PDA

View Full Version : Ergas Australian Junior Chess Squad



Pages : [1] 2

Kerry Stead
27-01-2004, 01:02 PM
The 'launch' at the closing ceremony of the Juniors in Perth didn't *quite* go to plan, but I am pleased to announce the first 9 selections for the 2004 squad.
Further selections will be made in due course, and now that I am back in Sydney I should have a chance to finish off the website in the next few days.

NECG Squad 2004

Denis Bourmistrov
Michael Wei
Dusan Stojic
Vincent Suttor
Gareth Oliver
Junta Ikeda
Mouthun Ly
Angela Song
Raymond Song

Congratulations to these kids (I managed to inform most of them after the presentation that they had been selected for the squad) - they are the future of chess in this country, and hopefully if they are fostered well, can potentially produce a number of titled players in time, and make Australia more competitive on the world scale.

peanbrain
27-01-2004, 02:22 PM
Only one girl at the moment. I like to think as a chess community we will make lot more efforts to encourage female participation for the future?

Kerry Stead
27-01-2004, 05:02 PM
Only one girl at the moment. I like to think as a chess community we will make lot more efforts to encourage female participation for the future?
As you may be aware, there is a quota of 3 under 14 girls for the squad. It would be good if Australia were able to compete on a world scale in both the boys and girls ranks. As it stands, of the applicants, only Angela stood out as a 'must have' for the squad. The other places will be filled, but it will be much more difficult to decide who is most deserving of these spots.
I should be able to post the website URL in the next few days.

arosar
28-01-2004, 04:34 PM
Let's have a little fun. Out of those in the squad above, I predict Ikeda to be a future titled player - an IM.

Here's hoping that one day we get to produce our very own Magnus Carlsen.

AR

jenni
28-01-2004, 04:41 PM
Let's have a little fun. Out of those in the squad above, I predict Ikeda to be a future titled player - an IM.

Here's hoping that one day we get to produce our very own Magnus Carlsen.

AR
I'm greedy - I don't just want one. I'll go for Moulthun, Ray and Junta.

peanbrain
28-01-2004, 10:43 PM
Let's have a little fun. Out of those in the squad above, I predict Ikeda to be a future titled player - an IM.

Here's hoping that one day we get to produce our very own Magnus Carlsen.

AR

let's not have silly predictions - we are talking about real kids here arosa!
A bit of senstivity will do you no harm ....

peanbrain
28-01-2004, 10:48 PM
Let's have a little fun. Out of those in the squad above, I predict Ikeda to be a future titled player - an IM.

Here's hoping that one day we get to produce our very own Magnus Carlsen.

AR
I've changed my mind. We should make it more fun like arosar suggested so here goes my prediction: "that arosar will never make it to the NECG squad"!!

And I'm willing to take $10000 bets on it!!

Kerry Stead
10-02-2004, 03:33 PM
The NECG Australian Junior Chess Squad webpage has finally been finished.
NECG Webpage (http://nswjcl.org.au/NECG/NECG.htm)
It has all the information about the squad, as well as the rating reports for the 53 applicants, as well as the supporting statements that were included.

All information has now been sent to the selection panel, who now have the unenviable task of trying to sort out who should be in the squad.
The panel consists of:
Kerry Stead (NSW), George Howard (SA), Jenni Oliver (ACT), Ian Rogers (NSW), Gary Lane (NSW), Brett Tindall (NSW), Geoff Saw (Vic), Manuel Weeks (NSW), Joe Tanti (SA).
The primary consideration when choosing the panel was that they have a good knowledge of the players involved and know something of their play, temperament, etc.

Further additions to the squad already announced should be done within a week or so, and I expect the entire squad to be finalised by the end of February, so that all members have plenty of time to organise arrangements for the first squad session immediately after the Doeberl Cup in Canberra.

chesslover
11-02-2004, 07:56 PM
The NECG Australian Junior Chess Squad webpage has finally been finished.
NECG Webpage (http://nswjcl.org.au/NECG/NECG.htm)


Jolly good stuff Kerry

Good site, and obvious a lot of hard work and effort has gone into this

You should be proud of your efforts

well done indeed :)

chesslover
11-02-2004, 08:30 PM
I have looked at some of the supporting statements from candidates - and they range from no supporting statements, to adequate to a mini "war and peace".

My favourite supporting statement is from a candidate, who just wrote this little gem as his supporting statement - "pretty soon all of you are going to have to bow down and worship my magnificent force".

Now that people can see what other candidates wrote, can they continue to provide additional statements? Is there a deadline for this, as Kerry stated that the selection panel is already looking at these statements?

Kerry Stead
11-02-2004, 10:37 PM
If you noticed, there was a deadline that has already passed (December 15) for candidates to apply for the squad and submit additional information, so no more information can be submitted. The selection panel basically got the information on the website, as well as some spreadsheets that Jenni Oliver put together from the rating reports. I also included cross tables from the Australian Reserves and Australian Juniors.

arosar
12-02-2004, 02:54 PM
Some of 'em applicants need to be taught how to write an application letter. They seem to be just mucking around.

AR

jenni
12-02-2004, 05:37 PM
Some of 'em applicants need to be taught how to write an application letter. They seem to be just mucking around.

AR
That's kids for you. If you can't be anarchic when you are young when can you?

paulb
12-02-2004, 06:27 PM
My favourite supporting statement is from a candidate, who just wrote this little gem as his supporting statement - "pretty soon all of you are going to have to bow down and worship my magnificent force".

:)

I can only hope selectors take seriously such Kasparovian self-confidence
:)

chesslover
12-02-2004, 06:59 PM
:)

I can only hope selectors take seriously such Kasparovian self-confidence
:)

Kasparov has the results, experiences and titles to feel and express such self-confidence

chesslover
12-02-2004, 07:03 PM
:)

I can only hope selectors take seriously such Kasparovian self-confidence
:)

I assume that when the candidate wrote this ""pretty soon all of you are going to have to bow down and worship my magnificent force", everyone will know what the "magnificant force" that the candidate has means?

Whatever this "force" is, it seems not to be fully developed yet (perhaps not surprising considering the male candidate's age), but it seems in the near future ("pretty soon") it will develop to be a "magnificant force" that will awe others so much that they will "bow down and worship" it

;) :lol:

PHAT
12-02-2004, 07:17 PM
That's kids for you. If you can't be anarchic when you are young when can you?

Your whole life.

Oepty
13-02-2004, 10:33 AM
Seeing the same player who wants us to bow down to him has a rating of 11381 according to the site perhaps we should all be in awe at the moment.
Scott

Kerry Stead
13-02-2004, 10:42 AM
Seeing the same player who wants us to bow down to him has a rating of 11381 according to the site perhaps we should all be in awe at the moment.
Scott
Oops!
I've done a 'Price is Right' and bumped a 1 off his rating to give the correct rating ...
If anyone notices anything else amiss with the page, perhaps you could either PM me or drop me an email kerrys@ihug.com.au
Thanks

chesslover
13-02-2004, 03:37 PM
Seeing the same player who wants us to bow down to him has a rating of 11381 according to the site perhaps we should all be in awe at the moment.
Scott

maybe he is faking it? I am pretty sure that this is a misprint, and that his "maginificant force" will be deflated very soon!! ;)

Kerry Stead
22-02-2004, 07:40 AM
8 Additions to the NECG Squad that can be made official ... (players will be notified later today - I'm off to Toukley for day 2 in a minute)
Heather Huddleston
Tristan Stevens
Justin Huang
James Obst
Max Illingworth
Zhigen Lin
Adelaide Soltysik
James Morris
Congratulations to these kids!

Full squad as it stands (3 more places and 'reserve list' to be added):
U18s:
Denis Bourmistrov
Michael Wei
Dusan Stojic
Vincent Suttor
Gareth Oliver
Heather Huddleston
Tristan Stevens
U14s:
Junta Ikeda
Mouthun Ly
Justin Huang
James Obst
U12s:
Angela Song
Max Illingworth
Zhigen Lin
Adelaide Soltysik
U10s:
Raymond Song
James Morris

peanbrain
22-02-2004, 10:54 AM
8 Additions to the NECG Squad that can be made official ... (players will be notified later today - I'm off to Toukley for day 2 in a minute)


Full squad as it stands (3 more places and 'reserve list' to be added):


I suggets you spare a spot for bushlover, otherwise he's likely to ruin it for everyone and kick start his bloody appeals process!

chesslover
23-02-2004, 05:05 PM
I suggets you spare a spot for bushlover, otherwise he's likely to ruin it for everyone and kick start his bloody appeals process!

Mr Pea-sized-brain stop provoking and baiting me

and my name is not bushlover

and congrats to the juniors chosen in the squad. well done

PHAT
23-02-2004, 10:06 PM
Mr Pea-sized-brain stop provoking and baiting me

and my name is not bushlover



Then stop taking the bait Felcher Christian.

Kerry Stead
16-03-2004, 02:31 AM
Final three places and reserves list have been decided

3 added to squad:
Rebecca Harris
Ruperto Lugo
Amy Evans

5 Reserves:
Casey Hickman
Daniel Anderson
Benjamin Harris
Justin Chow
Andrew Brown

Full squad is as follows:

Under 18s
Denis Bourmistrov Vic
Michael Wei ACT
Dusan Stojic Vic
Vincent Suttor NSW
Gareth Oliver ACT
Heather Huddleston NSW
Tristan Stevens SA
Rebecca Harris NSW
Under 14s
Junta Ikeda ACT
Mouthun Ly Qld
Justin Huang NSW
James Obst SA
Ruperto Lugo Vic
Amy Evans Qld
Under 12s
Angela Song NSW
Max Illingworth NSW
Zhigen Lin Vic
Adelaide Soltysik NSW
Under 10s
Raymond Song NSW
James Morris Vic

Reserves list:
Casey Hickman Vic
Daniel Anderson Qld
Benjamin Harris NSW
Justin Chow ACT
Andrew Brown ACT

Congratulations to these kids.

The first squad session, to be held in Canberra immediately following the Doeberl Cup, is being organised at the moment. Coaches confirmed for the session are GM Ian ROgers, GM Darryl Johansen & IM Gary Lane. The kids should learn a lot from these players, and hopefully this will be the beginning of the improvement of Australian Junior chess on a worldwide scale!

jasonhu
15-04-2004, 09:04 AM
la la la. mmm food.

Lucena
16-04-2004, 11:56 PM
la la la. mmm food.
Jason you are a funny one :)

jenni
17-04-2004, 01:00 AM
I think he is enjoying the pizza.....

ursogr8
18-12-2004, 09:48 AM
Final three places and reserves list have been decided

3 added to squad:
Rebecca Harris
Ruperto Lugo
Amy Evans

5 Reserves:
Casey Hickman
Daniel Anderson
Benjamin Harris
Justin Chow
Andrew Brown

Full squad is as follows:

Under 18s
Denis Bourmistrov Vic
Michael Wei ACT
Dusan Stojic Vic
Vincent Suttor NSW
Gareth Oliver ACT
Heather Huddleston NSW
Tristan Stevens SA
Rebecca Harris NSW
Under 14s
Junta Ikeda ACT
Mouthun Ly Qld
Justin Huang NSW
James Obst SA
Ruperto Lugo Vic
Amy Evans Qld
Under 12s
Angela Song NSW
Max Illingworth NSW
Zhigen Lin Vic
Adelaide Soltysik NSW
Under 10s
Raymond Song NSW
James Morris Vic

Reserves list:
Casey Hickman Vic
Daniel Anderson Qld
Benjamin Harris NSW
Justin Chow ACT
Andrew Brown ACT

Congratulations to these kids.

The first squad session, to be held in Canberra immediately following the Doeberl Cup, is being organised at the moment. Coaches confirmed for the session are GM Ian ROgers, GM Darryl Johansen & IM Gary Lane. The kids should learn a lot from these players, and hopefully this will be the beginning of the improvement of Australian Junior chess on a worldwide scale!

Is anyone aware of an update to this list of names?
Is there thread or web-site that gives progressive information on activities?
Is the programme of events for 2005 in a calendar somewhere?


Hi All,

During the tournaments at Mt Buller if the Mercure Grand Chalet is patronised well re bednights there is a distinct possibility that this $4,000 donation to a Junior Developement Fund could become an Annual Thing. So perhaps lets wait till after the dust settles on the Open / Junior etc and give people an opportunity to assess.

If things go well perhaps we can use the interest and half the money allocated each year ie half the new lot of $4,000 each year in that specific year. That way the Mercure Grand Chalet / ACF Junior Developement can grow and spend money as well.

Continuing support of a substantial level for future years depends upon people staying at the Mercure Grand Chalet. That has been as simply put as is possible so that there can be NO misunderstanding.

Regards
George Howard
Main Organiser Mt Buller Tourneys

Has this $4000 been formally added to the NECG 'budget' for 2005?

regards
starter

jenni
18-12-2004, 01:23 PM
We are in the process of revamping the squad for 2005. An initial paper was sent out by me in November. I had some responses to this (not many!). Ian Rogers, Geoff Saw and myself had a discussion on it in Mt Buller at the schools comp and a further set of info was sent out about it after that. I don't think anyone has responded to that one!

People to receive info in Vic were Darryl, Geoff Saw, Cordover. Its not confidential and receivees were told they could pass the info onto anyone they thought appropriate.

Major changes are

. only one camp a year, but a major one with multiple days of coaching, followed by a comp.

reason - taking up too many holidays (Aussie kids want a life apart form chess)
- difficult for parents - expense and time off work

. not having the comp associated with an adult comp. Instead have a list of adult comps and the kids having to play at some as part of their commitment

reason - most of the adult comps are not convenient in terms of school holidays and there is a resistance to kids taking time off from school

- also makes it very long if we are increasing no of days of coaching

. no applications from kids - a list is being built of appropriate juniors (will be finalised after the juniors)and then kids approached. If they don't want to be in the squad, then their name will be deleted.

reason - many good juniors did not put their names forward, because they thought they weren't good enough.


I think these are the major changes. The camp will almost definitely be in October next year in the week that is common to as many states as possible (Vic, NSW and ACT seem to have common holidays on Oct, so it is likely to be the last week of the Vic hols and first week of NSW, ACT) Easter is very difficult next year (strange timing) and July tends to be very filled with junior state championships in many states.

We are also looking to have analysis done for squad members at some adult tournaments.

Because Qld, ACT and NSW all had camps in 2004, we are looking to have the camp in Vic next year. This is dependent on Vic being prepared to host the camp and also provide billets where requested. Geoff Saw has this as an action item to make enquiries.

As far as the $4000 goes, I don't believe it was earmarked for anything as yet. Once we have a new president we will be looking to get the Junior sub-committee going and look at appropriate use of the money.

We have not as yet had an indication from NEC that they will be continuing funding next year, although it was a 3 year commitment on their part. (I have an action item to follow up on that)..

Garvinator
18-12-2004, 01:35 PM
. not having the comp associated with an adult comp. Instead have a list of adult comps and the kids having to play at some as part of their commitment.

reason - most of the adult comps are not convenient in terms of school holidays and there is a resistance to kids taking time off from school

Is there any plans to make it a requirement that the players must play in at least one tournament outside of their normal routine, normally a different state? ie players from nsw must play in one of the larger tournaments in either vic or qld(just an example). So that means they have attend one of the following tournaments ie Gold Coast Open, Doeberl, Uni Open, Ballarat just as an example.

I can just see that some, if not most(maybe even all) will just take the easy option and play in the large adult comps in their home state.

ursogr8
18-12-2004, 01:43 PM
We are in the process of revamping the squad for 2005. An initial paper was sent out by me in November. I had some responses to this (not many!). Ian Rogers, Geoff Saw and myself had a discussion on it in Mt Buller at the schools comp and a further set of info was sent out about it after that. I don't think anyone has responded to that one!

People to receive info in Vic were Darryl, Geoff Saw, Cordover. Its not confidential and receivees were told they could pass the info onto anyone they thought appropriate.

Major changes are

. only one camp a year, but a major one with multiple days of coaching, followed by a comp.

reason - taking up too many holidays (Aussie kids want a life apart form chess)
- difficult for parents - expense and time off work

. not having the comp associated with an adult comp. Instead have a list of adult comps and the kids having to play at some as part of their commitment

reason - most of the adult comps are not convenient in terms of school holidays and there is a resistance to kids taking time off from school

- also makes it very long if we are increasing no of days of coaching

. no applications from kids - a list is being built of appropriate juniors (will be finalised after the juniors)and then kids approached. If they don't want to be in the squad, then their name will be deleted.

reason - many good juniors did not put their names forward, because they thought they weren't good enough.


I think these are the major changes. The camp will almost definitely be in October next year in the week that is common to as many states as possible (Vic, NSW and ACT seem to have common holidays on Oct, so it is likely to be the last week of the Vic hols and first week of NSW, ACT) Easter is very difficult next year (strange timing) and July tends to be very filled with junior state championships in many states.

We are also looking to have analysis done for squad members at some adult tournaments.

Because Qld, ACT and NSW all had camps in 2004, we are looking to have the camp in Vic next year. This is dependent on Vic being prepared to host the camp and also provide billets where requested. Geoff Saw has this as an action item to make enquiries.

As far as the $4000 goes, I don't believe it was earmarked for anything as yet. Once we have a new president we will be looking to get the Junior sub-committee going and look at appropriate use of the money.

We have not as yet had an indication from NEC that they will be continuing funding next year, although it was a 3 year commitment on their part. (I have an action item to follow up on that)..

Thanks jenni,
for taking the time to type all that.

As well as the communication initiatives you have listed (for VICTORIA) I think you should add something into the formal channel of CV.
David represents his non-affiliated interests well, and Geoff is on the Committee of Dark Horse. But there are junior programs at MCC, BHCC, WHJC, DCC and Regionals and quite a few others.

starter

Denis_Jessop
18-12-2004, 01:54 PM
Thanks jenni,
for taking the time to type all that.

As well as the communication initiatives you have listed (for VICTORIA) I think you should add something into the formal channel of CV.
David represents his non-affiliated interests well, and Geoff is on the Committee of Dark Horse. But there are junior programs at MCC, BHCC, WHJC, DCC and Regionals and quite a few others.

starter


I understand from Jey Hoole that Geoff is now also the CV delegate to the ACF Council in place of DC who resigned some time ago.

Denis Jessop

jenni
18-12-2004, 02:04 PM
Hi Denis,

Yes I understood that as well - however I am happy to send the info to anyone - as I said it is supposed to be as inclusive as possible. If Starter would like to nominate some extra people and pm their e-mails I will forward the info to them.

Jenni

jenni
18-12-2004, 02:08 PM
Is there any plans to make it a requirement that the players must play in at least one tournament outside of their normal routine, normally a different state? ie players from nsw must play in one of the larger tournaments in either vic or qld(just an example). So that means they have attend one of the following tournaments ie Gold Coast Open, Doeberl, Uni Open, Ballarat just as an example.

I can just see that some, if not most(maybe even all) will just take the easy option and play in the large adult comps in their home state.

