PDA

View Full Version : National Open Schools Championships



ChessGuru
09-09-2005, 11:23 AM
Held over the weekend of December 3 & 4, 2005
At Bayview Conference Centre, Melbourne

Eligibility is limited to 5 schools from Victoria (host state), 3 from NSW, QLD and TAS, 2 from ACT and SA, 1 from each of NT and WA.
• The top team entered from each State receives FREE accommodation, food and coaching at the Finals (for 5 players and 1 adult supervisor).
• Great prizes; everyone wins something.
• Winners represent Australia at the Oceania Schools Championships
• 4 free high-level chess coaching sessions with International Master players
• All players receive free Private Tuition after their games with Master Coaches
• Friendly social atmosphere; BBQ, transfer chess and movie on Saturday night.
• All players get a National Chess Rating!
• Can your school become involved? Find out how; contact Chess Kids on interschool@chesskids.com.au or (03) 9578 6203.
• Held in 3 divisions; Open Secondary, Junior Secondary and Primary.

Any school may apply to participate – a selection process will be employed to qualify the allowable number of teams from each state.

Applications must be received by October 31 for a school to be considered. Schools will be notified of their qualification, or otherwise, after a selection process ending on November 8. All enquiries to David Cordover on 0411 877 833.

pax
09-09-2005, 12:06 PM
Not to be confused with the Australian Schools Teams Championships, being held in Sydney on December 10-11.
http://www.nswjcl.org.au/AustralianSchools/2005/ASC_Index.htm

The ASTC is the ACF endorsed national schools championship event.

jenni
09-09-2005, 12:15 PM
I think there is room for both competitions. The ASTC will always be the "prestige" tournament that kids compete fiercely to get to. However I know a few years ago when my primary girls team just missed out on qualifying, we would have been happy to take them to something like this as a reward for their hard work and to get them extra experience.

How succesful it will be, will depend on cost for the extra teams. Often you get one "professional" chessplayer who gathers a team around him.her and the others are not as committed.

pax
09-09-2005, 01:21 PM
I agree. Maybe some (dedicated) teams will even wish to combine both competitions into the one trip?

It's very hard to judge unless you know the costs. I would assume that they might be considerable given that a conference centre is being hired.

Does anyone know anything about the Oceania Schools Championships? Another CK venture?

jenni
09-09-2005, 03:47 PM
I agree. Maybe some (dedicated) teams will even wish to combine both competitions into the one trip?
Doesn't work so well when they are in different towns. Certainly a case for a team going to both, but consecutive weeks is a bit of an ask.

ChessGuru
09-09-2005, 04:50 PM
With travel being so cheap (can I advertise for VirginBlue here?) the opportunity for these events to be well attended becomes much greater. The hope is that while the State Junior League will send one team to the ACFASTC the Open event will attract 2 or 3 teams from each state.

The added division of JUNIOR SECONDARY (Year 7-9 only) gives an opportunity for ease of transition from Primary to Secondary chess (with the hope of keeping more kids playing chess in the years we tend to lose 75% of primary numbers).

Another incentive is that the top team from each state gets FREE everything. Guaranteeing that anyone who can find $59 each way can fly into Melbourne and play.

The Maximum Cost that any team will be up for is $1000 - this will include 2 nights accommodation, all food, IM coaching, private coaching after games, entry fee, social activities (tennis, pool, table tennis, movies) and hopefully airport to venue transfers. A 'team' is defined as 5 kids and 1 supervising adult.

Maximum cost of $200 p.p. for a 2 day weekend getaway, food included, coaching included, plus an adult free? Well...if you find a better offer anywhere else please let me know!

I hope that this will be well supported and the start of a long-lasting and high-profile event. Details of the Oceania Schools Championships will be available shortly.

Libby
10-09-2005, 07:03 AM
I do wonder a little bit why this is promoted in a way (in the flyer anyway) that would suggest - to the layman - that this is in fact our official National Schools Championship.

Further enhanced by the reference to the (no details yet) Oceania qualification status.

I have no problem with the event as an opportunity for players but some objection to the marketing spin.

ACTJCL will discuss the event at our meeting tomorrow and I expect we will distribute the information via our schools information list with a small note of clarification. Most of our schools are "laymen" and don't even consider the ASTC, let alone understand that this event is a (very worthy) private venture.

I have no idea if teams from the ACT will attend. You are aware that the Pacific School Games are in Victoria that weekend (and preceding week) and making significant demands on some school sport resources?

On the promotion side of things, this would probably work better for us (and possibly for ChessKids as well) if we were able to distribute such information to schools at a time in which they are actively playing our events rather than now, when they are thinking more about upcoming summer team sports.

firegoat7
10-09-2005, 12:55 PM
How long will Guru be allowed to get away with these false marketing claims before the ACF does something about his behaviour.

IMO he should be rang on the phone and told to stop this misleading advertising. The ACF is not powerless, it can ban him from chess events if he continues to undermine their products through confusing media releases. It is simply not good enough and confuses schools,kids and players.

The ACF ought to have a simple little icon that says an event is ACF sanctioned or not. Those that are ACF sanctioned should have clear and concise advertising. There should be no doubt from partrons about what they are actually buying.

cheers Fg7

Rincewind
10-09-2005, 03:20 PM
I agree though perhaps not quite as strongly. DC has every right to earn a living and if in doing so chess participation in Australia goes up then even better. However, it should be done with the right level of 'marketing puff'. Not sure that the ACF could generate enough of a brand awareness to make a logo work. But if it can be done for a low cost, it is probably worthwhile.

Denis_Jessop
10-09-2005, 03:34 PM
How long will Guru be allowed to get away with these false marketing claims before the ACF does something about his behaviour.

IMO he should be rang on the phone and told to stop this misleading advertising. The ACF is not powerless, it can ban him from chess events if he continues to undermine their products through confusing media releases. It is simply not good enough and confuses schools,kids and players.

The ACF ought to have a simple little icon that says an event is ACF sanctioned or not. Those that are ACF sanctioned should have clear and concise advertising. There should be no doubt from partrons about what they are actually buying.

cheers Fg7

The ACF does have its logo which is usually (and is expected to be) on publicity information for ACF events plus the statement that the event is organised for the ACF - see, for example, the publicity for the forthcoming Australian Championships and Juniors.

DJ

PHAT
10-09-2005, 03:40 PM
Guru,

The term "OPEN" implies open to all comers. Thus, "Any school may apply to participate – a selection process will be employed to qualify the allowable number of teams from each state," makes it an "INVITATIONAL."

Other than that, go for it. The more happy chess players, the better for Australian chess.

Rincewind
10-09-2005, 03:49 PM
The ACF does have its logo which is usually (and is expected to be) on publicity information for ACF events plus the statement that the event is organised for the ACF - see, for example, the publicity for the forthcoming Australian Championships and Juniors.

Is it a registered trademark? If not, is there any protection from unscrupulous infringement?

I'm not for one moment suggesting that DC or anyone else has or would try to fake or infringe on the ACF logo. Just wondernig what protection the ACF has.

Spiny Norman
10-09-2005, 04:19 PM
Is it a registered trademark?
I don't think it would need to be a registered (R) trademark to be effective ... just a regular, every day trademark (TM) would probably do? Anyone being unscrupulous could easily be identified if the ACF would list authorised/approved tourneys on their website so that people could verify them.

But I think there's room for a variety of tournaments, not just the ACF- approved flavour. Just as long as we don't end up like boxing (or FIDE!), with the need for reunification bouts.

PHAT
10-09-2005, 04:41 PM
Just as long as we don't end up like boxing (or FIDE!), with the need for reunification bouts.

Think again! Imagine if chess could generate pay for view material like boxing does for Foxtel.

FCP
29-10-2005, 07:52 PM
I got this email recently.




Dear Famous Chess Player,

We are running the National Open Schools Championships on the weekend of December 3 and 4 in Clayton (near Monash Uni). We are expecting 175 players from every state and territory in Australia (still working on NT - but I am hopeful).

We are trying very hard to make this the best event of the year for these kids. Our commitment to this is demonstrated by our offer of $12,200 in grants to attending schools so far, with more likely to come!

One extra-special way in which we think that this may be possible is to have a plethora of 'famous' chess players wandering around during the weekend, possibly just spectating, possibly analysing some games and maybe even providing a lecture. Most likely just playing table tennis, soccer, blitz or transfer chess would be the players preference!

So please accept this cordial invitation to attend the National Open Schools in whatever capacity you can manage.

If you are able to grace us with your presence during the weekend then I will do my utmost to provide you with some or all of:
a) A warm inner glow
b) Opportunity to spectate a Future GrandMaster
c) lunch at the venue
d) dinner and social evening (movie, table tennis, transfer chess etc) on Saturday night
e) a free entry to a weekender that Chess World is running (Mind Sports weekender, Drouin Open etc) or sponsoring (Elwood, Ballarat, Xmas Swiss etc)
f) cash payment (for lecturers only - to be negotiated)

Event details:
When: 3 and 4 December, 2005.
9am – 4.00pm on both Saturday and Sunday

Where: Bayview Conference Centre, Bayview Rd,
Clayton, Melbourne.

You are most welcome to just turn up - or you can email me to ask for more information or to let me know you are going to come along.

My contact details are cordover@chessworld.com.au or 0411 877 833.

Yours in chess,


David Cordover

When I read this I wipe a small tear from my eye as I realized my lifelong dream is fulfilled. I am a Famous Chess Player! Finally, after all this time I achieve recognition I have always wanted. Soon, there will be masses of reporters outside, who want to interview me. I go outside, putting on my dark glasses and balaklava so I am not mobbed. But phew, nobody is outside. No problem, in a few days the phone will be endlessly ringing as Time, CNN and Sports Illustrated try desperately to get an exclusive. I will be in the same class as the celebrities Malcolm Pyke, Trent Parker and Mr Bonham, who have had their photos in Inside Sport.

I do not care very much for watching future Grandmasters, as I am presumably going to be one soon myself, I do however look forward to Mr Cordover doing his utmost to provide me with a warm inner glow.

four four two
30-10-2005, 06:25 AM
Can I be your fan FCP? I promise I wont stalk you,just a couple of photos to put on my mantle would be enough. ;) :lol: :clap:

Frank Walker
30-10-2005, 07:21 AM
Nice little trick Guru, making kids think they are famous in order to ge more money!

ChessGuru
30-10-2005, 10:11 AM
Frank - the system suggested worked very well in Tasmania with the Tas Junior Championships - clubs and individuals became very involved and enjoyed themselves immensley.

At the end of the day the clubs and Tas Chess Assn. were far better of than I was (financially). But we all had a good time.

Why the relcutance to pull together for the good of chess?

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 10:57 AM
Why the relcutance to pull together for the good of chess?

What is the reluctance to choosing event names which are unambiguous and don't pretend to be something they are not?

:wall:

ursogr8
30-10-2005, 11:17 AM
What is the reluctance to choosing event names which are unambiguous and don't pretend to be something they are not?

:wall:

Baz

Perhaps our chess community could find some common ground if you took up the opportunity that the GURU offered in this post to mac (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=75997&postcount=162) where he said "Would you be OK if I called the event the "chess kids schools championships of Victoria" as you have quoted? Or in your mind I am not allowed to use the word Victora? I'd just like it narrowed down for me...".

Over to you; if you choose.
Can you post a range of titles you would find satisfactory; for a Victorian event; for an all States event?


starter

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 11:50 AM
Over to you; if you choose.
Can you post a range of titles you would find satisfactory; for a Victorian event; for an all States event?

Replace the words "Victorian" or "State" (where ever they occur) with "Chess Kids" and I'd be reasonably happy. The way I see it there are at least three problems

(1) The names are too easily mistaken for real titles
(2) The names are reported as real titles in the media
(3) The guru genuinely believes his titles mean something

Quite simply, the words "State" or "Victorian" should not exist in the title of a chess event at all unless it is being held under the auspices of Chess Victoria. Likewise, National or Australian should not occur in the title of his events unless those events are endorsed by the ACF.

ursogr8
30-10-2005, 12:39 PM
Replace the words "Victorian" or "State" (where ever they occur) with "Chess Kids" and I'd be reasonably happy. The way I see it there are at least three problems

(1) The names are too easily mistaken for real titles
(2) The names are reported as real titles in the media
(3) The guru genuinely believes his titles mean something

Quite simply, the words "State" or "Victorian" should not exist in the title of a chess event at all unless it is being held under the auspices of Chess Victoria. Likewise, National or Australian should not occur in the title of his events unless those events are endorsed by the ACF.

Thanks for the response Baz.

It will be interesting to see if they draw comment from others who have a marketing flair (not me, I am a superseded mathematician ;) ).

I don't know the GURU's tournaments well enough to judge if your suggestions are appropriate. For example, does he restrict (finals) entry to only those Victorian teams that have qualified through a Chess Kids qualifier. Or does he OPEN it to anyone with the readies? I suspect the latter because his inducement to EHPS to participate; but I could easily be wrong on this. If it is virtually unrestricted entry then of course Chess Kids is an inappropriate descriptor and it is tempting to see Victorian as the appropriate descriptor. Perhaps the middle ground is the eccentric Mexican as a descriptor.

I notice you have dropped your (earlier) suggested 'Challenge' in lieu of 'Championship'. This is wise since 'Challenge' definitely does not convey the nature of the national event proposed.

Finally, I take it your (3) above was just your mischievious side coming out? :confused:
Surely the GURU is allowed a little passion to follow what he believes in (with some elements perchance worng judgements), else we will all fall at this criterion.

regards
starter

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 01:25 PM
I don't know the GURU's tournaments well enough to judge if your suggestions are appropriate. For example, does he restrict (finals) entry to only those Victorian teams that have qualified through a Chess Kids qualifier. Or does he OPEN it to anyone with the readies? I suspect the latter because his inducement to EHPS to participate; but I could easily be wrong on this. If it is virtually unrestricted entry then of course Chess Kids is an inappropriate descriptor and it is tempting to see Victorian as the appropriate descriptor. Perhaps the middle ground is the eccentric Mexican as a descriptor.

