PDA

View Full Version : Victorian Primary and Secondary School Teams Championships



klyall
12-09-2005, 07:48 PM
Congratulations to Essex Heights Primary School 'A' Team who today won the Victorian Primary School Teams Championships (Open).

The 'A' Team comprised James Morris, Eugene Schon, Udit Thakur and Jerome Lugo.

Final results -

First - Essex Heights 'A' - 27 points
Second - Essex Heights 'B' - 17.5 (on countback)
Third - Greythorne - 17.5

PLC won the Primary Girls Teams championships.

I understand that over the weekend Melbourne High School won the Secondary School Teams Championships. Second was Scotch and third Brighton Grammar.

Congratulations to all players.

Thank you to Chess Victoria - the organisers of the competition.

jenni
12-09-2005, 07:54 PM
Congratulations to your team and the other winners.

This is the webpage for the ASTC - NSWJCL are to be congratulated on all the information - should be a great weekend.

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

firegoat7
15-09-2005, 01:25 PM
Hello ChessVictoria,

How about some crosstables or information

cheers Fg7

jenni
15-09-2005, 03:43 PM
No cross tables, or proper standings, but at least the final finishing positions of all the teams have been listed since Monday evening, as well as team members. Gives you 90% of what you want (although I must admit cross tables are always fun to look at!)

Bereaved
15-09-2005, 04:15 PM
Hello everyone,

Not exactly the main topic, but very close is the following report from this weeks ACF bulletin.


From ACF bulletin 14/09/05

Schools confusion: The ACF has written to Australian schools to avoid potential confusion between two events to be held in December this year - the ACF's Australian Schools Teams Championships and another event called "National Open Schools Finals - 2005 Championship Event" which is being run by Chess Kids, a private business. The ACF's letter reads as follows:

Attn: The Principal/Chess Coordinator

National Interschool Chess

It has come to our attention that Chess Kids, a commercial venture operating from Melbourne, is promoting to Australian schools an event it calls National Open Schools Finals - 2005 Championship Event to be held in Melbourne on 3-4 December 2005.

We are concerned that this tournament may be confused with the Australian Schools Teams Championships, an event instituted by the Australian Chess Federation Inc in 1998 and conducted annually since then, this year in Sydney on 10-11 December.

The Australian Schools Teams Championships are the only national interschool title events recognised by the Australian Chess Federation, the peak body controlling chess in Australia. Entry to the championships is by qualification, not invitation - they are contested by the qualifying teams, primary and secondary, open and girls, from the school championships conducted by the affiliated Chess Associations of each state and territory.

If you would like further information on the Australian Schools Teams Championships and the state qualification process, please feel free to contact me, or the Chess Association of your state. Their web sites can be accessed via the links available at http://www.auschess.org.au/acflinks.htm

Yours sincerely

Jey Hoole
Secretary
Australian Chess Federation Inc
www.auschess.org.au

What a naughty little Guru!! :naughty: :naughty: :liar:

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

jenni
15-09-2005, 04:29 PM
I don't know why people have a problem with this. Of course Guru is puffing as always and the ACF are taking the correct action to dispel any confusion for those states who do not have a close relationship with their schools.

However as far as I can see the more chess the better. The ASTC has been going long enough that there is no need to see this comp as a rival. Given the fierce competition to be the rep team at the ASTC it is hard to see a qualifying team deciding to not bother going and going to DC's instead.

I personally view it as a mistake to have them so close together and thus force a choice, a bit more distance could have seen teams being prepared to go to both.

Spiny Norman
15-09-2005, 05:09 PM
I don't know why people have a problem with this.
I agree. There's absolutely nothing wrong with people conducting competitions and encouraging people to participate. As long as 'the guru' doesn't call the tourney the same as the ACF one, and doesn't claim to be the same as the ACF one, where's the issue?

Its also quite appropriate for the ACF also to help ensure that there's no confusion. However I've just snuck a quick look at the ACF website and noted:

1. the 'upcoming tournaments' page covers May, June and July 2005 (about 4-5 months out of date); and

2. there seems to be no easily identifiable 'sanctioned tournaments' page where people can check whether any tourney (guru-organised, or otherwise) has been organised/sanctioned as an official title of the ACF

Perhaps these two items might be taken on board by someone at the ACF?

Bereaved
15-09-2005, 05:53 PM
Hello everyone,

I have no problems with Junior events being run either; I just don't feel that the clarity of the distinction between those events that lead towards the National Schools teams event and other events is made clear enough.

Surely the fact that the ACF has felt the need to send out a blanket circular to schools to ensure that the confusion is avoided begs the question of did the Guru not do so himself??

Surely within the responsibilities of an organiser should be not to mislead his market audience? To be sure that he had verified all facts as being correct? To above and beyond all else to be sure people knew what they were getting?

Running Junior events = great!!; Running any event where there is possible heartache after the truth is ascertained = bad

Provided it is clear that the Guru has not misled the participants in these events fine, elsewise :hmm: :hmm:

Perhaps someone can show us a flier for the events in question or refer us to where they can be seen?

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

jenni
15-09-2005, 06:01 PM
Chess Kids

National Open Schools Finals
2005 Championship Event


More than 26,000 Primary and Secondary School Students from 1583 schools around Australia participated in a State Interschool or Zone Competition in 2005.

Only 20 teams (0.5% of all players) from around Australia are eligible to qualify and play in these prestigious National Finals.

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.

www.chesskids.com.au

Denis_Jessop
16-09-2005, 10:32 AM
Jenni beware!!

"Therfore bihoveth hire a ful long spoon
That shal ete with a feend"

Chaucer

DJ

jenni
16-09-2005, 01:35 PM
Jenni beware!!

"Therfore bihoveth hire a ful long spoon
That shal ete with a feend"

Chaucer

DJ

Yeah yeah I know - however better the devil you know or something... :lol:

Bill Gletsos
16-09-2005, 04:46 PM
One wonders how the Guru can guarantee all players will get a National Chess rating from this event.
Perhaps he is not referring to the ACF rating system, but a Guru run National Schools Rating list in which case people/schools could be easily confused.
If it only contains the results from this event, its usability must surely be questionable.

Also what are these so called Oceania Shools Championship.
Is this an Oceania Zone endorsed event.
If so who endorsed it, if not will using such a name give a false impression that is a FIDE Oceania zone endorsed event.

Frank Walker
16-09-2005, 08:23 PM
I went to a recent interschool Primary Competition and he had given 10 points for every game the kids had won, which is ridiculous so the kids were shocket to see thier ratings around 60.

klyall
17-09-2005, 12:14 AM
One wonders how the Guru can guarantee all players will get a National Chess rating from this event.
Perhaps he is not referring to the ACF rating system, but a Guru run National Schools Rating list in which case people/schools could be easily confused.
If it only contains the results from this event, its usability must surely be questionable.

Also what are these so called Oceania Shools Championship.
Is this an Oceania Zone endorsed event.
If so who endorsed it, if not will using such a name give a false impression that is a FIDE Oceania zone endorsed event.

I recently spoke with David Cordover and I asked him what the Oceania Schools Championships were.

He advised that he is running the Oceania Schools Championships in Melbourne at the same time as the Australian Juniors are being held in Brisbane.

This will make it impossible to be at both events at the same time.

Mischa
17-09-2005, 12:18 AM
you been sleeping with the enemy again Kerry?

Mischa
17-09-2005, 12:18 AM
gotta stop that honey

Garvinator
17-09-2005, 12:24 AM
I recently spoke with David Cordover and I asked him what the Oceania Schools Championships were.

He advised that he is running the Oceania Schools Championships in Melbourne at the same time as the Australian Juniors are being held in Brisbane.

This will make it impossible to be at both events at the same time.
so he is running it in direct conflict with the australian championship and australian juniors, is that right?

Mischa
17-09-2005, 12:25 AM
Isn't that what she said?

Garvinator
17-09-2005, 12:41 AM
Isn't that what she said?
i thought you would have noticed by now that i usually just like to try and clarify matters before having a big rant. ;)

Bereaved
17-09-2005, 01:06 AM
Why wait, GG?

I never seem to apparently?

I am staggered that the blithe posting of this flier is not questioned more rigorously. For me the statistic about the number of schools that participated in an interschool event and the numbers of children specified makes me wonder if these are all children within Guru based events or Children playing interschool chess in general?

And as far as running an event in direct competition to the Australian junior :hmmm:

Questions, questions, too many questions?

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Garvinator
17-09-2005, 01:19 AM
Why wait, GG?

I never seem to apparently?

because by the time I have got my clarification, others have already started ranting and then I dont have too ;)

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 01:25 AM
Why wait, GG?

I never seem to apparently?

I am staggered that the blithe posting of this flier is not questioned more rigorously. For me the statistic about the number of schools that participated in an interschool event and the numbers of children specified makes me wonder if these are all children within Guru based events or Children playing interschool chess in general?I suspect it is from interschool in general.

And as far as running an event in direct competition to the Australian junior :hmmm:And this is the same dude who wants the ACF to give him $5000 for the NT.

