-11-2004, 04:47 PM
All that shows is that you have no clue about survey design and no idea about fund raising.

AR

You sound as though you do know. So how about you become the Olympiad Fund Co-Ordinator for the 2006 Olympiad and show us how it is done?

arosar
22-11-2004, 08:14 AM
You sound as though you do know. So how about you become the Olympiad Fund Co-Ordinator for the 2006 Olympiad and show us how it is done?

No, how about you do since you're so concerned by it with a $125 investment?

Then you can be a REAL hero!

AR

Garvinator
22-11-2004, 10:58 AM
No, how about you do since you're so concerned by it with a $125 investment?

Then you can be a REAL hero!

AR
Amiel, you are not a big fan of being a volunteer that is known. But I am sure that if you proposed that you get paid say 10% of what ever you raise and you get a $100,000 sponsor, i am sure the high majority of ppl wouldnt mind that you receive $10,000 or so for your efforts :)

Paul S
22-11-2004, 04:42 PM
No, how about you do since you're so concerned by it with a $125 investment?

Then you can be a REAL hero!

AR

Hi Amiel

I don't want to be a hero. I would have thought being a hero is more in line with your type of personality than mine.

Besides, as I've been rather turned off this whole Olympiad fundraising thing (see my posts in this thread), why would I want to take on the role of 2006 Olympiad Fund Co-Ordinator?

arosar
23-11-2004, 08:50 AM
I don't want to be a hero. I would have thought being a hero is more in line with your type of personality than mine.

My personality?

You're the passive-aggressive type. So it's you!

AR

Paul S
24-11-2004, 01:14 AM
So it's you!

:confused:

Kevin Bonham
27-11-2004, 12:37 AM
I have been surprised that there have been no complaints from players or people close to the 2004 Olympiad team (eg Olympiad Captains, friends/partners/spouses of players etc) regarding the small $1630 amount collected from the Olympiad Fund.

Is that the final amount? I don't believe so.


The impression I get from this is that the players are quite content to pay all their expenses themselves.

Or maybe they just don't like whacking a cap out on their own behalf and begging for $$$, perhaps? Or maybe they're just too busy doing what they do best? This "impression" of yours - do you have any evidence for it at all, or is it just supposition? There are heaps of possible reasons why players might not choose to comment.

I think we should all be grateful to the players for all being willing to go - there was not one withdrawal despite the financial difficulties, which I thought was amazing.


That is fine, but if this is the case, then why have an Olympiad Fund?

To give people a way to show the players their efforts are appreciated and say it with $$$. To give the players some compensation for their efforts - however little it is, even $200 off an air fare helps. These are just some reasons.


For instance, if the players were interested in the Olympiad Fund, I would have thought that they would have voted for Jason Lyons as one of the 2004 team captains, given his success in raising funds for the 2002 Olympiad.

The captaincy has multiple duties. All the candidates for the Women's captaincy had strong claims but they also had very different skills.
The players could be interested in the Olympiad Fund but more interested in other qualities of a coach - most notably, things like opening preparation. Jason was only a candidate for the Women's team captaincy anyway so only the four Women's candidates had any say in whether he was involved or not.

The Olympiad Appeal exists to provide an organised (hopefully!) way that players wanting to make donations to support the team can do so. Even when it runs as a token effort I think that's still better than leaving people with no channel to easily direct those funds through at all. If you want to support the team by some other method, no one's stopping you and I'm sure it would be extremely well received.

Paul S
27-11-2004, 03:09 PM
Good to have you back, Kevin. Hope you enjoyed your holiday.

Unlike some others on this forum (who have made no contribution towards the Olympiad Fund at all), I am aware that you have done so. In fact, while your $50 was less than my $125, I personally regard your contribution as morally more greater/significant than mine (due to your less fortunate at the time financial circumstances - mind you, I am hardly rich myself, but I am a SINK). As such, I have respect and credibillity for what you say on this issue (even though I disagree with some of your points).


Is that the final amount? I don't believe so.

I never said it was the final amount. $1630 is the latest available figure that I am aware of. I got it from a recent ACF email bulletin. If you have a more recent figure, then please feel free to share it with us!


Or maybe they just don't like whacking a cap out on their own behalf and begging for $$$, perhaps? Or maybe they're just too busy doing what they do best?

Maybe. Maybe not.


This "impression" of yours - do you have any evidence for it at all, or is it just supposition? There are heaps of possible reasons why players might not choose to comment.

The evidence is that:
1) There has been no complaints from the players.
2) The players chose to reject a proven fund raiser in Jason Lyons as team captain.
3) The players did not (to my knowledge) do any fund raising themselves (eg playing simuls and attending functions). Like I said previously, I was in Peter Parr's shop recently. As you know, Peter was a 6 time Olympiad Captain. Peter told me that in his day there were simuls and functions to raise funds for the Olympiad. In 2004 for whatever reason the players did not attend any simuls/functions.