The words State, Victorian, National or Australian should be considered completely unacceptable.


I notice you have dropped your (earlier) suggested 'Challenge' in lieu of 'Championship'. This is wise since 'Challenge' definitely does not convey the nature of the national event proposed.

Challenge is a good descriptor but I don't believe on can really stop the director of Chess Kids holding the Chess Kids Championships.


Finally, I take it your (3) above was just your mischievious side coming out? :confused:
Surely the GURU is allowed a little passion to follow what he believes in (with some elements perchance worng judgements), else we will all fall at this criterion.

I didn;t say his passion was the problem. However, a genuine belief in the validity of his 'titles' is more than passion. It shows a disregard for proper channels and should be a warning to chess administrators everywhere.

Dozy
30-10-2005, 03:00 PM
Thanks for the response Baz.

It will be interesting to see if they draw comment from others who have a marketing flair (not me, I am a superseded mathematician ;) ). . . .
Don't underestimate yourself, Starter. Next time you get the blues just remind yourself that, in any society, it's the mathematicians who count!

ursogr8
30-10-2005, 03:11 PM
The words State, Victorian, National or Australian should be considered completely unacceptable.



Challenge is a good descriptor but I don't believe on can really stop the director of Chess Kids holding the Chess Kids Championships.


<snip>


Baz

Ok

If we are agreed he can use the words 'Chess Kids',

and

if we are agreed he can use the word 'Championships,

how now does he distinguish the FINALS event that he holds in Victoria for Victorians, without the ambiguity you were annoyed about?

and

how now does he distinguish the FINALS event that he holds for All States, without the ambiguity you were annoyed about?

starter

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 03:22 PM
how now does he distinguish the FINALS event that he holds in Victoria for Victorians, without the ambiguity you were annoyed about?

and

how now does he distinguish the FINALS event that he holds for All States, without the ambiguity you were annoyed about?

He calls one

Chess Kids Championship Qualifiers

The entry rules stipulate the entrants are from the state of Victoria.

He calls the other

Chess Kids Championships

Again the entry rules stipulate the interstate 'qualification' protocol.

Doing so will greatly lessen any ambiguity as to the endorsement of the event and further to this the origaniser should be careful as to how these names appear in any media coverage of the event.

ursogr8
30-10-2005, 03:34 PM
He calls one

Chess Kids Championship Qualifiers

The entry rules stipulate the entrants are from the state of Victoria.

He calls the other

Chess Kids Championships

Again the entry rules stipulate the interstate 'qualification' protocol.

Doing so will greatly lessen any ambiguity as to the endorsement of the event and further to this the origaniser should be careful as to how these names appear in any media coverage of the event.


Baz

I have received advice that leads me to believe that you (as a school, or group) can play in the All States event even if your team has not previously played in CK events.
Hence, both Qualifier at the State level, and CK at either State or All States level do not describe (without ambiguity) who can play.

We return then to the Guru's request that he made and I referenced here. (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=76098&postcount=20)


Have you other suggestions?

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 05:19 PM
Baz

I have received advice that leads me to believe that you (as a school, or group) can play in the All States event even if your team has not previously played in CK events.
Hence, both Qualifier at the State level, and CK at either State or All States level do not describe (without ambiguity) who can play.

We return then to the Guru's request that he made and I referenced here. (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=76098&postcount=20)


Have you other suggestions?

Starter,

It is not the purpose of an event title to describe (with or without ambiguity) who can play. Those details are complicated and best left to the tournament conditions of entry. Therefore, there exists no logical problem with the names I proposed.

four four two
30-10-2005, 05:27 PM
Starter,if any school is prepared to pay the cash[$1000] then Im sure DC will be happy to let them "qualify". ;)

Libby
30-10-2005, 06:06 PM
Where do we go if Chess Kids re-registers under the Business Names -

Chess Kids Australia
Chess Kids Victoria
Chess Kids South Australia
Chess Kids Tasmania?

We'd best start working on an education pack for schools & media to understand that

"Chess Kids Australia Interschool Championships"

are not the

Chess Kids Australian Interschool Championships etc etc etc

Does anyone own the words "national" or "australia" or "state" etc when prefaced by a company or sponsorship logo?

(A genuine question out of curiosity rather than mischief :) )

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 06:14 PM
(A genuine question out of curiosity rather than mischief :) )

I don't know if there is any force of law in ACF trying to maintain National or Australian stay out of the title of events regardless of whether those words for a part of a company name or not. What is important is that operator understand what names are and are not considered unacceptable and when someone runs an event with an unacceptable name, that some action be taken.

In 5-10 years will we be sitting around here argue as to whether ABC's claim to 3 national titles, including a national schools team title is nothing but marketing puff because said title was earned at that event in Melbourne in 2005? Who will know or care about the details then. Someone has a vague recollection that two titles were awarded that year for some reason and ABC does have an official-looking trophy with Australian Champion engraved on it.

Libby
30-10-2005, 06:36 PM
In 5-10 years will we be sitting around here argue as to whether ABC's claim to 3 national titles, including a national schools team title is nothing but marketing puff because said title was earned at that event in Melbourne in 2005? Who will know or care about the details then. Someone has a vague recollection that two titles were awarded that year for some reason and ABC does have an official-looking trophy with Australian Champion engraved on it.

And I would respectfully suggest that "puff" is "puff" and recognised easily by those who do know.

"Puff" will attract the media.

Assuming the ACF can keep itself functional (and the website up to date), it should be pretty easy to establish what title is what.

We have been home to "Australia's Best Chess Coach" in the ACT. I'm sure that attracted a number of people to a bookstore, sold some products and perhaps connected a few new people to the game. I can't begin to understand what independent measures went into determining a right to that claim - maybe it was legitimate :eh: As I've said before, we have also had a "National Junior Open" (or Championship or something along those lines). I believe the Australian Juniors still survives - in fact thrives.

Will people be going from school to school comparing trophies & write-ups in the school newsletter?

Will Curtin Primary assert themselves as superior to Essex Heights in the (unlikely) event we win in Melbourne? Will anyone credit us as such? Maybe our own misguided Principal in the weekly newsletter because he is excited over a win in the event.

I'm relatively excited over the fact that ANY interest is currently being expressed here over the ASTC at all. I must have missed where it had any significant interest in the past to the general chess community outside of the children, schools and junior organisations involved.

Rincewind
30-10-2005, 06:46 PM
And I would respectfully suggest that "puff" is "puff" and recognised easily by those who do know.

"Puff" will attract the media.

Assuming the ACF can keep itself functional (and the website up to date), it should be pretty easy to establish what title is what.

For those sufficiently motivated but the rest will just accept it. Erosion does not change the status quo in any readily apparent way. Slowly, drop by drop, grain by grain.


I'm relatively excited over the fact that ANY interest is currently being expressed here over the ASTC at all. I must have missed where it had any significant interest in the past to the general chess community outside of the children, schools and junior organisations involved.

I'm very excited by the prospect of the ASTC.

Libby
30-10-2005, 06:54 PM
I'm very excited by the prospect of the ASTC.

Well, on the grounds of any publicity being good publicity maybe the ASTC will benefit from this volume of interest & discussion as opposed to this volume of interest & discussion

http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=1301

in 2004.

jenni
30-10-2005, 07:20 PM
: As I've said before, we have also had a "National Junior Open" (or Championship or something along those lines). I believe the Australian Juniors still survives - in fact thrives.

.

I think it was a National Junior Open - I've just been going through my cupboard trying to find Gareth's trophy, but got bored after about 30. This was a tournament run by Geoff Butler as a private business. It was a terrific tournament, but no-one ever authorised the use of the name and it was only ever a business venture. If it had carried on (it ran for 2 years only) it would have a great addition to the junior calendar.

No-one at that time (not even Shaun :) ), put up any protests about it being called a "National" tournament.

four four two
31-10-2005, 07:50 AM
DC claims that all players playing in this tournament will receive a national rating,is this tournament actually going to be rated by the ACF? :hmm:

Ian Rout
31-10-2005, 09:07 AM
DC claims that all players playing in this tournament will receive a national rating,is this tournament actually going to be rated by the ACF? :hmm:
I'm not sure how you guarantee players get a rating, since it depends on playing a sufficiently number of players who are themeselves rated, and not scoring 0% (or 100%). Unless there is going to be a Chess Kids rating list.

The format isn't stated so the first of these may at least be feasible, though quoting ratings as an inducement implies that a number of the players are going to be unrated.

ursogr8
31-10-2005, 09:43 AM
He calls one

Chess Kids Championship Qualifiers

The entry rules stipulate the entrants are from the state of Victoria.

He calls the other

Chess Kids Championships

Again the entry rules stipulate the interstate 'qualification' protocol.

And when the winning team returns to their home State and approaches the media to publicize their win, how does one describe beating all-comers in Australia if not using the words National or All States? You can't say to the journalist....if you want to know who I beat...just read the entry conditions on this flyer.
Baz, I think the title name has to have at least
> who is sponsoring the event
> what game is being played
> what was the catchment of entrants.


Doing so will greatly lessen any ambiguity as to the endorsement of the event and further to this the origaniser should be careful as to how these names appear in any media coverage of the event.


regards starter

Rincewind
31-10-2005, 10:07 AM
And when the winning team returns to their home State and approaches the media to publicize their win, how does one describe beating all-comers in Australia if not using the words National or All States? You can't say to the journalist....if you want to know who I beat...just read the entry conditions on this flyer.
Baz, I think the title name has to have at least
> who is sponsoring the event
> what game is being played
> what was the catchment of entrants.

I disagree. Does the Bendigo Bank Elwood Club Championship do that? They have interstate and international entrants. Does the ANU Open? Does the Doeberl Cup?

I think you are stretching here, Treeeeev.

ursogr8
31-10-2005, 12:13 PM
I disagree. Does the Bendigo Bank Elwood Club Championship do that? They have interstate and international entrants. Does the ANU Open? Does the Doeberl Cup?

I think you are stretching here, Treeeeev.

You may think I am stretching Baz.

But, it seems to be necessary to be forensic on this one because
> you are usually not on dubious causes
> this time you are.

OK
Let us take them one at a time.
BBEClubC (I don't want to write it in full because they are having a terrific tourney and there should be no criticism whatsoever (I visited yesterday for the a.m. round btw.........have to agree with Gary Bekker; they are a remarkably happy and social group down there). Baz....it is not a Club Championship as I understand it.....hence it fails your ambiguity test.
ANU.........OPEN = catchment, ANU=presume this is the sponsor, chess implied. Passes my triad_test.
Doeberl Cup.............Baz, really, :rolleyes:, when was the last time a micro-junior won this and rushed back to his home-town press and said "photo. me holding the Cup?"
We were talking names for junior events Baaaazzzz.

starter

Rincewind
31-10-2005, 01:41 PM
You may think I am stretching Baz.

But, it seems to be necessary to be forensic on this one because
> you are usually not on dubious causes
> this time you are.

OK
Let us take them one at a time.
BBEClubC (I don't want to write it in full because they are having a terrific tourney and there should be no criticism whatsoever (I visited yesterday for the a.m. round btw.........have to agree with Gary Bekker; they are a remarkably happy and social group down there). Baz....it is not a Club Championship as I understand it.....hence it fails your ambiguity test.
ANU.........OPEN = catchment, ANU=presume this is the sponsor, chess implied. Passes my triad_test.
Doeberl Cup.............Baz, really, :rolleyes:, when was the last time a micro-junior won this and rushed back to his home-town press and said "photo. me holding the Cup?"
We were talking names for junior events Baaaazzzz.

starter

You are still stretching. Many junior events are title events. As Guru lacks the authority to claim a title of any kind they are not comparable. Back to the drawing board for you my friend.

ursogr8
31-10-2005, 02:03 PM
You are still stretching. Many junior events are title events. As Guru lacks the authority to claim a title of any kind they are not comparable. Back to the drawing board for you my friend.

Baz, I think the ball is in your court.
You quoted three senior events to prove a point, when the debate is actually about naming of junior events.
And you were trying to refute my triad_criteria. Have another turn, if you wish.

starter

Rincewind
31-10-2005, 02:12 PM
Baz, I think the ball is in your court.
You quoted three senior events to prove a point, when the debate is actually about naming of junior events.
And you were trying to refute my triad_criteria. Have another turn, if you wish.

Starter, you have no point. You asked for titles which I would find as suitible alternatives to the Guru's mischievious titles. I did so. You have no problem with them other than they don't sound good like official junior events. Sorry, mate, but that is the point!!!

Please come back with something substantional next time.

ChessGuru
01-11-2005, 12:08 AM
There is a billboard near my home which states:

VOTED THE #1 "product" STORE IN THE WORLD!*

(in tiny, tiny print) *by internal staff poll

I think that is a good one - better get my internal staff survey going. :lol:


"Chess Kids National Schools Championships - voted the #1 most prestigious title event in Australia."

"Chess Kids Victorian Interschool Championships - voted the "REAL" state championships!"

"Melbourne Chess Club - voted the building most like a festering tub of regurgitated pig-swill."

This is going to be great! :owned:

ursogr8
01-11-2005, 06:57 AM
Starter, you have no point. You asked for titles which I would find as suitible alternatives to the Guru's mischievious titles. I did so. You have no problem with them other than they don't sound good like official junior events. Sorry, mate, but that is the point!!!

Please come back with something substantional next time.

Baz

In this post (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=76476&postcount=292) the GURU is inviting your creativity to get to middle ground on this issue that you have raised. Please consider to put forward suggestions that match the four criteria.
We may be close to resolving this issue after much forensic.

regards
starter

Rincewind
01-11-2005, 07:12 AM
In this post (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=76476&postcount=292) the GURU is inviting your creativity to get to middle ground on this issue that you have raised. Please consider to put forward suggestions that match the four criteria.
We may be close to resolving this issue after much forensic.

Sorry Starter but why should I agree with the guru's 4 criteria? There is no reason for the name to include a geographic element unless you want to masquerade as a real title event. I will update my names to include the proviso of "schools" if necessary (but I don't even believe it is).