Bereaved
17-09-2005, 01:25 AM
"And as I swung my foot backwards with full force, it occured to me that I was about to kick my own arse..."

Funny GG, Funny!! :lol: :lol:

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Just saw your reply Bill, those are good points too. unfortunately there are probably no good answers... :hmm: :wall:

four four two
17-09-2005, 01:27 AM
Oceania schools championship sounds very mickey mouse to me :hmm: ,are there any foreign countries competing? If there are not ,then its just an Australian schools championship by another name. Would the students competing in such an event expect this event to be run by a private company? :whistle:

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 01:29 AM
Perhaps Fiji, New Zealand and PNG will be sending schools. :whistle:

Bereaved
17-09-2005, 01:30 AM
Yes good point 442; which other countries are sending teams??

Perhaps someone knows?? Even those that have been asked overseas? (Does Tasmania count??!!)

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Bill you are far too quick!! But seriously, why not write more than a few lines and reply in the context of your own opinion rather than through someone elses post as a large quote, Yours again, M

four four two
17-09-2005, 01:40 AM
Just a side question here,is there an Ocenia junior championship? :hmm:

Garvinator
17-09-2005, 01:47 AM
Just a side question here,is there an Ocenia junior championship? :hmm:
officially or unofficially :whistle:

PHAT
17-09-2005, 01:48 AM
Also what are these so called Oceania Shools

Nature appaus a vacuum.

PHAT
17-09-2005, 01:52 AM
Perhaps Fiji, New Zealand and PNG will be sending schools. :whistle:

Slagging off the chess status of other countries now. :thumdown: (Don't even attempt to say you weren't :hand:)

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 02:02 AM
Slagging off the chess status of other countries now. :thumdown: (Don't even attempt to say you weren't :hand:)All you are demonstrating as usual is your ignorance.
They happen to be the other countries in the Oceania Zone along with Australia.
As such if the Guru is running an Oceania schools Championship then it is reasonable to assume the other schools would come from the other Countries in the Oceania Zone.

four four two
17-09-2005, 02:05 AM
Hey ,he left out the Solomons,Tonga ,Samoa etc . :P

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 02:08 AM
Hey ,he left out the Solomons,Tonga ,Samoa etc . :PAs far as I am aware none of them are members of FIDE. As such they are not part of the Oceania Zone.

four four two
17-09-2005, 02:11 AM
What is the "fee" to join FIDE?

antichrist
17-09-2005, 02:12 AM
In the Nationals I presume any junior can enter - in some sports it can only be selected state teams?

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 02:13 AM
What is the "fee" to join FIDE?No idea.

PHAT
17-09-2005, 02:17 AM
...then it is reasonable to assume the other schools would come from the other Countries in the Oceania Zone.

To use your style of logic, you should not assume anything until you check the facts

And you were still sagging off the chess status of other countries :thumdown:

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 02:18 AM
To use your style of logic, you should not assume anything until you check the factsI didnt which is I why in my original post I used the words perhaps.

And you were still sagging off the chess status of other countries :thumdown:No. The only one slagging off at them is you for falsely accusing me of doing it.

PHAT
17-09-2005, 02:22 AM
No idea.
Who cares if you have "no idea?" Why post this so vital information?

four four two
17-09-2005, 02:25 AM
Maybe Denis can tell us what Australias fee is later on today...

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 02:26 AM
Who cares if you have "no idea?" Why post this so vital information?You fool.
four four two was asking the question in response to my comment that the three countries he mentioned were not part of FIDE.
As such I was informing him that I didnt know the answer.

PHAT
17-09-2005, 02:39 AM
You fool.
four four two was asking the question in response to my comment that the three countries he mentioned were not part of FIDE.
As such I was informing him that I didnt know the answer.

Thanks for the abusive "fool" tag, Mr NSWCA President.

However, 442's Q was not addressed to you. You simpley thought that it would be informative to let the universe know that you have "no idea."

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 02:42 AM
Thanks for the abusive "fool" tag, Mr NSWCA President.Yes, well as usual you chose to falsely accuse me of slagging off above and in fact have contributed nothing to the topic.
As such you deserve to be shown up for what you are.

However, 442's Q was not addressed to you. You simpley thought that it would be informative to let the universe know that you have "no idea."Ha this is funny coming from someone who continually demonstrates he have no clue.

antichrist
17-09-2005, 02:49 AM
Well community leader just keep yourself occupied here and don't peer over in Good luck thread

PHAT
17-09-2005, 03:22 AM
As such you deserve to be shown up for what you are.

Which is, as you say, a "fool."

I am not sre that any prospective sponsor would like to know how you, the president of the NSWCA, personally attack NSWCA members.



Ha this is funny coming from someone who continually demonstrates he has no clue.

I would go up against you in a Mastermind and IQ test anytime and not expect there to be an s.d. unit of a difference either way. However, if you wish to delude yourself as to your superiority to me feel free to deride me as much as you like. Just remember, I "cut it out" long ago,

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 03:40 AM
Which is, as you say, a "fool."

I am not sre that any prospective sponsor would like to know how you, the president of the NSWCA, personally attack NSWCA members.You saw fit to make a false claim against me back in post #30. I chose to respond.
In fact given that you have personally insulted me on numerous occasions over the past few years and especially on your defunct bulletin board is the vilest of terms, my response above was rather mild.

I would go up against you in a Mastermind and IQ test anytime and not expect there to be an s.d. unit of a difference either way. However, if you wish to delude yourself as to your superiority to me feel free to deride me as much as you like. Just remember, I "cut it out" long ago,No, you havent cut it out at all as evidenced by post #30 in this thread when you falsely accused me of slagging off.

jenni
17-09-2005, 12:51 PM
Why wait, GG?

I never seem to apparently?

I am staggered that the blithe posting of this flier is not questioned more rigorously. For me the statistic about the number of schools that participated in an interschool event and the numbers of children specified makes me wonder if these are all children within Guru based events or Children playing interschool chess in general?

And as far as running an event in direct competition to the Australian junior :hmmm:

Questions, questions, too many questions?

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

I never thought (given my history of conflict with him last year :) ) that I would be the lone voice the doesn't (yet) dislike what he is doing. I guess I want to wait a bit and see what happens before I put the boot in.

Why is this disliked? If Richard G-H was proposing it, would it be treated with as much dislike? Well for a start I suspect Richard wouldn't propose something like this without first getting approval from the ACF and also talking about it to other Junior organisations! However the Guru does like to go his own way...

Reasons why we don't like this

. He does so many shonky things, that everything has to be distrusted on principle

. He can't resist making up grandiose titles to assist his marketing

. He is very successful at what he does, so if he is doing something shonky he will get away with it.

I think the third point is the real problem. He is very good at filling any vacuum that exists and in some states there are very large vacuums in junior areas, so he is effectively becoming the junior organisation in those states.

I would think ACT, Queensland and NSW have nothing to worry about with this new initiative. There is no way that any schools/juniors in the ACT would go to Guru's comps in preference to the ASTC or Aus Juniors. However with thousands of kids playing schools chess these days isn't it good to have a lower level competition for them to play?

The same applies to the Aus Juniors. The way it is structured many children and parents find it too long and too serious. They would like to have chess to play in the summer holidays, but not 2 weeks at a comp playing one game a day. Do we change the Aus Juniors to meet their needs, or do we create other comps which they can go to?

I would suspect no-one going to David's Oceania thingy is anyone who should have been at the Aus Juniors. Sure he brought a big group of Tasmanians to the Aus Juniors in Mt Buller, but really for most of them it just wasn't the sort of comp that they should have been playing in.

You could argue that the Major is being run in opposition to the Aus Juniors. Juniors who do not want to play 10 hours of chess a day, have to choose between the two. You could even argue that the Major is being run in opposition to the Aus Champs - on no you all cry - the people in the major aren't allowed to play the champs. You could also argue that the kids who are likely to go to the Oceania comp wouldn't get into the juniors if there were any qualifying rules.

Other examples are states that run competitions at Easter in opposition to Doeberl. I think the Doeberl people would like to see nothing run at the saem time as their comp, but realistically given the huge numbers at Doeberl in recent years it is hard to see the other comps have had any impact and it allows people to still play chess in other areas of Australia.

From my point of view we shouldn't be fighting over a certain number of people and trying to get them to go to the one competition, we should be doubling and tripling the number of people playing, so multiple comps get good attendences.

The real need in all this is to somehow establish enough of a working relationship with the Guru that we can be sure any talented players that are identified in his environment are moved into playing at adult comps and are encouraged to attend the Aus Juniors.