Yes this could happen - however part of the squad brief is to give info and encouragement to parents and members. Obviously we would be encouraging particiaption in as many as possible - including overseas tournaments. Given NECG provides no travel subsidies it is up to parents to decide what they can afford. Anyone who doesn't stretch themselves would be in danger of being droppped the following year, as enthusiasm is important.

ursogr8
18-12-2004, 02:11 PM
Hi Denis,

Yes I understood that as well - however I am happy to send the info to anyone - as I said it is supposed to be as inclusive as possible. If Starter would like to nominate some extra people and pm their e-mails I will forward the info to them.

Jenni

hi jenni
I have fwdd your long post to a key potential bidder. I will await his advice.
Also, I think you should send to GW (who can call on the CV Junior Co-ordinator as a resource). GW's email I guess you have....but can also obtain from the CV website (http://www.chessvictoria.com/) .
regards
starter

Garvinator
18-12-2004, 02:29 PM
Yes this could happen - however part of the squad brief is to give info and encouragement to parents and members. Obviously we would be encouraging particiaption in as many as possible - including overseas tournaments. Given NECG provides no travel subsidies it is up to parents to decide what they can afford. Anyone who doesn't stretch themselves would be in danger of being droppped the following year, as enthusiasm is important.
i understand that necg provides no travel subsidies ;) just that with the cheap fares that are available some of the time and that fares between say sydney and melbourne arent that expensive if booked early, I dont believe that cost in itself can be used as the primary reason for not travelling, especially if the junior is one of the top players in the tournament and likely to be walking away with some prize money at the end of the tournament.

jenni
18-12-2004, 02:36 PM
i understand that necg provides no travel subsidies ;) just that with the cheap fares that are available some of the time and that fares between say sydney and melbourne arent that expensive if booked early, I dont believe that cost in itself can be used as the primary reason for not travelling, especially if the junior is one of the top players in the tournament and likely to be walking away with some prize money at the end of the tournament.

Wait until you have children.....

jenni
18-12-2004, 02:38 PM
hi jenni
I have fwdd your long post to a key potential bidder. I will await his advice.
Also, I think you should send to GW (who can call on the CV Junior Co-ordinator as a resource). GW's email I guess you have....but can also obtain from the CV website (http://www.chessvictoria.com/) .
regards
starter

Have forwarded it to GW - does he read his e-mails? He never answers mine - I have been reduced of late to phoning him (shudder!)

Garvinator
18-12-2004, 04:16 PM
Have forwarded it to GW - does he read his e-mails? He never answers mine - I have been reduced of late to phoning him (shudder!)
he answered mine when i sent one to him for him as webmaster.

ursogr8
18-12-2004, 06:30 PM
Have forwarded it to GW - does he read his e-mails? He never answers mine - I have been reduced of late to phoning him (shudder!)

jenni

He answers mine usually within the hour.
But then, when you are are a 'starter' of issues, Gazza finds it better to nip them in the bud. ;)

starter

Denis_Jessop
18-12-2004, 07:54 PM
Hi Denis,

Yes I understood that as well - however I am happy to send the info to anyone - as I said it is supposed to be as inclusive as possible. If Starter would like to nominate some extra people and pm their e-mails I will forward the info to them.

Jenni


Hi Jenni

My point was more that by bringing in Geoff you are making contact with CV now that he is their ACF delegate. I agree that this is a matter on which a wide range of people should be consulted. If our ACF Junior Subcommittee was already up and running I would say let them look at it and consult whomever they like.

Cheers
Denis

jenni
18-12-2004, 10:42 PM
Hi Jenni

My point was more that by bringing in Geoff you are making contact with CV now that he is their ACF delegate. I agree that this is a matter on which a wide range of people should be consulted. If our ACF Junior Subcommittee was already up and running I would say let them look at it and consult whomever they like.

Cheers
Denis

Absolutely - when the Junior sub-committee is running, it will be very easy to disseminate this sort of information - it will be the responsibility of the state delegate on the sub-committee to ensure it goes to all relevant people in his/her state.

When I sent the info to Darryl, Geoff and David, I assumed they would forward the info to anyone else they felt was relevant and because I knew Geoff was the Vic delegate I assumed he would be a good point of contact for Vic. unfortunately Vic appears to be very fractured and it is hard for a non-mexican to understand contact points for all the different groups. :)

ursogr8
19-12-2004, 06:44 AM
Absolutely - when the Junior sub-committee is running, it will be very easy to disseminate this sort of information - it will be the responsibility of the state delegate on the sub-committee to ensure it goes to all relevant people in his/her state.

When I sent the info to Darryl, Geoff and David, I assumed they would forward the info to anyone else they felt was relevant and because I knew Geoff was the Vic delegate I assumed he would be a good point of contact for Vic. unfortunately Vic appears to be very fractured and it is hard for a non-mexican to understand contact points for all the different groups. :)

Knowing that it is fractured, then this is all the more reason to send to the head honcho, who will pass it on the the CV Junior Co-ordinator. This will ensure coverage and impartiality.


starter

jenni
19-12-2004, 10:37 AM
jenni

He answers mine usually within the hour.
But then, when you are are a 'starter' of issues, Gazza finds it better to nip them in the bud. ;)

starter

Has not answered any of mine this year - what have I done wrong? I definitely have the right e-mail address.

However he is always very helpful when I phone him. Unfortunatley I regard a phone as an instrument of torture and only use it when I am desperate.

Libby
19-12-2004, 11:08 AM
Wait until you have children.....

Small reality check Garvin (and nobody should travel with an expectation of winning enough money to cover the cost - and especially not place that pressure on a child.)

Last year my eldest daughter spent a week in Tassie with diving, Kayleigh had 2 weeks in Greece with chess followed by a trip to Perth. Eldest went to Brisbane with diving in 2004 and Tassie for school camp. Kayeigh off to Mt Buller for school AND juniors in a matter of a few weeks. I'll just factor that into a single income family budget that has to meet the weekly cost of -

Child 1 - diving, gymnastics, athletics & soccer plus assorted school stuff
Child 2 - chess, swimming & school stuff
Child 3 - ballet, gymnastics, swimming & school stuff

Not a whinge but just a little indicator of why travelling a lot - even with cheap fares - is a tricky consideration. In the end, were Kayleigh strong enough to be selected, we would only accept a place if we were sure we could commit to the minimum requirements and would attempt to do more. I have fundraised my a**e off over the last two years but even the most dedicated parent sometimes runs out of juice ... :)

PHAT
20-12-2004, 12:05 AM
Small reality check Garvin


Libby, you, I, we parents, knowwwww. Those who aren't/haven't are in blissy ignorance. May they die alone in an quiet house.

Bill Gletsos
20-12-2004, 10:52 AM
Libby, you, I, we parents, knowwwww. Those who aren't/haven't are in blissy ignorance. May they die alone in an quiet house.
You just cant help yourself can you.
The last sentence was uncalled for.
You just have to denigrate others even when not provoked.

jenni
16-03-2005, 07:27 PM
For 2005 the Squad was increased by 50% to a total of 30 members. There was a strong feeling among selection consultants this year, that more was needed to be done to keep our good girls playing and this resulted in a record number of girls making the squad.

List (in alphabetical order of first name)




Name State Sex Age (as of 1 Jan 2005)

Alex Jule Qld F 15
Angela Song NSW F 12
Chris Wallis Vic M 14
Dusan Stojic Vic M 15
Emma Guo ACT F 9
Gareth Oliver ACT M 16
James Morris Vic M 10
James Obst SA M 14
Jason Hu NSW M 17
Jessica Kinder Qld F 13
Junta Ikeda ACT M 13
Kayleigh Smith ACT F 11
Lara Ong ACT F 10
Luthien Russell QLD F 11
Max Illingworth NSW M 12
Molly McGarity QLD F 11
Moulthun Ly QLD M 13
Ray Song NSW M 10
Rebecca Harris NSW F 15
Rengan Vijayakumar VIC M 11
Ruperto Lugo VIC M 14
Sally Yu VIC F 10
Sam Chow VIC M 17
Sam Grigg QLD M 12
Sherab Guo-Yuthok ACT M 14
Tamzin Oliver ACT F 13
Vaness Reid NSW F 15
Vincent Suttor NSW M 16
Yi Yuan ACT M 9
Zhigen Lin VIC M 11




Squad facilitators are Denis Jessop and Jenni Oliver

Selection Consultants are

GM Ian Rogers
IM Gary Lane
IM Stephen Solomon
Manuel Weeks
Alan Goldsmith
Geoff Saw
Kerry Stead

Many thanks to them, for the large amount of work involved in examining all the performance data and tournament results. (And to Bill Gletsos for providing it all).

And of course most important of all to the wonderful NECG for providing funding for the second year.

Mischa
16-03-2005, 07:47 PM
Go team!!!

Thunderspirit
16-03-2005, 08:23 PM
Any room in the Under 27's section?? :owned:

jenni
16-03-2005, 08:29 PM
Any room in the Under 27's section?? :owned:

Poor Lee - this stuff needed to be around when you were growing up :)

The_Wise_Man
16-03-2005, 08:44 PM
Jenni

Can you please add Male or Female, Age and State Association?

Wise

jenni
16-03-2005, 08:48 PM
Jenni

Can you please add Male or Female, Age and State Association?

Wise

Sorry - of course. I forgot the adult environment wouldn't know all of them.

Trent Parker
17-03-2005, 02:20 PM
Damn If i only chose to pick chess instead of playing piano as a hobby when i was younger :lol: :lol:

rupy
20-03-2005, 09:06 PM
hi i was wondering why there was only 1 under 10 male kid in the squad :/ wasn't the focus of the squad to develop the real youth of australia?

(not that i have any personal interest in this matter ^^)

jenni
20-03-2005, 11:58 PM
hi i was wondering why there was only 1 under 10 male kid in the squad :/ wasn't the focus of the squad to develop the real youth of australia?

(not that i have any personal interest in this matter ^^)

It really gets difficult selecting under 10's as they are hard to assess. There were 4 under 10's on the short list, but the selectors only felt 2 were ones they wanted to put in. It is an enormous juggling act between airy potential of under 10's and more solid achievements of older juniors.

The accent was always on developing the under 14 group (this includes u12 and U10), and there were 18 under 14's, 8 under 16's and 4 under 18's, so definitely a focus on the younger age group.

ursogr8
21-03-2005, 07:15 AM
It really gets difficult selecting under 10's as they are hard to assess. There were 4 under 10's on the short list, but the selectors only felt 2 were ones they wanted to put in. It is an enormous juggling act between airy potential of under 10's and more solid achievements of older juniors.

The accent was always on developing the under 14 group (this includes u12 and U10), and there were 18 under 14's, 8 under 16's and 4 under 18's, so definitely a focus on the younger age group.

The ROOKIES Cup was won yesterday (for March) by Eugene Schon. Pencil him in as one for the future. And already I can't beat James Morris.
You have my sympathy trying to make decisions through data that is monotonically increasing.

regards
starter

jenni
21-03-2005, 10:21 AM
The ROOKIES Cup was won yesterday (for March) by Eugene Schon. Pencil him in as one for the future. And already I can't beat James Morris.
You have my sympathy trying to make decisions through data that is monotonically increasing.

regards
starter

Eugene missed out by a whisker. In fact if the same squad had been picked last year he would definitely have got in, but there was a concerted decision to give preference to girls this year, whereas last year a much smaller no of girls made it in.

Mischa
21-03-2005, 10:39 AM
Beat you to it Starter...I nominated Eugene for the squad this year

ursogr8
21-03-2005, 10:49 AM
Beat you to it Starter...I nominated Eugene for the squad this year
:eek: I had no idea, noidea.
But it was a good idea, noidea.

Mischa
21-03-2005, 11:06 AM
Have them sometimes you know!
Just let on you know, you know

jenni
21-03-2005, 11:22 AM
Beat you to it Starter...I nominated Eugene for the squad this year

To explain this a bit further. Initially a list of the strongest juniors in Australia was created. A major criteria was that juniors had to have played either the Aus Juniors or the Aus Open.

After that the list was distributed to state organisations and major coaches and they were asked for names of promising juniors to be added. ACT, NSW and Qld were fairly active in adding names to the list. I don't believe Victoria added any, although there were already a number of Victorians on the list, from the initial process.

Noidea asked me to add Eugene, which I had no problme with, as Eugene has had some good results. He decided to play up in the Under 18 at the Aus Juniors, which made it difficult to assess his relative ranking to the other under 12's, but he did seem at least as strong as some of the other juniors being nominated by the other states.

After all nominations were in, all juniors were approached to ask if they would be available for the camp in Sep/Oct. A number of juniors took themselves off the list, either because of school commitments, or financial constraints. These included Michael Wei, Ronald Yu, Edwin Wu and William Xu among others.

After that the squad was finalised - this took a number of iterations. About 20 of the squad members received 9 out of 9 votes, but then it fragmented quite a lot for the last 10 places.

ursogr8
21-03-2005, 11:33 AM
To explain this a bit further. <snip>



tks jenni
As I said earlier a tough job give the rapid increase in ratings.

Incidentally, readers may wonder who loses all these ratings points to juniors.
When I first joined Box Hill, John Butler was 1800 thereabouts. Just plug his name into
http://www.chessaustralia.com.au/index.cfm?p=ratings#search
and you can see what a feast has been made by the Bourmistrovs, Nemeths etc.

regars
starter

pax
21-03-2005, 11:52 AM
No West Australians? Was that for financial/logistical reasons, or did none make the grade?

Bill Gletsos
21-03-2005, 12:46 PM
tks jenni
As I said earlier a tough job give the rapid increase in ratings.

Incidentally, readers may wonder who loses all these ratings points to juniors.
When I first joined Box Hill, John Butler was 1800 thereabouts.That must have been a long time back because from dec 1992 his rating declined from 1647 down to 1414 in Dec 1999. After the April 2000 150 point increase his rating was 1538 in Aug 2000. It has steadily decresed since then.As far as I can see his results justify his current rating.

Just plug his name into
http://www.chessaustralia.com.au/index.cfm?p=ratings#search
and you can see what a feast has been made by the Bourmistrovs, Nemeths etc.Hard to see where they made a feast given that since Aug 2000 he played Denis Bourmistrov(1943) once, Janos Nemeth(1819) once and Laszlo Nemeth(1548) once.

BTW that graph is incorrect.
It appears that the ratings showing for dec 2003 are for the John Butler from NSW as John M Butler from Vic never had a published rating of 1400 odd in Dec 2003.

ursogr8
21-03-2005, 01:57 PM
That must have been a long time back because from dec 1992 his rating declined from 1647 down to 1414 in Dec 1999.
tks Bill
I had in mind the mid 70's start.


After the April 2000 150 point increase his rating was 1538 in Aug 2000. It has steadily decresed since then.As far as I can see his results justify his current rating.
Hard to see where they made a feast given that since Aug 2000 he played Denis Bourmistrov(1943) once, Janos Nemeth(1819) once and Laszlo Nemeth(1548) once.

I had in mind earlier, and I put an etc.


BTW that graph is incorrect.
It appears that the ratings showing for dec 2003 are for the John Butler from NSW as John M Butler from Vic never had a published rating of 1400 odd in Dec 2003.

I hope the ACE folk are reading this.


starter

pax
21-03-2005, 02:06 PM
tks Bill
I had in mind the mid 70's start.



I had in mind earlier, and I put an etc.

What, you mean some people lose rating points over 30 years? Astonishing! I blame those pesky juniors :lol:

jenni
21-03-2005, 02:40 PM
No West Australians? Was that for financial/logistical reasons, or did none make the grade?

A bit of both - there were no terribly strong WA kids (and no girls!!!), but there were some like Yita Choong, Thomas Donaldson etc who could have been added, but no-one from WA added any. I didn't pursue it, because I assumed logistics were the problem and I felt that they would struggle to be selected ahead of other kids already nominated.

There are no WA players in the top Under 20, Under 18, under 12 and under 10. Thomas Donaldson is no 18 on the top under 16 list. Yita Choong is no 16 on the top under 14 list. There are 2 girls in the top under 20 females list, but both are no longer juniors.

My feeling is that there is much more junior activity in WA now, than there used to be, but there is need for more work to be done to generate strong juniors. It was great to see an open Primary team play in the schools comp in Mt Buller. An Open High school team has participated for a few years now. Exposure to more interstate competition has to help - it is just so hard when they are so isolated.

auriga
21-03-2005, 02:44 PM
tks Bill
I hope the ACE folk are reading this.
starter

starts i think you've found a correlation dispersion problem...
i'll fix asap.

pax
21-03-2005, 02:54 PM
A bit of both - there were no terribly strong WA kids (and no girls!!!), but there were some like Yita Choong, Thomas Donaldson etc who could have been added, but no-one from WA added any. I didn't pursue it, because I assumed logistics were the problem and I felt that they would struggle to be selected ahead of other kids already nominated.

That's a real shame. I reckon WA could have made a good case for Yita and Thomas to be given special consideration in order to have representation from all states on the squad (and they would compare reasonably well with other borderline selections). I guess if they don't make the case it's a bit hard to select them!

auriga
21-03-2005, 03:36 PM
starts i think you've found a correlation dispersion problem...
i'll fix asap.

s. it has now been fixed.

Paul S
21-03-2005, 09:59 PM
Noidea asked me to add Eugene, which I had no problme with, as Eugene has had some good results.

He had a good result in last year's Doeberl, getting a draw against me! ;) :)

Oepty
22-03-2005, 10:45 AM
The quad looks quite good although I wonder whether it is little large and whether there is two many girls in the squad, I think there is probably a couple to many. I am surprised the Schon did not make and also Rukman Vijayakumar. Sophie Eustace from an SA perspective is probably a little unlucky as well given the high number of girls. I think she probably is a better prospect than a few of the girls who made it. The selection job is very tough so thank you for those who took up the task.
Scott

jenni
22-03-2005, 12:02 PM
The quad looks quite good although I wonder whether it is little large and whether there is two many girls in the squad, I think there is probably a couple to many. I am surprised the Schon did not make and also Rukman Vijayakumar. Sophie Eustace from an SA perspective is probably a little unlucky as well given the high number of girls. I think she probably is a better prospect than a few of the girls who made it. The selection job is very tough so thank you for those who took up the task.
Scott

Rukman was another one who was a near miss. 30 is big - 50% bigger than last year, but not an inordinate number. The problem last year was that if you wanted to included some of the up and comers, then you had to exclude some of the older elite kids. I guess if you still want to push ahead the older good kids, as well as nurture the younger possibly good kids, increasing the squad to 30 allows it.

One of the coments I had from one of the selectors (who shall be nameless), summed up the general feeling of selectors this year and perhaps explains why so many girls made it in. I believe all the girls in the squad have potential to become strong players.

"I found one interesting note in that my attitude last year was that everyone had to earn their place regardless of their gender but after what I saw at Mt Buller and just looking online has scared me a little about the state of female junior chess in Australia! I find it impossible to rule out any female since I have the belief that if female chess will be improved it must be because of a group of girls, not just one or two. "

Libby
23-03-2005, 09:39 AM
The quad looks quite good although I wonder whether it is little large and whether there is two many girls in the squad, I think there is probably a couple to many. I am surprised the Schon did not make and also Rukman Vijayakumar. Sophie Eustace from an SA perspective is probably a little unlucky as well given the high number of girls. I think she probably is a better prospect than a few of the girls who made it. The selection job is very tough so thank you for those who took up the task.
Scott

I would also consider Sophie unlucky but it is my understanding that SA failed to put her forward?