The purpose of the name of an event is so it can be referred to unambiguously. Chessguru's goal is exactly the opposite.

ChessGuru
01-11-2005, 08:33 AM
What about the "UNREAL Australian Chess Championships"

Rincewind
01-11-2005, 08:35 AM
What about the "UNREAL Australian Chess Championships"

Are you stupid? The problem is with the word "Australian".

ursogr8
01-11-2005, 09:47 AM
Sorry Starter but why should I agree with the guru's 4 criteria?

Baz
I presume your question is not rhetorical.
It is the GURU's event; he puts up the readies and takes the commercial risks. Surely he should be allowed to use is own criteria to set his marketing headline, constrained (as we are trying to establish) by the official title vernacular. You don't have to agree with the GURU's criteria, but I do think you have to put forward suggestions that meet that criteria (with constraints operating).


Now, as to the constraints. You have ruled out National and Australian. My feeling is you should be content with one official title word; it removes ambiguity if the ACF settles on one. Is it to be National, or Australian?
Also, I have thrown All States into the mix, but you have not commented on this.



There is no reason for the name to include a geographic element unless you want to masquerade as a real title event.
The link between geographic and 'official title' escapes me. Take a topical example...> the Melbourne Cup, today,....in this case the geographic element is simply saying where the race is run. Or another one........> the Americas Cup for sailing.......often not held in the Americas.
The geographic element is just window dressing or marketing puff by a commercial operator. This element causes no erosion to the official events that seem to want to hide their light under a bushel.


I will update my names to include the proviso of "schools" if necessary (but I don't even believe it is).


The purpose of the name of an event is so it can be referred to unambiguously. Chessguru's goal is exactly the opposite.


And this is probably the core of the discussion. I think the GURU would say that the purpose of the name is to headline the advertising and marketing of the event.
The erosion that occurs (at Mexican level) is due to the CV inaction, not due to the GURUs ambush marketing. The GURU's event is well-attended, we can hardly criticize him for that.


Having said all that, I am convinced he needs to change his event-title.
Over to you.


regards
starter

Rincewind
01-11-2005, 10:02 AM
It is the GURU's event; he puts up the readies and takes the commercial risks. Surely he should be allowed to use is own criteria to set his marketing headline, constrained (as we are trying to establish) by the official title vernacular. You don't have to agree with the GURU's criteria, but I do think you have to put forward suggestions that meet that criteria (with constraints operating).

I disagree. I'll reiterate: without endorsement, the words State, National, Victoria(n) and Australia(n), etc are completely unacceptable as they are too easily confused with titled events.


Now, as to the constraints. You have ruled out National and Australian. My feeling is you should be content with one official title word; it removes ambiguity if the ACF settles on one. Is it to be National, or Australian?
Also, I have thrown All States into the mix, but you have not commented on this.

I disagree both are equally likely to cause confusion and reserve the right to disagree with any other words which may do the same.


The link between geographic and 'official title' escapes me. Take a topical example...> the Melbourne Cup, today,....in this case the geographic element is simply saying where the race is run. Or another one........> the Americas Cup for sailing.......often not held in the Americas.
The geographic element is just window dressing or marketing puff by a commercial operator. This element causes no erosion to the official events that seem to want to hide their light under a bushel.

Your examples are flimsy at best. Melbourne is a city and Americas refers to a broad geographic area. But even if you had better examples it would not make much difference. Use of the words I disagree with simply leads to confusio with title events. If he wants to run titled events then he should put a bid together and approach the appropriate governing body. :hand:


And this is probably the core of the discussion. I think the GURU would say that the purpose of the name is to headline the advertising and marketing of the event.
The erosion that occurs (at Mexican level) is due to the CV inaction, not due to the GURUs ambush marketing. The GURU's event is well-attended, we can hardly criticize him for that.

I think you should leave the guru to make his own arguments. His marketing goals are not my concern and neither should they be yours.


Having said all that, I am convinced he needs to change his event-title.

On this we agree.

PHAT
01-11-2005, 11:57 AM
Are you stupid? The problem is with the word "Australian".

How about the whole chees community holds the Real UnAustralian Chess Championshits. :owned:

rob
01-11-2005, 02:47 PM
When is something 'National' or 'Australian'? The inference seems to be when ppl from all areas of Australia participate. But this title may lose its credibility if say no-one from NT & WA compete. You could take the view that if ppl from all of Australia are eligible to compete, so it is a National event. That would allow Matt to organise the 'Common Man Australian/National Chess Championships', and we could organise a number of National Chess events in WA to get our own '3 times' Aussie Champions!
I'd expect something to be deemed 'National' or 'Australian' only if the official body (ACF) deems it to be so.

Brian_Jones
01-11-2005, 03:33 PM
If you hold a national event in WA Rob, there is a danger someone might just come over from the East and take all the money off you!

Remember the Australian Master Games?

rob
01-11-2005, 04:13 PM
If you hold a national event in WA Rob, there is a danger someone might just come over from the East and take all the money off you!

Remember the Australian Master Games?
Certainly I do recall meeting you and your wife - I don't believe your kids were there. But I've since then had the pleasure of briefly speaking to your son-in-law (mostly about soccer).

ursogr8
01-11-2005, 09:07 PM
<snip>

I think you should leave the guru to make his own arguments. His marketing goals are not my concern and neither should they be yours.



<snip>

Baz

The GURU is a reality in our bailiwick, and as such we have to understand him and manage with his company being a competitor for some of the services we supply. We are not in a remote City where we can ignore his marketing goals as you seem to want to do.
We operate in a metropolis where many energetic youngish chess players now find it more to their liking to coach rather than administer; thus the ranks of State administrators are very depleted compared with the golden years.
To further our Club and State goals we have to deal with each of the 'commercials' in an appropriate way.


starter

Rincewind
01-11-2005, 09:10 PM
The GURU is a reality in our bailiwick, and as such we have to understand him and manage with his company being a competitor for some of the services we supply. We are not in a remote City where we can ignore his marketing goals as you seem to want to do.
We operate in a metropolis where many energetic youngish chess players now find it more to their liking to coach rather than administer; thus the ranks of State administrators are very depleted compared with the golden years.
To further our Club and State goals we have to deal with each of the 'commercials' in an appropriate way.

Well CV can roll over and play dead. You know any other tricks?

ursogr8
01-11-2005, 09:27 PM
Well CV can roll over and play dead.

These were not my words at all.


You know any other tricks?

And these look to be just plain derogatory.
You are starting to match the look on your avatar. :hand:


starter

Rincewind
01-11-2005, 09:40 PM
These were not my words at all.

And these look to be just plain derogatory.
You are starting to match the look on your avatar. :hand:

It is from frustration. We seem to have come to an impasse. Lets say the english language has 100,000 words. I leave DC 99,998 words to name his event and you seem to think that is unreasonable.

Anything which sounds like or might be construed as a titled event should be unacceptable to the governors of those titles. Hence, Australian and National should be vetoed by ACF, State and Victorian should be vetoed by Chess Victoria. Anything less dishonours the true title winners.

ursogr8
01-11-2005, 09:48 PM
It is from frustration. We seem to have come to an impasse. Lets say the english language has 100,000 words. I leave DC 99,998 words to name his event and you seem to think that is unreasonable.

Anything which sounds like or might be construed as a titled event should be unacceptable to the governors of those titles. Hence, Australian and National should be vetoed by ACF, State and Victorian should be vetoed by Chess Victoria. Anything less dishonours the true title winners.

Hoisting me on a petard of numbers.
Now that is like the old Baz.

;)

starter

PHAT
01-11-2005, 10:07 PM
Anything which sounds like or might be construed as a titled event should be unacceptable to the governors of those titles.

That assumes that the governors are comatose.

pax
02-11-2005, 01:03 PM
I don't think there should be any problem with the "ChessKids Australian Championship", or the "ChessKids National Schools Championship".

The ACF don't own the words "National" or "Australian". The word "ChessKids" should be enough for any thinking person to differentiate these events from ACF endorsed events.

I don't really see how ChessKids are supposed to differentiate their own regional events from state-wide events and nationwide events without using words like "National" and "Victorian".

Denis_Jessop
02-11-2005, 02:21 PM
I don't think there should be any problem with the "ChessKids Australian Championship", or the "ChessKids National Schools Championship".

The ACF don't own the words "National" or "Australian". The word "ChessKids" should be enough for any thinking person to differentiate these events from ACF endorsed events.

I don't really see how ChessKids are supposed to differentiate their own regional events from state-wide events and nationwide events without using words like "National" and "Victorian".

I have real trouble with these suggestions.

First the statement that the ACF does not own the words "National" and "Australian" is a little imprecise. I see the situation as more analogous with the use of company and business names, The ACF and each State and Territory Association is the governing body for the respective jurisdictions. They alone have the authority to hold Australian and State and Territory title events. This derives from the ACF's affiliation with FIDE, among other things.

It has long been the law that company and business names will not be registered if they contain words that suggest a connection with the Commonwealth, a State or Territory or local government where no such connection exists. Use of words such as "Australian ", "National" and "State" clearly fall within that prohibition. Likewise the use of those words in relation to chess events implies a connection with the relevant governing body and cannot properly be used if no such connection exists.

A name such as "Chess Kids Australian Championship" clearly implies that the event is the (legitimate) Australian Championship sponsored by Chess Kids with naming rights as was the case with the last Aus Open sponsored by Lidums. It is quite unacceptable as the name for a private DC event.

DJ

pax
02-11-2005, 02:33 PM
It has long been the law that company and business names will not be registered if they contain words that suggest a connection with the Commonwealth, a State or Territory or local government where no such connection exists. Use of words such as "Australian ", "National" and "State" clearly fall within that prohibition. Likewise the use of those words in relation to chess events implies a connection with the relevant governing body and cannot properly be used if no such connection exists.


Are you sure?

There are literally thousands of businesses with "Australian" and "National" in the name with no such connection:

Australian Boutique Premium Wines
Australian Botannical Products
Australian Brushwood Fencing
...

It's pretty clear that there is no practical restriction on the use of these names...

shaun
02-11-2005, 02:50 PM
Are you sure?

There are literally thousands of businesses with "Australian" and "National" in the name with no such connection:

Australian Boutique Premium Wines
Australian Botannical Products
Australian Brushwood Fencing
...

It's pretty clear that there is no practical restriction on the use of these names...

And Canberra is pretty rife with them such as the "National Zoo and Aquarium" and the "National Indoor Sports Centre". Funnily enough my attention was drawn to this issue a number of years again when a friend of mine wondered if it was possible to take action against the use of the name "National Junior Open" (qv an earlier post by Jenni). To me the name was sufficiently ambiguous not to bother.

And if we are taking a vote (as requested by DC) I submit either "Chess Kids National Schools Open" or "Chess Kids National Schools Finals".

ursogr8
02-11-2005, 02:58 PM
It is from frustration. We seem to have come to an impasse. Lets say the english language has 100,000 words. I leave DC 99,998 words to name his event and you seem to think that is unreasonable.

Anything which sounds like or might be construed as a titled event should be unacceptable to the governors of those titles. Hence, Australian and National should be vetoed by ACF, State and Victorian should be vetoed by Chess Victoria. Anything less dishonours the true title winners.

Did you mean this as a plural Baz? :uhoh:

starter

Rincewind
02-11-2005, 03:10 PM
Did you mean this as a plural Baz? :uhoh:

The ambiguity is useful. There seems to be some fresh debate on the topic this afternoon which has probably prompted your query. Originally I intended it in the singular but it applies equally as well in the plural.

jenni
02-11-2005, 03:38 PM
It has long been the law that company and business names will not be registered if they contain words that suggest a connection with the Commonwealth, a State or Territory or local government where no such connection exists. Use of words such as "Australian ", "National" and "State" clearly fall within that prohibition. Likewise the use of those words in relation to chess events implies a connection with the relevant governing body and cannot properly be used if no such connection exists.


Unfortunately often all they care about is that it doesn't cause confusion with another name. Whoever registers first gets it - unless you go to a lengthy and expensive case which proves they were nicking your name in some way.

e.g. in 1997 I tried to incorporate the ACT Junior Chess League with that name. I wasn't allowed to use it, because a chess coaching business already had the name ACT Junior Chess and they felt ours was too close. I was allowed to use ACTJCL, which is why that is what we have on our docs. I did protest on the grounds that we were a non profit organisation and the official Junior organising body, endorsed by ACTCA, but they had little interest. The name of a chess business took precedence over the name of the governing body.

In the end it would have caused little confusion, if they had allowed us to use the name, as we had a clearly defined role and we communicated with all our stake holders. I don't think there was ever any danger in anyone confusing the two organisations.

Rincewind
02-11-2005, 03:49 PM
In the end it would have caused little confusion, if they had allowed us to use the name, as we had a clearly defined role and we communicated with all our stake holders. I don't think there was ever any danger in anyone confusing the two organisations.

Companies pretending to be official bodies like this is one of my pet hates. The most irksome (to me) is the Australian Institute of Mathematics, which sell a computer-based maths tutoring package. I don't know anything about the software but the intentionally misleading company name is enough to get me very annoyed. It is far too close to both the Australian Mathematical Society and the Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute for my liking.

jenni
02-11-2005, 04:59 PM
And if we are taking a vote (as requested by DC) I submit either "Chess Kids National Schools Open" or "Chess Kids National Schools Finals".
Don't mind either, although the first is my preference. Isn't it nice of David to let us choose? :cool:

ChessGuru
02-11-2005, 08:55 PM
I think that the first step the ACF should be taking is to quickly take action against the following companies:

Chess Australia Pty Ltd (recently formed)
Chess Australia (part of the ACE bag of tricks)
Australian Chess Enterprises (even the ACE acronym is dangerously close?)
Chess Pty Ltd (the removal company)

There are plenty more - just look on the ASIC website.