Then his environment adds to the bottom of the pyramid and helps create future adult players.

four four two
17-09-2005, 01:12 PM
I dont think people have a problem with DC organising tournaments in general,Ithink its more the fact that some of his tournament title names can give people a misleading impression that they are in fact the official ACF tournaments when they are not. As for the Oceania tournament, if he can clearly demonstrate that foreign players will be playing then I see no problem,but if he cant it would give those people playing in that tournament the false impression that the tournament was an ACF tournament organised in conjunction with FIDE,seeing as it has an international sounding name. :whistle:

jenni
17-09-2005, 01:21 PM
I dont think people have a problem with DC organising tournaments in general,Ithink its more the fact that some of his tournament title names can give people a misleading impression that they are in fact the official ACF tournaments when they are not. As for the Oceania tournament, if he can clearly demonstrate that foreign players will be playing then I see no problem,but if he cant it would give those people playing in that tournament the false impression that the tournament was an ACF tournament organised in conjunction with FIDE,seeing as it has an international sounding name. :whistle:

this is of course his major problem - he can't resist dressing everything up. I guess you attract more people if it sounds important. I really feel there is a niche for mass participation competitions and they can stand on their own feet, but maybe not.

Once again it comes down to communication - states with good links to their junior communities can quicky rectify any grandiose titles.

The ACT has sent out David's flyer to schools and advertised it in the weekly e-mail bulletin, along with a short note from Libby stating that it is a privately run competition and not to be confused with the ASTC.

firegoat7
17-09-2005, 01:28 PM
this is of course his major problem - he can't resist dressing everything up. I guess you attract more people if it sounds important. I really feel there is a niche for mass participation competitions and they can stand on their own feet, but maybe not.

Look this is true but its not the major problem. The major problem is that he cannot see these issues as being ethically important. Guru has a massive blind spot when it comes to Oz chess.

cheers Fg7

four four two
17-09-2005, 01:28 PM
Yes but misleading the public on the true nature of tournaments could be potentially damaging to the ACF,if he makes wild promises and doesnt deliver they will think the ACF is the one that has stuffed up. Not a good thing,dont you agree? :hmm:

Spiny Norman
18-09-2005, 08:19 AM
I dont think people have a problem with DC organising tournaments in general,Ithink its more the fact that some of his tournament title names can give people a misleading impression that they are in fact the official ACF tournaments when they are not.
Put yourself in the Guru's shoes for a minute. You are trying to make a living out of chess. You want the tournament to sound important so as to attract the most entries. I am interested to know what people think the tournaments should have been called.

antichrist
18-09-2005, 08:44 AM
Put yourself in the Guru's shoes for a minute. You are trying to make a living out of chess. You want the tournament to sound important so as to attract the most entries. I am interested to know what people think the tournaments should have been called.

It is deceptive to call Oceania so and so when by far the biggest and most important comp in Oceania is being held up the coast.

In comparison the "Sydney Easter Cup" is the original and currently only tourney in Sydney at Easter.

Mischa
18-09-2005, 11:01 AM
Jenni....your kids played interschool...did their teams win?
Was their achievement devalued because someone declared that they were running the schools event and even achieved media coverage for such!!
Not fair on the kids and schools who participated.
Our team won but no one believes this cos another team are being held up as state champions

WhiteElephant
18-09-2005, 11:26 AM
Our team won but no one believes this cos another team are being held up as state champions

Really? That sux. Do you mean another team which played in a CV event? Or another event? Which team?

jenni
18-09-2005, 11:46 AM
Jenni....your kids played interschool...did their teams win?
Was their achievement devalued because someone declared that they were running the schools event and even achieved media coverage for such!!
Not fair on the kids and schools who participated.
Our team won but no one believes this cos another team are being held up as state champions

Mischa I agree that is unfair. However isn't the problem a lack of media attention for the right team? As I said earlier the problem is that the Guru fills a vacuum that appears and is very good at what he does.

If the official tournament had been doing major media releases and pointing out they were the only Australian Chess federation endorsed competition and maybe even sticking the knife in and pointing out that the other competitions were private ones with grandiose titles (media always love a bit of controversy), would he have got the coverage and been able to convince everyone that his were state champsions?

Did anyone do a media realease for your comp? Did they phone up and try and get coverage. In 1997 when I started the Primary school comp in Canberra I found you had to do a lot of personal hassling in order to get media attention - I suspect that is what the Guru does and probably by now he has all the right contacts.

I agree I would have been exceptionally annoyed if what happened to you happened to my team. However I still believe the solution is to do it better, not to try and crush other chess activity.

If I were you (and I know you are quite a competent, pushy sort of person, which is an asset when dealing with the media), I would be approaching the media, and pointing out some of the facts and asking them to rectify the publicity they have given to a private competition, vs an ACF endorsed competition.

WhiteElephant
18-09-2005, 11:58 AM
But the Guru's state finals haven't happened yet. That's why I was asking which team it is that is being touted as state champions. Totally agree wiith you, Jenni, the media have so many competing interests wanting their attention, you need to be pushy and make lots of noise to be heard. CV don't do much of that as far as I am aware which makes it difficult to get publicity for the CV-run events.

four four two
18-09-2005, 01:28 PM
No one is trying to stop DC from organising tournaments,but if he consciously
fails to inform people that hes tournaments are private as opposed to official VCA tournaments,then that is totally unethical.In Victoria DC has a proven track record of misleading the public about the true details of his tournaments.

As for media coverage,are you aware G Wastell[VCA president] has a weekly newspaper column? :hmm:

WhiteElephant
18-09-2005, 01:32 PM
No one is trying to stop DC from organising tournaments,but if he consciously
fails to inform people that hes tournaments are private as opposed to official VCA tournaments,then that is totally unethical.In Victoria DC has a proven track record of misleading the public about the true details of his tournaments.

Completely agree.


As for media coverage,are you aware G Wastell[VCA president] has a weekly newspaper column? :hmm:

Yes, forgot about that, I don't read it very often. In that case Gary can and should clarify the distinction between VC-run and non-VC-run events in his column.

Rincewind
18-09-2005, 02:17 PM
Mischa I agree that is unfair. However isn't the problem a lack of media attention for the right team? As I said earlier the problem is that the Guru fills a vacuum that appears and is very good at what he does.

Seems the vacuum is one which CV is quite happy to leave alone and allow DC to fill. Just because DC is a better marketeer than CV and the ACF doesn't mean he should be allowed to do as he pleases and erode the prestige of the ACF endorsed state and national events. I would hope all state associations would be advising their schools to ignore the DC event and its 'oceania' successor and they will be seen as the mickey mouse money making ventures that they are. Not that I have anything aganist making money, just selling snake-oil to do it.

four four two
18-09-2005, 04:27 PM
Here here Rincewind,finally someone who understands the point ive been trying to make. :clap: :clap: :clap: ;)

jenni
18-09-2005, 04:44 PM
Seems the vacuum is one which CV is quite happy to leave alone and allow DC to fill. Just because DC is a better marketeer than CV and the ACF doesn't mean he should be allowed to do as he pleases and erode the prestige of the ACF endorsed state and national events. I would hope all state associations would be advising their schools to ignore the DC event and its 'oceania' successor and they will be seen as the mickey mouse money making ventures that they are. Not that I have anything aganist making money, just selling snake-oil to do it.

I still feel the problem is being tackled the wrong way round. You may be right and DC is totally irredeemable and shonky - he certainly seriously annoyed me last year at the ACF conference in Canberra with some of his tactics. :)

However he can only erode the prestige if he is allowed to erode the prestige - I really can't stand it when people sit on thier hands and do nothing!


I also think that national mass participation tournaments are something we need.

Prior to 1997 ANU ran the ACT High School and Primary school comps. They were pretty small, but filled an important niche. However we wanted to see 1000 kids or more playing not the couple of hundred that ANU had. There was enormous displeasure from the ANU people at us starting new comps - exacerbated by bad feeling between some of the people on "opposite" sides. It was outright warfare for the first year.

However after that both competitions have been successful. ANU to a certain extent is the prestige one that the "best" teams go to (it can only cope with 40 teams per event). The ACTJCL one has become the huge one leading to the ASTC and across the 4 divisions (girls PS and HS and Open PS and HS) around 1,500 children compete.

Its been a win win scenario - shouldn't we be negotiating to try and create a win win in this case (even if it does mean DC earns some money)?

Rincewind
18-09-2005, 05:06 PM
As I said it would appear the appropriate people to counter this initiative are sitting on their hands, or worse, sleeping with the enemy. From the marketting and scheduling of these events, it's clear that DC is not trying to complement, but rather set up a event in direct competition to the endorsed alternative. As such, rather than looking for a win-win, perhaps it is time for CV and the ACF to take stock and fight for its turf before they are irrevocably dispossessed. Now is the time for all good Victorians to come to the aid of their state schools competitions and the the other states can assist as I mentioned above. After all, if you let your neighour's house burn down, it doesn't make yours look any better.

jenni
18-09-2005, 05:17 PM
I remain unconvinced, but I suppose in these chess matters it is always a fight to the death...

four four two
18-09-2005, 05:21 PM
Too right, Rincewind. :clap: :clap: :clap:

PHAT
18-09-2005, 05:55 PM
Seems the vacuum is one which CV is quite happy to leave alone and allow DC to fill.

I was the first to suggest this (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=70028&postcount=29). Instead of putting the boot into DC, put the boot into the creators of the vacuum.


Just because DC is a better marketeer than CV and the ACF doesn't mean he should be allowed to do as he pleases and erode the prestige of the ACF endorsed state and national events.