So, based on the above, it seems to me that the players are happy to pay their own expenses and that there appears to be no need for an Olympiad fund.


There are heaps of possible reasons why players might not choose to comment.

Then ask them and find out!


I think we should all be grateful to the players for all being willing to go - there was not one withdrawal despite the financial difficulties, which I thought was amazing.

Yes, I think it is good that there were no last minute withdrawals (unlike in previous years).

However, as I said earlier, it seems that the players were quite content to pay all expenses out of their own pocket.


To give people a way to show the players their efforts are appreciated and say it with $$$. To give the players some compensation for their efforts - however little it is, even $200 off an air fare helps. These are just some reasons.

I don't have any problem with this. It's just that the whole exercise of having an Olympiad Appeal appears to be unneccessary.


The captaincy has multiple duties. All the candidates for the Women's captaincy had strong claims but they also had very different skills.
The players could be interested in the Olympiad Fund but more interested in other qualities of a coach - most notably, things like opening preparation.

The players are entitled to choose whoever they want. If the Olympiad players prefer to have someone as captain with better opening preparation as opposed to someone who is good at obtaining sponsorship, then that is their choice. However, the players can't have it both ways!


Jason was only a candidate for the Women's team captaincy anyway so only the four Women's candidates had any say in whether he was involved or not.

I agree. However, if payment of expenses was a concern, the nI am sure that the Mens team would have pressured/lobbied the women to vote for Jason as captain. As they apparently did not, I assume that the men (like the women) are quite happy to pay for their own expenses at the Olympiad.


The Olympiad Appeal exists to provide an organised (hopefully!) way that players wanting to make donations to support the team can do so. Even when it runs as a token effort I think that's still better than leaving people with no channel to easily direct those funds through at all. If you want to support the team by some other method, no one's stopping you and I'm sure it would be extremely well received.

I have been disillusioned with various aspects of the 2004 Olympiad Appeal (refer earlier in this thread). As such, it is unlikely that I will contribute to the Olympiad Fund again (although you never know).

I will ask the questions:
1) Is the Olympiad Fund necessary given the low priority the ACF has placed on it in 2004 (and the fact that no-one could be bothered to be the Olympiad Fund Co-Ordinator)?
2) Are the players quite content to pay for all their own Olympiad expenses, given that a) no players have publically complained at lack of Olympiad funding, b) that none of the players participated in any fund raising (simuls, functions etc) themselves and c) they did not want Jason Lyons as team captain?

PHAT
27-11-2004, 05:13 PM
Good to have you back, Kevin. Hope you enjoyed your holiday.

Unlike some others on this forum (who have made no contribution towards the Olympiad Fund at all), I am aware that you have done so. In fact, while your $50 was less than my $125, I personally regard your contribution as morally more greater/significant than mine (due to your less fortunate at the time financial circumstances - mind you, I am hardly rich myself, but I am a SINK). As such, I have respect and credibillity for what you say on this issue (even though I disagree with some of your points).



I never said it was the final amount. $1630 is the latest available figure that I am aware of. I got it from a recent ACF email bulletin. If you have a more recent figure, then please feel free to share it with us!



Maybe. Maybe not.



The evidence is that:
1) There has been no complaints from the players.
2) The players chose to reject a proven fund raiser in Jason Lyons as team captain.
3) The players did not (to my knowledge) do any fund raising themselves (eg playing simuls and attending functions). Like I said previously, I was in Peter Parr's shop recently. As you know, Peter was a 6 time Olympiad Captain. Peter told me that in his day there were simuls and functions to raise funds for the Olympiad. In 2004 for whatever reason the players did not attend any simuls/functions.

So, based on the above, it seems to me that the players are happy to pay their own expenses and that there appears to be no need for an Olympiad fund.



Then ask them and find out!



Yes, I think it is good that there were no last minute withdrawals (unlike in previous years).

However, as I said earlier, it seems that the players were quite content to pay all expenses out of their own pocket.



I don't have any problem with this. It's just that the whole exercise of having an Olympiad Appeal appears to be unneccessary.



The players are entitled to choose whoever they want. If the Olympiad players prefer to have someone as captain with better opening preparation as opposed to someone who is good at obtaining sponsorship, then that is their choice. However, the players can't have it both ways!



I agree. However, if payment of expenses was a concern, the nI am sure that the Mens team would have pressured/lobbied the women to vote for Jason as captain. As they apparently did not, I assume that the men (like the women) are quite happy to pay for their own expenses at the Olympiad.



I have been disillusioned with various aspects of the 2004 Olympiad Appeal (refer earlier in this thread). As such, it is unlikely that I will contribute to the Olympiad Fund again (although you never know).