Surely these stab at the very HEART of the ACF - what they are....I am just too close to your liking to one of their many (23) ACF Titles (although not actually that close when the official Title is "Australia Chess Federation Australian Secondary (Primary) Schools Open (Girls) Teams Champions".

ElevatorEscapee
05-11-2005, 12:17 AM
It sounds like World Series Cricket all over again... but does Mr Cordover = Mr Packer? :hmm: :lol: (and who's Kim Hughes? ;) )

Denis_Jessop
05-11-2005, 12:04 PM
This is the current relevant part of the Corporations Regulations (sorry if the formatting doesn't quite line up). The Bulletin Board Bush Lawyers Association can make what it will of it. :confused:

Schedule 6 Availability of names
(regulations 2B.6.01, 2B.6.02, 5B.3.01 and 5B.3.02)
Part 1 Rules for ascertaining whether names are identical
6101
In comparing one name with another for paragraph 147 (1) (a) or (b) or 601DC (1) (a) or (b) of the Act, the following matters are to be disregarded:
(a) the use of the definite or indefinite article as the first word in one or both of those names;
(b) the use of ‘Proprietary’, ‘Pty’, ‘Limited’, ‘Ltd’, ‘No Liability’ or ‘NL’ in one or both of the names;
(c) whether a word is in the plural or singular number in one or both names;
(d) the type, size and case of letters, the size of any numbers or other characters, and any accents, spaces between letters, numbers or characters, and punctuation marks, used in one or both names;
(e) the fact that one name contains a word or expression in column 2 of the following table and the other name contains an alternative for that word or expression in column 3:

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
Item Word or expression Alternative


1 Australian Aust
2 Company Co or Coy
3 Co Company or Coy
4 Coy Company or Co
5 Number No
6 and &
7 Incorporated Inc
8 Corporation Corp
9 Australian Company Number ACN

Part 2 Names unacceptable for registration
6203
For paragraph 147 (1) (c) or 601DC (1) (c) of the Act, a name is unacceptable for registration if the name:
(a) in the opinion of ASIC, is undesirable, or likely to be offensive to:
(i) members of the public; or
(ii) members of any section of the public; or
(b) subject to rule 6204:
(i) contains a word or phrase specified in an item in Part 3, or an abbreviation of that word or phrase; or
(ii) a word or phrase or an abbreviation having the same or a similar meaning; or
(c) subject to rule 6205, includes the word ‘Commonwealth’ or ‘Federal’; or
(d) in the context in which it is proposed to be used, suggests a connection with:
(i) the Crown; or
(ii) the Commonwealth Government; or
(iii) the Government of a State or Territory; or
(iv) a municipal or other local authority; or
(v) the Government of any other part of the Queen’s dominions, possessions or territories; or
(vi) a department, authority or instrumentality of the Commonwealth Government; or
(vii) a department, authority or instrumentality of the Government of a State or Territory; or
(viii) the government of a foreign country;
if that connection does not exist; or
(e) in the context in which it is proposed to be used, suggests a connection with:
(i) a member of the Royal Family; or
(ii) the receipt of Royal patronage; or
(iii) an ex-servicemen’s organisation; or
(iv) Sir Donald Bradman;
if that connection does not exist; or
(f) in the context in which it is proposed to be used, suggests that the members of an organisation are totally or partially incapacitated if those members are not so affected.
6204
Paragraph 6203 (b) does not apply to:
(a) item 6309, 6312 or 6318 of Part 3 if a word in any of those items must be included in the name of:
(i) a registrable Australian body; or
(ii) a registered Australian body;
because of the Act under which it is incorporated or registered; and
(b) item 6314 of Part 3 if the word must be included in the name of:
(i) a registrable Australian body; or
(ii) a registered Australian body; or
(iii) a registered foreign company; or
(iv) a foreign company;
because of the Act under which it is incorporated or registered.
6205
Paragraph 6203 (c) does not apply if ASIC is satisfied that the word is used in a geographical context.

Part 3 Restricted words and phrases

Column 1 Column 2
Item Word or phrase
6301 Aboriginal Corporation
6302 Aboriginal Council
6304 Chamber of Commerce
6305 Chamber of Manufactures
6306 Chartered
6308 Consumer
6309 Co-operative
6311 Executor
6312 Friendly Society (other than in relation to the conduct of a financial business)
6312A GST
6312B G.S.T.
6313 Guarantee
6314 Incorporated
6316 Made in Australia
6317 R.S.L.
6317A RSL
6318 Starr Bowkett
6319 Stock Exchange
6320 Torres Strait Islander Corporation
6321 Trust
6322 Trustee

Part 4 Consent required to use restricted words and phrases

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
Item Word or phrase Minister
6401 Anzac Minister for Veterans’ Affairs
6403 Geneva Cross, Red
Crescent, Red Cross,
Red Lion and Sun Minister for Defence
6405 United Nations Minister for Foreign Affairs
6406 University Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs

Part 5 Names relating to financial institutions for use of which consent is required


Item
Letters, word or expression Public authority, instrumentality or agency
6501 ADI APRA
6502 authorised deposit-taking institution APRA
6503 bank APRA
6504 banker APRA
6505 banking APRA
6506 building society APRA
6507 credit society APRA
6508 credit union APRA
6509 friendly society (in relation to the
conduct of a financial business) APRA

jenni
05-11-2005, 12:37 PM
and they complained that Libby's posts were long and confusing..... :eek:

pax
05-11-2005, 02:24 PM
So to cut a long story short, there is no restriction on the words "National" or "Australian", unless a connection with the Government is explicitly suggested.

pax
05-11-2005, 02:26 PM
It's pretty funny that The Don is mentioned explicitly in the act (alongside the Royal family).

four four two
05-11-2005, 02:26 PM
Well you cant say Denis hasnt provided the information about what the name requirements are. ;) Hope this means the ACF will be challenging DC if DC proclaims in media/advertising his tournament as the legitimate "representative" australian schools title. ;)

Denis_Jessop
05-11-2005, 05:35 PM
and they complained that Libby's posts were long and confusing..... :eek:

My post is very clear - it's the regulations that are the problem and I didn't write them.

Now you know what we lawyers face when we try to read legislation or (often) High Court judgments :rolleyes:

PHAT
06-11-2005, 12:26 PM
...it's the regulations that are the problem and I didn't write them. Now you know what we lawyers face when we try to read legislation ...

:boohoo: :naughty: "Lawyers" wrote it, so, "lawyers" can go stew in their own shit. The problem is that the scum expect that we should pay their drycleaning bills. :evil:

four four two
06-11-2005, 02:13 PM
Lawyers dont write legislation,politicians do. :wall:

Kaitlin
06-11-2005, 02:26 PM
Yep and Judges interperate the legislation and Police enforce the legislation... wat do Lawyers do again :ponder: ??

[Edit] Oh yeah .. Lawyers get paid by the word (like how many they write, in like when Lawyers were first invented they used to anyways... I dont know about now)

jenni
06-11-2005, 03:24 PM
Lawyers dont write legislation,politicians do. :wall:

Not quite true - politicians design legislation. Legislative drafters (who are lawyers) write it.

four four two
06-11-2005, 03:37 PM
Bills in parliament are introduced and finalised by politicians,some of whom are lawyers. A non elected member of parliament can be consulted in an area of expertise,but at the end of the day the legislation is introduced and passed by politicians. ;)

Denis_Jessop
06-11-2005, 04:19 PM
:boohoo: :naughty: "Lawyers" wrote it, so, "lawyers" can go stew in their own shit. The problem is that the scum expect that we should pay their drycleaning bills. :evil:

You've got the wrong slant, Matt. Lawyers draft it that way so that they can make money from the confusion :whistle:

DJ

Denis_Jessop
06-11-2005, 04:25 PM
Not quite true - politicians design legislation. Legislative drafters (who are lawyers) write it.

Or to put a finer touch to it, public servants design the legislation, based on a general governmental notion, the Parliamentary Counsel (lawyers) draft it, the responsible Minister puts it to Cabinet for approval (some of them even understand what's happening :doh: ) and the average poli doesn't get much of a look in :eek:

DJ

PHAT
06-11-2005, 06:18 PM
Lawyers dont write legislation,politicians do. :wall:

Bollocks. Politicians ask for it to be written/drafted, then they pass it with amendments.

PHAT
06-11-2005, 06:23 PM
You've got the wrong slant, Matt. Lawyers draft it that way so that they can make money from the confusion :whistle:

DJ

No, I have the correct slant. They spend that money on drycleaning their suits. :owned:

jenni
06-11-2005, 08:29 PM
Or to put a finer touch to it, public servants design the legislation, based on a general governmental notion, the Parliamentary Counsel (lawyers) draft it, the responsible Minister puts it to Cabinet for approval (some of them even understand what's happening :doh: ) and the average poli doesn't get much of a look in :eek:

DJ

This sounds a bit like the "camel is a horse designed by a committee".

arosar
10-11-2005, 03:47 PM
Blog updated.

http://closetgrandmaster.blogspot.com/

AR

Rincewind
10-11-2005, 04:42 PM
Blog updated.

http://closetgrandmaster.blogspot.com/

AR

Does your blog have an update relevent to this thread?

Kevin Bonham
10-11-2005, 05:19 PM
Does your blog have an update relevent to this thread?

Yes, the "West Ulverstone Tassie Champs" entry is relevant. But maybe AR should post a little teaser instead of just "blog updated".

ChessGuru
10-11-2005, 05:27 PM
Dear Chess Public,

I urge you to support the Chess Kids National Interschool Championships. Please let your local school know of the wonderful opportunity available!

Some states have provided NO entries as yet. It would be a shame to end up with a small event....

Remember there is a FREE entry which includes food, accomodation and coaching for EVERY state!

EMail finals@chesskids.com.au for details of schools who have entered and if YOUR school can have a place!

All the best,
David

Rincewind
10-11-2005, 05:44 PM
Some states have provided NO entries as yet. It would be a shame to end up with a small event....

So where is the credibility of the event as a "national" "championships"? It's only 3.5 weeks aways and not yet too late for any school in some state(s) to turn up and get a spot on spec.

Do you have a list of confirmed entrants?

ChessGuru
10-11-2005, 07:58 PM
Of course I have a list of confirmed entrants. And I am confident the event will be a massive success!

However with 3.5 weeks to go I would be happy to offer anyone who has been a little slow in getting together their entry another opportunity to participate.

I am yet to see any chess event where the final field is confirmed 3.5 weeks away from the start!

ChessGuru
10-11-2005, 07:59 PM
Anyone want to take bets/guesses as to the number of teams in the final field?

Rincewind
10-11-2005, 08:28 PM
I am yet to see any chess event where the final field is confirmed 3.5 weeks away from the start!

http://www.nswjcl.org.au/AustralianSchools/2005/ASTC_Teams.htm

This has been published for a while now. Only one team is still listed as being "to be confirmed" and it is still 4.5 weeks away. Oh, but you knew that already, didn't you?

ChessGuru
10-11-2005, 09:10 PM
Actually I had no idea. One of the NSW organisers pointedly refused to provide me with any information what-so-ever!

Rincewind
10-11-2005, 09:12 PM
Actually I had no idea. One of the NSW organisers pointedly refused to provide me with any information what-so-ever!

Really? You couldn't have been to determined to find out. It is linked to directly off the NSWJCL's main home page.

pax
10-11-2005, 09:40 PM
Anyone want to take bets/guesses as to the number of teams in the final field?

Then guess the number of teams from outside Victoria and Tasmania :hmm:

Rincewind
10-11-2005, 09:44 PM
Then guess the number of teams from outside Victoria and Tasmania :hmm:

I know of one from the ACT...

Libby
11-11-2005, 06:46 AM
I know of one from the ACT...

Get stuffed Barry.

You wonder why I take this personally and why I am at this event busily destroying Australian or Victorian chess or whatever it is I supposedly have the power to do.

Try this.

I have run a little school chess club for 5 years. I am a parent, friend and mentor and regard all those roles as more important than the pathetic chess politicking that rotates endlessly here.

In the past year, three young children in my chess club lost a parent to cancer. One quite serious young player among them had their participation severely curtailed over the past two years as a consequence of the parent's illness and now has the other parent desperate to make up for lost time by offering as many opportunities as possible.

Again, in the past year, one young member broke their neck, experienced operations that were potentailly paralysing & life-threatening. Has lost almost all participation in other sport, lost the opportunity to represent the school overseas in a student exchange and spent much of the year having lost even the ability to run about in the playground.

So when I initially ignored this opportunity, and then felt a bit "gulity" for doing so - it was in this role as mother, friend & mentor. And when I went to the school, and made them aware of all of the political issues & controversies around the opportunity to compete they remained ecstatic.

They remained ecstatic because of the opportunity it gave to this particular group of children who have had a really difficult time of things at a very young age.

And they don't giving a flying f@$k what you think.

I hope that is offensive enough for you.

And I hope if anything is achieved within the hallowed "official" halls of chess over this event it will be people getting off their arse to stop bellyaching on the BB and look at ways they can offer great programs, new ideas, a profile, and opportunities for children & adults in chess.

Instead of saying "why should I have to do it?"

Rincewind
11-11-2005, 07:03 AM
Get over it Libby!

It's bigger than you and bigger than the whole f%$king ACT.

I believe Curtin are doing chess a disservice by attending the Guru's tournament for reasons we went through weeks ago. Now I asked the question of which school were attending. The non-Vic, SA and Tas schools are of particular interest as they are the ones that are less influenced by Chess Kids the service provider.

So you see I wasn't trying to get a rise out of you. In fact I thought you had given up on this board for a while anyway. Either way, unless you can come up with something more original than vacillating between spruking on all the things you have been able to achieve in the ACT and lobbing mindless insults at me, then I for one could live without your posts.

(PS I feel sorry for the individuals at your school who had some bad luck. But what is the point of bringing it up? To make me feel guilty? To argue that personal happiness is more important than chess governance? I think you really are confused either way.)

Libby
11-11-2005, 07:49 AM
(PS I feel sorry for the individuals at your school who had some bad luck. But what is the point of bringing it up? To make me feel guilty? To argue that personal happiness is more important than chess governance? I think you really are confused either way.)