What prestige does the VC event have if DC can roll it into the gutter like an inconsequential waste of time.


I would hope all state associations would be advising their schools to ignore the DC event and its 'oceania' successor

Narrr. They should be sticking the boot into CV for allowing it to happen.


Not that I have anything aganist making money, just selling snake-oil to do it.
In the absence of genuine medical care, the placebo effect is as good a treatment as you will get.

PHAT
18-09-2005, 06:04 PM
... perhaps it is time for ... the ACF to take stock and fight for its turf before they are irrevocably dispossessed.
Yeah, sure thing! :lol: It cannot even get the Mt Buller CDs in the mail or run an Olympiad fund raiser.Forget the ACF. It is a waste of time money and effort. It's time that ship be scuttled and all in her sent to Davy Jones' locker.

Mischa
18-09-2005, 10:17 PM
Um
confident and pushy???
you really don't know me well

Rincewind
18-09-2005, 10:20 PM
If I were you (and I know you are quite a competent, pushy sort of person, which is an asset when dealing with the media), I would be approaching the media, and pointing out some of the facts and asking them to rectify the publicity they have given to a private competition, vs an ACF endorsed competition.

But Mischa is not a CV commitariat, neither is she pushy or have the media contacts that DC has. Surely the job is for the CV Schools coordinator (vacant) and (possibly) publicity officer.

Spiny Norman
19-09-2005, 08:10 AM
Put yourself in the Guru's shoes for a minute. You are trying to make a living out of chess. You want the tournament to sound important so as to attract the most entries. I am interested to know what people think the tournaments should have been called.
Well the silence in response to this has been quite deafening. Most of you seem happy to point the finger and complain about the naming/positioning of the event(s), but what are the alternatives?

The ACF is in a position to defend its turf. They have a website. They interact with the states. I tend to agree with Jenni's comments ... "nature abhors a vacuum". The promotion of the ACF-sanctioned events, not just before each event but AFTERWARDS with a clearly visible honour roll on the official website, would go a long way towards eliminating any confusion and would also allow the Guru to run his business and continue to promote junior chess.

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 08:28 AM
Originally Posted by Frosty
Put yourself in the Guru's shoes for a minute. You are trying to make a living out of chess. You want the tournament to sound important so as to attract the most entries. I am interested to know what people think the tournaments should have been called.

Well the silence in response to this has been quite deafening. Most of you seem happy to point the finger and complain about the naming/positioning of the event(s), but what are the alternatives?

The ACF is in a position to defend its turf. They have a website. They interact with the states. I tend to agree with Jenni's comments ... "nature abhors a vacuum". The promotion of the ACF-sanctioned events, not just before each event but AFTERWARDS with a clearly visible honour roll on the official website, would go a long way towards eliminating any confusion and would also allow the Guru to run his business and continue to promote junior chess.
Frosty! Maaate!!
You probably were not on the bb when the whole marketing puff issue had a forensic.
You may not be getting a response because we are all 'puffed out', from the previous. ;)

starter

jenni
19-09-2005, 09:43 AM
But Mischa is not a CV commitariat, neither is she pushy or have the media contacts that DC has. Surely the job is for the CV Schools coordinator (vacant) and (possibly) publicity officer.

This is of course why Victoria makes no progress - people have to take on responsibility not wait for someone else to do it! The old - the govinmint orta to do sumthin syndrome.

In the ACT last year (year before?) the media only came to the high schools comp and there was a very nice photo in the paper. The winner of the primary school finals didn't get a mention. One Mum phoned up the paper and complained like crazy about unfair treatment and sure enough a few days later there was a very photogenic picture of the primary school kids.

While not denying that a well run organisation would be doing all this, if they are not then the affected people should do it themselves (or take over the organisation).

jenni
19-09-2005, 09:44 AM
Um
confident and pushy???
you really don't know me well

I admire pushy people - I am one myself. :)

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 10:05 AM
While not denying that a well run organisation would be doing all this, if they are not then the affected people should do it themselves (or take over the organisation).

Two issues, firstly there is an organisation with incumbants who need to held to account for the current state of play and the ACF and other state associations can assist with this. Meekly promoting the DC event as "good for chess" or ACF neutral does not (IMHO) help.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 10:06 AM
I admire pushy people - I am one myself. :)
However milage varies.

jenni
19-09-2005, 10:18 AM
However milage varies.
Huh? Are you being nasty about my age? :cry:

jenni
19-09-2005, 10:31 AM
Two issues, firstly there is an organisation with incumbants who need to held to account for the current state of play
.
Totally agree


and the ACF and other state associations can assist with this.
.

, but fail to see it is anything to do with the ACF or other states. At the end of the day voters get the government they deserve or something. Palace revolts have to start from within. Have a look at the USA's track record in interfering with the domestic affairs of other countries......

Victoria has to solve its own internal problems and the solution can only be implemented by Victorians in their own state. e.g. it only takes a few enthusiastic parents to run a primary schools comp. It takes no chess expertise to organise a zone and contact schools, any fool can run the draws with swiss perfect and I am sure with the abundance of talent Victoria has, someone can be found to provide chess expertise on the day.


Meekly promoting the DC event as "good for chess" or ACF neutral does not (IMHO) help.

It is good for chess - how can destroying another event - particularly one that will attract the non-elite kids, possibly be good for chess.

Look at South Africa - it gets 1000 kids to its nationals AND runs a mass participation junior teams event before it. Australia continues to allow every little personal hatred it can interfere to keep chess small.

If FG7 (my personal hatred) was to run an event I would be happy to promote it.

Any input from the states or the ACF should be to work with DC to make sure that his event does not cause problems for an ACF event - it should not be to kill it.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 10:42 AM
Jenni, were the Super League years good for Rugby League? Are the various organisations that exist good for Boxing? Was the Kasparov/Short PCA world championship good for chess?

The problem is the tournament is set up in competition to ACF endorsed events. Is touting as a national and zonal event for which it has no ACF (nor as I understand it FIDE) endorsement. So it will take kids away from the ACF endorsed events (as it is difficult to compete in both) and will reduce the validity of ACF product by putting up an alternative championship.

It is a problem which should be addressed by Chess Victoria, but it can also be assisted in this effort by the other states. Should not the sister associations come to the aid of Chess Victoria when needed?

jenni
19-09-2005, 11:05 AM
Jenni, were the Super League years good for Rugby League? Are the various organisations that exist good for Boxing?


No good talking sport to me - I have noidea.


Was the Kasparov/Short PCA world championship good for chess?


It depends on how things are done - see my ANU example. A head on clash is bad. Co-operation can create a synergy that takes everything forward.



The problem is the tournament is set up in competition to ACF endorsed events. Is touting as a national and zonal event for which it has no ACF (nor as I understand it FIDE) endorsement. So it will take kids away from the ACF endorsed events (as it is difficult to compete in both) and will reduce the validity of ACF product by putting up an alternative championship.


This I guess this is where I disagree. I know Mischa has extensive experience with the ASTC, but do you? There is NO WAY that any team is going to go to Cordover's comp in preference to the ASTC. It is of course up to the state organisation in each state to make sure that the schools are aware of the nature of both competitions. The ACT has already notified all schools in Canberra that one comp is the official Australian schools comp and that the other is a worthwhile but privately run competition.

I would 1000% support each state letting their schools know this information. I agree if a state sits on its hands and doesn't actively contact their schools there is the danger of confusion among schools who haven't been involved in the ASTC previously. However that is totally different to trying to kill the second comp altogether.

Look at junior soccer (see I do know something about sport). They have state teams and inter state tournaments. They also have the Kanga Cup, which is a huge international tournament with large numbers of Australian club teams and overseas teams. Does the Kanga Cup destroy the Nationals? No - it fills a gap where kids who can't make the state teams, can still compete in something that feels special.

It woul obviously be nicer if the second comp was also being run by the ACF, then we would all feel safer that DC doesn't have a long term motive of creating a competition that is more succesful.

They are just such different comps

- one is elite, extremely hard to get into
- the other is more an anyone goes and it is a chess festival and coaching camp

They occupy different niches and there can be a place for both.

Finally I am not sure what the ACF can do? Can it actually stop DC - I would doubt it. They could sue him and prove damage due to his comp taking away competitors from ours, but I am not sure they can stop him holding this comp or calling it whatever he likes.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 11:21 AM
This I guess this is where I disagree. I know Mischa has extensive experience with the ASTC, but do you? There is NO WAY that any team is going to go to Cordover's comp in preference to the ASTC. It is of course up to the state organisation in each state to make sure that the schools are aware of the nature of both competitions. The ACT has already notified all schools in Canberra that one comp is the official Australian schools comp and that the other is a worthwhile but privately run competition.