I have recently seen an ACF email sent about chasing states for nominations to the newly formed ACF Junior sub-committee. ACT has nominated Jenni and NSW nominated Richard G-H - nobody else seems to be showing much interest.

If you want to progress your junior players and be involved in decisions made which affect their participation and opportunities in the game then you need to have an effective means to lobby on their behalf.

The NECG Squad and ACF sub-committee are not related, and I'm not suggesting being on the sub-committee is a way to get your state players selected. But you need to have someone, or a junior-focussed organisation, willing to go out and bat for your players and not just hope someone will notice them.

ACT inclusion in the Squad is immensely disproportinate with our population. Compare our school competitions with those in most other states (other than our very successful girls competition) and I believe our representation is even disproportionate with our junior chess playing population.

However it is not disproportionate when you consider our numbers in Mt Buller, our success in Mt Buller, our likely numbers at the 2005 World Youth (selected or otherwise) or even with the willingness of our juniors to travel to events - because we have only 3 weekenders "at home" all year.

And we have no chess business in the ACT running events for us, broadly providing school or private coaching services or even a shop we can go to for books & equipment. We just work our little (or not so little :eek: ) backsides off.

arosar
23-03-2005, 09:51 AM
Remind us again the aims and purpose of this NECG squad.

AR

Garvinator
23-03-2005, 12:06 PM
I have recently seen an ACF email sent about chasing states for nominations to the newly formed ACF Junior sub-committee. ACT has nominated Jenni and NSW nominated Richard G-H - nobody else seems to be showing much interest.
CAQ has discussed who to nominate. Hasnt our nominated person been put forward yet?

Libby
23-03-2005, 12:23 PM
CAQ has discussed who to nominate. Hasnt our nominated person been put forward yet?

Not according to the email I received on 21/3.

jenni
23-03-2005, 02:14 PM
Remind us again the aims and purpose of this NECG squad.

AR

A prime purpose was to create something with a national focus that would foster the development of strong and potentially strong juniors in Australia. This year it appears to have also become a vehicle for affirmative action in promoting female chess in Australia. The accent was always on the younger children as there was more "bluesky" in this age group. However it also rewards those Juniors who have already become strong players.

Some new initiatives this year are to set up a mentoring panel available to advise juniors and parents in the squad, a monthly e-mail homework system and a montlhy newsletter.

Denis_Jessop
23-03-2005, 02:51 PM
CAQ has discussed who to nominate. Hasnt our nominated person been put forward yet?

I sent an e-mail about the lack of nominations on 21 March and received a reply from Ian Murray that the CAQ nominee is Kieron Olm-Milligan. There are so far no further responses. So we now have 3 members confirmed plus myself ex officio.

DJ

Bill Gletsos
23-03-2005, 03:16 PM
Really, Kieron? Is the squad u20 then, cos I'm quite sure Kieron turns 20 this year. I would have thought Casey Barnard or Ben Lazarus would have been more logical choices.They are talking about the ACF junior subcommittee not the NECG.

Garvinator
23-03-2005, 03:27 PM
I sent an e-mail about the lack of nominations on 21 March and received a reply from Ian Murray that the CAQ nominee is Kieron Olm-Milligan. There are so far no further responses. So we now have 3 members confirmed plus myself ex officio.

DJ
yes Keiron is our nomination

Libby
23-03-2005, 03:33 PM
Really, Kieron? Is the squad u20 then, cos I'm quite sure Kieron turns 20 this year. I would have thought Casey Barnard or Ben Lazarus would have been more logical choices.

:doh:

Alan Shore
23-03-2005, 03:40 PM
They are talking about the ACF junior subcommittee not the NECG.

Oh, ok. Didn't read it properly.. I'm still not well. :(

Bill Gletsos
23-03-2005, 03:42 PM
Oh, ok. Didn't read it properly.. I'm still not well. :(Ok then, we will let you off this time. ;)

jenni
23-03-2005, 04:15 PM
Oh, ok. Didn't read it properly.. I'm still not well. :(

Can't blame you - they've been indulging in the dreaded thread drift.....

However Kieran seems a good choice - should be enthusiastic and still in touch with junior issues.

Oepty
23-03-2005, 04:42 PM
I would also consider Sophie unlucky but it is my understanding that SA failed to put her forward?


That is now my understanding as well. I think in light of this I want to be inlcuded in any calls such as this in the in future. Without wanting to big name myself I think I know more about the strength of junior players in SA, than anyone else in SA apart from Alan Goldsmith. I cannot though give to much details on Chess Kids coached players who have not played outside their competitions, there seems to be a few strong players coming from this sector. I can give the details as to why this is the case if you wish. I also now do have a position with the SAJCL although not on the main committee. If I had any idea that Sophie had not been nominated I would have done so myself. Alan does an awful lot for junior chess in SA but tends to be a little disorganised and sometimes things like this just slip past him.



I have recently seen an ACF email sent about chasing states for nominations to the newly formed ACF Junior sub-committee. ACT has nominated Jenni and NSW nominated Richard G-H - nobody else seems to be showing much interest.

If you want to progress your junior players and be involved in decisions made which affect their participation and opportunities in the game then you need to have an effective means to lobby on their behalf.

The NECG Squad and ACF sub-committee are not related, and I'm not suggesting being on the sub-committee is a way to get your state players selected. But you need to have someone, or a junior-focussed organisation, willing to go out and bat for your players and not just hope someone will notice them.

ACT inclusion in the Squad is immensely disproportinate with our population. Compare our school competitions with those in most other states (other than our very successful girls competition) and I believe our representation is even disproportionate with our junior chess playing population.

However it is not disproportionate when you consider our numbers in Mt Buller, our success in Mt Buller, our likely numbers at the 2005 World Youth (selected or otherwise) or even with the willingness of our juniors to travel to events - because we have only 3 weekenders "at home" all year.

And we have no chess business in the ACT running events for us, broadly providing school or private coaching services or even a shop we can go to for books & equipment. We just work our little (or not so little :eek: ) backsides off.

I don't no how long ago the call for nominations went out but I will try and talk to Alan Goldsmith about it.
Scott

jenni
23-03-2005, 08:04 PM
That is now my understanding as well. I think in light of this I want to be inlcuded in any calls such as this in the in future. Without wanting to big name myself I think I know more about the strength of junior players in SA, than anyone else in SA apart from Alan Goldsmith. I cannot though give to much details on Chess Kids coached players who have not played outside their competitions, there seems to be a few strong players coming from this sector. I can give the details as to why this is the case if you wish. I also now do have a position with the SAJCL although not on the main committee. If I had any idea that Sophie had not been nominated I would have done so myself. Alan does an awful lot for junior chess in SA but tends to be a little disorganised and sometimes things like this just slip past him.

I don't no how long ago the call for nominations went out but I will try and talk to Alan Goldsmith about it.
Scott

I am quite happy to include you on my list next year for the 2006 squad, please PM me with your e-mail address.

The list went to both Alan Goldsmith and David Cordover both of whom should have added Sophie to the list.

Alan admitted he hadn't had time to deal with the NECG list effectively and I think next year will do so. However if you feel you have more time and can be a good source of SA potential juniors, we would be more than happy to have you the e-mail list. The idea was to be inclusive as possible, without being silly about it. This year I would not have expected Sophie to make the squad(just as I did not expect Sally Yu or Lara Ong to do so and I think both of those are stronger than Sophie). However given the feeling of the selectors, it was definitely a plus being a girl in 2005.

Garvinator
23-03-2005, 11:05 PM
I cannot though give to much details on Chess Kids coached players who have not played outside their competitions, there seems to be a few strong players coming from this sector.
this brings up and interesting situation. Should selectors consider players whose 'qualifications' come from non acf type events? The acf and state associations have a product which needs to be valued and protected. I will leave my comments as this for now as I dont know how to word the next section. Also I fear that my opinions will be in the minority and might offend a few people, which I am sick of doing.

Libby
24-03-2005, 06:22 AM
this brings up and interesting situation. Should selectors consider players whose 'qualifications' come from non acf type events? The acf and state associations have a product which needs to be valued and protected. I will leave my comments as this for now as I dont know how to word the next section. Also I fear that my opinions will be in the minority and might offend a few people, which I am sick of doing.

I think this would be a bit irrelevant anyway as all the NECG kids had to have played the Aus Open and/or the Aus Junior. And if their experience beyond that was to a limited field of local junior events they would need to be truly exceptional to have any serious hope of selection. In my opinion, given I'm not a selector.

And the acf and state associations may well have a product worth valuing but the "value" of the product varies a great deal and I'd suggest that not every junior is getting as much "value" as the the other junior may be at a local level.

If you have an opinion worthy of serious consideration then put it out there - don't just allude to it. That's a cop out. Just support opinions with some context, ideas or evidence and you end up with a debate - not just a slagging ;)

jenni
24-03-2005, 11:04 AM
this brings up and interesting situation. Should selectors consider players whose 'qualifications' come from non acf type events? The acf and state associations have a product which needs to be valued and protected. I will leave my comments as this for now as I dont know how to word the next section. Also I fear that my opinions will be in the minority and might offend a few people, which I am sick of doing.

I understand this point of view, because we should value ACF events. However I think at the junior level, we shouldn't isolate parents and juniors coming through non ACF events. Often these events have been their first introduction to chess and we should welcome them and bring them into the fold (so to speak).

Basically a Junior who has only played in non ACF events will not have an ACF rating and as such will not stand up too well in a selection process (which is heavily geared around looking at performance data from ACF events.).

Mischa
24-03-2005, 11:11 AM
it is true that juniors often play in these events as a prelude to playing in ACF tournaments. Would it also be true to say that they are unlikely to play in ACF tournaments unless they wanted to go further with their chess, or if they felt that they had performed well enough to do so?
If my junior was not doing very well in 'local' events would it be likely that I would invest a lot of money in travelling to attend ACF tournaments?
I don't think I worded that very well, but I hope you know what I mean.

Denis_Jessop
24-03-2005, 07:24 PM
it is true that juniors often play in these events as a prelude to playing in ACF tournaments. Would it also be true to say that they are unlikely to play in ACF tournaments unless they wanted to go further with their chess, or if they felt that they had performed well enough to do so?
If my junior was not doing very well in 'local' events would it be likely that I would invest a lot of money in travelling to attend ACF tournaments?
I don't think I worded that very well, but I hope you know what I mean.

I would have taken Garvin's posting to refer, in effect, to ACF-rated events, that is events conducted by JCLs, clubs, State Associations and the ACF within the ACF rating umbrella so to speak. There are very few events, junior or senior, actually run by, or for, the ACF - basically Australian Championships. I think it is fair to say that any junior likely to be in consideration for the NECG squad would already have played in many of the kinds of events that I mentioned in my first sentence, usually starting with juniors-only events and moving on to the others. At the very beginning the juniors only events would be unlikely to have been ACF-rated but prospective NECG people would have progressed beyond that stage. Whether there are any juniors who have never played in an ACF-rated event but are yet good enough to be considered for the NECG squad is an interesting question. I would doubt it as you need to play in those kinds of events for experience and development. And how could the selection consultants evaluate those people's strength?

DJ

Oepty
24-03-2005, 08:57 PM
I am quite happy to include you on my list next year for the 2006 squad, please PM me with your e-mail address.

The list went to both Alan Goldsmith and David Cordover both of whom should have added Sophie to the list.


I don't think Cordover should be blamed in this case. It is now my understanding that he has hardly anything to do with Chess Kids in SA. It is run by Matthew Juszczynski. As for Alan, he is extemely busy as well so he made a mistake. He has told me though he was very surprised Sophie would not have been considered without him having to nominate her. Thankyou for allowing me to be on the email list.



Alan admitted he hadn't had time to deal with the NECG list effectively and I think next year will do so. However if you feel you have more time and can be a good source of SA potential juniors, we would be more than happy to have you the e-mail list. The idea was to be inclusive as possible, without being silly about it. This year I would not have expected Sophie to make the squad(just as I did not expect Sally Yu or Lara Ong to do so and I think both of those are stronger than Sophie). However given the feeling of the selectors, it was definitely a plus being a girl in 2005.

I think Sally Yu should definitely be on the list, and Lara Ong would be a borderline case. This though is a bit irrevelant as I think every girl whose name was put to the selectors was chosen in the squad therefore it is probably fair to say the Sophie Eustace would have been almost a certainity. I would put Sophie, Sally and Lara all ahead of 2 of the other girls who did make the squad.

I will most probably not be on the internet until next Tuesday so don't expect an answer until then

Scott

jenni
24-03-2005, 10:19 PM
I don't think Cordover should be blamed in this case.

No-one is blaming anyone! I was just pointing out that there was the opportunity to put her on and two of the people who could have, were given that opportunity. Though given Cordover has worked with her on a number of occasions, I would have thought he might have put her on. However he is probably very busy being a first time father at the moment.

This is the first time that nominating of juniors by the states has happened and next year people will be more aware. I do not believe Sophie would have made the squad this year,even if she had been nominated. Mind you I didn't expect Sally or Lara to make it on either.

The strongest juniors in their age groups were put on initially. Luthien and Kayleigh Smith are way ahead of the other girls in the under 12 age group (Sophie's age group). Molly Mcgarity got on by virtue of being the Under 12 Girls Champion. There is no way that Sophie is strong enough to be put on with those 3 girls. After that it was up to the states to nominate juniors that were not currently strong but their state organisations recognised them as having potential

e,g Neither Sally Yu nor Lara were initially on.



This though is a bit irrevelant as I think every girl whose name was put to the selectors was chosen in the squad therefore it is probably fair to say the Sophie Eustace would have been almost a certainity.



It is not true that every girl on the list would have been put on. As the numbers got bigger and bigger, girls would have been left off in order to not penalise the boys (and create a very weak sqaud). There is only so far that affirmitive action can go. Of the girls both Lara and Sally were left out of the squad initially and only got in on the final pass.



I think Sally Yu should definitely be on the list, and Lara Ong would be a borderline case.


Sally performed very well at the Open. A bit weaker at the Aus Juniors, but she was playing the under 18 and was tired. Lara beat Sophie in both their head on games, so a bit difficult to put Sophie ahead of her? Sally and Sophie both played Ballarat and although they both got 2 points, Sally's performance looked stronger. Lara Ong also had a performance rating of 1400 at Toukley a couple of weeks ago.


I would put Sophie, Sally and Lara all ahead of 2 of the other girls who did make the squad.


You could argue she should have got in ahead of Tamzin and Jessica as she is 2 years younger and only 300 points lower, but most of the selectors voted for the 2 of them and they got in on hte first pass and I do not believe the selectors would have dropped either of those in favour of Sophie (or Sally or Lara).

Anyway the thing to remember is this is only for 1 year and if Sophie continues to improve at a greater rate than the girls currently ahead of her, she will walk into the squad ahead of other girls in her own age group, next year. What I like about Sophie is that she is so enthusiastic about chess - you just see her playing in everything. :)

Libby
25-03-2005, 07:56 AM
I get very tired (even on a local level) of being picked at and questioned over selection issues etc (and am recently suffering on a similar local matter :( ).

Not because people shouldn't be allowed to question/appeal etc but because people can't make the time to read the information that is sent to them.

If there are deadlines by which to reply, if there is information people are required to submit, if there are conditions to be met for selection and that information is communicated to each state/individual then that's what you need to do.

Debates after the event can be quite depressing and counter-productive (again, in current and past personal experience) because so many come out of the aggrieved/overlooked party just not meeting the crteria which were published/promulgated.

I get a lot of email. I know it's a pain in the neck. But so are people who want to heap a whole big pile of **** on you because they are ticked off that you have dared to ask them to meet the criteria set down. And they were too busy to read it properly themselves. But somehow you are the one in the wrong, or the system is skewed or you should overlook their shortcomings because "they really want to do it and they're definitely better than x or y player who can't possibly justify their place."

My rant for the day - it's been a long week :mad:

jenni
25-03-2005, 10:21 AM
My rant for the day - it's been a long week :mad:

Hmm - I'll have to find out later today what happened.

Of course this is a constant problem for volunteers - it doesn't matter what you do or how hard you work to be fair and equitable, there is always someone waiting to take a piece out of you. You get really tired of trying to listen to people and do everything you can to meet their needs and then find someone who never lifts a finger to help, tearing you to bits, because you told their little cheating darling that they had to move the piece they touched (or whatever).

Selections are always the pits, because everyone has their favourites and often no real idea of comparisons between kids. ACT Dev squad can be particularly bad as many of the parents have no idea (sorry R :) ), and are totally convinced that little Johnny is the next Kasparov (more likely Bobby Fischer, because they wouldn't have heard of Kasparov), just because he always beats them at chess.

Garvinator
25-03-2005, 12:48 PM
Hmm - I'll have to find out later today what happened. and since many are at canberra for easter, so can the rest of us ;)


Of course this is a constant problem for volunteers - it doesn't matter what you do or how hard you work to be fair and equitable, there is always someone waiting to take a piece out of you. You get really tired of trying to listen to people and do everything you can to meet their needs and then find someone who never lifts a finger to help, tearing you to bits :hmm: sounds very familiar, oh dear i am having deja vu :doh:

Libby
25-03-2005, 01:52 PM
:hmm: sounds very familiar, oh dear i am having deja vu :doh:

Don't forget I was using an example that involves people being given the information they need, failing to read or act upon it, and then seeking to lay responsibility for that elsewhere.

Garvinator
25-03-2005, 02:20 PM
Don't forget I was using an example that involves people being given the information they need, failing to read or act upon it, and then seeking to lay responsibility for that elsewhere.
yes i know but the part i quoted was relevant to my comment and was a whole general comment.

Libby
25-03-2005, 02:43 PM
yes i know but the part i quoted was relevant to my comment and was a whole general comment.

It's OK Garvin. I have more than 20 years of torture behind me as a volunteer - I know where you are coming from - just can't resist turning the screws myself on occasion ;)

Garvinator
25-03-2005, 02:45 PM
It's OK Garvin. I have more than 20 years of torture behind me as a volunteer
some ppl never learn ;)

Libby
25-03-2005, 02:55 PM
some ppl never learn ;)

That's certainly how it is feeling right now :( Of course, being involved with your own kids (which eats up about half of my volunteer "years") is a different motivation. My previous incarnation came out of the "love of the game" league. It was a bit of a wrench to give that up but not as tricky as abdicating from roles in which the benefits (or loss of benefits) will affect your own child.

All of course, based on the over-inflated volunteer ego that they just couldn't do it without you :owned: When I exited the softball/baseball fields of endeavour the ripples were pretty minor. Someone always comes along, letting go yourself is often the hardest part.

Oepty
26-03-2005, 11:17 AM
No-one is blaming anyone! I was just pointing out that there was the opportunity to put her on and two of the people who could have, were given that opportunity. Though given Cordover has worked with her on a number of occasions, I would have thought he might have put her on. However he is probably very busy being a first time father at the moment.

This is the first time that nominating of juniors by the states has happened and next year people will be more aware. I do not believe Sophie would have made the squad this year,even if she had been nominated. Mind you I didn't expect Sally or Lara to make it on either.

The strongest juniors in their age groups were put on initially. Luthien and Kayleigh Smith are way ahead of the other girls in the under 12 age group (Sophie's age group). Molly Mcgarity got on by virtue of being the Under 12 Girls Champion. There is no way that Sophie is strong enough to be put on with those 3 girls. After that it was up to the states to nominate juniors that were not currently strong but their state organisations recognised them as having potential

e,g Neither Sally Yu nor Lara were initially on.