Nothing to do with guilt or otherwise for you. It was intended to illustrate the factors that led me - against a previously held conviction I'll add - to consider the opporunity to compete.

And my position, not as chess administrator, but as someone who cares a lot about these particular children, with whom I have worked over many years and whose (deceased) parents had been friends and helpers with the school chess club. "Bad luck" is an interesting concession when compared to the concern expressed for children who miss out on getting their names & achievements correctly recognised in the paper.

Now obviously, whilst I anticipated a level of controversy and flak over this decision to participate, I didn't expect it aimed at the school or the kids and I thought an explanation might soften the position of some. It was very hard for me to assess (in advance) how critical our participation was going to be seen to the issue of "chess governance" over and above the desire I had to do something special for these kids - for their "personal happiness."

Of course, had I placed their "personal happiness" in the way of potentially life threatening implications for other living creatures I would have been pretty irresponsible. In this example, I continue to see our impact as overstated.


then I for one could live without your posts.

And you will.

pax
11-11-2005, 08:25 AM
I believe Curtin are doing chess a disservice by attending the Guru's tournament for reasons we went through weeks ago. Now I asked the question of which school were attending. The non-Vic, SA and Tas schools are of particular interest as they are the ones that are less influenced by Chess Kids the service provider.

As far as I know, you are the only one that is of the view that Curtin should boycott the DC event.

jenni
11-11-2005, 08:34 AM
Get over it Libby!

It's bigger than you and bigger than the whole f%$king ACT.

I believe Curtin are doing chess a disservice by attending the Guru's tournament for reasons we went through weeks ago. Now I asked the question of which school were attending. The non-Vic, SA and Tas schools are of particular interest as they are the ones that are less influenced by Chess Kids the service provider.

So you see I wasn't trying to get a rise out of you. In fact I thought you had given up on this board for a while anyway. Either way, unless you can come up with something more original than vacillating between spruking on all the things you have been able to achieve in the ACT and lobbing mindless insults at me, then I for one could live without your posts.

(PS I feel sorry for the individuals at your school who had some bad luck. But what is the point of bringing it up? To make me feel guilty? To argue that personal happiness is more important than chess governance? I think you really are confused either way.)

What a lot of rubbish! Amazing how Barry who knew nothing about junior chess 1 year ago is now the arbiter of what is good for junior chess in Australia.

Rincewind
11-11-2005, 09:16 AM
What a lot of rubbish! Amazing how Barry who knew nothing about junior chess 1 year ago is now the arbiter of what is good for junior chess in Australia.

And funny that no one outside of the ACT seems to have a clue how to do things. I have my opinion which I have voiced. I am a complete relativist and never claim that I am right or wrong. I don't even believe in the existence of an objectively right thing.

However Libby (and now you) now seem to think that the only way to get your point across is to attack me on a personal level.

I think you should just get over yourselves and try to understand the issues.

jenni
11-11-2005, 09:45 AM
And funny that no one outside of the ACT seems to have a clue how to do things. I have my opinion which I have voiced. I am a complete relativist and never claim that I am right or wrong. I don't even believe in the existence of an objectively right thing.


No-one has ever said that -if Libby (and I) are free with our opinions it is becasue we thought just maybe we had achieved a lot that could be shared.

However stupid to think that anyone on this Bulletin board is interested in doing anything except vent their spleen and try to score points off each other.



However Libby (and now you) now seem to think that the only way to get your point across is to attack me on a personal level.

I think you should just get over yourselves and try to understand the issues

I doubt that Cordover's comp will be successful and that is sad, because I think it is a useful addition to the chess calendar. Part of the problem lies with Cordover's inability to build relationships with other organisations and people. There is a real lack of trust.

However I think it is you who are a one issue person. Totally centred around Essex Heights and its problems and incapable of seeing outside of it.

I am pissed off because this stupid issue of a private person (Libby in her capacity as a Curtin parent) taking 4 kids to a private competition, has resulted in such flak for Libby that it has had repercussions for us on what work she is prepared to do in the future.

I was really hoping that she would be prepared to take on more of a national role. But I doubt that will happen now. Australia is so short of quality administrators that this is much more of an issue than the hysteria over media publicity in Victoria.

Rincewind
11-11-2005, 09:55 AM
No-one has ever said that -if Libby (and I) are free with our opinions it is becasue we thought just maybe we had achieved a lot that could be shared.

However stupid to think that anyone on this Bulletin board is interested in doing anything except vent their spleen and try to score points off each other.

Jenni, that is just being pessimistic. In some cases what you share has been of use and the BB has had many positives in terms of sharing information on grant applications, news, building networks, etc. However, sometimes people have differences of opinion. That is just life.


I doubt that Cordover's comp will be successful and that is sad, because I think it is a useful addition to the chess calendar. Part of the problem lies with Cordover's inability to build relationships with other organisations and people. There is a real lack of trust.

However I think it is you who are a one issue person. Totally centred around Essex Heights and its problems and incapable of seeing outside of it.

I am pissed off because this stupid issue of a private person (Libby in her capacity as a Curtin parent) taking 4 kids to a private competition, has resulted in such flak for Libby that it has had repercussions for us on what work she is prepared to do in the future.

I was really hoping that she would be prepared to take on more of a national role. But I doubt that will happen now. Australia is so short of quality administrators that this is much more of an issue than the hysteria over media publicity in Victoria.

I certainly think the problem is bigger than Essex Heights. And it isn't about EH not getting media coverage. I don't consider that as even 1% of the problem. If you still think otherwise then you are totally missing the point.

Yes DC the individual is a big part of it but not essentially so. The ACF and other states have to recognise that other like minded individuals could try to push a similar agenda.

By the same token this isn't about you or Libby or me. There is no need for anyone to get pissed off. I try to keep my comments off the personal level. However when provoked I do occasionally retaliate.

jenni
11-11-2005, 11:54 AM
Jenni, that is just being pessimistic. .

Well actually I am pessimistic and not just about this BB.

After 11 years I can see no improvement in the structure of chess in Australia. There are a lot more businesses and people making money, but is chess really progressing - I doubt it. Ok - one can point to the success of the kids overseas and I will agree that we are getting better results. However that is because more juniors are getting professional coaching and at a younger age.

Looking at the bigger picture though, all I can see are large numbers of fractious people who are more interested in pursuing their ancient feuds. People aren't interested in co-operating or building. There are pockets of excellence where things are being done, but highly dependent on individuals and just as likely to collapse in the future.

Everyone wants to score points and pull people down.

Few of the juniors translate into life long players - most of them view it as a scholastic pursuit - win their titles and trophies, maybe throw in a few rep opportunities overseas and then hang up their chess pieces as they move onto Uni and a career.

The ACF is a disaster, as is the ACF Junior Sub-committee.


The Aus Juniors hasn't increased in size in 10 years.

The Ergas squad has many kids who apply and get selected to have the status and then can't be bothered turning up for the camp (in spite of making a "commitment" to it, before going up for selection.)

Many adults view the juniors as the enemy and have no desire to help build them for the future.

Everyone whines, everyone complains, no-one gets off their backsides and does anything.

So yes I am bloody pessimistic at the moment.

Garvinator
11-11-2005, 12:26 PM
Well actually I am pessimistic and not just about this BB.

After 11 years I can see no improvement in the structure of chess in Australia. There are a lot more businesses and people making money, but is chess really progressing - I doubt it. Ok - one can point to the success of the kids overseas and I will agree that we are getting better results. However that is because more juniors are getting professional coaching and at a younger age.

Looking at the bigger picture though, all I can see are large numbers of fractious people who are more interested in pursuing their ancient feuds. People aren't interested in co-operating or building. There are pockets of excellence where things are being done, but highly dependent on individuals and just as likely to collapse in the future.

Everyone wants to score points and pull people down.

Few of the juniors translate into life long players - most of them view it as a scholastic pursuit - win their titles and trophies, maybe throw in a few rep opportunities overseas and then hang up their chess pieces as they move onto Uni and a career.

The ACF is a disaster, as is the ACF Junior Sub-committee.


The Aus Juniors hasn't increased in size in 10 years.

The Ergas squad has many kids who apply and get selected to have the status and then can't be bothered turning up for the camp (in spite of making a "commitment" to it, before going up for selection.)

Many adults view the juniors as the enemy and have no desire to help build them for the future.

Everyone whines, everyone complains, no-one gets off their backsides and does anything.

So yes I am bloody pessimistic at the moment.


Finally someone has said it. What it will take is a few ppl who are willing to say no to a few ppl and get off their backsides and get things done.

Unfortunately Australian Chess cannot move forward in any meaningful way under the current structure. The whole accor deal proved this. They were unwilling to provide full backing because of what happened during the transfer of organisers.

Garvinator
11-11-2005, 12:27 PM
As far as I know, you are the only one that is of the view that Curtin should boycott the DC event.
not the only one.

Rincewind
11-11-2005, 12:53 PM
As far as I know, you are the only one that is of the view that Curtin should boycott the DC event.

Not Curtin in particular. All schools while ever the tournament is called a National Championships.

Rincewind
11-11-2005, 12:59 PM
So yes I am bloody pessimistic at the moment.

Sorry to hear that. Things do progress and changes are made it's just always way slower than it should or could be in a perfect world. I think the communcation provided here is a good thing, more good than bad anyway.

Libby
11-11-2005, 01:33 PM
By attending his event Curtin Primary are being willing participants in the destruction of any sort of chance junior chess in Victoria might have!

... but hey, by all means, have fun.


especially participation from a prestigious ACT school like Curtin, helps DC and ultimately hurts Chess Victoria.


It was extremely disappointed that a prestigious school like Curtin Primary would be sending a team as that furthers DC agenda.

But I'm pleased to know it isn't just my school/players/self that are totally responsible. And that I was unjustified in feeling provoked.

I'm sorry to have attempted to inject a human element into decision-making when it involves children. Obviously it was more important than I realised that 3x 12yo and 2x11yo not attend this event. Having attempted to give some perspective to the recent lives of some of the children involved, I thought others might develop a level of perspective on what actually is important in the life of 3x 12yo & 2x 11yo.

Do I dispute the contentiousness of David calling his event "national" - not at all.

Do I accept that these 5 children will somehow have a significant influence on the future direction of chess in this country - not at all.

That's my difficulty.

Please ensure this level of disapproval is conveyed equally to all schools & states found to be participating in the event. I have seen the list. I believe we are not the only "dual representatives."

If you are at all concerned that I have continued to post, be reassured it will stop. Jenni is quite correct in suggesting that I am immensely discouraged, not by the concern people have expressed, but by their lack of a plan of action to make a difference.

It seems the only action to be called for is the need for me to withdraw my team. And that "somebody else" must do something to stop the Guru.

And whilst I will confess to having an overblown sense of my own importance and a tendency to shoot my mouth off, I won't accept that I bear responsibility for whatever is happening in Victoria, Tasmania or South Australia.

I am so bent on destruction that I have spent a considerable amount of time recently preparing the ACTJCL bid to host the "official" national junior events. It is most likely, if successful, I will substantially carry that along with the day-to-day responsibility of junior activities in the ACT.

But I have completely withdrawn from those activities and tasks requested of me outside of the ACT. And I'll be very careful not to inflict my suggestions, advice or "spruking" here in future.

Rincewind
11-11-2005, 01:46 PM
But I have completely withdrawn from those activities and tasks requested of me outside of the ACT. And I'll be very careful not to inflict my suggestions, advice or "spruking" here in future.

Are you suggesting that anyone should really care?

JohnH
14-11-2005, 09:55 AM
Actually I had no idea. One of the NSW organisers pointedly refused to provide me with any information what-so-ever!

I am on the Council of the NSWJCL and am not aware of you approaching either the NSWJCL or any member of Council. As was pointed out to you all significant information is in the public domain and has been so for a period of time.

Perhaps you'd like to name the person and what information was refused you.

jenni
14-11-2005, 09:58 AM
I am on the Council of the NSWJCL and am not aware of you approaching either the NSWJCL or any member of Council. As was pointed out to you all significant information is in the public domain and has been so for a period of time.

Perhaps you'd like to name the person and what information was refused you.

Actually David did send an e-mail to Richard and Richard replied in less than amicable terms. Can't remember when - pretty early in the year and well before NSW would have had any website etc.

JohnH
14-11-2005, 10:09 AM
Actually David did send an e-mail to Richard and Richard replied in less than amicable terms. Can't remember when - pretty early in the year and well before NSW would have had any website etc.

I'm assuming you have read this email and that the less than amiable terms is your assessment of its content.

jenni
14-11-2005, 11:06 AM
I'm assuming you have read this email and that the less than amiable terms is your assessment of its content.

Yes - the e-mail request was sent in April, which was far too early for any information to be available. I think the exchange started off polite, but did disintegrate....

JohnH
14-11-2005, 11:11 AM
Yes - the e-mail request was sent in April, which was far too early for any information to be available. I think the exchange started off polite, but did disintegrate....

Hi Jenni,

Just trying to get my head around this. Did you read the emails concerned?

I'm sending you a PM.

John

jenni
14-11-2005, 11:22 AM
Hi Jenni,

Just trying to get my head around this. Did you read the emails concerned?

I'm sending you a PM.

John
Yep - for some reason was copied by both parties....

It's no big deal and David is being a little naughty because he has known about the webpage for ages, because I sent him an e-mail to let him know when it was made public...

jenni
05-12-2005, 09:29 AM
Curtin Primary from the ACt won the inaugural Chess Kids Open Schools, Primary Division. Melbourne High won the Secondary schools, not sure about the intermediate or whatever it was called.

Well done to these teams. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Spoke to Libby last night. She was positive about the event and the kids had had some fun. No media coverage. :lol:

It is certainly not an event which poses any threat to the ASTC - very much a "get kids involved" sort of event and ChessGuru is very effective at this level. I will put my head on a block and maintain that there is no way a team, apart from Tasmania, will go to this event in preference to the ASTC, although teams might well decide to play in both (as happened this year). (Tasmania of course being a special case - hopefully will change by next year).