I think there is a huge risk that the second and third strongest Victorian teams will start to play in DC comp in preference to the ACF endorsed comp. This has the overall effect of weakening the official state and therefore also the national comp. This is (at the moment) just peculiar to Victoria where the main problem exist. I agree other states are not yet impacted in this way but they may once DC establishes a market share and starts running qualifying events in the other states.

four four two
19-09-2005, 11:39 AM
No one is against DC running tournaments per se,but if you are running junior tournaments at the same time as the VCA and are using official sounding names then you are clearly trying to lure people away from the VCA event. :hand:
If a private sponsor was to organise a tournament called the "Australian National Championship" in late december and have decent prize money then some of the people who were going to play in the official Australian Chess Championship would join that tournament for the chance to win prize money. This would have a devaluing affect on the official title,you would then have 2 people claiming to be the "australian" champion. Would this be good for Australian chess Jenni? :hmm: :whistle:

jenni
19-09-2005, 12:06 PM
I think there is a huge risk that the second and third strongest Victorian teams will start to play in DC comp in preference to the ACF endorsed comp. This has the overall effect of weakening the official state and therefore also the national comp. This is (at the moment) just peculiar to Victoria where the main problem exist. I agree other states are not yet impacted in this way but they may once DC establishes a market share and starts running qualifying events in the other states.
Not sure I understand - the ASTC only allows the strongest team in each division to compete - I think it would be great for the second and third strongest to compete in Dc's December comp and if I were him I would be holding it in the middle of the year and promoting it to the strongest schools as an open competition and an opportunity to get some coaching and experience and get ready for the state finals.

If you are talking about DC holding qualifying zones for the state comp - well this is where the whole thing falls down. Why on earth is he holding qualifying zones and why does Vic have the bizarre system where schools can choose what zones they compete in? In the ACT (and I suspect school sport generally interstate), zones are fixed to the school area. i.e if your school is in a geographical region then you compete in that zone - you can't zone hop or choose your zone, unless you have a sound reason (e.g a major clash with something else).

Only Victorians can fix this problem.

Ian Rout
19-09-2005, 12:15 PM
No one is against DC running tournaments per se,but if you are running junior tournaments at the same time as the VCA and are using official sounding names then you are clearly trying to lure people away from the VCA event. :hand:
If a private sponsor was to organise a tournament called the "Australian National Championship" in late december and have decent prize money then some of the people who were going to play in the official Australian Chess Championship would join that tournament for the chance to win prize money. This would have a devaluing affect on the official title,you would then have 2 people claiming to be the "australian" champion. Would this be good for Australian chess Jenni? :hmm: :whistle:
It must be extremely rare for a commercial enterprise to run an event and not put their name in the title - in any field, not just chess. Part of the benefit to the enterprise is the publicity of having their name prominently associated with the event. When it is an enterprise not normally known to be so shy I think it is worth asking what the motive might be, and I think in this case it's obvious.

jenni
19-09-2005, 12:24 PM
No one is against DC running tournaments per se,but if you are running junior tournaments at the same time as the VCA and are using official sounding names then you are clearly trying to lure people away from the VCA event. :hand:
If a private sponsor was to organise a tournament called the "Australian National Championship" in late december and have decent prize money then some of the people who were going to play in the official Australian Chess Championship would join that tournament for the chance to win prize money. This would have a devaluing affect on the official title,you would then have 2 people claiming to be the "australian" champion. Would this be good for Australian chess Jenni? :hmm: :whistle:
If I thought that DC's comp would harm the ASTC I would be fighting him tooth and nail - I don't believe it will because kids and parents go to the ASTC because of tradition, and prestige.

As long as the state organisations clearly define to the schools the difference between the two competitions there just isn't an issue.

The problem seems to be confined to Victoria (and perhaps Tasmania).

I understood Vic had "outsourced" some zones to DC - does he also run his own events at the same time as the official ones? If so you need a marketing effort to counter it.

If I were in Victoria I would be creating a group of adult chess players and parents who were prepared to put a bit of work in . Take back the schools comps and have all zones run by the group (except maybe country ones?). Then the only way to qualify for the ASTC would be via the official route. A parallel organisation might exist, but schools would know that they can't get to the ASTC via it. The second and third strongest teams never believe they are until after the finals, so they will want to compete and have a chance to go to the ASTC. If a strong school appears and only goes to the rival comp, then market directly to them. Prestige will always win! Start doing media releases and get media to the official events.

Maybe you are right and DC needs to be killed, because he will never co-operate with anyone, but I would be putting up a proper fight first. The best scenario would be to have multiple competitions filling different niches.

i.e. Dc's comps could be almost the second and third divisions - promoting chess activity (and making him money). The official comps become the top division comps for teams that have a serious chance of qualifying for the ASTC or want to test themselves in the harder divsion.

four four two
19-09-2005, 12:27 PM
There are currently at least 3 coaching companies in this country that could arrange 5000 dollars in sponsorship for an unofficial Australian championship,they dont have to have their name in the title of the tournament,just their company logo prominently displayed in all the advertising brochures... ;) .These companies could also hire people to run this tournament who dont normally work for them. :whistle:

four four two
19-09-2005, 12:31 PM
The problem Jenni is that DC isnt trying to fill different niches,hes trying to capture 1 specific niche. ;)

jenni
19-09-2005, 12:34 PM
The problem Jenni is that DC isnt trying to fill different niches,hes trying to capture 1 specific niche. ;)

You are probably right - adding to my general depression at the moment with Australian chess. :wall:

However I still have faith in his inability to harm the ASTC - one of my favourite competitions. What he can do to Victorian chess of course is another issue.

Can someone explain to me why he can't be countered in Victoria?

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 12:41 PM
Not sure I understand - the ASTC only allows the strongest team in each division to compete - I think it would be great for the second and third strongest to compete in Dc's December comp and if I were him I would be holding it in the middle of the year and promoting it to the strongest schools as an open competition and an opportunity to get some coaching and experience and get ready for the state finals.

If you are talking about DC holding qualifying zones for the state comp - well this is where the whole thing falls down. Why on earth is he holding qualifying zones and why does Vic have the bizarre system where schools can choose what zones they compete in? In the ACT (and I suspect school sport generally interstate), zones are fixed to the school area. i.e if your school is in a geographical region then you compete in that zone - you can't zone hop or choose your zone, unless you have a sound reason (e.g a major clash with something else).

Only Victorians can fix this problem.

The problem is DC's events are not planned not marketed as a suppliment. Ian's observation above is a good one. This is an exercise to take over the schools competition by promoting a better alternative which replaces the ACF endorsed event. If it is successful the CV will lose control over any credible inter-schools teams event.

We can't stop or blame DC for trying but other state associations don't have to make his job easier by promoting it a s a good alternative for schools unable to make the ATSC. Such a position is short sighted and does nothing to support CV's struggle to keep control of a schools competition.

Libby
19-09-2005, 01:25 PM
I also have a problem with David's competition but only over the title.

I would have no problem with "Chess Kids Australian Schools Challenge" or something along those lines but I think the current title is intentionally misleading. Perhaps on marketing grounds but just as possibly so the protagonist can enjoy watching us run around in ever smaller, defensive circles getting our ACF knickers in a twist over it.

So when I circulated the info to ACT schools via our mailing list, it included the following disclaimer -


"NATIONAL" SCHOOLS CHAMPIONSHIP OPPORTUNITY

Please find attached some information about the Chess Kids "National Schools Championship." Chess Kids is a Victorian-based business running a range of inter-school and other chess activities, mostly in Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia.

The attached flyer is for a Chess Kids event which they have chosen to call the "National Schools Championship." This is not the same as the Australian Schools Teams Championship (ASTC), the official event of the Australian Chess Federation and the event for which teams qualify through the ACTJCL inter-school events that many of you have participated in throughout the year.

The attached flyer contains as much information as we presently have for this Chess Kids event. This is the first year it has been conducted so we are unable to assist you with any other information. The flyer refers to qualification through this event for the "Oceania Schools Championship." Again, this has nort been held before and we have no information about when/where/how it will be conducted.

Any school may nominate for this Chess Kids competition. In the event several ACT schools wish to nominate we do not know how Chess Kids will assess the "top" school for the purpose of the free accommodation etc but it may be that they will seek details of the final standings in our events.

If you are interested, and we encourage schools who have a group of serious players in their midst to "have a go," please contact the organiser directly, David Cordover, on interschool@chesskids.com.au or (03) 9578 6203. More information about the Chess Kids business can be found @ http://www.chesskids.com.au/

The event can't compete with the ASTC (in taking away competitors) unless some states have their top team choose this over the "official" event. Nobody else can go to ASTC anyway.

And if the Oceania event is run in competition with the Aus Juniors I would think the guru was very silly because he will almost guarantee no top quality Australian juniors will participate.

I have no idea how you repair the problems you have in Victoria. Rather than getting yourself all hot and bothered about David, you would do better to build a viable alternative.

Where does that come from? Who knows? In my experience however, most junior sport relies most heavily on a dedicated parent group rather than on professionals or senior players. I receive newsletters and info for athletics, soccer, diving and gymnastics in this household - along with chess. For all these various junior bodies, the overwhelming majority of office bearers and coaches are parents.