It is not true that every girl on the list would have been put on. As the numbers got bigger and bigger, girls would have been left off in order to not penalise the boys (and create a very weak sqaud). There is only so far that affirmitive action can go. Of the girls both Lara and Sally were left out of the squad initially and only got in on the final pass.

Sally performed very well at the Open. A bit weaker at the Aus Juniors, but she was playing the under 18 and was tired. Lara beat Sophie in both their head on games, so a bit difficult to put Sophie ahead of her? Sally and Sophie both played Ballarat and although they both got 2 points, Sally's performance looked stronger. Lara Ong also had a performance rating of 1400 at Toukley a couple of weeks ago.




You could argue she should have got in ahead of Tamzin and Jessica as she is 2 years younger and only 300 points lower, but most of the selectors voted for the 2 of them and they got in on hte first pass and I do not believe the selectors would have dropped either of those in favour of Sophie (or Sally or Lara).

Anyway the thing to remember is this is only for 1 year and if Sophie continues to improve at a greater rate than the girls currently ahead of her, she will walk into the squad ahead of other girls in her own age group, next year. What I like about Sophie is that she is so enthusiastic about chess - you just see her playing in everything. :)

I agree with most of the points in the post.
I am sorry I used the word blame, it was the wrong word, perhaps fault would have been better.

I think that as many people as possible should be contacted and a more towards that as you have mentioned is a very good idea.

As far as the relative strengths of the girls under 12, I too would consider Luthien Russell and Kayleigh Smith as being a bit stronger than the rest. As far the rest go, it is probably Guo, McGarity, Yu, Ong and Eustace in that order, but with very little between the last 2. Lara did beat Sophe 2-0 nill which is means she does deserve to be considered stronger, but Sophie did go 1-1 with both Guo and McGarity at Mt Buller as well. Sally Yu performance was better at Ballarat than Sophie's performance as I would expect, but both were good. It is interesting they had three opponnents in common.

I was not going to name Tazmin and Jessica as the 2 girls I was talking about but seeing you did I will confirm them.

To change the subject, what happened with Deborah Ng, I think she probably would have been very close to selection as well. It is also interesting looking at the girls list, Heather Huddleston, Michelle Lee, Amy Evans, Casey Hickman and Adelaide Solystik all who did not play would have to been very close to selection if they had played at Mt Buller.

Scott

Libby
26-03-2005, 11:39 AM
As far as the relative strengths of the girls under 12, I too would consider Luthien Russell and Kayleigh Smith as being a bit stronger than the rest. As far the rest go, it is probably Guo, McGarity, Yu, Ong and Eustace in that order, but with very little between the last 2. Lara did beat Sophe 2-0 nill which is means she does deserve to be considered stronger, but Sophie did go 1-1 with both Guo and McGarity at Mt Buller as well. Sally Yu performance was better at Ballarat than Sophie's performance as I would expect, but both were good. It is interesting they had three opponnents in common.

I was not going to name Tazmin and Jessica as the 2 girls I was talking about but seeing you did I will confirm them.

To change the subject, what happened with Deborah Ng, I think she probably would have been very close to selection as well. It is also interesting looking at the girls list, Heather Huddleston, Michelle Lee, Amy Evans, Casey Hickman and Adelaide Solystik all who did not play would have to been very close to selection if they had played at Mt Buller.

Scott

I think this (again) is a case of needing more information.

Firstly, you had to have played Aus Open or Aus Jnrs. Most of your "missing" did not. Secondly, a number of children approached did withdraw from the selection process because they could not commit to the camp.

Emma Guo is younger than all of the others. She is U10. That makes her current performance far more noteworthy. She is currently ranked second on the Australian Open Under 10 list. Given she is nearly 2 years younger than Luthien & Kayleigh, she is probably outperforming both of them if you factor the age in. Age is part of the selection process.

The lesson seems to be to have someone (and it's great to see you wanting to be involved) who will advocate for these SA kids. Even if it does just mean putting their name in the hat. You could back-and-forth over the relative merit of individuals but the selections have been made.

For all Jenni knew at the time (as coordinator) children may not have been put forward because state associations had asked them and the player was either not interested or not available.

Organising this stuff can be painful and time-consuming because people are non-responsive to emails & messages. There's only so much chasing up you should have to do.

Oepty
26-03-2005, 11:51 AM
I think this (again) is a case of needing more information.

Firstly, you had to have played Aus Open or Aus Jnrs. Most of your "missing" did not. Secondly, a number of children approached did withdraw from the selection process because they could not commit to the camp.

Emma Guo is younger than all of the others. She is U10. That makes her current performance far more noteworthy. She is currently ranked second on the Australian Open Under 10 list. Given she is nearly 2 years younger than Luthien & Kayleigh, she is probably outperforming both of them if you factor the age in. Age is part of the selection process.

The lesson seems to be to have someone (and it's great to see you wanting to be involved) who will advocate for these SA kids. Even if it does just mean putting their name in the hat. You could back-and-forth over the relative merit of individuals but the selections have been made.

For all Jenni knew at the time (as coordinator) children may not have been put forward because state associations had asked them and the player was either not interested or not available.

Organising this stuff can be painful and time-consuming because people are non-responsive to emails & messages. There's only so much chasing up you should have to do.

Hang on Libby, I am very well aware of the playing in My Buller requirement for selection. I even stated it in my post. Go back and read it again, especially the last sentence which ends, "all who did not play would have to been very close to selection if they had played at Mt Buller". I think it is very clear what I was meaning.

As far as Emma Guo's age goes, I am well aware of that as well, she is 9 where as the other girls are older. I do try and make sure I know what I am talking about. That is why yesterday I went through the games I have form the girls tournaments at Mt Buller as well as Sally Yu's games in the Open.

Scott

Libby
26-03-2005, 12:55 PM
Hang on Libby, I am very well aware of the playing in My Buller requirement for selection. I even stated it in my post. Go back and read it again, especially the last sentence which ends, "all who did not play would have to been very close to selection if they had played at Mt Buller". I think it is very clear what I was meaning.

As far as Emma Guo's age goes, I am well aware of that as well, she is 9 where as the other girls are older. I do try and make sure I know what I am talking about. That is why yesterday I went through the games I have form the girls tournaments at Mt Buller as well as Sally Yu's games in the Open.

Scott

Hi Scott

I agree with what you are saying. And I certainly agree many(most) of the girls you named would have been strong candidates for selection. Wasn't quite sure where the speculation goes when those we speculate about were not in the race?

However Deborah is one example who made herself unavailable.

Wasn't sure if you were aware of Emma's age, or that others reading your post would have been as well informed (or researched ;) ). It's easy to lump these girls all together but there is a spread of ages there. Part of seeing Luthien & Kayleigh at the top has to be an acknowledgement that they are also older than many of the others (except Molly & Sophie I think). So much can change in 12 months of junior chess. In this age group we can be talking about somebody not even on our radars now, by this time next year.

Oepty
26-03-2005, 01:20 PM
Hi Scott

I agree with what you are saying. And I certainly agree many(most) of the girls you named would have been strong candidates for selection. Wasn't quite sure where the speculation goes when those we speculate about were not in the race?

However Deborah is one example who made herself unavailable.

Wasn't sure if you were aware of Emma's age, or that others reading your post would have been as well informed (or researched ;) ). It's easy to lump these girls all together but there is a spread of ages there. Part of seeing Luthien & Kayleigh at the top has to be an acknowledgement that they are also older than many of the others (except Molly & Sophie I think). So much can change in 12 months of junior chess. In this age group we can be talking about somebody not even on our radars now, by this time next year.

Okay thanks Libby. As far as mentioning the names who were not in the race goes, well I was looking at ratings list yesterday and going on rating noticed that these 5 girls would have been in contention. It seemed interesting to me so I thought it might be interesting to others, thats all.

Just on girls performances Sophie Eustace and Katrina Knapp both scored 3/7 in the SA championships. Sophie's performance was alot better though pushing a couple of 1600+ players, especially Andrew Short in her last game. Knapp's best result was a win against the totally out of form Fedja Zulfic.

Now to get away from speculating on various girls abilities onto the stucture of the quad. I wonder whether with the increase in the size of the squad whether it is worth allocating a certain number of spots to girls. I was thinking of perhaps 20 open (which could include girls if they are strong enough e.g Angela Song) and 10 positions for girls. What do you think of the idea?

Scott

pax
26-03-2005, 01:37 PM
Now to get away from speculating on various girls abilities onto the stucture of the quad. I wonder whether with the increase in the size of the squad whether it is worth allocating a certain number of spots to girls. I was thinking of perhaps 20 open (which could include girls if they are strong enough e.g Angela Song) and 10 positions for girls. What do you think of the idea?

Scott

I think it's a mistake to make "policy" decisions regarding representation of gender, age groups or states. Good selectors will always have a balanced squad in mind, but can also take into account that in any given year there may be particular pockets of strength that need to be recognised.

In any case, the size of the squad will probably change year to year as funding changes so any policy decisions may become rapidly obsolete.

As for this year's squad, it matches your suggestion perfectly so I assume you have no problem with it demographically?

Oepty
26-03-2005, 01:42 PM
Actually it may or may not meet my suggestion. There are 12 girls out of 30, which means it would need 2 girls and only 2 girls to be considered as part of the top 20 regardless of giving girls a bias as happened this year. I am more looking for it to be open before the start of the process.
Scott

Libby
26-03-2005, 02:15 PM
The ACT runs a Development Squad program. This is now an Under 14 group. It did start as an U18 group but a general increase in player strength, better coaching etc has made it largely obsolete for the older kids. When we started the program in 2002 we could only "dream" of having a significant core of juniors in the 1500-2000 range. A great number now in that range were part of our 2002 Squad.

We require -

a weekly chess commitment (demonstrated over a period of months at a minimum) which can be a junior club or adult club;

regular play in our events and an ambition (if not yet realised) to play major events (like our local weekenders and Aus Juniors);

good sportsmanship and good behaviour at our events;

a parental commitment to assist with the running of at at least one ACTJCL event during the year.

The selected kids get eight coaching days (one per month April-Nov) with the same coach each month (as far as possible) in small groups of 4-6 kids/coach. Our aim being that the combined factors of reward (selection & inclusion), participation, and quality coaching will encourage the players and their families to take chess more seriously and foster the kind of level of participation that leads to real improvement.

We select 10x U12 players with at least 3 girls (and no fewer than 3 boys assuming the gender balance can ever be tipped the other way).

We select 10x U10 players with at least 3 girls

We select 10x players in the U8 and/or U14 age groups with at least 3 girls. The U14 places being heavily weighted towards children who may have only developed a serious interest in chess late in Primary School. It has been quite successful in retaining these kids and giving them the push along required to make a successful foray into secondary school chess.

In our Squad of 30 we will have at least 9 girls so roughly 1/3. I think that balance has been about right. On average, at least one girl has always won easily on merit, another is in the fringe range and often the last girl is an affirmitive action placement.

Our Dev Squad costs the kids $150 for the year. ACTJCL subsidises the coaching sessions and a shirt (many will have seen our representative shirts at the Aus Juniors). We try to run at least one annual "Grandmaster Camp" (coaching weekends in which GMs Rogers & Johansen have been involved along with IM Wallace, IM Laszlo Hazai etc) and our Development Squad get priority selection for that as well (invites are highly sought after!)

This year's Squad is -

Yi Yuan, Justin Chow, Kayleigh Smith, Emma Guo, Edward Xing, Jake McCook, Casey Baines, Taiyang Zhang, Tomoki Kimura, Alana Chibnall, James Li, Joshua Bishop, Savannah McGuirk, Etienne Masle-Farquhar, Grace Huang, Benjamin Xing, Megan Setiabudi, Lucinda Flood, Yijun Zhang, Niranjan Gupte, Amy Flood, Bevan Lee, Gala Huang, Harry Thompson, Eliot Osborne, Adrian Trowell, Angus Gruen, Allen Setiabudi & Andrew Spooner (and yes, that's only 29 as others didn't meet the criteria).

Just thought I'd give Paul a list to watch out for at Doeberl ;) Although there are plenty of similarly scary kids out there who don't apply because they don't meet the criteria, don't want to meet the criteria or don't need it. But it has been very successful in bringing through our whole new exciting group of players.

As an example, my daughter is 12 this year. There are almost no juniors her actual age playing actively in Canberra at a higher level. However, just one-two years behind her we have an embarressment of riches coming through. Not entirely because of the Development Squad but certainly nurtured through it.

pax
26-03-2005, 02:30 PM
Actually it may or may not meet my suggestion. There are 12 girls out of 30, which means it would need 2 girls and only 2 girls to be considered as part of the top 20 regardless of giving girls a bias as happened this year. I am more looking for it to be open before the start of the process.
Scott

Well Angela and Emma would be strong candidates for top 20 under your suggestion.

Anyway, I think it's a mistake for numbers to be allocated before you look at who has applied for the reasons in my previous post. What happens if the camp is at an inconvenient time, and most of the top girls are unavailable?

Libby
26-03-2005, 02:49 PM
Personally, I think "affirmitive action" on the part of the girls needs to happen at a state level.

I think it is sensible to have a minimum number of places set aside for girls in a national program as well but I am wary of tipping it so far in that direction that you are accepting significantly weaker girls at the expense of significantly stronger boys.

However, Jenni has made clear the views of some of the selectors this year. And I think they had every reason to be appalled by the state of junior chess for girls.

Kayleigh's team cruised to a win at the Aus Schools in the Girls' Primary divison. She is a very active player. The other 3 girls play actively on a local level and are all rated around 600 but are not immensely dedicated or ambitious. They just play some chess regularly.

They are also eligible, as a whole team, to play again this year.

Of more concern, to me, was that we had the option to fill the bye. When the second & third ranked ACT schools declined to fill the bye, we took a second team from Kayleigh's school because we have the highest level of activity of any school in Canberra (the only school, sadly, able to field at least 4 players who had played in at least one event all year - we had 13 of those!)

Anyway, I explained to the parents that they must see this as experience only, and the girls had almost no prospect of winning any games. They were, after all 11, 11, 8, 8 & 7 and none were rated. They had finished =10th in our local competition.

However they were able to finish 2-2 with both the best Girls team from Vic & SA. They even swindled a back-rank aginst the B2 of our stronger team :doh:

The best team from a state may be well behind the Open team (although we had 2 of these girls in the team which had originally won the Open comp, just can't play both :( ) but I think we should expect a level of competence. I'm not blaming the girls, just saying we all need to be doing the work locally to make sure they are not just competent, but even better than that.

Oepty
26-03-2005, 03:09 PM
Libby, The ACT development squad looks to be excellent. I recognize a lot of the players although far from all of them. The parental involvement idea is not one I had thought of before.

I also agree there should be affirmative action at state level. the SAJCL did hold a girls only tournament last year with with limited response. I will be trying to lobby Alan to do more this year. On an adult scene I think it is very sad that there has been no SA womens champs for a number of years. As far as junior girls in SA go, well the fact we had an 11 year old, Sophie Eustace, win the State Girls championships says a bit. The only other junior girls in SA of any real strength and appear to be talking chess seriously, and have played in competitions I have seen are Surabhi Heitman and Katrina Knapp, perhaps also Kendra Selvanderan. The is probably some more be coached within Chess Kids, I played a casual game against one girl who seemed to have some real talent. Alan and myself had a talk a few weeks ago when we seriously considered a junior girl who has not played for a few years might actually still be the strongest junior girl in SA. Sad.

Scott

Libby
26-03-2005, 03:41 PM
Libby, The ACT development squad looks to be excellent. I recognize a lot of the players although far from all of them. The parental involvement idea is not one I had thought of before.

I also agree there should be affirmative action at state level. the SAJCL did hold a girls only tournament last year with with limited response. I will be trying to lobby Alan to do more this year. On an adult scene I think it is very sad that there has been no SA womens champs for a number of years. As far as junior girls in SA go, well the fact we had an 11 year old, Sophie Eustace, win the State Girls championships says a bit. The only other junior girls in SA of any real strength and appear to be talking chess seriously, and have played in competitions I have seen are Surabhi Heitman and Katrina Knapp, perhaps also Kendra Selvanderan. The is probably some more be coached within Chess Kids, I played a casual game against one girl who seemed to have some real talent. Alan and myself had a talk a few weeks ago when we seriously considered a junior girl who has not played for a few years might actually still be the strongest junior girl in SA. Sad.

Scott

Term 1 is "Girl's Term" in the ACT.

We run the ACT Girls Primary Championship with between 250-300 girls. We run 2 zones plus a final, all with the same format as our Open events.

Between the zones & the final we run the "Girls Allegro" (15 min chess) and we sell it to the girls as a good place to practice for the final. We also offer more trophies at the Allegro (proportionately) than we do in our Open events with 1st, 2nd & 3rd place plus 1st, 2nd & 3rd U8, U10 & U12. This is to try to ensure a number of "new" girls win a prize as that can really generate ongoing involvement and even parental enthusiasm.

In the Term 1 holidays, we have a Girls Only Development Day. We use as many female coaches as we can (remembering that we charge only $25/day and actually engage coaches as young as 12, but mostly 15-18). This is good on the role-modelling side of things but also good for retention of the older girls who stay linked to chess through these coaching opportunities.

We tend to have 3-4 children per coach at these days with each group carefully allocated based on the age, experience & strengths of the coach.

Early in Term 2 is our Girls Secondary. We experiment with this format to try to get as many girls to compete. Not all can find 3 friends willing to form a team so you risk losing them altogether. This year, our compromise is to have prizes (again, disproportionate with Open events) for individuals (1st & 2nd Girl in every year 7-12) and then prizes for the top two teams at the event by using the aggregate scores of the top 4 players for every school fielding at least 4 players.

The top two schools fielding at least 4 players can playoff for our Aus Schools place.

However, following hot on the heels of the Girls Secondary (and close enough to our Term 1 Primary activities) we run the ACT Women's & Girls Championship. We too, had no Women's Championship for many years. But we have developed a core of girls who play rated games. So we run a rated event which is almost entirely girls (apart from the young at heart, Jenni Oliver). We get an encouraging number of inexperienced girls prepared to attempt this event too. It's not exactly over run with competitors but we do get around 20 - which looks pretty good on a national level!

And now we have won an ACT Women's Sport Grant to run a targeted 3 day program in the July holidays.

We still feel our progress is slow and the standard at our Girls Primary events in Term 1 is absolutely deadly :( however we are in there having a go. Nothing can happen for girls until some kind of critical mass is achieved. You are going to die waiting for that 1 in 100 girl, but that 1 in 100 boy can appear every year.

Oepty
26-03-2005, 03:49 PM
Term 1 is "Girl's Term" in the ACT.

We run the ACT Girls Primary Championship with between 250-300 girls. We run 2 zones plus a final, all with the same format as our Open events.

Between the zones & the final we run the "Girls Allegro" (15 min chess) and we sell it to the girls as a good place to practice for the final. We also offer more trophies at the Allegro (proportionately) than we do in our Open events with 1st, 2nd & 3rd place plus 1st, 2nd & 3rd U8, U10 & U12. This is to try to ensure a number of "new" girls win a prize as that can really generate ongoing involvement and even parental enthusiasm.