Woul be nice to see some detailed results here. (hint hint)

Mischa
05-12-2005, 01:39 PM
Was still called the National Interschools Final

jenni
05-12-2005, 02:19 PM
Not sure - I didn't ask Libby - I think he has started putting Chesskids in front as requested.

There was certainly some confusion - as expected. A parent was talking to one of the other parents, who said they were really excited, because their school had "finally" made it to the finals. The Curtin parent said " But this is the first time it has run" to the bewilderment of the other parent. ;)

Garvinator
05-12-2005, 02:39 PM
Not sure - I didn't ask Libby - I think he has started putting Chesskids in front as requested.

There was certianly some confusion - as expected. A parent was talking to one of the other parents, who said they were really excited, becasue their school had "finally" made it to the finals. The Curtin parent said " But this is the first time it has run" to the bewilderment of the other parent. ;)
How many players did this event get? How many interstaters for a 'national' event?

jenni
05-12-2005, 02:59 PM
How many players did this event get? How many interstaters for a 'national' event?
Didn't ask Libby. She was phoning me from Melbourne and we concentrated more on Curtin and general ambience. Curtin was there from ACT and obviously Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia. WA definitely had at least one team there, because the team is going to the ASTC next week - two comps for one airfare. Not sure about Qld or NSW. However 5 is not bad for a start.

Garvinator
05-12-2005, 03:07 PM
Not sure about Qld
none from caq. CAQ wanted nothing to do with it and didnt promote it at all.

Rincewind
05-12-2005, 04:03 PM
none from caq. CAQ wanted nothing to do with it and didnt promote it at all.

Interesting. :hmm:

jenni
05-12-2005, 06:13 PM
none from caq. CAQ wanted nothing to do with it and didnt promote it at all.

Not quite right - it appears that schools managed to find out the info anyway - see results below.

The ACTJCL did not "promote" the event, but it did send out the info to all schools in the ACT, with a clear explanation of what it was about. Which is better, for the state organisation to send it out with an explanation, or for schools to trip over the info? :confused:

jenni
05-12-2005, 06:17 PM
PRIMARY INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPS – NATIONAL FINALS

National Primary Chess Finals
Venue: Bayview Conference Centre
Date: December 3 & 4, 2005

School Standings
Place Name Score
1 CURTIN PRIMARY 20.5 ACT
2 MT VIEW PRIMARY 20.0 VIC
3 LINDEN PARK PRIMARY 19.5 SA
4 MIDLAND CHRISTIAN SCHOOL 17.5 WA
5 BURNSIDE PRIMARY 16.5 SA
6 WEST ULVERSTONE PRIMARY 15.5 TAS
7 GREYTHORN PRIMARY 14.5 VIC
8 CAULFIELD GRAMMAR 14.5 VIC
9 TRINITY GRAMMAR 13.5 VIC
10 THE FRIENDS SCHOOL 13.5 TAS
11 ST KEVIN'S 13.5 VIC
12 DONCASTER GARDENS PRIMARY 12.5 VIC
13 YAVNEH COLLEGE 12.0 VIC
14 PRINCES ST PRIMARY 9.5 TAS

National Primary Chess Finals
Venue: Bayview Conference Centre
Date: December 3 & 4, 2005

Individual Standings
Place Name School Total Countback
1 Aran Somaskanthan Caulfield Grammar 6.5 31.5
2 Kayleigh Smith Curtin Primary 6.0 34
3 Ben Edland Midland Christian School 6.0 26.5
4 Joshua Bishop Curtin Primary 5.5 33
5 Justin Thai Linden Park Primary 5.0 31.5
6 Samuel Chan Mt View Primary 5.0 31.5
7 Victor Xie Mt View Primary 5.0 30
8 Michael Chan Mt View Primary 5.0 29.5
9 Michael Tan Mt View Primary 5.0 29
10 David Brown Linden Park Primary 5.0 27
11 Vincent Zhang Linden Park Primary 5.0 26.5
12 Calvin Fong Burnside Primary 5.0 23.5
13 Noah Brash Yavneh College 4.5 31.5
14 Vincent Horton West Ulverstone Primary 4.5 31
15 Caleb Simmons Midland Christian School 4.5 30
16 Casey Baines Curtin Primary 4.5 28
17 Michael Brown Linden Park Primary 4.5 25.5
18 James Briant Princes St Primary 4.5 25
19 Karen Khoo Curtin Primary 4.5 25
20 Bryan Lee Greythorn Primary 4.0 30.5
21 Kendra Selvanderan Burnside Primary 4.0 29
22 Max Rintoul The Friends School 4.0 28
23 Joseph Ng Greythorn Primary 4.0 27.5
24 Ian Teichert Caulfield Grammar 4.0 27
25 John Hanson Trinity Grammar 4.0 26
26 Nina Horton West Ulverstone Primary 4.0 23.5
27 Rhys Kilpatrick The Friends School 4.0 23.5
28 Sam Brownrigg West Ulverstone Primary 4.0 22.5
29 Liam Gage-Brown Burnside Primary 4.0 19.5
30 Vafi Cheng Doncaster Gardens Prima 4.0 16.5
31 Stephen Lui Greythorn Primary 3.5 27.5
32 Jesse Smith Midland Christian School 3.5 26.5
33 George Britten-Jones Linden Park Primary 3.5 26.5
34 Thomas Edland Midland Christian School 3.5 26
35 Timothy Selvanderan Burnside Primary 3.5 26
36 Christopher Parra St Kevin's 3.5 24.5
37 Aaron Jones Trinity Grammar 3.5 24.5
38 Joshua Martin St Kevin's 3.5 24
39 Oliver Chuc St Kevin's 3.5 22
40 Rhys Katich Midland Christian School 3.5 21
41 Ben Ditchfield Trinity Grammar 3.0 26.5
42 Dominic Canale Greythorn Primary 3.0 26.5
43 Andrew Spooner Curtin Primary 3.0 24
44 Jason Lee Greythorn Primary 3.0 23
45 Cooper Denehey The Friends School 3.0 22
46 Raymond Louey Doncaster Gardens Primar 3.0 21
47 William Phillips St Kevin's 3.0 20.5
48 Bernard Shan Trinity Grammar 3.0 20
49 Jacinta Chatwin West Ulverstone Primary 3.0 20
50 Peter Sale St Kevin's 3.0 19
51 Benji Jones Yavneh College 3.0 18
52 Derek Huang Doncaster Gardens Primar 3.0 17
53 Yair Prawer Yavneh College 2.5 28.5
54 Alec Cummings Trinity Grammar 2.5 24.5
55 Liang Tan Mt View Primary 2.5 21.5
56 Raymond Chan Doncaster Gardens Prima 2.5 21
57 Andrew Morrison The Friends School 2.5 19.5
58 Andrew Roberts Caulfield Grammar 2.0 25
59 Isaac Tam Caulfield Grammar 2.0 23
60 Aleks Stojilovic Caulfield Grammar 2.0 22.5
61 Ethan Duniam West Ulverstone Primary 2.0 22
62 Yonnie Lipshatz Yavneh College 2.0 21
63 Harrison Briant Princes St Primary 2.0 19.5
64 Mikalha George Princes St Primary 2.0 18
65 Dennis Shekh Burnside Primary 2.0 18
66 Eli Lipshatz Yavneh College 2.0 17
67 Connor Young Princes St Primary 1.0 23.5
68 William Maher Princes St Primary 0.5 19.5
69 Thomas Atherton The Friends School 0.5 17.5

Junior Secondary Championships
Scotch College (Vic) has a virtually unbeatable team with their number 1 player, Derek Yu, remaining undefeated in Regional, State and now National events! An amazing 23 wins straight. Yavneh College (Vic) finished in second place with Tyndale Christian School (SA) collecting 3rd on countback in only their second year of competitive play!

SECONDARY INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPS – NATIONAL FINALS

National Junior Secondary Chess Finals
Venue: Bayview Conference Centre, Melbourne
Date: December 3 & 4, 2005

School Standings
Place Name Score
1 SCOTCH COLLEGE 23.5 VIC
2 YAVNEH COLLEGE 19.0 VIC
3 TYNDALE CHRISTIAN 16.0 SA
4 BRIGHTON GRAMMAR 16.0 VIC
5 CABRAMATTA HIGH SCHOOL 14.0 NSW
6 KING KHALID ISLAMIC COLLEGE 14.0 VIC
7 PENLEIGH & ESSENDON GRAMMAR 12.0 VIC
8 FAITH LUTHERAN COLLEGE 10.5 QLD
9 ALBURY HIGH SCHOOL 9.5 NSW
10 KIRWAN HIGH SCHOOL 6.0 QLD

National Junior Secondary Chess Finals
Venue: Bayview Conference Centre, Melbourne
Date: December 3 & 4, 2005

Individual Standings
Place Name School Total Countback
1 Derek Yu Scotch College 7.0 28.0
2 Daniel Diamond Yavneh College 6.0 35.5
3 Derek Eer Scotch College 6.0 27.0
4 Kai Nagao Scotch College 5.5 26.0
5 Ben Lucato Scotch College 5.0 29.5
6 Paul Yu Scotch College 5.0 28.0
7 George Priestley Brighton Grammar 4.5 33.0
8 Nicholas Ng Brighton Grammar 4.5 31.0
9 Kanal Phok Cabramatta High School 4.5 28.0
10 Daniel Jones Yavneh College 4.5 27.5
11 Anthony Hain Yavneh College 4.5 25.5
12 Sean Darcy Albury High School 4.5 21.0
13 Nathan Joel Yavneh College 4.0 31.5
14 Burak Demir King Khalid Islamic Coll 4.0 31.0
15 Christopher Toft Tyndale Christian 4.0 31.0
16 Matthew Thorpe Tyndale Christian 4.0 27.5
17 Aaron Savage Tyndale Christian 4.0 27.0
18 Justin Ng Penleigh & Essendon Gram 4.0 24.5
19 Lloyd Hookey Kirwan High School 4.0 24.0
20 Joshua Jelic Tyndale Christian 4.0 22.0
21 Jonathan Pham Brighton Grammar 4.0 18.0
22 Joshua Owens Tyndale Christian 3.5 26.0
23 Mohammad Soued King Khalid Islamic College 3.5 23.0
24 Yasser Sarwar King Khalid Islamic College 3.5 21.5
25 Dennis Nguyen Cabramatta High School 3.5 21.0
26 Jue Keam Song Cabramatta High School 3.0 29.0
27 Toni Cao Cabramatta High School 3.0 25.5
28 Donald Tse Penleigh & Essendon Gramma 3.0 24.5
29 Jamie Darcy Albury High School 3.0 23.0
30 Suhail Wardak King Khalid Islamic College 3.0 22.0
31 Alex Pocock Faith Lutheran College 3.0 22.0
32 Shoji Nakayama Brighton Grammar 3.0 19.5
33 Joel Degan Faith Lutheran College 3.0 19.5
34 Thomas Lew Penleigh & Essendon Gramma 3.0 17.0
35 Todd Youngs Faith Lutheran College 2.5 25.0
36 Benjamin Luo Cabramatta High School 2.5 22.5
37 Brian Sack Yavneh College 2.5 18.0
38 Imran Ameer King Khalid Islamic College 2.0 28.0
39 Will Mosley Brighton Grammar 2.0 25.0
40 Liam Ellis Albury High School 2.0 22.0
41 Dirk Pideaux Kirwan High School 2.0 21.5
42 Joshua Roziel Penleigh & Essendon Gramma 2.0 20.0
43 Nicholas Lynem Faith Lutheran College 2.0 20.0
44 Daniel Golder Penleigh & Essendon Gramma 2.0 18.5
45 Chris Drysdale Faith Lutheran College 1.0 18.0
46 Chris Albert Albury High School 0.0 18.5

Open Secondary Championships
A Victorian trifecta in the Open Championships. Melbourne High School (Vic) had a slow start to the weekend, but dominated the final few rounds to end victorious! Brighton Grammar just managed to hang on to second place ahead of Mirboo North Secondary.

National Open Secondary Chess Finals
Venue: Bayview Conference Centre, Melbourne
Date: December 3 & 4, 2005

School Standings
Place Name Score
1 MELBOURNE HIGH SCHOOL 22.5 VIC
2 BRIGHTON GRAMMAR 18.0 VIC
3 MIRBOO NORTH SECONDARY 17.5 VIC
4 RED CLIFFS SECONDARY 14.5 VIC
5 ST BRENDAN-SHAW COLLEGE 13.5 TAS
6 ST PATRICK'S COLLEGE 13.0 TAS
7 KIRWAN HIGH SCHOOL 12.0 QLD
8 ST MARY'S - BROOME 8.0 WA



National Open Secondary Chess Finals
Venue: Bayview Conference Centre, Melbourne
Date: December 3 & 4, 2005

Individual Standings
Place Name School Total Countback
1 Artem Nikolayevsky Melbourne High School 6.5 29.0
2 Kingsley Feng Melbourne High School 5.5 27.5
3 Surya Raviganesh Melbourne High School 5.5 25.5
4 Matthew Potter Mirboo North Secondary 5.0 32.0
5 Brendan Linke Brighton Grammar 5.0 31.5
6 Roger Dong Brighton Grammar 5.0 30.0
7 David Gordon Melbourne High School 5.0 28.0
8 Adrian Hartojo Melbourne High School 5.0 26.0
9 Daniel Potter Mirboo North Secondary 4.5 27.5
10 Thomas Hendrey St Brendan-Shaw College 4.5 25.5
11 Sasha Siminov Brighton Grammar 4.0 32.0
12 Jonathan Sest Brighton Grammar 4.0 31.5
13 David O'Connor Brighton Grammar 4.0 31.0
14 Michael Potter Mirboo North Secondary 4.0 29.0
15 Pietro Figlioli Mirboo North Secondary 4.0 27.5
16 Kevin Hendrey St Brendan-Shaw College 4.0 26.5
17 Mark Ferris St Patrick's College 4.0 26.0
18 James Connors Red Cliffs Secondary 4.0 21.5
19 Tim Lowth Kirwan High School 4.0 18.5
20 Tim Nulty Red Cliffs Secondary 3.5 26.0
21 John Grant Red Cliffs Secondary 3.5 25.5
22 Daniel Lucas Red Cliffs Secondary 3.5 25.5
23 Marten Sinnema Mirboo North Secondary 3.5 19.0
24 Joanna Ferris St Patrick's College 3.0 26.0
25 Braydon Munro Red Cliffs Secondary 3.0 25.5
26 Justin Hood St Patrick's College 3.0 22.5
27 Christopher Boltong St Brendan-Shaw College 3.0 22.5
28 Callum Greechan St Mary's - Broome 3.0 22.0
29 Joshua Theeuf Kirwan High School 3.0 21.5
30 Bryn Armitage St Patrick's College 3.0 21.5
31 Paul Dela Pena Kirwan High School 3.0 17.5
32 Ryan Wise St Patrick's College 2.5 23.5
33 Dean McNeil Kirwan High School 2.0 20.5
34 Lennard Jaffrey St Mary's - Broome 2.0 20.0
35 Benjamin Brown St Brendan-Shaw College 2.0 19.5
36 Michael Griffiths St Brendan-Shaw College 2.0 17.0
37 Tom Keevil St Mary's - Broome 1.5 22.0
38 Brenton Hamaguchi St Mary's - Broome 1.5 22.0
39 Jerome Phillips St Mary's - Broome 1.0 23.0

Garvinator
05-12-2005, 06:19 PM
Not quite right - it appears that schools managed to find out the info anyway - see results below.