I will ask the questions:
1) Is the Olympiad Fund necessary given the low priority the ACF has placed on it in 2004 (and the fact that no-one could be bothered to be the Olympiad Fund Co-Ordinator)?
2) Are the players quite content to pay for all their own Olympiad expenses, given that a) no players have publically complained at lack of Olympiad funding, b) that none of the players participated in any fund raising (simuls, functions etc) themselves and c) they did not want Jason Lyons as team captain?

Post of the year candidate.

Ian_Rogers
27-11-2004, 10:57 PM
Two questions, one sensible, one based on a series of false premises.

**1) Is the Olympiad Fund necessary given the low priority the ACF has placed on it in 2004 (and the fact that no-one could be bothered to be the Olympiad Fund Co-Ordinator)?**

The Olympiad Appeal has been low priority for the ACF for at least a decade. The question of whether the Appeal deseves to exist is quite another matter,
that can be based on two other questions:
(a) Would more money be raised if the effort the ACF put into the Olympiad Appeal was used to look for corporate sponsors? (Presumably not, since almost no effort is put into the Olympiad Appeal.)

(b) Is the Olympiad Appeal for something more than just fund-raising? Is it not also a morale-raiser for the team, who through it know that lots of people are supporting them.

**2) Are the players quite content to pay for all their own Olympiad expenses, given that

a) no players have publicly complained at lack of Olympiad funding,**

Why should any player who wished to complain do so publicly? In any case working out ways to make the 2004 Olympiad Appeal more successful would be more productive.


**b) that none of the players participated in any fund raising (simuls, functions etc) themselves and **

This is simply untrue. However players raised money for themselves, not the Appeal. Although at one time the ACF tried to force players to give the proceeds of their pre-Olympiad simuls and lectures to the Appeal, it is generally accepted by the players that if you do the work, you deserve the reward.
Also, the fact that no sponsor was found for the 2004 team does not mean that an effort was not made to find one.

**c) they did not want Jason Lyons as team captain?**

Each team votes for the best possible captain. Jason, despite his fund-raising skills, apparently did not fit the bill.
This year England tried using a representative of their sponsor as their Open team captain. (Maybe his attendance was even a condition of the sponsorship.) You can judge by the results whether this was a wise policy.

Ian

Paul S
28-11-2004, 08:11 PM
Hi Ian

Thankyou for your feedback. It is always good to hear from Australia's #1 player on this forum! As usual, you make some good points, and I feel considerably more positive towards contributing to the 2006 Olympiad than I did before reading your post.

In particular two of your points which caught my attention and deserve a bit of comment from me.


(b) Is the Olympiad Appeal for something more than just fund-raising? Is it not also a morale-raiser for the team, who through it know that lots of people are supporting them.

This is an aspect I had not considered before. In 2002 when there were regular updates in the ACF weekly email Bulletin of Olympiad Fund contributors, there was about DOUBLE the 2004 total dollar amount collected from individuals, but there were also LOTS more contributors. If I was a 2002 Olympiad player, I certainly would have found it pleasing to see the large number of contributors (even if in many instances the contribution was small)and that, as you say, lots of people were supporting the team.


This is simply untrue. However players raised money for themselves, not the Appeal. Although at one time the ACF tried to force players to give the proceeds of their pre-Olympiad simuls and lectures to the Appeal, it is generally accepted by the players that if you do the work, you deserve the reward.
Also, the fact that no sponsor was found for the 2004 team does not mean that an effort was not made to find one.

It looks like people like myself were under a misconception. Until reading this, it had appeared to me (and others on this BB) that the players had not done anything pro-active themselves in raising Olympiad Funds. I think the reason for this is due to these player-initiated fund raising activities NOT having been brought to the attention of the general Australian chess public (at least not to my knowledge, anyway). I cannot recall seeing anything of this nature (ie of individual players organising their own simuls/functions/whatever) in Australian chess media (eg the ACF weekly email Bulletin, Brian Jones' bi-monthly magazine, Peter Parr's SMH column, your Sun-Herald article etc). Can I suggest that when the 2006 Olympiad players do self-initiated fund raising activities that a brief mention be made of it in the "chess media"? Not only would this assist the player(s) in question to help raise funds, but it would make the general Australian chess public aware that the players are "NOT just sitting back expecting others to serve them" and therefore make the general Australian chess public more supportive (and desiring to contribute to) the 2006 Olympiad Fund.