In the Term 1 holidays, we have a Girls Only Development Day. We use as many female coaches as we can (remembering that we charge only $25/day and actually engage coaches as young as 12, but mostly 15-18). This is good on the role-modelling side of things but also good for retention of the older girls who stay linked to chess through these coaching opportunities.

We tend to have 3-4 children per coach at these days with each group carefully allocated based on the age, experience & strengths of the coach.

Early in Term 2 is our Girls Secondary. We experiment with this format to try to get as many girls to compete. Not all can find 3 friends willing to form a team so you risk losing them altogether. This year, our compromise is to have prizes (again, disproportionate with Open events) for individuals (1st & 2nd Girl in every year 7-12) and then prizes for the top two teams at the event by using the aggregate scores of the top 4 players for every school fielding at least 4 players.

The top two schools fielding at least 4 players can playoff for our Aus Schools place.

However, following hot on the heels of the Girls Secondary (and close enough to our Term 1 Primary activities) we run the ACT Women's & Girls Championship. We too, had no Women's Championship for many years. But we have developed a core of girls who play rated games. So we run a rated event which is almost entirely girls (apart from the young at heart, Jenni Oliver). We get an encouraging number of inexperienced girls prepared to attempt this event too. It's not exactly over run with competitors but we do get around 20 - which looks pretty good on a national level!

And now we have won an ACT Women's Sport Grant to run a targeted 3 day program in the July holidays.

We still feel our progress is slow and the standard at our Girls Primary events in Term 1 is absolutely deadly :( however we are in there having a go. Nothing can happen for girls until some kind of critical mass is achieved. You are going to die waiting for that 1 in 100 girl, but that 1 in 100 boy can appear every year.

All this ACT stuff is absolutely brilliant. I guess it is too late to try this this year in SA but I will be trying to get something up and going.

Scott

Libby
26-03-2005, 04:28 PM
All this ACT stuff is absolutely brilliant. I guess it is too late to try this this year in SA but I will be trying to get something up and going.

Scott

Perhaps i should not be giving away our secrets :eek:

It's all an evolving process and it's not perfect. You can check out our calendar @ http://www.atmcomputers.com.au/actjcl/calendar.htm It includes links to some of the regional events our kids might want to travel to as well as our ACTJCL events.

School holiday days are not on the calendar as I supervise & run those and do that subject to what my other kids are up to.

jenni
26-03-2005, 08:09 PM
I was not going to name Tazmin and Jessica as the 2 girls I was talking about but seeing you did I will confirm them.


Well it was kinda obvious. :)




To change the subject, what happened with Deborah Ng, I think she probably would have been very close to selection as well.


Deborah turned down the sqad as her mother said music was her priority this year.




It is also interesting looking at the girls list, Heather Huddleston, Michelle Lee, Amy Evans, Casey Hickman and Adelaide Solystik all who did not play would have to been very close to selection if they had played at Mt Buller.

Scott

Heather Huddleston is in year 11 and will be concentrating on studies for the next 2 years - she is going to Belfort in July and if her team gets in she will play the schools comp, but I can't see her playing too much chess over the next 2 years. Michelle won't play chess again until she gets to Uni. Amy Evans has given up chess (although I think will play schools comps). Casey and Adelaide are both strong girls. I understand Casey was going to play the Aus Juniors but something prevented her. Not sure what is happening with Adeliade -don't see her play much at the moment.

This of course points out yet again what is happening in female chess - how do you keep the girls playing, so that you can build up a strong group, not an islolated 1 or 2?

jenni
26-03-2005, 08:23 PM
Anyway, I think it's a mistake for numbers to be allocated before you look at who has applied for the reasons in my previous post. What happens if the camp is at an inconvenient time, and most of the top girls are unavailable?

I think this is true the selections are very difficult and we already have some restrictions (i.e there has to be a certain number form the lowere age groups etc). I think you have to trust that the selectors are all people with a great interest in junior chess and that each year they will get a good squad picked, allowing for perceived needs that year.

I also think it is a lot like the AIS - many sports juniors never get selected for AIS scholarships, but still make it to the top. Sometimes not being picked is the spur that is needed to maek a big commitment and improvemment - we have certainly seen that with the ACT development squad.

As far as having to play the Aus Juniors or Aus Champs go - anything that makes our juniors come and play our elite tournaments can only be good.

Denis_Jessop
26-03-2005, 09:26 PM
I think this is true the selections are very difficult and we already have some restrictions (i.e there has to be a certain number form the lowere age groups etc). I think you have to trust that the selectors are all people with a great interest in junior chess and that each year they will get a good squad picked, allowing for perceived needs that year.

I also think it is a lot like the AIS - many sports juniors never get selected for AIS scholarships, but still make it to the top. Sometimes not being picked is the spur that is needed to maek a big commitment and improvemment - we have certainly seen that with the ACT development squad.

As far as having to play the Aus Juniors or Aus Champs go - anything that makes our juniors come and play our elite tournaments can only be good.

To pursue Jenni's reference to the AIS I think all States and the ACT (and probably the NT) now have their own Academy of Sport and the athletes from those Academies often mix it honorably with those from the AIS. So there is no reason why the States could not set up junior development programs for those who miss out on the NECG squad and give them more than adequate development assistance. It might even create a bit of competition as a spur to improvement.

DJ

Oepty
27-03-2005, 08:19 PM
Well it was kinda obvious. :)

Well I guess so, but one of them could have been Alex Jule.





Heather Huddleston is in year 11 and will be concentrating on studies for the next 2 years - she is going to Belfort in July and if her team gets in she will play the schools comp, but I can't see her playing too much chess over the next 2 years. Michelle won't play chess again until she gets to Uni. Amy Evans has given up chess (although I think will play schools comps). Casey and Adelaide are both strong girls. I understand Casey was going to play the Aus Juniors but something prevented her. Not sure what is happening with Adeliade -don't see her play much at the moment.

This of course points out yet again what is happening in female chess - how do you keep the girls playing, so that you can build up a strong group, not an islolated 1 or 2?

Thanks for the info. I was sadly expecting to hear that at least one of them had given up chess.
How do you get a group together? I don't know, we haven't succeeded in SA.
Even having a keen chess mum and a grandmaster for an uncle, a IM for a father or a WGM for a mother does not seemed to have worked in SA.
Scott

jenni
27-03-2005, 11:17 PM
How do you get a group together? I don't know, we haven't succeeded in SA.
Even having a keen chess mum and a grandmaster for an uncle, a IM for a father or a WGM for a mother does not seemed to have worked in SA.
Scott
Its terribly hard! WE find lots of girls only events helps - it creates a differnent atmosphere and seems to promote more bonding and socialising. Tony and I have worked with so many girls and it is so disappointing to see them get to High School and give up.

Chocolate and junk food does help. We always add junk food to our training sessions - keeps them happy for awhile and seems to stave off "retirement' if you make it fun. Last year I had bags fo lollies for the Girls High Schools championships - we will see if this encourages them to return this year. :)

As far as keeping serious girls playing - I don't know. We are hoping that having a group of them in NECG will create the social networls that girls seem to need and encourage them to want to play other tournaments.

Garvinator
27-03-2005, 11:25 PM
Its terribly hard! WE find lots of girls only events helps
i think a heap of girls only events couls actually hurt girl participation. Yes, when they are young, it is fine to have girls only events as for young females and young males for that matter, because the idea of having anything to do with the opposite sex will have accusations of girlie germs ;) .

But as they get older, i dont think there should be girls only events. There are very few girl only events on the Gold Coast and they seem to be managing to keep girls playing when they are young. If they stay on when they get to 18 or so is another question.

Garvinator
27-03-2005, 11:28 PM
Even having a keen chess mum and a grandmaster for an uncle, a IM for a father or a WGM for a mother does not seemed to have worked in SA.
Scott
i would say that having a titled player as a known relative could actually be a reason why the player doesnt play anymore. Its called pressure and expectation, maybe not from her own family, but as you point out here, this player has titled player relatives, so i would imagine that any time the player turns up at a tournament either he/she gets asked about her relative in question, or feels an expectation that they should be improving faster (well it is a real pressure applied from other ppl, or just an internal pressure).

Libby
28-03-2005, 07:37 AM
i think a heap of girls only events couls actually hurt girl participation. Yes, when they are young, it is fine to have girls only events as for young females and young males for that matter, because the idea of having anything to do with the opposite sex will have accusations of girlie germs ;) .

But as they get older, i dont think there should be girls only events. There are very few girl only events on the Gold Coast and they seem to be managing to keep girls playing when they are young. If they stay on when they get to 18 or so is another question.

Do you think we have a dozen or something?

We run a girls-only Primary School Championship because -

1. It encourages girls to play. ie about 120-160 girls per zone in 2 zones. At corresponding "Open" zones may get only 6-10 girls per 160 entrants in a zone.

2. It allows us to qualify our best girls team for the girls division at Aus Schools rather than the very dubious practice of taking the best all-girl team from our Open event (which forces girls to play in an all-girl team to be considered rather than playing at their level in whatever "open" teams their school may enter).

We then run a Girls Allegro (15 min chess), Girls Only Development Day in one school holidays (all others are "open" days), and our Women & Girls championship. Is that a "heap"? Who is running or proposing a "heap" of girls only events? I think the Qld experience is similar to ours. Whilst you feel it is having no problem keeping girls playing, look at the loss of Amy Evans? What percentage of your girls in her age group does that represent? How many boys would you lose to represent that same percentage? Is it even close?

Can I say that I come from the position of a parent whose daughter is unhappy in "girls-only" events because "none of her friends are there." She has no "girl" friends because they don't like anything she's interested in - warhammer, magic cards, warcraft etc. She has never needed other girls around to want to play chess.

However, more girls play our girls-only events than play our Open events. The trick we are trying to play, especially by running them at the start of the year, is to encourage a proportion of them to continue into the open events later in the year. And each year we snag a couple more. In that we we hope to build our base of female players, not create a climate where they won't attempt open events. My explanation to Scott, was to illustrate how we cluster the girls activities. A means to attract them to play 1 then 2 then 3 events and then feel confident to say "I know what I'm doing, I enjoy this, I'll be happy at the Open events and gee, I even know a few other girls that I don't go to school with already, and I might see them there too."

And if you propose awarding a "Women's" or "Girl's" title in anything it is best awarded in a Women's or Girl's event isn't it? At least that way it should go to someone who deserved it, rather than whichever player dropped a couple of early games in the Open event and came home with a soft draw?

I can't see the chess calendars being over run with Girls only activities anytime soon. We have run two Open events this term already so the boys are not short of opportunities. The only discouragement for boys in "open" as opposed to "boys-only" events is that dreaded risk of losing to a girl - stomached more easily by some than others. The germs don't seem to be a big problem - even seem to be rather valued in some quarters ;)

Garvinator
28-03-2005, 08:02 AM
Can I say that I come from the position of a parent whose daughter is unhappy in "girls-only" events because "none of her friends are there." She has no "girl" friends because they don't like anything she's interested in - warhammer, magic cards, warcraft etc. She has never needed other girls around to want to play chess.
about to leave for brisbane open, so havent got time to reply to any other posts but this one. I remember you saying this about Kayleigh before. Funny story, well I think so, from mt buller. I think you might enjoy this one Libby.

Just before one of the rounds in the girls under 18, most of the girls were standing around talking clothes, mags and the rest of it.
Then I noticed Kayleigh sitting at the board waiting for her game to start, stuffing her face with chocolate (looked like more of it got on her hands and face than in her mouth :uhoh: ) and wasnt the slightest bit interested in joining in the conversation about what colour nail polish looked best with pants or whatever the other girls were talking about :eek:

Libby
28-03-2005, 08:42 AM
Just before one of the rounds in the girls under 18, most of the girls were standing around talking clothes, mags and the rest of it.
Then I noticed Kayleigh sitting at the board waiting for her game to start, stuffing her face with chocolate (looked like more of it got on her hands and face than in her mouth :uhoh: ) and wasnt the slightest bit interested in joining in the conversation about what colour nail polish looked best with pants or whatever the other girls were talking about :eek:

In Mt Buller, it probably was chocolate alll over her hands & face (messy eating is a Kayleigh specialty) but grotty fingers are a permanent state for her as painting your warhammer figures leads to copious amounts of paint on fingers, occasionaly wiped on forehead and (of course) you clean your paint brush by wiping it on your pants (and if Mum gets cross - you wipe it on the desk itself, or even on your bedsheets). It sooo reminds me of my brother - that fresh scent of turpentine & enamel in the bedroom!

Oepty
28-03-2005, 02:17 PM
i would say that having a titled player as a known relative could actually be a reason why the player doesnt play anymore. Its called pressure and expectation, maybe not from her own family, but as you point out here, this player has titled player relatives, so i would imagine that any time the player turns up at a tournament either he/she gets asked about her relative in question, or feels an expectation that they should be improving faster (well it is a real pressure applied from other ppl, or just an internal pressure).

You are quite possibly right.
Scott

Oepty
28-03-2005, 02:37 PM
In SA we have held Primary School girls competition. I am not sure how many schools competed last year, but in 2002 there was only 5 schools/ 25-30 girls. Of the winning team, 2 of 6 are still playing, the board 1 and the reserve.

I think SA has produced, although not kept an excellent number of strong junior girls, Kylie Coventry, Jasmine, Juanita and Jade Lauer-Smith, Monika Gajic probably top the list. The only trouble is none of this group still play chess.

The position might not be quite as bad as I think as I have found a Chess Kids rating list for SA in the last couple of days and there seems to be a reasonably large number of girls on this list as well. Interestingly the top two positions are held by Surabhi Heitmann and Sophie Eustace. I still think Surabhi is the stronger player of the 2, although only just.
Scott

ursogr8
07-04-2005, 08:56 AM
A prime purpose was to create something with a national focus that would foster the development of strong and potentially strong juniors in Australia. This year it appears to have also become a vehicle for affirmative action in promoting female chess in Australia. The accent was always on the younger children as there was more "bluesky" in this age group. However it also rewards those Juniors who have already become strong players.

Some new initiatives this year are to set up a mentoring panel available to advise juniors and parents in the squad, a monthly e-mail homework system and a montlhy newsletter.

hi jenni

Any update on this?
I hear on my grapevine that VIC is being considered for this years event? Is ChessGURU the host organisation?

starter

jenni
07-04-2005, 12:22 PM
hi jenni

Any update on this?
I hear on my grapevine that VIC is being considered for this years event? Is ChessGURU the host organisation?

starter

No - Box Hill are organising it. Gerry and Kerry Lyall. I think it is about 90% definite. Haven't been doing any NECG stuff for the last 2 weeks - am wearing my overseas team hat at the moment. If I survive the next week, I'll be getting back to NECG.

jenni
08-06-2005, 04:11 PM
NECG was taken over/merged late last year with an American company Charles River Associates. As such NECG would not be continuing with the sponsorship.

Mr Henry Ergas one of the principals of NECG is continuing with the sponsorship out of his personal funds.

The squad is thus being renamed the

"Ergas Australian Elite Training Squad. "

We are very grateful for his generosity.

Thank-you also to Ian Rogers, Ian Rout, Gary Lane and Darryl Johansen who are all taking on a homework assignment for the Ergas Squad, to Stephen Solomon for giving me some reading material ideas and to Kerry Lyall and Gerrit Hartland for all the work they are doing for the Melbourne Camp and to Graeme Gardiner for helping with the June Mini-squad in Queensland.

pax
08-06-2005, 05:03 PM
Mr Henry Ergas one of the principles of NECG is continuing with the sponsorship out of his personal funds.

What a legend! :clap:

jenni
09-09-2005, 04:37 PM
Thanks very much to Shaun Fielder, who has set up a terrific website for us. Thanks also to Box Hill for providing the cyber space.

As can be seen from details on the web page, the camp is only a few weeks away and should be a great event.

This is the link

http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/junior/2005/elite/index.htm

kveldulv
09-09-2005, 05:27 PM
To make it a little easier to find, I have added a link to it from the Box Hill home page.

So, you can just go to www.boxhillchess.org.au (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au) and click "2005 Ergas Squad" in the quick-links section on the left-hand-side.

arosar
09-09-2005, 05:48 PM
And to think I got good connections there in that club. There's no link to my blog. I'm so heart broken by this.

AR

ursogr8
11-09-2005, 07:59 PM
And to think I got good connections there in that club. There's no link to my blog. I'm so heart broken by this.

AR

hi Amiel

Listen mate, you will not mind if I just touch-up the grammar in your sentence; will you?
It should read
"There is no link in my blog".

That's right folks; Australia's biggest chess blogger links to the NSWCA, but no Mexican site. :rolleyes:

;)

regards
starter

Spiny Norman
12-09-2005, 07:17 AM
That's right folks; Australia's biggest chess blogger links to the NSWCA, but no Mexican site. :rolleyes:
AR, I think it'd be a vauable public service if you added "Links" to the premier chess websites in Australia. Perhaps someone could start a thread to call for nominations?

ursogr8
12-09-2005, 09:07 AM
AR, I think it'd be a vauable public service if you added "Links" to the premier chess websites in Australia. Perhaps someone could start a thread to call for nominations?

Frosty

I said that, first.
But you said it nicely. :clap:

starter

jenni
19-09-2005, 10:02 PM
Another thank-you!

To Brian Jones and ACE for sponsoring some book prizes for the Ergas Squad Camp.

Davidflude
24-09-2005, 11:29 AM
Just to bring everybody up to speed Box Hill is ready to to run Ergas. We have an extra helper in Starter which will take pressure off other helpers to some extent. He is a swiss perfect expert and good on the Internet.

1) all impedimenta is packed in cars and ready to deliver to the venue on Tuesday morning. Kerri please note I have grabbed extra scoresheets. Any participants who arrive on the dot of nine to help shift materials will be much appreciated.

2) all software and files are installed on computer including latest rating file and draft tournament entries for swiss perfect.

2) I will pick up parking permits monday and try for an extra one for Starter

3) I will update virus checker after midnight monday so that it is right up to date.

4) Is there an official opening? Do we have a definitive list of distinguished guests?

ursogr8
24-09-2005, 12:33 PM
Just to bring everybody up to speed Box Hill is ready to to run Ergas. We have an extra helper in Starter which will take pressure off other helpers to some extent. He is a swiss perfect expert and good on the Internet.

1) all impedimenta is packed in cars and ready to deliver to the venue on Tuesday morning. Kerri please note I have grabbed extra scoresheets. Any participants who arrive on the dot of nine to help shift materials will be much appreciated.

2) all software and files are installed on computer including latest rating file and draft tournament entries for swiss perfect.

2) I will pick up parking permits monday and try for an extra one for Starter

3) I will update virus checker after midnight monday so that it is right up to date.

4) Is there an official opening? Do we have a definitive list of distinguished guests?

All
This is an example of Kiwi humour by the Flavoured Dude, and so obviously not true. I guess I deserve to be a target since I have panned him here (when he has deserved it ;) ).


starter

jenni
24-09-2005, 06:45 PM
I am merging this into the existing Ergas thread. Gladys Yu is organising official guests. According to the latest info I have

"Opening:
Liberal Spokesperson for Sport and Rec – the Hon Bruce Atkinson
Whitehorse Weekly photographer

Closing:
State Member for Box Hill – Robert Clark
Singtao Daily reporter
MasterNow weekly magazine chief editor"

In addition to this Stephen Mayne from Crikey will be giving a little talk to the kids at the opening of the training tournament on the 30th September.