Why should parents do it? Perhaps because they have a reason to provide the best possible experience for their child the sport can offer. That's the only reason I got involved - and I'm so tired of hearing how other people are too busy, too tired or (the ultimate in flattering "get-out" clauses) not as good as me and just can't do it.

Nobody showed me how to write a media release, in fact, nobody even asked me to start doing it - I just did. Nobody helped me run my first chess tournament, where the computer crashed and about 5 times more players than expected turned up, I just had to bumble along.

Our ACT interschool events are cheaper than David's (by about $14/team I believe) and they are the only means to qualify for the official Australian event - the ASTC. How about taking that marketing ball and running with it.

jenni
19-09-2005, 01:46 PM
I think what both Libby and I are saying is that DC can only be succesful if you let him.

In 1997 we started the ACT Primary School comp with 4 people and a few friendly adults to help on the days.

In 2002 Tony and I were running 5 zones of the Primary schools comp and all of the High Schools comp, pretty much on our own with teachers helping on the day.

2005 Libby is runnng all of the primary and High schools on her own, with parental and teacher help on the days.

A few parents and friendly adults and you can run this stuff - it doesn't have to be organised by Chess Victoria - only endorsed. All the marketing edge is with the ACF endorsed tournament, you just have to use it.

Ian Rout
19-09-2005, 02:14 PM
I think what both Libby and I are saying is that DC can only be succesful if you let him.
It's not quite as simple as that. CG has a few advantages.

First he doesn't have to set up a better competition - in fact if that's what he was doing it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. But all he needs to do is to undermine the existing competition, close it down, and take over from it. Second, he doesn't have to set up anything sustainable, after it has achieved its aim he can close it down or scale it back if he decides its too much trouble (remember Mt Buller). Third, he can have multiple bites at the cherry, if this one doesn't work he can try something else. Finally he doesn't have any rules to play by, so he can use tricks like giving it a name that masks its true status.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 02:15 PM
I think the resourcing and organisation required for a school teams comp for Victoria is an order of magnitude greater than that for the ACT. This is not meant as a criticism of what you (pl) have acheived but be aware it is a much more daunting task for one or even a small group of volunteer parents. Perhaps Victoria needs an separate origanisation for junior chess and such a thing should be investigated but CV (as a spin off) or a committee of parents to begin as a start up, as you suggest. But recognise this is no small feat.

However, there still is a CV organised event happening and schools competing and qualifying though to the NTSC. The problem is not one of a starting up but of growing the existing events so that no niche markets exist.

I have absolutely no problem with DC organising chess events. I hope he does and continues to do so well into the future. What I do have a problem with is DC trying to supplant an CV, ACF titled event with a commercial and unendorsed event which is marketed as the same as or better than the ACF product. In this case, I believe this is what he is doing and by distributing his marketing material, even with Libby's caveats, assists him achieve his goal. A goal which I believe is to the ultimate detriment of junior chess in Victoria and Australia wide.

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 02:15 PM
Two issues, firstly there is an organisation with incumbants who need to held to account for the current state of play and the ACF and other state associations can assist with this. Meekly promoting the DC event as "good for chess" or ACF neutral does not (IMHO) help.

Ok Baz

I will name names, and detail the accountability, as you request.

1 The organisation responsible for drawing the publics attention to the fact that they run the 'official' events, and the GURU runs non-official events is.........CHESS Victoria.
2 The appointed publicity officer is...............Vacant.
3 The appointed Junior Co-ordinator is..........Vacant.
4 The number of Executive attending last Sundays CV Executive meeting was............................................... .........2, with one very late late-comer.

I agree with your earlier posts on this re vacuums etc.; and he should not be allowed free space. So, what next?

Notice that no-one has taken up Frosty's invitation to even prescribe what the GURU might be encouraged to call his events.


starter

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 02:19 PM
1 The organisation responsible for drawing the publics attention to the fact that they run the 'official' events, and the GURU runs non-official events is.........CHESS Victoria.
2 The appointed publicity officer is...............Vacant.
3 The appointed Junior Co-ordinator is..........Vacant.
4 The number of Executive attending last Sundays CV Executive meeting was............................................... .........2, with one very late late-comer.

I agree with your earlier posts on this re vacuums etc.; and he should not be allowed free space. So, what next?

Well my understanding of such things is that accountablity flows up. Therefore Gary needs to be held to account for these short-comings. If he cannot attract committee members then maybe a change at the top is necessary. Or a spin off Junior Chess Victoria should be encouraged.


Notice that no-one has taken up Frosty's invitation to even prescribe what the GURU might be encouraged to call his events.

Probably because it is a pointless exercise.

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 02:31 PM
Well my understanding of such things is that accountablity flows up. Therefore Gary needs to be held to account for these short-comings. If he cannot attract committee members then maybe a change at the top is necessary. Or a spin off Junior Chess Victoria should be encouraged.

1 There can only be change as you suggest if candidates stand. I have been to the past 5 AGMs at least..........and he is elected unopposed. Some Clubs do not even send voting delegates.

2 The spin-off path has been attempted (in the past) and the only resource that lasted any distance was the GURU.




Probably because it is a pointless exercise.
Pointless it maybe, but it was so simple that it formed a reasonable litmus test to see if there was any energy for interested parties to at least do some small thing.

So, what next?

regards
starter

Libby
19-09-2005, 02:39 PM
I think the resourcing and organisation required for a school teams comp for Victoria is an order of magnitude greater than that for the ACT. This is not meant as a criticism of what you (pl) have acheived but be aware it is a much more daunting task for one or even a small group of volunteer parents. Perhaps Victoria needs an separate origanisation for junior chess and such a thing should be investigated but CV (as a spin off) or a committee of parents to begin as a start up, as you suggest. But recognise this is no small feat.

Then compare it to NSW instead. And I believe there has been a Victorian JCL in the past.

And it is daunting, even just on an ACT scale. I ran 12 days this year, largely by myself. Everything from jamming enough equipment for 160+ kids into my little car to carrying it into venues, setting up tables & chairs etc.

It's a long day and it's very tiring.

Using scale however, one would hope for more people to help run such events, just on a per head of population basis, in Victoria over the ACT. And look at their chess culture (as quoted by FG7) there must be helpful people passionate about chess all over the place :doh:

If people say "why should I have to do it" not much will get done. It ranks alongside "how much will I get paid to do it" in the school of how chess differs from other junior sport.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 03:16 PM
1 There can only be change as you suggest if candidates stand. I have been to the past 5 AGMs at least..........and he is elected unopposed. Some Clubs do not even send voting delegates.

2 The spin-off path has been attempted (in the past) and the only resource that lasted any distance was the GURU.

The reasons for 1. could be more than just a lack of interest or qualified candidates. It could just be that candidates are discouraged because GW has the support of the majority of clubs and a new candidate could not upset the apple cart. I'm not sying this is so, just that your implied conclusion is not the only explanation.

Regarding 2. This goes back to my first post. Support from the top is necessary but lamentably not sufficient for success.

antichrist
19-09-2005, 03:21 PM
Someone can run a minor, non-profit one to cater for those who won't be going to the nationals. The SEC does it against the Doeberl and no great worry. At least it would be benign.

PHAT
19-09-2005, 03:25 PM
I tend to agree with Jenni's comments ... "nature abhors a vacuum".

Geez, you are the second one. I said it first, OK .... geezz :cool:

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 03:29 PM
Geez, you are the second one. I said it first, OK .... geezz :cool:

And here was I thinking it was Spinoza. :doh:

Spiny Norman
19-09-2005, 03:45 PM
1 The organisation responsible for drawing the publics attention to the fact that they run the 'official' events, and the GURU runs non-official events is.........CHESS Victoria.
2 The appointed publicity officer is...............Vacant.
3 The appointed Junior Co-ordinator is..........Vacant.
4 The number of Executive attending last Sundays CV Executive meeting was............................................... .........2, with one very late late-comer.
That's a pretty sad state of affairs ... is that a common situation, or is it the exception to the rule?

PHAT
19-09-2005, 03:54 PM
I agree other states are not yet impacted in this way but they may once DC establishes a market share and starts running qualifying events in the other states.

First let me declair that I am wholey with Jenni in this thread, which means she must be wrong.

Second.

Maybe you have hit the nail on the head and have not realised it! What would be intrinsically wrong with DC or DC-like chessers turning Junior chess to a commercially viable sport.

One of the biggest problems for chess is impossible mixture of:
1. The culture of prize money, coupled with
2. Amature players and voluteer officials.

PERHAPS I have been right all along, insisting that chess needs, paid competent, accountable administrators, in order to grow beyond its current fringe feakshow status.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 04:03 PM
Maybe you have hit the nail on the head and have not realised it! What would be intrinsically wrong with DC or DC-like chessers turning Junior chess to a commercially viable sport.

One of the biggest problems for chess is impossible mixture of:
1. The culture of prize money, coupled with
2. Amature players and voluteer officials.

PERHAPS I have been right all along, insisting that chess needs, paid competent, accountable administrators, in order to grow beyond its current fringe feakshow status.

Aaaarrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(runs and jumps out of nearest window).

jenni
19-09-2005, 04:03 PM
Well my understanding of such things is that accountablity flows up. Therefore Gary needs to be held to account for these short-comings. If he cannot attract committee members then maybe a change at the top is necessary. Or a spin off Junior Chess Victoria should be encouraged.
.
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Now you're talking.

jenni
19-09-2005, 04:14 PM
I think the resourcing and organisation required for a school teams comp for Victoria is an order of magnitude greater than that for the ACT. This is not meant as a criticism of what you (pl) have acheived but be aware it is a much more daunting task for one or even a small group of volunteer parents. Perhaps Victoria needs an separate origanisation for junior chess and such a thing should be investigated but CV (as a spin off) or a committee of parents to begin as a start up, as you suggest. But recognise this is no small feat.
.

Absolutely - even if you only took Melbourne it would be something like 10 times the size of ACT. However initially it would only be running what already exists and not trying to grow it to all schools.

Looking at the ACF accounts (I think 2003and 2002)

Levy from Victoria (2003) $1,032 ACT $900
Levy from Victoria (2002) $1,113 ACT $933

Doesn't seem too much difference in size. Once system is in place, obviously more helpers would be needed to grow it to the size of NSW's comp.

jenni
19-09-2005, 04:15 PM
First let me declair that I am wholey with Jenni in this thread, which means she must be wrong.

.

It's a worry isn't it. :lol:

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 04:23 PM
Absolutely - even if you only took Melbourne it would be something like 10 times the size of ACT. However initially it would only be running what already exists and not trying to grow it to all schools.

Looking at the ACF accounts (I think 2003and 2002)

Levy from Victoria (2003) $1,032 ACT $900
Levy from Victoria (2002) $1,113 ACT $933

Doesn't seem too much difference in size. Once system is in place, obviously more helpers would be needed to grow it to the size of NSW's comp.

Currently they are the same size and that is the problem. You're right, it needs to be the same order of magnitude in size as NSW and this is the daunting bit.

jenni
19-09-2005, 04:36 PM
Currently they are the same size and that is the problem. You're right, it needs to be the same order of magnitude in size as NSW and this is the daunting bit.

I find a lot of things scare me (believe it or not I am actually a shy person and not as brash as I appear.).

However over the years I find if you just go in and start small and learn as you go, before you know what's happening it seems easy and it grows.

If you think about starting something the size of NSW it is impossible to start. I just can't see how with a small group and the ground work already there that its not possible.

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 05:48 PM
<snip> Why on earth is he holding qualifying zones and why does Vic have the bizarre system where schools can choose what zones they compete in? In the ACT (and I suspect school sport generally interstate), zones are fixed to the school area. i.e if your school is in a geographical region then you compete in that zone - you can't zone hop or choose your zone, unless you have a sound reason (e.g a major clash with something else).

Only Victorians can fix this problem.

Actually this zone-hopping has one good by-product. Strong schools such as Scotch College can afford to 'rest' Sam Chow (just an example) and if the team fails to qualify then they try again (in another zone). I am not sure of the value of jenni's one-try, sudden death, knockout, preference.

starter

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 05:51 PM
You are probably right - adding to my general depression at the moment with Australian chess. :wall:

However I still have faith in his inability to harm the ASTC - one of my favourite competitions. What he can do to Victorian chess of course is another issue.

Can someone explain to me why he can't be countered in Victoria?

The GURU runs some zones and the winners gravitate into the higher level rounds (ie the quarter finals and semis etc). The higher level rounds are owned by CV. His relative market share is declining; I am not seeing where he needs to be countered.


starter

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 05:57 PM
Then compare it to NSW instead. And I believe there has been a Victorian JCL in the past.

<snip>.... there must be helpful people passionate about chess all over the place :doh:

If people say "why should I have to do it" not much will get done. It ranks alongside "how much will I get paid to do it" in the school of how chess differs from other junior sport.

hi Libby

There are such people, but the coaching success is such that nearly all our best individuals (civic-minded, ethical, altruistic) are precluded because the chant goes up conflict-of-interest. This includes Frank, George, David L, Darryl, David H, Nick, Denis, just to name a few.


starter

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 06:00 PM
The reasons for 1. could be more than just a lack of interest or qualified candidates. It could just be that candidates are discouraged because GW has the support of the majority of clubs and a new candidate could not upset the apple cart. I'm not sying this is so, just that your implied conclusion is not the only explanation.

Must be something in the air at the GONG. ;) Matt calls for Bill's head on a plate, and you call for Gary's.

starter

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 06:01 PM
That's a pretty sad state of affairs ... is that a common situation, or is it the exception to the rule?

Steve
It is common that there are quite a few unfilled positions.
T

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 06:03 PM
First let me declair that I am wholey with Jenni in this thread, which means she must be wrong.

Second.

Maybe you have hit the nail on the head and have not realised it! What would be intrinsically wrong with DC or DC-like chessers turning Junior chess to a commercially viable sport.

One of the biggest problems for chess is impossible mixture of:
1. The culture of prize money, coupled with
2. Amature players and voluteer officials.

PERHAPS I have been right all along, insisting that chess needs, paid competent, accountable administrators, in order to grow beyond its current fringe feakshow status.


Or, alternatively, we allow commercial operators to sit on State Association committees and we set guidelines for COI resolution.


starter

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 06:16 PM
Must be something in the air at the GONG. ;) Matt calls for Bill's head on a plate, and you call for Gary's.

I made no such call. I was just guided by your posts and followed it to its logical conclusion. Honestly, if CV cannot attract committee members, what is to be done? Maybe it is time to Gary to step down. Cometh the hour, cometh the man (or woman). Just an idea. I have no personal problem with Gary a a person. I have only met him the once and briefly. However, something would appear to be rotten in the state of Victoria.

And as I said repeatedly, I have no problem with DC turning a dollar out of being a chess event organiser and coaching service provider. However, I believe the sights of this latest venture is set too high and, if successful, will ultimately weaken the endorsed chess event. Perhaps this is a risk when you invite private enterprise into a partnership with a NPO like CV. :hmm:

jenni
19-09-2005, 06:25 PM
Actually this zone-hopping has one good by-product. Strong schools such as Scotch College can afford to 'rest' Sam Chow (just an example) and if the team fails to qualify then they try again (in another zone). I am not sure of the value of jenni's one-try, sudden death, knockout, preference.

starter

It goes against all concepts of school sports. School sports are centred on zones, regions and then states and schools stick to their zones. Of course you can (and do get some zones that are super strong and some that are weak, but realistically any school that is going to win is also going to win their zone (or at least finish high enough to get into finals or semis). By not allowing zone hopping you allow a weaker school to have the esteem of winning a zone. Does Victoria have trophies for each zone?

I have seen a school win a zone and been so excited about their trophies and you kind of look at them and sigh and know they will be unlikely to make top 10 in the finals, but if you are growing chess that win is important.

If you allow strong schools to zone hop then surely it has to discourage other schools?

jenni
19-09-2005, 06:30 PM
The GURU runs some zones and the winners gravitate into the higher level rounds (ie the quarter finals and semis etc). The higher level rounds are owned by CV. His relative market share is declining; I am not seeing where he needs to be countered.


starter

If this is true then what is the problem. DC's interest is at the zone level and then the kids flow onto the endorsed comps - can't see how this is harming anyone? He is filling a vacuum where for whatever reason Vic doesn't have the resources to run all the zones.

As long as the strongest teams then go onto the semis, is there any problem?

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 07:36 PM
It goes against all concepts of school sports. School sports are centred on zones, regions and then states and schools stick to their zones. Of course you can (and do get some zones that are super strong and some that are weak, but realistically any school that is going to win is also going to win their zone (or at least finish high enough to get into finals or semis). By not allowing zone hopping you allow a weaker school to have the esteem of winning a zone. Does Victoria have trophies for each zone?

I have seen a school win a zone and been so excited about their trophies and you kind of look at them and sigh and know they will be unlikely to make top 10 in the finals, but if you are growing chess that win is important.

If you allow strong schools to zone hop then surely it has to discourage other schools?

Jenni

Not all concepts of school sports, obviously; because it is a fact of life in the Victorian chess competition.
Yes; medallions for a zone winner.
No discouragement. Imagine beating Scotch College...the thrill is terrific.
Then Scotch just repecharge back in by going to another zone, and trying again.
Sounds ok to me for the preliminary rounds....not the FINALS.


starter

ursogr8
19-09-2005, 07:37 PM
If this is true then what is the problem. DC's interest is at the zone level and then the kids flow onto the endorsed comps - can't see how this is harming anyone? He is filling a vacuum where for whatever reason Vic doesn't have the resources to run all the zones.

As long as the strongest teams then go onto the semis, is there any problem?

I stayed out of this GURU/CV thread for a long while because I couldn't see a clear definition of a Mexican problem.

Rincewind
19-09-2005, 07:41 PM
Not all concepts of school sports, obviously; because it is a fact of life in the Victorian chess competition.
Yes; medallions for a zone winner.
No discouragement. Imagine beating Scotch College...the thrill is terrific.
Then Scotch just repecharge back in by going to another zone, and trying again.
Sounds ok to me for the preliminary rounds....not the FINALS.