The ACTJCL did not "promote" the event, but it did send out the info to all schools in the ACT, with a clear explanation of what it was about. Which is better, for the state organisation to send it out with an explanation, or for schools to trip over the info? :confused:
Yes the schools can find out their own information and I would imagine that maybe David helped them along too.

My point was that at our last caq council meeting before the caq agm last Saturday, David's event was discussed and it was decided that we werent going to promote or send any team.

Of course if a team went on their own, that is up to them.

In fact, the Queensland Club Team Championship, held yesterday, got over 100 players.

I see the results still say:

PRIMARY INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPS – NATIONAL FINALS

National Primary Chess Finals .

and this carries on for the other divisions too. No mention of chesskids anywhere there.

I can understand how a person can think that this would be an official acf event. No mention of chesskids there at all.

jenni
05-12-2005, 06:35 PM
Yes the schools can find out their own information and I would imagine that maybe David helped them along too.

My point was that at our last caq council meeting before the caq agm last Saturday, David's event was discussed and it was decided that we werent going to promote or send any team.

ACTJCL also did not send a team. It was a decision by the school and parents to go and it got no funding from the ACTJCL, unlike teams that go to the ASTC who get $300 per team.

My point is that it is much better to control what info the schools receive than to let them find it on their own.


I see the results still say:

PRIMARY INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPS – NATIONAL FINALS

National Primary Chess Finals .

and this carries on for the other divisions too. No mention of chesskids anywhere there.

I can understand how a person can think that this would be an official acf event. No mention of chesskids there at all.

According to Libby everything including the T-shirts said "Chesskids etc"

BFG
05-12-2005, 07:27 PM
I see the results still say:

PRIMARY INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPS – NATIONAL FINALS

National Primary Chess Finals .

and this carries on for the other divisions too. No mention of chesskids anywhere there.

I can understand how a person can think that this would be an official acf event. No mention of chesskids there at all.

Next time we must ensure Jenni attaches the letterhead on the document itself. :wall:

Rincewind
05-12-2005, 07:40 PM
I think there were plenty of positives to come out of the event.

Congratuations to Curtin, Scotch and Melbourne High for good results.

Also it would have provided a good warm up event for Midlands Christian and Melbourne High as well as the girl(s) in the Curtin team who will be contesting the real nationals this weekend.

From what I understand the event was well run, enjoyable and from the point of view of an organiser, David should be congratulated.

However, I believe calling the thing the Chess Kids INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPS – NATIONAL FINALS is clearly misleading. Despite the bold claims of the organisor the event clearly was not a meeting of the strongest teams from all states. In fact the only team which could clearly make that claim was Melbourne High and while fielding a strong team and winning easily, it does not appear they faced the strong competition of the likes of Radford, Knox Grammar, Somerset and St Peters which they will this weekend. So while I wish Melbourne High all the best, on paper they look to be an outside shot of winning both.

----

However, this is only the first year and I'm sure the news of the positives will spread faster than the negatives...

Still, stay positive and roll on the "real" Australian Schools Teams Championships for 2005. :)

Mischa
05-12-2005, 09:09 PM
YOu are WRONG
the T shirts say National schools finals

jenni
05-12-2005, 09:13 PM
YOu are WRONG
the T shirts say National schools finals

Only going by what Libby said - I must have misunderstood her. I will ask for clarification.....

jenni
05-12-2005, 09:20 PM
I think there were plenty of positives to come out of the event.

Congratuations to Curtin, Scotch and Melbourne High for good results.

Also it would have provided a good warm up event for Midlands Christian and Melbourne High as well as the girl(s) in the Curtin team who will be contesting the real nationals this weekend.

I think both Melbourne and Midland Christian were very sensible using it for a warm-up. I have to admit I thought about it, but just too lazy.....




. So while I wish Melbourne High all the best, on paper they look to be an outside shot of winning both.



I would probably put them as the weakest of the teams, playing next weekend. WA, who have struggled in the past and usually taken the wooden spoon, seem on paper to have put together quite a strong team. While I don't see them winning either (my favourites are St Peter's), I think they are going to be quite competitive.

----



However, this is only the first year and I'm sure the news of the positives will spread faster than the negatives...

Still, stay positive and roll on the "real" Australian Schools Teams Championships for 2005. :)

Hmm - I have to admit I am in total agreement with your sentiments.

jenni
06-12-2005, 08:13 AM
YOu are WRONG
the T shirts say National schools finals

From Libby

"On the front of the shirt we have the ChessKids logo on the right breast.

On the left breast - appearing exactly as I type it below (other than the font - but I bolded what is bolded etc) is -

CHESS KIDS
National Interschool Championships
December 3 & 4, 2005
Melbourne

On the back is a cartoon (lifted off the web as I have used it before in my newsletters) under which is printed

www.chesskids.com.au

By my calculation - the word Chess Kids appearing 3 times on one shirt.

Kayleigh's trophy - exact text again but font is wrong (Chess Kids also appearing in "larger" engraving than the other details) is -

Chess Kids
National Interschool Championships 2005
Primary School Champion
"

So I suppose Mischa and I are both right. My intent was that ChessGuru was including the word chesskids as requested. However Mischa was correct I said "in front" and it is "on top", so my statement was not totally correct.

jenni
06-12-2005, 08:21 AM
Happy faces

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 08:32 AM
So I suppose Mischa and I are both right. My intent was that ChessGuru was including the word chesskids as requested. However Mischa was correct I said "in front" and it is "on top", so my statement was not totally correct.

In fact an arguement could be made that using the different font, size and weight actually is more misleading. Of course my opinion is that it is the word "National" that causes the problem.

BFG
06-12-2005, 09:06 AM
YOu are WRONG
the T shirts say National schools finalsStop being so petty, Mischa. As you can see Chess Kids is more prominent than the name of the tournament.

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 09:26 AM
Stop being so petty, Mischa. As you can see Chess Kids is more prominent than the name of the tournament.

You seem to be missing the point. The way it has been rendered makes it look like the sponsor is "Chess Kids" and the tournament is "National Interschool Championships". Therefore Mischa's point is not petty but important and highly relevant.

The tournament name was deliberately chosen to mislead and advertising and promotion continued in the same vein.

As per my previous post. There were some positives to come out of the event but a "National Interschool Championships" it was not.

jenni
06-12-2005, 09:41 AM
As per my previous post. There were some positives to come out of the event but a "National Interschool Championships" it was not.

But many of the schools who were there (including the Queensland school) thought it was.

The correct way to tackle this, is not to take the high ground and decide at a meeting not to support it, but to communicate with one's schools, inform them what it is and what it is not...

Getting into petty arguements over T-shirts and names is silly. Communication with one's target audience is not.

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 09:52 AM
But many of the schools who were there (including the Queensland school) thought it was.

Correction: at least one accompanying parent from one Queensland school thought it was.


The correct way to tackle this, is not to take the high ground and decide at a meeting not to support it, but to communicate with one's schools, inform them what it is and what it is not...

We can argue until the cows come home about what was the correct way to handle the situation but you still seem to think there is a dichotomy of possibilities. I see no problem with havnig a meeting and deciding that participation in the event be actively discouraged until the organiser renames and markets the event in a more ACF friendly way. Actively discourage would include communication to one's schools.


Getting into petty arguements over T-shirts and names is silly. Communication with one's target audience is not.

Again the false dichotomy. As I pointed out already the t-shirts are misleading because "Chess Kids" is on a different line and in a different typeface.

As for the pettiness of the discussion, I believe you were the first to bring up the subject of t-shirts (#131). :hand:

jenni
06-12-2005, 10:23 AM
Correction: at least one accompanying parent from one Queensland school thought it was.


Can't argue with you - I wasn't there. However Libby said (gosh I getting sick of saying that :) ), that there was widespread mis-understanding by many of the parents as to what the competition was and that the Curtin parents ended up biting their tongues, becasue they didn't want to be seen to be constantly correcting people



Actively discourage would include communication to one's schools.


Yes I would agree. I think it would be sad to destroy a good competition, however if a state body decided to do that AND communicated their decision and reasons to their schools, I would regard that as active communication.







As for the pettiness of the discussion, I believe you were the first to bring up the subject of t-shirts (#131). :hand:

Not really I think this discussion was kicked off by Rowena in posts 122 and 134.

Anyone I am out of this - I am sick of the Rowena/Barry show on this issue. :cool:

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 10:36 AM
Can't argue with you - I wasn't there. However Libby said (gosh I getting sick of saying that :) ), that there was widespread mis-understanding by many of the parents as to what the competition was and that the Curtin parents ended up biting their tongues, becasue they didn't want to be seen to be constantly correcting people

Neither can I. I was just saying what was supported by the evidence you revealed to date. "Widespread misunderstanding" may have existed but I had no reason to suspect that until you mentioning it just now.


Yes I would agree. I think it would be sad to destroy a good competition, however if a state body decided to do that AND communicated their decision and reasons to their schools, I would regard that as active communication.

On this we agree then. :cool:


Not really I think this discussion was kicked off by Rowena in posts 122 and 134.

I think you'll find that post #122 makes no mention of t-shirts and #134 postdates your post #131.

In fact, post #122 just brought up the question of the naming of the event. I don't believe this is a petty point and is really the crux of the debate.


Anyone I am out of this - I am sick of the Rowena/Barry show on this issue. :cool:

There are more graceful ways to exit a discussion. Perhaps it is a geographical thing.

Garvinator
06-12-2005, 10:51 AM
Can't argue with you - I wasn't there. However Libby said (gosh I getting sick of saying that :) ), that there was widespread mis-understanding by many of the parents as to what the competition was and that the Curtin parents ended up biting their tongues, becasue they didn't want to be seen to be constantly correcting people
and this is the main point. Except for the school that was 'in the loop' regarding what the exact status of the chesskids event, because it was called chesskids national finals, most of the people believed it was an official event. Having it qualify for a tournament called the Oceania Schools Tournament makes it even worse.

I am willing to bet that David didnt make any formal announcements stating exactly that his event is not an official acf event in any way shape or form.

Who were the qld school?

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 10:54 AM
Who were the qld school?

Well it would have had to have been Faith Lutheran or Kirwan. If the misunderstanding was widespread, maybe both?

BFG
06-12-2005, 11:01 AM
Well it would have had to have been Faith Lutheran or Kirwan. If the misunderstanding was widespread, maybe both?

Rather than indulging in speculation, or making pronouncements here, maybe it would be better to make your enquiries to those who attended or to David himself.

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 11:07 AM
Rather than indulging in speculation, or making pronouncements here, maybe it would be better to make your enquiries to those who attended or to David himself.

Well I was going off the results. They were the only Queensland schools that competed. I only replied to Garvin because it seemed likely (given the last sentence of her last post here) that Jenni would not.

BFG
06-12-2005, 11:15 AM
Well I was going off the results. They were the only Queensland schools that competed. I only replied to Garvin because it seemed likely (given the last sentence of her last post here) that Jenni would not.

Whether or not Jenni replied, the results are on public view here - courtesy of Jenni (via Libby). Garvin seems almost capable of the same level of investigation himself.

The best course of action appears to be to allow this thread to die a natural death rather than prolong it with unneccesary posts.

At least until the sky falls as predicted ...

Rincewind
06-12-2005, 11:37 AM
Whether or not Jenni replied, the results are on public view here - courtesy of Jenni (via Libby). Garvin seems almost capable of the same level of investigation himself.

The best course of action appears to be to allow this thread to die a natural death rather than prolong it with unneccesary posts.

At least until the sky falls as predicted ...

Maybe the best course of action for you. Of course, milage varies.

ChessGuru
08-12-2005, 01:12 PM
Not surprised that CAQ didn't promote the event.

U know that all schools events in Qld are run by GardinerChess? He pays $1000 per year for the rights....funny how that is an OK arrangement in Qld, but not in other states.

Why would an assoc. with such a close affilliation to a rival business promote anything other than GardinerChess activities?

Anyway - event was a huge success. Any schools who didn't play missed out big time. Any state/individual who discouraged or even failed to promote the event was doing a dis-service to the schools, the kids and to chess.

Funny way to promote chess to say "I am promoting chess, but don't play in this chess tournament. Better to not play at all."

At least we are getting closer to everyone being happy with the name of the event...now it is just my choice of FONT which is pissing ppl off! :hmm:

Rincewind
08-12-2005, 01:23 PM
At least we are getting closer to everyone being happy with the name of the event...now it is just my choice of FONT which is pissing ppl off! :hmm:

No, I don't think we are getting closer.