By the way we are still looking for a couple of adults (preferably 2100+) to play in the training touranament. No entry fee and $1500 in prize money. As an extra bonus, you get your game ananlysed by either Ian Rogers or Darryl.

Anyone who is interested could contact Kerry Lyall or Gerrit Hartland for more details. I leave for Melbourne tomorrow morning.

Kevin Bonham
25-09-2005, 03:59 PM
In addition to this Stephen Mayne from Crikey will be giving a little talk to the kids at the opening of the training tournament on the 30th September.

Interesting. How would he come to be involved in such a thing?

jenni
25-09-2005, 05:19 PM
Interesting. How would he come to be involved in such a thing?

Well at turns out he is a chess player is his past. Ian Rogers knows him and I wanted some interesting people so Ian invited him.

Davidflude
25-09-2005, 05:33 PM
What, no Labour gliteratti. Surely chess should not be part of party politics.

jenni
25-09-2005, 07:22 PM
What, no Labour gliteratti. Surely chess should not be part of party politics.
No idea - Gladys has been dealing with the pollies. I think it is a case of taking what you can get, rather than being even handed.

ursogr8
25-09-2005, 08:34 PM
No idea - Gladys has been dealing with the pollies. I think it is a case of taking what you can get, rather than being even handed.

hi jenni

Actually. and unwittingly, the Flavoured Dude has highlighted an issue that has intrigue and genuine strands of influence. I look forward to discussing with you during the coming week. How do you like your coffee?

regards
starter

jenni
25-09-2005, 10:58 PM
hi jenni

Actually. and unwittingly, the Flavoured Dude has highlighted an issue that has intrigue and genuine strands of influence. I look forward to discussing with you during the coming week. How do you like your coffee?

regards
starter

Not a coffee drinker I am afraid. I'll bring some orange tea.

For the NECG opening ceremony last year I had Senator Kate Lundy (labour) and MLA Bill Stefaniak (Liberal), so I managed to keep both sides happy. Kate is actually an ex chess player, so maybe a change of government would be beneficial for chess.....

ursogr8
27-09-2005, 03:34 PM
Not a coffee drinker I am afraid. I'll bring some orange tea.

For the NECG opening ceremony last year I had Senator Kate Lundy (labour) and MLA Bill Stefaniak (Liberal), so I managed to keep both sides happy. Kate is actually an ex chess player, so maybe a change of government would be beneficial for chess.....

Well, this years ERGAS training squad has been formerley launched by an MP who has invented a chess game for pairs. I hope Ian Rogers has not had to quickly re-write his first lecture notes. ;)
Bill Jordan is scheduled to lecture in the first session after lunch...I am also looking forward to that. :cool:

starter

Mischa
27-09-2005, 08:32 PM
Well, this years ERGAS training squad has been formerley launched by an MP who has invented a chess game for pairs. I hope Ian Rogers has not had to quickly re-write his first lecture notes. ;)
Bill Jordan is scheduled to lecture in the first session after lunch...I am also looking forward to that. :cool:

starter


formally....

ursogr8
27-09-2005, 08:42 PM
Twenty seven participants...1 ill, unable to attend today.

Robert Jamieson's final session was received well by the Flavoured Dude who was free-loading in the back-stalls. :P

Breakout sessions tomorrow with 4 coaches attending. Thursday also.

Friday, Saturday, Sunday (am)....tourney against strong players.

Speech-maker at the start has got over her nerves. :uhoh:


late edit....Denis Bourmistrov now signed up for the tourney (ERGAS) that starts on Friday. Denis tells me the combined rating with his flat-mates is in excess of 7000. Is there a stronger household in Aus.?


starter

formally....yes...all my own work (in a previous life ;) )

Davidflude
29-09-2005, 01:04 AM
Great day today. The coaches really got the attention of the kids. Watched a good deal of David Smerdon's sessions. The problems set were really tough. Just like the ones in Kaissiber magazine. One young lady showed considerable class in
finding a brute force "cook" to a study which has a very elegant solution.

The adults had to do no supervision at all.

Flavoured Dude

ursogr8
30-09-2005, 11:23 AM
test

Rincewind
30-09-2005, 11:33 AM
Looks like fire-eater's visit delighted all. :)

Carl Gorka
30-09-2005, 12:05 PM
Looks like fire-eater's visit delighted all. :)

:) They were all deeply studious when I arrived, but all work and no play can be very dull ;)

ursogr8
30-09-2005, 03:34 PM
1 Jule, Alexandra (17) 0:1 Hacche, David J (1)
2 Suttor, Vincent (2) 1:0 Yu, Derek (18)
3 Glenton, Alan (19) 0:1 Ikeda, Junta (3)
4 Stojic, Dusan (4) 0:1 Yuan, Yi (20)
5 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) .5:.5 Wallis, Christopher (5)
6 Oliver, Gareth (6) 1:0 Dalton, Samuel (22)
7 Grigg, Sam (23) 0:1 Bourmistrov, Denis (7)
8 Hu, Jason (8) 1:0 Russell, Luthien (24)
9 Chow, Justin (25) 0:1 Raine, Marcus (9)
10 Jager, Jesse (10) 1:0 Kinder, Jessica (26)
11 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) .5:.5 Song, Angela (11)
12 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) .5:.5 Guo, Emma (28)
13 Smith, Kayleigh (29) .5:.5 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13)
14 Flude, David A (14) 1:0 Yu, Sally (30)
15 McGarity, Molly (31) 1:0 Morris, James (15)
16 Schön, Eugene (16) 1:0 Chow, Keli (32)

ursogr8
30-09-2005, 03:54 PM
1 Hacche, David J (1) .5:.5 Jager, Jesse (10)
2 Raine, Marcus (9) .5:.5 Suttor, Vincent (2)
3 Ikeda, Junta (3) 1:0 Flude, David A (14)
4 Schön, Eugene (16) 0:1 Oliver, Gareth (6)
5 Bourmistrov, Denis (7) 1:0 McGarity, Molly (31)
6 Yuan, Yi (20) 0:1 Hu, Jason (8)
7 Wallis, Christopher (5) 1:0 Oliver, Tamzin L (27)
8 Song, Angela (11) 1:0 Smith, Kayleigh (29)
9 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13) 0:1 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12)
10 Guo, Emma (28) .5:.5 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21)
11 Russell, Luthien (24) 0:1 Stojic, Dusan (4)
12 Morris, James (15) 1:0 Grigg, Sam (23)
13 Kinder, Jessica (26) 1:0 Jule, Alexandra (17)
14 Yu, Derek (18) 0:1 Chow, Justin (25)
15 Yu, Sally (30) 1:0 Glenton, Alan (19)
16 Dalton, Samuel (22) 1:0 Chow, Keli (32)

Libby
30-09-2005, 04:12 PM
Nice to see our over-rated ACT kids are holding their own ;)

It's very quiet up here in Canberra - take any one child out of a mix of three and the results are nearly blissful. (As is doing - almost - nothing related to chess for a week or so. Pestering people here doesn't count :lol: )

Mischa
30-09-2005, 09:01 PM
the ACT kids enjoyed fireeater as well

Rincewind
30-09-2005, 09:07 PM
the ACT kids enjoyed fireeater as well
:clap:

ursogr8
30-09-2005, 09:15 PM
Round 4 pairings
1 Hacche v G Oliver
2 Bourmistrov v Suttor
3 Ikeda v Jager
4 Morris v Hu
5 Kinder v Stojic D
6 Yuan v Flude
7 Wallis v Schon
8 Raine v T Oliver
9 Song v Guo
10 Smith k v Rukman
11 Russell v Jule
12 S Yu v D Yu
13 Chow v Rengan
14 Dalton v McGarity
15 Grigg v Guo-Yuthok
16 K Chow v Glenton

ursogr8
30-09-2005, 09:43 PM
Round 4 pairings
1 Hacche v G Oliver
2 Bourmistrov v Suttor
3 Ikeda v Jager
4 Morris v Hu
5 Kinder v Stojic D
6 Yuan v Flude
7 Wallis v Schon
8 Raine v T Oliver
9 Song v Guo
10 Smith k v Rukman
11 Russell v Jule
12 S Yu v D Yu
13 Chow v Rengan
14 Dalton v McGarity
15 Grigg v Guo-Yuthok
16 K Chow v Glenton

^^
Thirteeen of these players have played 3 games (60min +10) today, starting at 10.30am (at the Box Hill Town Hall....ERGAS), and now have fronted up at BHCC for a 75 +30sec game. Four games in the day. :clap: :clap:

starter

Carl Gorka
30-09-2005, 10:39 PM
test

Thanks for those pics...Ian Rogers made a star guest appearance:D

Mischa
30-09-2005, 10:53 PM
Hey fireater thank you for such great entertainment...the smiles on the faces say it all!!!

Frank Walker
30-09-2005, 11:11 PM
How are the kids selected of this competition?

Carl Gorka
30-09-2005, 11:21 PM
Hey fireater thank you for such great entertainment...the smiles on the faces say it all!!!

no worries, it's a welcome change to carry the meths in public without a brown bag :lol:

Mischa
30-09-2005, 11:26 PM
and no straw

Carl Gorka
30-09-2005, 11:38 PM
and no straw

no, that's the MacDonald's Meths Ice drink thingy version :confused:

Mischa
30-09-2005, 11:42 PM
the pink drink thingy that even my little one couldn't handle?

Carl Gorka
30-09-2005, 11:46 PM
the pink drink thingy that even my little one couldn't handle?

Yep, the meths is an acquired taste ;)

Mischa
30-09-2005, 11:48 PM
:)

BFG
01-10-2005, 07:46 AM
How are the kids selected of this competition?They are all members of the ERGAS Squad that was selected at the beginning of the year. There is a week long camp for the squad members, consisting of coaching and games, going on at the moment. These games are part of that camp.

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:06 PM
1 Hu, Jason (8) .5:.5 Ikeda, Junta (3)
2 Oliver, Gareth (6) .5:.5 Bourmistrov, Denis (7)
3 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) 0:1 Hacche, David J (1)
4 Suttor, Vincent (2) 1:0 Song, Angela (11)
5 Jager, Jesse (10) 1:0 Wallis, Christopher (5)
6 Stojic, Dusan (4) 1:0 Raine, Marcus (9)
7 Flude, David A (14) 1:0 Dalton, Samuel (22)
8 Chow, Justin (25) 0:1 Morris, James (15)
9 Guo, Emma (28) .5:.5 Schön, Eugene (16)
10 McGarity, Molly (31) 0:1 Yuan, Yi (20)
11 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) 0:1 Kinder, Jessica (26)
12 Smith, Kayleigh (29) 1:0 Yu, Sally (30)
13 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) 1:0 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13)
14 Jule, Alexandra (17) 1:0 Grigg, Sam (23)
15 Yu, Derek (18) 1:0 Chow, Keli (32)
16 Glenton, Alan (19) 0:1 Russell, Luthien (24)

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:07 PM
1 Hacche, David J (1) .5:.5 Oliver, Gareth (6)
2 Bourmistrov, Denis (7) .5:.5 Suttor, Vincent (2)
3 Ikeda, Junta (3) 1:0 Jager, Jesse (10)
4 Morris, James (15) 0:1 Hu, Jason (8)
5 Kinder, Jessica (26) .5:.5 Stojic, Dusan (4)
6 Yuan, Yi (20) 1:0 Flude, David A (14)
7 Wallis, Christopher (5) 1:0 Schön, Eugene (16)
8 Raine, Marcus (9) 1:0 Oliver, Tamzin L (27)
9 Song, Angela (11) 1:0 Guo, Emma (28)
10 Smith, Kayleigh (29) 0:1 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12)
11 Russell, Luthien (24) 0:1 Jule, Alexandra (17)
12 Yu, Sally (30) 0:1 Yu, Derek (18)
13 Chow, Justin (25) 1:0 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21)
14 Dalton, Samuel (22) 0:1 McGarity, Molly (31)
15 Grigg, Sam (23) 0:1 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13)
16 Chow, Keli (32) 0:1 Glenton, Alan (19)

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:07 PM
1 Hu, Jason (8) 1:0 Hacche, David J (1)
2 Suttor, Vincent (2) 1:0 Ikeda, Junta (3)
3 Oliver, Gareth (6) 1:0 Yuan, Yi (20)
4 Wallis, Christopher (5) 0:1 Bourmistrov, Denis (7)
5 Stojic, Dusan (4) 0:1 Song, Angela (11)
6 Jager, Jesse (10) .5:.5 Raine, Marcus (9)
7 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) 1:0 Kinder, Jessica (26)
8 Flude, David A (14) .5:.5 Chow, Justin (25)
9 Yu, Derek (18) 0:1 Morris, James (15)
10 Jule, Alexandra (17) 1:0 McGarity, Molly (31)
11 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13) 1:0 Guo, Emma (28)
12 Schön, Eugene (16) 1:0 Smith, Kayleigh (29)
13 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) .5:.5 Russell, Luthien (24)
14 Glenton, Alan (19) 0:1 Dalton, Samuel (22)
15 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) .5:.5 Yu, Sally (30)
16 Chow, Keli (32) 0:1 Grigg, Sam (23)

Frank Walker
01-10-2005, 05:08 PM
They are all members of the ERGAS Squad that was selected at the beginning of the year. There is a week long camp for the squad members, consisting of coaching and games, going on at the moment. These games are part of that camp.

Thank for the info :P

Garvinator
01-10-2005, 05:16 PM
Starter,

It appears that you are showing the players starting seed number instead of their current points total, why is that?

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:21 PM
1. Hacche, David J VIC 17:W 10:D 12:W 6:D 8:L
2. Suttor, Vincent NSW 18:W 9:D 11:W 7:D 3:W
3. Ikeda, Junta ACT 19:W 14:W 8:D 10:W 2:L
4. Stojic, Dusan VIC 20:L 24:W 9:W 26:D 11:L
5. Wallis, Christopher VIC 21:D 27:W 10:L 16:W 7:L
6. Oliver, Gareth ACT 22:W 16:W 7:D 1:D 20:W
7. Bourmistrov, Denis VIC 23:W 31:W 6:D 2:D 5:W
8. Hu, Jason NSW 24:W 20:W 3:D 15:W 1:W
9. Raine, Marcus VIC 25:W 2:D 4:L 27:W 10:D
10. Jager, Jesse VIC 26:W 1:D 5:W 3:L 9:D
11. Song, Angela NSW 27:D 29:W 2:L 28:W 4:W
12. Vijayakumar, Rukman VIC 28:D 13:W 1:L 29:W 26:W
13. Guo-Yuthok, Sherab ACT 29:D 12:L 27:L 23:W 28:W
14. Flude, David A VIC 30:W 3:L 22:W 20:L 25:D
15. Morris, James VIC 31:L 23:W 25:W 8:L 18:W
16. Schön, Eugene VIC 32:W 6:L 28:D 5:L 29:W
17. Jule, Alexandra QLD 1:L 26:L 23:W 24:W 31:W
18. Yu, Derek VIC 2:L 25:L 32:W 30:W 15:L
19. Glenton, Alan VIC 3:L 30:L 24:L 32:W 22:L
20. Yuan, Yi ACT 4:W 8:L 31:W 14:W 6:L
21. Vijayakumar, Rengan VIC 5:D 28:D 26:L 25:L 30:D
22. Dalton, Samuel VIC 6:L 32:W 14:L 31:L 19:W
23. Grigg, Sam QLD 7:L 15:L 17:L 13:L 32:W
24. Russell, Luthien QLD 8:L 4:L 19:W 17:L 27:D
25. Chow, Justin ACT 9:L 18:W 15:L 21:W 14:D
26. Kinder, Jessica QLD 10:L 17:W 21:W 4:D 12:L
27. Oliver, Tamzin L ACT 11:D 5:L 13:W 9:L 24:D
28. Guo, Emma ACT 12:D 21:D 16:D 11:L 13:L
29. Smith, Kayleigh ACT 13:D 11:L 30:W 12:L 16:L
30. Yu, Sally VIC 14:L 19:W 29:L 18:L 21:D
31. McGarity, Molly QLD 15:W 7:L 20:L 22:W 17:L
32. Chow, Keli VIC 16:L 22:L 18:L 19:L 23:L

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:24 PM
1 Hu, Jason (8) [3.5] 1:0 Hacche, David J (1) [3]
2 Suttor, Vincent (2) [3] 1:0 Ikeda, Junta (3) [3.5]
3 Oliver, Gareth (6) [3] 1:0 Yuan, Yi (20) [3]
4 Wallis, Christopher (5) [2.5] 0:1 Bourmistrov, Denis (7) [3]
5 Stojic, Dusan (4) [2.5] 0:1 Song, Angela (11) [2.5]
6 Jager, Jesse (10) [2.5] .5:.5 Raine, Marcus (9) [2.5]
7 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) [2.5] 1:0 Kinder, Jessica (26) [2.5]
8 Flude, David A (14) [2] .5:.5 Chow, Justin (25) [2]
9 Yu, Derek (18) [2] 0:1 Morris, James (15) [2]
10 Jule, Alexandra (17) [2] 1:0 McGarity, Molly (31) [2]
11 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13) [1.5] 1:0 Guo, Emma (28) [1.5]
12 Schön, Eugene (16) [1.5] 1:0 Smith, Kayleigh (29) [1.5]
13 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) [1.5] .5:.5 Russell, Luthien (24) [1]
14 Glenton, Alan (19) [1] 0:1 Dalton, Samuel (22) [1]
15 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) [1] .5:.5 Yu, Sally (30) [1]
16 Chow, Keli (32) [0] 0:1 Grigg, Sam (23) [0]

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:34 PM
Starter,

It appears that you are showing the players starting seed number instead of their current points total, why is that?

gg''
There is no good reason for it; it was just the policy. Now repaired I hope.


starter

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 05:39 PM
1 Hu, Jason NSW 1942 4.5 13.5 9.0 14.0
2-4 Oliver, Gareth ACT 1994 4 12.5 8.5 14.5
Bourmistrov, Denis VIC 1982 4 12.5 8.5 13.5
Suttor, Vincent NSW 2063 4 12.0 10.0 16.0
5-7 Ikeda, Junta ACT 2029 3.5 12.5 9.5 15.0
Vijayakumar, Rukman VIC 1837 3.5 9.5 6.5 11.0
Song, Angela NSW 1869 3.5 9.5 6.0 11.5
8-13 Hacche, David J VIC 2084 3 11.0 10.5 18.0
Jager, Jesse VIC 1899 3 10.5 8.5 14.5
Yuan, Yi ACT 1450 3 10.0 9.0 15.5
Raine, Marcus VIC 1924 3 9.5 8.0 14.0
Morris, James VIC 1673 3 8.0 6.5 12.0
Jule, Alexandra QLD 1524 3 6.0 6.0 10.0
14-20 Wallis, Christopher VIC 2003 2.5 8.5 7.5 13.0
Flude, David A VIC 1705 2.5 8.5 7.5 12.5
Stojic, Dusan VIC 2028 2.5 8.0 8.5 13.5
Kinder, Jessica QLD 1271 2.5 8.0 8.5 13.5
Schön, Eugene VIC 1555 2.5 7.5 5.5 9.5
Chow, Justin ACT 1298 2.5 6.5 7.5 12.0
Guo-Yuthok, Sherab ACT 1745 2.5 5.5 5.0 9.5
21-24 McGarity, Molly QLD 1043 2 7.0 9.0 15.0
Oliver, Tamzin L ACT 1242 2 6.0 8.0 13.0
Yu, Derek VIC 1520 2 5.0 7.0 11.0
Dalton, Samuel VIC 1348 2 5.0 5.5 9.5
25-29 Guo, Emma ACT 1212 1.5 6.0 8.5 13.5
Smith, Kayleigh ACT 1107 1.5 5.5 8.5 13.5
Vijayakumar, Rengan VIC 1398 1.5 5.0 6.5 10.5
Yu, Sally VIC 1073 1.5 4.5 5.0 8.5
Russell, Luthien QLD 1319 1.5 3.5 7.5 13.0
30-31 Glenton, Alan VIC 1510 1 2.0 5.0 8.5
Grigg, Sam QLD 1326 1 1.0 8.5 12.5
32 Chow, Keli VIC 690 0 0.0 5.0 8.5

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 08:06 PM
1 Suttor, Vincent (2) [5] : Hu, Jason (8) [5]
2 Bourmistrov, Denis (7) [4.5] : Ikeda, Junta (3) [4.5]
3 Hacche, David J (1) [4] : Song, Angela (11) [4.5]
4 Morris, James (15) [4] : Oliver, Gareth (6) [4]
5 Wallis, Christopher (5) [3.5] : Yuan, Yi (20) [3.5]
6 Jager, Jesse (10) [3.5] : Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13) [3.5]
7 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) [3.5] : Flude, David A (14) [3]
8 Raine, Marcus (9) [3] : Kinder, Jessica (26) [3]
9 Jule, Alexandra (17) [3] : Dalton, Samuel (22) [3]
10 Yu, Derek (18) [3] : Guo, Emma (28) [2.5]
11 Stojic, Dusan (4) [2.5] : Chow, Justin (25) [2.5]
12 Schön, Eugene (16) [2.5] : Yu, Sally (30) [2.5]
13 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) [2.5] : Grigg, Sam (23) [2]
14 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) [2] : McGarity, Molly (31) [2]
15 Smith, Kayleigh (29) [1.5] : Glenton, Alan (19) [1]
16 Chow, Keli (32) [0] : Russell, Luthien (24) [1.5]

Rafizadeh
01-10-2005, 09:27 PM
Hey does anyone know the results for round 6?

cheers

Mischa
01-10-2005, 09:35 PM
I would try to tell you some but scared .....