I'm not convinced but lean towards Jenni on this as the natural conservative that I am. I can see it is good for Scotch. Having trouble seeing the benefit for other schools. Perhaps you could elucidate further.

jenni
19-09-2005, 08:20 PM
Jenni

Not all concepts of school sports, obviously; because it is a fact of life in the Victorian chess competition.
Yes; medallions for a zone winner.
No discouragement. Imagine beating Scotch College...the thrill is terrific.
Then Scotch just repecharge back in by going to another zone, and trying again.
Sounds ok to me for the preliminary rounds....not the FINALS.


starter

Yes but if Scotch play their best team then if they deserve to win they do.
I guess it is nice to have regional variations on rules, but it just seems a bitopen to manipulation. I guess if it is all about making sure you have your best teams then a few bites at the cherry is probably what you want, but we view ours as not just a competition, but a development tool as well.

We have a rule that a school is only allowed 2 teams to go through to the finals (3 at the high school level). Sometimes the 3rd and 4th team at a school is eliminated and weaker teams from another school go through. The slight loss in quality is more than made up by the excitement of a school making it through to the finals. (I have seen school newletters, where they boast about having made it to the finals for the first time!).

Is there a limit on how many teams from a school can go through, or could Essex Heights (for eg) send off 10 teams to different zones and all of them get through?

Mischa
19-09-2005, 10:09 PM
Well we sent 4 and three nearly got through...two got thru to the finals and the girls thru to their finals. Our C team missed out on countback

ChessGuru
22-09-2005, 07:40 PM
And it is daunting, even just on an ACT scale. I ran 12 days this year, largely by myself. Everything from jamming enough equipment for 160+ kids into my little car to carrying it into venues, setting up tables & chairs etc.


Libby, I can certainly appreciate the work you put in....it is a busy day!

I ran 52 days like this in the past 3 months.... :D
Gives you some idea of the scale of what I am running in Victoria....plus what happens in other states.

Our entry fees may be more expensive than ACT fees, but we are only $1.30 or so more expensive per player than CV events...and we offer far more prizes (15 per event v. CV's 4)!

Why not take a look at Tasmania. No offence to Kevin, but really before a year ago there was nothing happening....so against all their better judgements (the we hate Guru ethos) they chose to 'support' my expansion in the state - I say 'support' but all they had to do was nothing, and they didn't really have a choice because i'd have done it all anyway!

So how goes it there? Well....in the past 12 months we have achieved:
-1200 kids playing interschool chess
-66 in a 2-day Tas Junior weekend
-The TCA made $300 (probably 20% of their annual turnover) by just allowing Chess Kids to run their State Junior
-Burnie and Launceston clubs have restocked (free of charge) their equipment supplies (including DGT clocks)
-Burnie Chess Club membership has doubled
-TCA weekend events have greatly increased in size (doubled?)
-Chess has appeared in the mainstream newspapers and on TV a dozen or more times
-Councils and libraries across the state have started chess clubs and promotions using chess

And as yet I don't think that anyone has found a reason to hate what I'm doing - perhaps some people are even struggling with internal demons - they see good, but they know I am evil - how is it so??

So - is this bad for chess?

Of course not...it is the best thing ever to happen to Tas chess, and would never have happened without commercial interest. Oh yes, one more thing...while all that was happening above - I made some money!

The best thing that CV can do is die quietly...then let commercial interest fill the vacuum without any bitching and watch the clubs and tournaments reap the benefits. Probably the ACF should go the same way....but nobody in the ACF/CV wants that to happen because everyone is interested in maintaining status-quo for their own selfish, political reasons.

ChessGuru
22-09-2005, 07:44 PM
It's not quite as simple as that. CG has a few advantages.

First he doesn't have to set up a better competition - in fact if that's what he was doing it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. But all he needs to do is to undermine the existing competition, close it down, and take over from it. Second, he doesn't have to set up anything sustainable, after it has achieved its aim he can close it down or scale it back if he decides its too much trouble (remember Mt Buller). Third, he can have multiple bites at the cherry, if this one doesn't work he can try something else. Finally he doesn't have any rules to play by, so he can use tricks like giving it a name that masks its true status.

The ACF doesn't have rules to play by either...just look at last year's Aus Open, this year's Aus Champs....rules are there to be ignored. Over the past 10 years i've seen rules see-saw back and forth in the ACF....keeps everyone busy, debate if the countback should be bucholtz or progressive...hhmm, good work guys - it's been both in the past and it's been changed 10 times in 10 years! Progress.

So why can't the ACF do the same - do something different if it doesn't work. Strive for improvement? If their event doesn't work - do something different! Why must it be the same?

ChessGuru
22-09-2005, 08:03 PM
And as I said repeatedly, I have no problem with DC turning a dollar out of being a chess event organiser and coaching service provider. However, I believe the sights of this latest venture is set too high and, if successful, will ultimately weaken the endorsed chess event. Perhaps this is a risk when you invite private enterprise into a partnership with a NPO like CV. :hmm:

So the fear is, basically, that I will run a better event than the ACF event...and because of that market forces will guide schools to want to play in the better event and away from the ACF.

So your solution is for me not to run my event?

:wall: Good work - solved the problem! :clap:

Why not improve the ACF event?

I'll let you in on a couple of secrets -
I am not trying to compete with the ACF event...you can see that because I've called my event by a different name, used a different format and holding it at a different time and in a different state! I have no intention of trying to deter schools playing in the ACF event from playing....but I would like all the other schools NOT playing in the ACF event to come to Melbourne (free for some) and play in my event... see, a different market altogether.

BUT - at the same time I would like my event to hold some prestige - and that comes only from people's perception. So that is why we accurately have named the event "National"...because we are inviting schools from around the country...."schools" because schools are involved...."open" because anyone can apply to play ... and "Championships" ... for the prestige.

My event will be better than the ACF event....it will be better run, more coaching, free stuff for kids, better organised....I don't know what you want me to do about that?

You think that I've aimed too high? And yet the ACF hasn't when they attempt to run any Australian Championship event, GP series, Olympiad fundraiser etc etc? Seems that you've got the 'status-quo' disease.

"Quick everybody - do nothign, at least we succeed there!"

Rincewind
22-09-2005, 08:41 PM
The top team entered from each State receives FREE accommodation, food and coaching at the Finals (for 5 players and 1 adult supervisor).

Chess Guru,

Does this clause include Victoria? If so how do you determine the best Victorian team? I would put money on Essex Heights (9 times state champions) having a strong claim to this.

If they were to field a team would they play for free?

antichrist
22-09-2005, 08:49 PM
RW, how come you follow Victorian junior chess so fervently, aren't you from the Gong?

I used to follow NSW junior chess but that was also because I lived and worked virtually next door to their centre.

Leonid Sandler
22-09-2005, 08:58 PM
Remember guys that free cheese you will get only in a mousetrap

Rincewind
22-09-2005, 09:06 PM
Remember guys that free cheese you will get only in a mousetrap

So what are you saying here, Leonid? David is trying to entrap the top teams from every state?

Rincewind
22-09-2005, 09:40 PM
So the fear is, basically, that I will run a better event than the ACF event...and because of that market forces will guide schools to want to play in the better event and away from the ACF.

So your solution is for me not to run my event?

Have you read my posts? I said numerous times that I have no problem with you organising events that complement the ACF calendar. I do disagree with you running events that erode the ACF product.


:wall: Good work - solved the problem! :clap:

Why not improve the ACF event?

Perhaps you would like to develop this idea further. How does holding a second event, called a National Championships, improve the ACF event?


I'll let you in on a couple of secrets -
I am not trying to compete with the ACF event...you can see that because I've called my event by a different name, used a different format and holding it at a different time and in a different state! I have no intention of trying to deter schools playing in the ACF event from playing....but I would like all the other schools NOT playing in the ACF event to come to Melbourne (free for some) and play in my event... see, a different market altogether.

BUT - at the same time I would like my event to hold some prestige - and that comes only from people's perception. So that is why we accurately have named the event "National"...because we are inviting schools from around the country...."schools" because schools are involved...."open" because anyone can apply to play ... and "Championships" ... for the prestige.

My event will be better than the ACF event....it will be better run, more coaching, free stuff for kids, better organised....I don't know what you want me to do about that?

You think that I've aimed too high? And yet the ACF hasn't when they attempt to run any Australian Championship event, GP series, Olympiad fundraiser etc etc? Seems that you've got the 'status-quo' disease.

David, you obvious are competing with the ACF event. Why else sweeten the deal with free entry nuless you are trying to build up a market share in other states? Why call the event the "National Open Schools Finals" and not the "Chess Kids Interstate Challenge"? Why include allusions to an qualification to an "Oceania Schools Championships"?

Speaking of the Oceania School Championships, do you have some details on them? Who will be organising them, where and when will they be held and will they be held under the auspices of FIDE or a national association?

In short, Guru, your post raises many more questions than it answers.