No problem with the event as such, and kids playing chess is good. However marketing the thing as something which it is not creates the problems.

Alan Shore
08-12-2005, 02:15 PM
Not surprised that CAQ didn't promote the event.

U know that all schools events in Qld are run by GardinerChess? He pays $1000 per year for the rights....funny how that is an OK arrangement in Qld, but not in other states.

Why would an assoc. with such a close affilliation to a rival business promote anything other than GardinerChess activities?

It's unsurprising, as the CAQ Secretary is an employee of Gardiner Chess.

However, I don't think what you say is entirely accurate, I DOP'ed at a schools event this year that wasn't run by Gardiner Chess.

pax
08-12-2005, 02:27 PM
Anyway - event was a huge success. Any schools who didn't play missed out big time. Any state/individual who discouraged or even failed to promote the event was doing a dis-service to the schools, the kids and to chess.


Huge seems to be a bit of an overstatement to me.

It sounds to me like it was a reasonably successful event for a first year, but 32 teams across 3 divisions (with only 11 outside Vic and Tas) in an open event looks a fair way short of "huge".

Frank Walker
08-12-2005, 03:29 PM
hmmm.....
Why does everyone hate hime?
Isnt he the guy who organises all the kids chess tournaments?
Just a little reminder of what he DOES serve to the chess community.

Rincewind
08-12-2005, 03:58 PM
hmmm.....
Why does everyone hate hime?
Isnt he the guy who organises all the kids chess tournaments?
Just a little reminder of what he DOES serve to the chess community.

No one hates David (well I don't, anyway). What we do here is discuss things which are good and bad for chess. A lot of what David and Chess Kids does is good for chess. Kids play chess, get coached, compete, have fun. This is all good.

For the bad stuff you can read the previous posts in this and other threads.

BFG
08-12-2005, 05:25 PM
Tripped over this on the WCBC thread (from Susan Polgar's blog). I thought it had some resonance given the earlier discuission of the use of terms such as "national" -


The annual Susan Polgar National Invitational for Girls, the annual Susan Polgar National Open Championship for Girls and the annual Susan Polgar World Open Championship for Girls.

ursogr8
08-12-2005, 06:40 PM
Tripped over this on the WCBC thread (from Susan Polgar's blog). I thought it had some resonance given the earlier discuission of the use of terms such as "national" -

So many emoticons to choose from, to complement BFG's post.
I think I will leave it up to ADMIN.

Rincewind
08-12-2005, 07:00 PM
So many emoticons to choose from, to complement BFG's post.
I think I will leave it up to ADMIN.

I'm having trouble seeing the point. Perhaps you or BFG could explain the relevance to me.

pax
08-12-2005, 08:17 PM
Tripped over this on the WCBC thread (from Susan Polgar's blog). I thought it had some resonance given the earlier discuission of the use of terms such as "national" -

I'm pretty sure that:
a) These events are endorsed by the USCF
b) Susan Polgar doesn't make money out of them

BFG
08-12-2005, 09:29 PM
I'm pretty sure that:
a) These events are endorsed by the USCF

This may well be the case but the relationship to the USCF is not explicit on the entry form (although that can be loaded from the USCF site)

http://www.uschess.org/tla/susanpolgarnationalopenforgirlsjan27-29-2006.pdf

and, although endorsed, it seems to have a rival

http://www.uschess.org/news/press/KCF2006girlschampionship.pdf

It must be very confusing to identify what is the "national" championship by any measure used here? The formats differ slightly but the "title" remains ambiguous surely?

And wouldn't the "world" title need to fall under the FIDE banner?

(Here will admit that I couldn't determine this from the website http://susanpolgar.com/polgarchess/spworldopengirls.pdf other than to find it seems to be linked to the Las Vegas International Chess Festival.)


b) Susan Polgar doesn't make money out of them

And if she did?

ChessGuru
09-12-2005, 08:45 AM
CAQ Council Minutes - September 2004

ITEM 5 – GENERAL BUSINESS

5.1 Licensing of Interschool Events

Council considered the following proposal from Gardiner Chess:-

“Gardiner Chess wishes to tender for the right to sponsor and conduct the current series of regional interschool tournaments culminating in the state interschool finals (the winners of which qualify for the national schools championships) for 2005 and beyond, and to expand the series as circumstances permit.

The series currently comprises the Greater Brisbane, Wide/Bay Burnett, Central Queensland South, Central Queensland North, North Queensland and Far North Queensland championships, each consisting of primary and secondary school team events in open and reserve divisions. Similar regional events are conducted independently by the Gold Coast, Toowoomba and Suncoast chess clubs under CAQ auspices.

A separate state qualifying event for girls has been organised by Russell Mowles in recent years as a one-day tournament for primary and secondary teams, with the winners progressing to the national schools girls championships. Russell has indicated that he will be unable to continue in future.

If the bid is successful, Gardiner Chess undertakes to:

a. pay to CAQ an amount of $1000 per year for the naming-rights sponsorship (e.g. Gardiner Chess Greater Brisbane Interschool Championships – under the auspices of the Chess Association of Queensland)
b. conduct each event in the series to a standard not less than that now achieved (it should be noted that the series was established by Ian Murray, who currently organises each event – he will be employed by Gardiner Chess to continue doing so)
c. conduct the girls events either in the established format or expanded to include a qualification mechanism for girls teams in the regional events
d. increase the number of school events each year in Brisbane, and in other regions according to demand
e. introduce interschool events in South-West Queensland (Roma) and North-West Queensland (Mt Isa) if considered viable following a feasibility study
f. conduct interschool qualifying events at the Gold Coast, Toowoomba and/or the Sunshine Coast should any organising club choose to discontinue its interschool events
g. meet all costs involved in conducting the series
h. submit results for rating and pay applicable CAQ administration fees and ACF administration fees and national schools levies.”

After discussion, it was moved by I.Murray, seconded G.Young, that Gardiner Chess be licensed by CAQ to conduct the events as described under the proposed terms for the five-year period commencing 1 January 2005, subject to satisfactory performance and an annual report of progress made. Defeated 1-2, with two abstentions.
G.Young moved, seconded H.Duggan, that Gardiner Chess be licensed by CAQ to conduct the events as described under the proposed terms for the three-year period commencing 1 January 2005, subject to satisfactory performance and an annual report of progress made. Carried 3-0 with two abstentions.

ChessGuru
09-12-2005, 08:50 AM
Belthasar - perhaps you are wrong....the event you DOPed at may have been a CAQ event, but according to the minutes of the CAQ meeting all events (until 2008) are now owned and run by GardinerChess - presumably they are making a profit?

Pax: I didn't make money from my event - it cost me around $14,000.... I presume that Polgar makes money SOMEWHERE in her life....so what is the difference?

What about the latest ACF Bulletin - a chess business called CHESS AUSTRALIA? Isn't that a bit misleading when put next to CHESS VICTORIA? Or what about AUSTRALIAN CHESS FEDERATION and other National sports associations, like TENNIS AUSTRALIA etc....

Marketing is just marketing....you will have to live with it or go after everyone equally.

BFG
09-12-2005, 09:32 AM
and this is the main point. Except for the school that was 'in the loop' regarding what the exact status of the chesskids event, because it was called chesskids national finals, most of the people believed it was an official event.

On rereading this comment I wonder which strategy gg regards as most effective in the aftermath of the event? The ACTJCL and personal strategy adopted by Libby - and much maligned. Or the ignore it and it will go away version?


I am willing to bet that David didnt make any formal announcements stating exactly that his event is not an official acf event in any way shape or form.

Having attended myself, I am at a bit of a loss as to where this statement would have fitted into the opening or presentation ceremonies. Nor would it have been necessary had other schools enjoyed the level of communication and understanding afforded to the parents linked to our team.

Alan Shore
09-12-2005, 11:47 AM
Th event I DOP'ed was the A grade of the '2005 GREATER BRISBANE INTERSCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIPs ROUND 2'. According to the minutes, it seems you're correct. However, there was no mention of Gardiner Chess running the event to anyone that I recall, although flyers for Gardiner Chess tournaments were distributed at the event.

I suppose that could be the pivotal difference though, that it was done with the approval of a State association, thus no conflicting events were being run.

firegoat7
09-12-2005, 02:50 PM
U know that all schools events in Qld are run by GardinerChess? He pays $1000 per year for the rights....funny how that is an OK arrangement in Qld, but not in other states.

Hilarious, not..... :doh:




Why would an assoc. with such a close affilliation to a rival business promote anything other than GardinerChess activities?


Ha ha...Chessguru the concerned democrat. You make me laugh with your see through rhetoric :clap: :clap: :clap: .



Anyway - event was a huge success. Any schools who didn't play missed out big time. Any state/individual who discouraged or even failed to promote the event was doing a dis-service to the schools, the kids and to chess.

Total nonsense...Hard to justify empirically. In comparison to your 'state' final , one school teacher was heard to comment "It didn't seem to be as big as the state finals...in fact, in some aspects, it was rather disappointing in comparison."

I am willing to bet that chess, kids and schools will survive without the promotion of your events :hmm: Furthermore, I don't think anybody is morally accountable to your fanciful moral claims. Still you are the last person I would ever expect to stand on moral grounds, especially if we consider your personal history of a 'lack of them'. Oh Guru, you r such a clownboots :banana: :evilb: :banana: :evilb:

cheers Fg7

firegoat7
09-12-2005, 02:58 PM
hmmm.....
Why does everyone hate hime?
Isnt he the guy who organises all the kids chess tournaments?
Just a little reminder of what he DOES serve to the chess community.

Maybe 'everyone ' knows his life history. Maybe people in 'chess circles' are more aware of his 'chess history' then people in outside society.
Maybe Chessguru is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Maybe you are a victim of Chessguru's rhetoric. Maybe we could define what the word 'chess community' means to you. Maybe you could clarify how he serves the 'chess community. Maybe he doesn't organise all the kids chess tournaments. Maybe that is the real problem.

Maybe,maybe,maybe or then again maybe not.

cheers Fg7

WhiteElephant
09-12-2005, 04:09 PM
What about the latest ACF Bulletin - a chess business called CHESS AUSTRALIA? Isn't that a bit misleading when put next to CHESS VICTORIA? Or what about AUSTRALIAN CHESS FEDERATION and other National sports associations, like TENNIS AUSTRALIA etc....


As far as I am aware, Chess Australia hasn't made any misleading marketing claims. What is your motivation for saying this, David, you aren't worried about a little healthy competition are you?

ChessGuru
09-12-2005, 09:33 PM
As far as I am aware, Chess Australia hasn't made any misleading marketing claims. What is your motivation for saying this, David, you aren't worried about a little healthy competition are you?

Worried - I think not. I invented the concept of healthy competition! It is like asking Microsoft if they are worried that someone has started selling a new operating system!

I am simply pointing out the opportunities for marketing 'fluff', as people like to put it. Similarly to other pointing out the Polgar events...and I am sure there is plenty more out there. I don't expect anything to change, I really shouldn't expect logic, but I nonetheless can't help myself from pointing out certain logical flaws in others arguments. But my problem is that I am starting from a flawed basis - I assume chessplayers are logical.

PHAT
09-12-2005, 10:51 PM
And wouldn't the "world" title need to fall under the FIDE banner?

ADmittedly i Am under teh waather and I havbe just starte dto read this thred but this quote] seems to be a bitr of a joke ... I think ...................

PHAT
09-12-2005, 10:54 PM
If the bid is successful, Gardiner Chess undertakes to:

a. pay to CAQ an amount of $1000 per year for the naming-rights sponsorship (e.g. Gardiner Chess Greater Brisbane Interschool Championships – under the auspices of the Chess Association of Queensland)
b. conduct each event in the series to a standard not less than that now achieved (it should be noted that the series was established by Ian Murray, who currently organises each event – he will be employed by Gardiner Chess to continue doing so)
c. conduct the girls events either in the established format or expanded to include a qualification mechanism for girls teams in the regional events
d. increase the number of school events each year in Brisbane, and in other regions according to demand
e. introduce interschool events in South-West Queensland (Roma) and North-West Queensland (Mt Isa) if considered viable following a feasibility study
f. conduct interschool qualifying events at the Gold Coast, Toowoomba and/or the Sunshine Coast should any organising club choose to discontinue its interschool events
g. meet all costs involved in conducting the series
h. submit results for rating and pay applicable CAQ administration fees and ACF administration fees and national schools levies.”

FMD and wow too!!!!!! sounds like the commertial end has the voluteeer end up agains teh wall pants around the ankels.

PHAT
09-12-2005, 11:15 PM
Maybe Chessguru is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Narrrrrrr> just another player mate . I reckon you should al get together down theer in VIC and workit out IN THE SAME WAY A S WE CANNOT GETT IT TOGETER IN NSW.

PHAT
10-12-2005, 02:46 PM
I think the exchange started off polite, but did disintegrate....

Say it ain't so. ;) Is RG-H realy not gentleman he pretends to be in public? What will people say next :snooty: :lol:

Frank Walker
11-12-2005, 09:53 AM
btw, who won?

Basil
02-10-2007, 09:14 PM
... but according to the minutes of the CAQ meeting all events (until 2008) are now owned and run by GardinerChess
That's not what the minutes say at all. "Owned?" Huh? Where? When?

What a streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch?

You don't normally stretch the truth, do you? :silenced:

Basil
02-10-2007, 09:24 PM
U know that all schools events in Qld are run by GardinerChess? He pays $1000 per year for the rights....
Only for 3 years - no automatic option - full re-tender required and call for other tenders for same - as in once all the hard infrastructure work (and expense) had been done.


Funny how that is an OK arrangement in Qld, but not in other states.
Not funny at all. We had numerous ppl wanting to run 'schools' in the southern region. However we packaged the southern region with the Far North Queensland region (Sydney is closer :eek:) so that the CAQ could represent the entire state.

Wish I were on this BB at the time ... eeeer 'slow the flow', if you get my drift.