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 09:38 PM
Hey does anyone know the results for round 6?

cheers


1 Bourmistrov, Denis (7) [4] .5:.5 Hu, Jason (8) [4.5]
2 Oliver, Gareth (6) [4] 0:1 Suttor, Vincent (2) [4]
3 Ikeda, Junta (3) [3.5] 1:0 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) [3.5]
4 Song, Angela (11) [3.5] 1:0 Raine, Marcus (9) [3]
5 Yuan, Yi (20) [3] .5:.5 Jager, Jesse (10) [3]
6 Morris, James (15) [3] 1:0 Jule, Alexandra (17) [3]
7 Hacche, David J (1) [3] 1:0 Stojic, Dusan (4) [2.5]
8 Chow, Justin (25) [2.5] 0:1 Wallis, Christopher (5) [2.5]
9 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13) [2.5] 1:0 Schön, Eugene (16) [2.5]
10 Kinder, Jessica (26) [2.5] .5:.5 Flude, David A (14) [2.5]
11 McGarity, Molly (31) [2] 0:1 Yu, Derek (18) [2]
12 Dalton, Samuel (22) [2] 1:0 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) [2]
13 Russell, Luthien (24) [1.5] 0:1 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) [1.5]
14 Guo, Emma (28) [1.5] 1:0 Smith, Kayleigh (29) [1.5]
15 Yu, Sally (30) [1.5] 1:0 Chow, Keli (32) [0]
16 Grigg, Sam (23) [1] 1:0 Glenton, Alan (19) [1]

Bereaved
01-10-2005, 09:41 PM
Starter, if you wrap the pairings in the code tabs, they look a bit more normal?

Hope that this helps,

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

ursogr8
01-10-2005, 10:46 PM
^^
Yeh. Did that earlier on in a round or two.

But with so many programmers tuned in here I thought they would be at home with the 'string' approach.

(Now followed your suggestion.)

kveldulv
02-10-2005, 12:02 AM
Website updated with results (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/junior/2005/elite/standings.html).

Also, a few new photos on the news page (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/junior/2005/elite/news.htm).

ursogr8
02-10-2005, 12:30 PM
1 Suttor, Vincent (2) [5] .5:.5 Hu, Jason (8) [5]
2 Bourmistrov, Denis (7) [4.5] 0:1 Ikeda, Junta (3) [4.5]
3 Hacche, David J (1) [4] 1:0 Song, Angela (11) [4.5]
4 Morris, James (15) [4] 0:1 Oliver, Gareth (6) [4]
5 Wallis, Christopher (5) [3.5] 1:0 Yuan, Yi (20) [3.5]
6 Jager, Jesse (10) [3.5] .5:.5 Guo-Yuthok, Sherab (13) [3.5]
7 Vijayakumar, Rukman (12) [3.5] 0:1 Flude, David A (14) [3]
8 Raine, Marcus (9) [3] 1:0 Kinder, Jessica (26) [3]
9 Jule, Alexandra (17) [3] 1:0 Dalton, Samuel (22) [3]
10 Yu, Derek (18) [3] 1:0 Guo, Emma (28) [2.5]
11 Stojic, Dusan (4) [2.5] 1:0 Chow, Justin (25) [2.5]
12 Schön, Eugene (16) [2.5] .5:.5 Yu, Sally (30) [2.5]
13 Vijayakumar, Rengan (21) [2.5] 0:1 Grigg, Sam (23) [2]
14 Oliver, Tamzin L (27) [2] 1:0 McGarity, Molly (31) [2]
15 Smith, Kayleigh (29) [1.5] 0:1 Glenton, Alan (19) [1]
16 Chow, Keli (32) [0] 0:1 Russell, Luthien (24) [1.5]

ursogr8
02-10-2005, 12:32 PM
1-3 Hu, Jason NSW 1942 5.5 24.0 22.5 30.5
Suttor, Vincent NSW 2063 5.5 22.5 23.5 33.0
Ikeda, Junta ACT 2029 5.5 22.5 21.5 29.0
4-5 Oliver, Gareth ACT 1994 5 21.5 20.0 28.5
Hacche, David J VIC 2084 5 20.0 21.0 30.0
6-8 Bourmistrov, Denis VIC 1982 4.5 21.5 23.5 31.0
Song, Angela NSW 1869 4.5 18.5 18.0 25.0
Wallis, Christopher VIC 2003 4.5 16.5 16.0 23.0
9-15 Jager, Jesse VIC 1899 4 18.0 21.0 29.5
Raine, Marcus VIC 1924 4 16.5 18.0 26.0
Morris, James VIC 1673 4 16.0 18.5 26.0
Flude, David A VIC 1705 4 15.5 16.0 24.0
Jule, Alexandra QLD 1524 4 13.0 15.5 22.5
Guo-Yuthok, Sherab ACT 1745 4 13.0 15.0 20.5
Yu, Derek VIC 1520 4 12.0 14.0 19.5
16-18 Yuan, Yi ACT 1450 3.5 17.0 21.0 28.5
Vijayakumar, Rukman VIC 1837 3.5 16.5 18.5 25.5
Stojic, Dusan VIC 2028 3.5 14.0 17.5 25.0
19-24 Kinder, Jessica QLD 1271 3 14.0 19.0 25.5
Schön, Eugene VIC 1555 3 13.0 15.5 20.5
Oliver, Tamzin L ACT 1242 3 11.0 18.0 24.5
Dalton, Samuel VIC 1348 3 11.0 15.0 20.0
Yu, Sally VIC 1073 3 10.0 13.0 17.0
Grigg, Sam QLD 1326 3 6.0 16.5 21.0
25-28 Chow, Justin ACT 1298 2.5 11.5 19.5 26.5
Guo, Emma ACT 1212 2.5 11.0 17.0 23.0
Vijayakumar, Rengan VIC 1398 2.5 10.0 14.0 21.0
Russell, Luthien QLD 1319 2.5 7.5 15.0 20.5
29-30 McGarity, Molly QLD 1043 2 11.0 18.5 26.0
Glenton, Alan VIC 1510 2 5.0 13.0 18.5
31 Smith, Kayleigh ACT 1107 1.5 8.5 16.0 22.5
32 Chow, Keli VIC 690 0 0.0 14.5 20.5

Rafizadeh
02-10-2005, 01:11 PM
Hello, I was wondering if the games from this Ergas tournament will ever be available on the internet? Were the scoresheets collected or anything of that sort?

cheers

jeffrei
02-10-2005, 01:20 PM
As one of the coaches I’d like to extend a thank you to everyone who made the event possible, in particular Jenni, Kerry and the BHCC folk, the parents who assisted on the day, the parents who provided billets, and of course Mr Ergas himself.

The results from my coaching section were as follows:

GROUP A
1st. Junta Ikeda (80/84, 95.24%)
2nd. Christopher Wallis (74/84, 88.10%)

GROUP B
1st. Rukman Vijayakumar (123/140, 87.86%)
2nd. Jesse Jager (113/140, 80.71%)

GROUP C
1st. Yi Yuan (60/66, 90.91%)
2nd. Rengan Vijayakumar (57/66, 86.36%)

GROUP D
1st. Justin Chow (85/90, 94.44%)
2nd. Sally Yu (83/90, 92.22%)

The first-place getters received a book donated by Australian Chess Enterprises, while the second-place getters received a voucher donated by Australian Chess Enterprises entitling them to 20% off any book plus free postage. Thanks to Brian Jones for generously donating these prizes.

Congratulations to these juniors. I won’t list the rest of the results but I will say that they went pretty much according to ratings, although Angela Song, James Morris and Derek Yu performed considerably above their ratings.

I’d also like to congratulate Jason and Vincent and Junta on winning the training tournament.

& I’m out.

ursogr8
02-10-2005, 06:46 PM
Hello, I was wondering if the games from this Ergas tournament will ever be available on the internet? Were the scoresheets collected or anything of that sort?

cheers

hi

State of play on the scoresheets is this

> some have been typed into a chessdata base and the Flavoured Dude has the cpu at his house with the intention to transfer the data to the ERGAS web-site some time this week,

>> some have been typed by Darryl Johansen ( :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: , yeh, I know, it surprised me at first), and have annotations made by Darryl as he typed ( :clap: :clap: ),

>>> some are hard-copy only (all of round 7 at least), and need a volunteer typist to get them into the data-base

>>>> and some may have been lost for ever if not handed in to ADMIN. ;)

regards
starter

Mischa
02-10-2005, 09:52 PM
Can I just say...apart from one junior (non squad) who was a bit nasty once or twice the whole week went smoothly and beautifully. The children were amazing...they played like the stars they are and behaved with good humour and fun and respect. I was proud to know them. What an amazing group of kids they are and how lucky is my kid to count them as friends...me too. I have been lucky to have met and bonded with these children.
But all thanks to two very special ladies who have made this possible.
Jenni always and forever for just the unbelievable job she continues to do year in and out with 'special' children and their even more "special" parents...balancing encouragement with moderation and control...with the kids as well!!!
But a most special word must be extended to Kerry Lyall who handled her first tournament pretty much on her own (with thanks to Trevor and David) ...and Jenni....
what a wonderful job she has done....all in Victoria should be proud...and I will repeat the lament that she is wasted NOT being the Vic junior representitive!!!
Well done Kerry!!!
Would also like to thank and really appreciate those adults that risked all ( esp. rating points) by being thrown into the junior shark pool to be eaten ...all in the name of promoting and assisting junior chess. David Hacche, David Flude, Marcus Raine and Denis Bourmistrov...we salute you :)
:You are what makes Australian chess for juniors
Can I also just put in a word for long suffering parents...OK done that.
But another for long suffering siblings....4 very special little kids (non chess) spent 6 pretty much boring days being told to shhhhh and be quiet and basically to shut up while their siblings starred in the chess room. Well done !!! you (in my opinion ) were the real stars of this event....it was sooo not about you and you soooo deserve credit .
all in all a wonderful experience...and one last thanks to all the coaches and speakers...it was exciting to see their enthusiasm with the opportunity to advance junior chess in Australia.
lastly...to Box Hill chess club....THANK YOU...how sad to think that without you this event would never have been staged in Melbourne.

ursogr8
02-10-2005, 10:09 PM
Can I just say...apart from one junior (non squad) who was a bit nasty once or twice the whole week went smoothly and beautifully. The children were amazing...they played like the stars they are and behaved with good humour and fun and respect. I was proud to know them. What an amazing group of kids they are and how lucky is my kid to count them as friends...me too. I have been lucky to have met and bonded with these children.
But all thanks to two very special ladies who have made this possible.
Jenni always and forever for just the unbelievable job she continues to do year in and out with 'special' children and their even more "special" parents...balancing encouragement with moderation and control...with the kids as well!!!
But a most special word must be extended to Kerry Lyall who handled her first tournament pretty much on her own (with thanks to Trevor and David) ...and Jenni....
what a wonderful job she has done....all in Victoria should be proud...and I will repeat the lament that she is wasted NOT being the Vic junior representitive!!!
Well done Kerry!!!
Would also like to thank and really appreciate those adults that risked all ( esp. rating points) by being thrown into the junior shark pool to be eaten ...all in the name of promoting and assisting junior chess. David Hacche, David Flude, Marcus Raine and Denis Bourmistrov...we salute you :)
:You are what makes Australian chess for juniors
Can I also just put in a word for long suffering parents...OK done that.
But another for long suffering siblings....4 very special little kids (non chess) spent 6 pretty much boring days being told to shhhhh and be quiet and basically to shut up while their siblings starred in the chess room. Well done !!! you (in my opinion ) were the real stars of this event....it was sooo not about you and you soooo deserve credit .
all in all a wonderful experience...and one last thanks to all the coaches and speakers...it was exciting to see their enthusiasm with the opportunity to advance junior chess in Australia.
lastly...to Box Hill chess club....THANK YOU...how sad to think that without you this event would never have been staged in Melbourne.


Impressions of a chess tournament (and in this case...a coaching hot-house + a tourney) are always an interesting read. In this case Mischa has given us a view that is not often presented......that of the attending parent. So, Rowena, thanks for this :clap: :clap: ; your longest post, and very valuable and accurate too. Thank you for keeping an eye on things when it was needed.


For me, one of the big surprises was the emergence of Gladys Liu as a great organiser of POLLIES to attend opening and closing ceremonies. Gladys has them there on time with their suits and ties, and plenty of cameras to record the occasion. I hope some of those pics can be mailed to me or the web-master.

Essentially this tourney was well serviced by Jenni. Kerry, Rowena, and Gladys. All good role models for girls to stay in chess.

with tks to all involved,
starter

Davidflude
03-10-2005, 09:00 AM
ERGAS

Now that ERGAS is over I will raise a few points which are meant for discussion and are not meant to be definitive.

The first point to make is that the training camp was a great success.

Congratulations to the selectors. They certainly rounded up a great mob of kids. Like the batting line up in the Australian cricket team the problem is not who to put in but who do you leave out.

My first comment on the tournament is the format. Playing a tournament with 7 games in two and a bit days left the adult participants total wrecks and by the end of the tournament even some of the juniors were out on their feet. Furthermore the time control tended to lead to time pressure on participants who normally are very good at time management. Second having four lectures in two days tended to put considerable pressure on the participants. Signs of tiredness in the children were visible to the adults towards the end of each day. On the other hand the coaching in small groups tended to go really well. It really showed the rule of thumb that the stronger the coaches the better the results. (The Petone Rugby club near Wellington used to have a former All Black fullback coach the seven year olds. Two of them grew up to be All Blacks).

My suggestion is that in future coaching camps there should be one round a day in the tournament with the lectures and coaching in small groups worked around this. I am unsure as to whether the tournament should take place in the morning or afternoon.

One thing is that it would be much possible to key in more games into the computer than with the tournament concentrated at the end of the training camp. Second the adults get a break while the participants of undergoing coaching or attending lectures. Thirdly the draw would be ready well in adance of each round. Not least there could be a sensible length lunch break
every day.

Thank goodness for the concept of regression to the mean. If you lose grading points in a tournament such as Ergas then you will become an under rated adult and should get them back in future tournaments.

Flavoured Dude

pax
03-10-2005, 10:25 AM
My suggestion is that in future coaching camps there should be one round a day in the tournament with the lectures and coaching in small groups worked around this. I am unsure as to whether the tournament should take place in the morning or afternoon.


This is obviously a good idea for many reasons. I would suggest lectures in the morning, games in the afternoon is the best way around.

One difficulty might be finding adult players for the tournament who are able to commit to a whole week. With this year's setup, a working adult only needed to take one day off, which isn't a big difficulty. A week is a bit more tricky!

jenni
03-10-2005, 11:58 AM
This is obviously a good idea for many reasons. I would suggest lectures in the morning, games in the afternoon is the best way around.

One difficulty might be finding adult players for the tournament who are able to commit to a whole week. With this year's setup, a working adult only needed to take one day off, which isn't a big difficulty. A week is a bit more tricky!
Yes it is an interesting concept. I agree that the current format is not working totally. It is very much a work in progress. I did a huge revamp this year from last year's format (3 coaching camps spread around the country).

The mega camp idea worked much better and was less of an impact on children and parents.

The time control of 60 +10 led to far too many time scrambles and blunders and it proved impossible for our hard working coaches to get through all the games analysis. We had assumed a reasonable % of quick games, but those pesky kids kept playing their hearts out and taking forever to finish.

I am leaning towards getting rid of the first day of lectures (great lectures from our guest speakers, but the range of ages and abilities made this a little unworkable).

This would allow us to add a day to the tournament and have 2 days of rotating groups. We would rotate the groups more often - instead of 1/2 day with a coach, perhaps 60 to 90 minutes and then rotate.

We could then have 3 1/2 days of comp, with 2 rounds per day and 1 on the last day. We could increase the time control to 90 +30. It would allow for better chess and more time for analysis.

I will also take David's idea on board and have a look at the logistics of that. Unfortunately asking adults for a full week commitment is a big ask and I would also like to keep the total time of the camp to 5 1/2 days. (Less time for parents to take off work, less accommodation costs).

I do put out a survey to all partiicpants asking for feedback and that throws up valuable comments.

Have to get washing and business work done, but will try and put some thank-yous and photos up later today!

Incidentally my apologies to David Flude for his loss of rating points, but we really did appreciate you playing!

Davidflude
03-10-2005, 02:09 PM
The previous poster said
"The time control of 60 +10 led to far too many time scrambles and blunders and it proved impossible for our hard working coaches to get through all the games analysis. We had assumed a reasonable % of quick games, but those pesky kids kept playing their hearts out and taking forever to finish.