Garvinator
28-11-2004, 10:39 PM
I cannot recall seeing anything of this nature (ie of individual players organising their own simuls/functions/whatever) in Australian chess media (eg the ACF weekly email Bulletin, Brian Jones' bi-monthly magazine, Peter Parr's SMH column, your Sun-Herald article etc). Can I suggest that when the 2006 Olympiad players do self-initiated fund raising activities that a brief mention be made of it in the "chess media"? Not only would this assist the player(s) in question to help raise funds, but it would make the general Australian chess public aware that the players are "NOT just sitting back expecting others to serve them" and therefore make the general Australian chess public more supportive (and desiring to contribute to) the 2006 Olympiad Fund.
also with the increased and cheap extra advertising, more players might be willing to attend, therefore creating more money for travel etc :D

Paul S
29-11-2004, 01:59 AM
also with the increased and cheap extra advertising, more players might be willing to attend, therefore creating more money for travel etc :D

That was part of the point I was making! :cool:

Paul S
01-12-2004, 04:50 PM
**b) that none of the players participated in any fund raising (simuls, functions etc) themselves and **

This is simply untrue. However players raised money for themselves, not the Appeal. Although at one time the ACF tried to force players to give the proceeds of their pre-Olympiad simuls and lectures to the Appeal, it is generally accepted by the players that if you do the work, you deserve the reward.
Also, the fact that no sponsor was found for the 2004 team does not mean that an effort was not made to find one.


As a matter of interest/curiosity, can Ian (or anyone else) give us a rundown on these events (Olympiad players' fund raising initiatives for themselves) and attempts to get 2004 Olympiad sponsorship?

arosar
01-12-2004, 05:01 PM
As a matter of interest/curiosity, can Ian (or anyone else) give us a rundown on these events (Olympiad players' fund raising initiatives for themselves) and attempts to get 2004 Olympiad sponsorship?

I would say, that it's none of your business.

GM Rogers, sir, just ignore me mate Paulie here. His newsletter success is just getting to his head.

AR

Paul S
01-12-2004, 05:07 PM
I would say, that it's none of your business.

GM Rogers, sir, just ignore me mate Paulie here. His newsletter success is just getting to his head.

AR

Its up to Ian (and others) if they wish to respond.

I am just asking (what I think is) a valid question.

As for "newsletter success", it will be about 2-3 months before NSWCA members see it, so whether or not it is "successful" remains to be seen!

P.S. Amiel:
1) Why are you so hostile towards a NSWCA newsletter for members?
2) Why not give it a go and see if it is worthwhile or not?
3) Why do you continually criticise something that is not yet a physical reality?

arosar
01-12-2004, 05:11 PM
3) Why do you continually criticise something that is not yet a physical reality?

I blame the atheists for that!

AR

Paul S
01-12-2004, 09:49 PM
I blame the atheists for that!

AR

:rolleyes: I thought you had more sense than to believe what Antichrist (Peter Hanna) says! :rolleyes:

arosar
02-12-2004, 06:54 AM
:rolleyes: I thought you had more sense than to believe what Antichrist (Peter Hanna) says! :rolleyes:

You idiot! If you don't get it, shut your fingertips!

AR

rob
02-12-2004, 02:53 PM
1) Why are you so hostile towards a NSWCA newsletter for members?
2) Why not give it a go and see if it is worthwhile or not?
3) Why do you continually criticise something that is not yet a physical reality?

Is it any wonder that there is a lack of volunteers in chess: try to do stuff for chessplayers and you are open to criticism or do nothing and avoid all the extra hassles. We need more doers and less booers :(

Paul S
02-12-2004, 10:26 PM
Is it any wonder that there is a lack of volunteers in chess: try to do stuff for chessplayers and you are open to criticism or do nothing and avoid all the extra hassles. We need more doers and less booers :(

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

Paul S
11-02-2005, 07:56 PM
What was the final amount collected for the 2004 Olympiad (and the list of donors)? In particular I would be interested to see who of the 20 or so ACF officials made a contribution (in light of the brief mention in the ACF bulletin in recent weeks that chess players should contribute to the Olympiad appeal).


As a matter of interest/curiosity, can Ian (or anyone else) give us a rundown on these events (Olympiad players' fund raising initiatives for themselves) and attempts to get 2004 Olympiad sponsorship?

Was there any effort made by the players? Any simuls or functions? Seems to be a deafening silence in response to my question! If I am going to contribute to the 2006 Olympiad appeal, I want to know what sort of pro-active efforts the players themselves have made regarding 2004 Olympiad fundraising (in light of my negative 2004 Olympiad donation experience - refer my earlier posts in this thread).

arosar
25-02-2005, 01:47 PM
Was there any effort made by the players?

You'll be happy to know Paulie that Norm Greenwood is still collecting donations for the Majorca Olympiad. So says the ad in the ACF newsletter.

AR

antichrist
25-02-2005, 04:59 PM
AR
Your post 90 in this thread was one of your smarter ones, pity it was wasted.

auriga
26-02-2005, 12:23 PM
You'll be happy to know Paulie that Norm Greenwood is still collecting donations for the Majorca Olympiad. So says the ad in the ACF newsletter.
AR

replace majorca with the word turin
and finish off the ad with 'please call.'