The following are excerpts from the 1997 FIDE Handbook and incorporates all changes through 1/99. The TD of a FIDE rated event must be familiar with the FIDE handbook and must not rely on these excerpts as an overview of FIDE requirements."


1.0 Rate of Play

For a game to be rated each player must have a minimum of two hours in which to complete all the moves, assuming the game lasts 60 moves. This means that this tournament does not meet FIDE rules for ratings.

jenni
03-10-2005, 02:18 PM
The previous poster said
"The time control of 60 +10 led to far too many time scrambles and blunders and it proved impossible for our hard working coaches to get through all the games analysis. We had assumed a reasonable % of quick games, but those pesky kids kept playing their hearts out and taking forever to finish.

The following are excerpts from the 1997 FIDE Handbook and incorporates all changes through 1/99. The TD of a FIDE rated event must be familiar with the FIDE handbook and must not rely on these excerpts as an overview of FIDE requirements."


1.0 Rate of Play

For a game to be rated each player must have a minimum of two hours in which to complete all the moves, assuming the game lasts 60 moves. This means that this tournament does not meet FIDE rules for ratings.

There was never any intention of FIDE rating the tournament, only ACF rating it? While we certainly had a large number of FIDE rated players, Ian Rogers and I investigated the concept of FIDE rating it, but it was impossible to do so, without running to evening games which would have been far too tiring for the younger kids. Have I misunderstood something? - at no stage was anyone told it would be FIDE rated. The seeding and pairings were done with local ratings only.

Davidflude
03-10-2005, 02:57 PM
Thanks Jenni for clearing up my confusion.

I also have been doing lots of laundry. My messages can wait until tomorrow.

jenni
03-10-2005, 03:07 PM
Thanks Jenni for clearing up my confusion.

I also have been doing lots of laundry. My messages can wait until tomorrow.
Its a problem isn't it - I have just put my 4th load out to dry and another one to go. Fortunately it is hot and sunny in Canberra!

jenni
03-10-2005, 05:10 PM
A picture of Deborah Russell and the charming Mischa. Deborah was there quietly reading and knitting all week, but always available for any help needed. Mischa of course was interested and active and organised the fabulous fire eating treat for the kids (this one will be hard to beat in future squad camps. :) )

jenni
03-10-2005, 05:13 PM
A picture of Jessica Kinder and David Flude playing - the venue at this point is Box Hill Town Hall. We had access to a number of rooms and teh venue worked very well. The grassy area outside allowed the kids to play soccer in the breaks. In the back ground is Yi Yuan - one of the over rated ACT kids. :lol:

jenni
03-10-2005, 05:18 PM
We had to have one of starter of course! GM Ian Rogers in the background

jenni
03-10-2005, 05:20 PM
Finally one of almost everyone taken at Box Hill Chess Club. I am green with envy of the Box Hill premises and hope they are successful in retaining them.

jenni
03-10-2005, 05:42 PM
A large number of thank-yous!

- Box Hill and Whitehorse Junior for hosting the Camp and providing venue and equipment.

- Gerrit Hartland for his support and pre camp organisation

- Kerry Lyall for the huge amount of work she did before and during the camp.

- Trevor Stanning and David Flude for assistance during the camp. Nothing seemed to be too much trouble for them. (and Kerry)

- Rowena for the Fire eating treat, which will live long in the kids (and adults) memories.

- Carl Gorka for providing the above mentioned treat - and a strong chess player too!

- Shaun Fielder for the website

- Brian Jones and ACE for providing some of the prizes.

- Our hard working coaches

GM Ian Rogers
GM Darryl Johansen
IM David Smerdon
FM Geoff Saw

- Our guest lecturers

IM Robert Jamieson
FM Bill Jordan

- Our brave adults who provided extra strength in the tournament

David Hacche
Denis Bourmistrov
Marcus Raine
David Flude

- Gladys Liu for organisisng the pollies (Bruce Atkinson - Liberal Sport and Rec, Jason Lebisch standing in for Anna Burke, Federal member for Chisholm and Robert Clark, state member for Box Hill)

- Stephen Mayne from Crikey! for an excellent motivational speech (and good PR in his publication)

- Rowena Moyle, Liz Wallis and Gladys Liu for providing Billets

- all the parents who provide time, money and support to enable their kids to participate.

- an extra thank-you to Ian for providing me with a sounding board and advice.

- last but most important of all to Mr Henry Ergas for his second year of sponsorship - without him none of this would be possible.

(apologies to anyone I have forgotten - there is always someone!)

jenni
03-10-2005, 05:48 PM
I would also like to add how wonderful the kids were . Some of them were on the lively side, of course!

The competition was very intense, but always friendly and with good sportsmanship. Upsets were so many, that I don't believe anyone in the top half escaped unscathed!

Davidflude
04-10-2005, 04:59 PM
It was intended that we would record all the games from Ergas on a database.

Alas, As is well known I played in the tournament and relatively few of the games were recorded on the database.

How can this be overcome in the future. In my opinion there is a need for multiple PC's and the rule that the games will not be examined by the coaches until after the games have been entered. Darryl entered games, annotated them
and discudded them all at once.

Again entering games becomes much easier if the tournament is spread over multiple days. One traditional way to get games entered is a best game award.

jenni
04-10-2005, 05:35 PM
It was intended that we would record all the games from Ergas on a database.

Alas, As is well known I played in the tournament and relatively few of the games were recorded on the database.

How can this be overcome in the future. In my opinion there is a need for multiple PC's and the rule that the games will not be examined by the coaches until after the games have been entered. Darryl entered games, annotated them
and discudded them all at once.

Again entering games becomes much easier if the tournament is spread over multiple days. One traditional way to get games entered is a best game award.

I think entering the games is secondary to the analysis. The focus has to be on the fact that it is a training tournament and not on the competition itself.

I think if we have 1 or 2 games a day and more time this will naturally resolve itself. Last year for the young masters I had 2 laptops at the venue and the kids entered the games as they finished. Because it was being run concurrently with the NECG tournaments Ian was analysing the games as well. Sometimes the games got analysed and entered and sometimes vice versa. I had a rule that the winner entered the game - they tended to be more motivated to do it than the loser. Often the pair of kids sat down together and one entered and they analysed as they entered.

Some of the older kids were a bit sniffy about being asked to enter their games, but on the whole it worked well and I had each round pretty much keyed in immediately.

Jason Hu
05-10-2005, 01:26 PM
Ok, i won't make a long speech. So i would just like thank all the organisors, billetters, especially Gladys for putting up with me for a week, all the players + coaches, and the fireeater was awesome :)

I had a great time and Denis showed me a bit of melbourne, so as you guys can tell, it was fun :P

I really wanted a trophy though :) <collects trophies> so if the organisors are willing to do a little more?!

Anyway, junior chess has being fun. I'm probably too weak to compete with the adult chess world, but maybe i'll keep on playing... we'll see

jenni
05-10-2005, 04:13 PM
I really wanted a trophy though :) <collects trophies> so if the organisors are willing to do a little more?!

Not much money left from this year's budget, but I'll see what I can do. Maybe a little one. :)


Anyway, junior chess has being fun. I'm probably too weak to compete with the adult chess world, but maybe i'll keep on playing... we'll see
Don't be silly Jason - you are more than good enough to keep playing. OK - you probably aren't going to win too many tournaments if the GM's and IM's are playing, but it is more about playing and enjoying than winning.

Besides you can still play the Uni comp and the Young Masters/Junior Masters next year.

WhiteElephant
05-10-2005, 06:36 PM
Anyway, junior chess has being fun. I'm probably too weak to compete with the adult chess world, but maybe i'll keep on playing... we'll see

You gotta be kidding man. First of all you can become an IM if you want to. Second of all, even if you continue playing adult tournaments at current strength (assuming youare about 100 or 200 points underrated), you'll kick ass in most tournaments you play.

Davidflude
05-10-2005, 07:25 PM
I am only slowly recovering from Ergas.

I got crunched by some thirteen year old tiger. I have avoided the same variation in the IECG World Cup. Now I have books on the King's Indian and Chess Informants all over my study. My opponent has an ICCF grading of over 2300.

Well this is what correspondence chess is all about. Selecting variations which you are happy with and then playing them against opponents who will severly
punish any errors. From my observations King's Indians were not common at Ergas. Has no-one told the juniors "Against 1.Nf3 or 1.c4 play the KID which guarantees a hard fight."?

jenni
06-10-2005, 11:00 AM
I am only slowly recovering from Ergas.

We really did appreciate all the adults who played. The feedback I am getting is that adding in adults worked really well and gave the kids the challenge I was hoping for.

If we continue to get funding for Ergas, it will probably be held in Canberra next year and NSW the year after - I hope that adults in both these states will be prepared to be as generous as the Victorian adults were.

jenni
06-10-2005, 11:13 PM
I got crunched by some thirteen year old tiger.

That would have been Junta Ikeda, as the other one who beat you was only 10. Both ACT kids - sorry! :(

ursogr8
08-10-2005, 09:11 PM
......


Similar to his recent statement that ACT was over rated and Vic under rated - and as correct. Anyone like to count up how many rating points Vic gave to ACT in the Ergas tournament?

I had a go at the numbers

ACT Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = 149


VIC Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = -172

starter

Mischa
08-10-2005, 09:16 PM
what does that mean?

Vlad
08-10-2005, 10:00 PM
I had a go at the numbers

ACT Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = 149


VIC Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = -172

starter

Are you saying that ACT kids performed very badly and Vic kids did very well? Or you just put a "minus" incorrectly?

ursogr8
09-10-2005, 08:42 AM
Are you saying that ACT kids performed very badly and Vic kids did very well? Or you just put a "minus" incorrectly?

Good morning drug

Let me be very careful here. I am not saying ACT kids performed very well relative to the VIC kids. What I am saying that based on taking the perfomance measures for the tournament and subtracting the ACF rating figure for each individual, then
ACT kids did better than their ratings
VIC kids did worse than their ratings.

Therefore, there is likelhood that ACT will have increased ratings in the Dec 2005 list, and VIC kids will have lowered ratings in the DEC 2005 list; as a generality.

Of course, there are specific examples where the generalty will not occur (probably). For example James Morris (VIC) played very well in the ERGAS, and is doing very well in the VIC CHAMP events. We should expect a rating increase in that case.

The minus was no accident.

starter

ps....Mischa, I trust this later post is more explanatory.

Mischa
09-10-2005, 09:14 AM
Yes it is thank you Trevor...did you take into consideration that a lot of the Vic. kids were 'non- squad'?

Vlad
09-10-2005, 10:36 AM
I had a go at the numbers

ACT Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = 149


VIC Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = -172

starter

Good morning starter,

Sorry for being pedantic but...:)

From what you are saying in the second post




ACT kids did better than their ratings
VIC kids did worse than their ratings.






you have put the minus sign incorrectly in the first post. You are saying that ACT kids performed better than their ratings. This means that their performance ratings were on average higher than their current ratings. This means that

ACT Average difference between local rating and tourney performance measure = -149,

which is in fact opposite to what you are saying in the first post. Similarly, the number for Vic kids is supposed to be positive.

Libby
09-10-2005, 10:42 AM
Yes it is thank you Trevor...did you take into consideration that a lot of the Vic. kids were 'non- squad'?

Rather than being about the status of the participants (some of whom were even a little elderly to be in the Squad ;) ) it could possibly reflect the ongoing concern we have in the ACT that many of our kids appear much weaker by rating than their actual ability.

FG has had his bleat about our ACT Championship "weakness." Quite simply - I don't know how you can raise the ratings of ACT juniors (and seniors for that matter) when we have almost no players over 2000 - irrespective of playing ability - and even a relatively small player population in the 1400-1900 range.

Who are our juniors supposed to gain points against? Each other?

Almost without exception, when they do travel they gain points but that is a hard ask for kids & families week-in and week-out. We have 3 weekenders in the ACT in a year.

And when kids do travel, as they did to ERGAS, they come home and shed those points again to their peers in the ACT. Our U14 Championship this coming weekend should assist in that :doh:

Rincewind
09-10-2005, 10:56 AM
And when kids do travel, as they did to ERGAS, they come home and shed those points again to their peers in the ACT. Our U14 Championship this coming weekend should assist in that :doh:

Not all ACT players would need to travel. Just enough to keep the mixing of the pools going. ACT representation in things like the squad. Weekenders in Sydney and other places as well as the 3 major local weekenders a year all help. I would suggest things are much easier for juniors in ACT with its central proximity to both chess 'captials' than say those in Perth, Adelaide, Hobart or Brisbane.

Denis_Jessop
09-10-2005, 12:16 PM
Rather than being about the status of the participants (some of whom were even a little elderly to be in the Squad ;) ) it could possibly reflect the ongoing concern we have in the ACT that many of our kids appear much weaker by rating than their actual ability.

FG has had his bleat about our ACT Championship "weakness." Quite simply - I don't know how you can raise the ratings of ACT juniors (and seniors for that matter) when we have almost no players over 2000 - irrespective of playing ability - and even a relatively small player population in the 1400-1900 range.

Who are our juniors supposed to gain points against? Each other?

Almost without exception, when they do travel they gain points but that is a hard ask for kids & families week-in and week-out. We have 3 weekenders in the ACT in a year.

And when kids do travel, as they did to ERGAS, they come home and shed those points again to their peers in the ACT. Our U14 Championship this coming weekend should assist in that :doh:


Libby, you are too generous about the ACT ratings. By my rough count there are 190 players on the September 2005 "active" list. Of those only 16 are rated above 1800. Only 4 are rated above 2000 - Michael Wei, Junta Ikeda, Shervin Rafizadeh and Peter Jovanovic all of whom are either juniors or recent juniors and two of whom are virtually inactive. Only 4 players are in the 1900-1999 range - Andre Bliznyuk, Roger Farrell, Brian Fitzpatrick and Gareth Oliver and two (or three?) of them are virtually inactive. The other 8 are in the 1800s and 5 of them are virtually inactive. That makes, say, 6 or 7 active players above 1800 including 4 juniors (Tor Lattimore is a junior in the 1800s).

I drew attention some years ago to the absence of a significant number of active ACT players above 1800 and the apparent lack of any way of increasing the number, at least of the adult population. The situation is not much improved now except by the presence of more juniors and one or two recruits from inter-State. Indeed the paucity of active adult players at any level is one of the hidden dangers for ACT chess life. I'm not sure how clubs are faring in other States.

As you say, with such a small number of higher-rated players it is almost impossible to improve one's rating. One way to do it is to play more inter-State weekenders and take some points from there.


DJ

jenni
09-10-2005, 12:50 PM
Not all ACT players would need to travel. Just enough to keep the mixing of the pools going. ACT representation in things like the squad. Weekenders in Sydney and other places as well as the 3 major local weekenders a year all help. I would suggest things are much easier for juniors in ACT with its central proximity to both chess 'captials' than say those in Perth, Adelaide, Hobart or Brisbane.

Absolutely - much easier for our kids to travel to Sydney particularly - an 8 hour trip to Melbourne is a little bit too far for a weekender, particularly if you have high school kids. You also have to have devoted parents and preferably no other siblings, or siblings who take second place, in order to make it feasible.

However it still doesn't stop the problem of the incestousness of the ACT scene. Apart from drooling with envy over Box Hill's fabulous premises, the list of people playing in the current Box Hill tournament had me equally envious.

Box Hill has a huge number of people in that 1400 to 2000 range, making it much easier for an up an coming junior to rise to 1500 or 1600. In the ACT you tend to get to around 1300 and then stick, until your strength is really around 1500+ and then you tend to start making a bit of headway. You are just totally lacking the mid rank people to allow a progresssion. (Gold Coast probably has a similar problem. Perth, Tas, Adelaide not so much, because of the small no of Juniors playing rated games, relative to adult population).

The other thing I have noticed is that there are a lot more restricted tournaments in the other states. i.e more opportunity to play players around your rating. We do have one - the premier etc, but the rest of our tournaments tend to be a big swiss with an enormous bounce.

I went to your wonderful glicko calculator and set up two fictional tournaments.

The player in both cases had a rating of 1600. The first tournament went like this

1700 w
1675 d
1500 w
1200 w
1475 w
1580 d
1700 w

This resulted in an increase of 48 points

The second tournament was

800 w
1200 w
1990 l
500 w
1100 w
2050 l
1700 w

resulted in an increase of 16 points.

I think changing the way some of our tournaments are run, could result in juniors making more of a progression. We will of course continue to encourage our kids to play outside of the ACT. My remark was not intended to be derogatory to Vic, just pointing out that FG7's silly statement of ACT being over rated relative to Victoria, seemed to not be borne out in the recent tournament.

ursogr8
09-10-2005, 01:17 PM
Yes it is thank you Trevor...did you take into consideration that a lot of the Vic. kids were 'non- squad'?

hi Rowena

The original point being made by jenni was simply a ratings comparison, not a non-squad comparison.

jenni has elaborated in a later post that the ACT seems to lack players in the 1400-2000 range, and so many ACT juniors get 'stuck at' 1400. On the other hand, with 100 players in the BH OPEN field, at all levels of ratings, our BH ratings are very likley to represent relatives strength form one play to the next. And since BH players can easily mix with MCC and other fields, then the VIC pool is likely to be reliable ratings; in contrast with the ACT.

I had another look at the negative differences....the 4 largest are in fact among our most active VIC players (and hence theoretically should have reliable ratings). And 'our best performers' in terms of pure numbers were Jesse, Hacche, Sally and Sam. But a lot of wariness should be exercised in judging by the pure number; the reason being that some ACT opponents clearly are under-rated, and so when you play them, and draw or beat them, it is not 'appreciated' sufficiently by the SP 'performance measure'. In other words, in a closed tourney such as ERGAS, the under-rating of the contingent from the ACT automatically penalizes the performance measures of all other participants.

regards
starter

ursogr8
09-10-2005, 01:24 PM
<snip>
The other thing I have noticed is that there are a lot more restricted tournaments in the other states. i.e more opportunity to play players around your rating. We do have one - the premier etc, but the rest of our tournaments tend to be a big swiss with an enormous bounce.

<snip>

I think changing the way some of our tournaments are run, could result in juniors making more of a progression. We will of course continue to encourage our kids to play outside of the ACT. My remark was not intended to be derogatory to Vic, just pointing out that FG7's silly statement of ACT being over rated relative to Victoria, seemed to not be borne out in the recent tournament.

jenni

:uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh:

I think perhaps all this part of your post ^^ belongs on the thread about intermingling SWISSES and Competitive Indicies?

;)
starter

ursogr8
09-10-2005, 01:30 PM
Good morning starter,

<snip>

which is in fact opposite to what you are saying in the first post. Similarly, the number for Vic kids is supposed to be positive.

hi drug

I am 100% sure you are understanding this point in the data.
We just have different ways of reading the sentence I wrote.
No apology required by you.

regards
starter

jenni
09-10-2005, 01:53 PM
jenni

:uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh:

I think perhaps all this part of your post ^^ belongs on the thread about intermingling SWISSES and Competitive Indicies?

;)
starter

I did think of that actually and in fact while writing it I went to the Box Hill site and showed Shannon how your tournaments worked. I think I am rapidly becoming converted and will have to revist the thread to familiarise myself with it. ;)

Libby
09-10-2005, 04:05 PM
Not all ACT players would need to travel. Just enough to keep the mixing of the pools going. ACT representation in things like the squad. Weekenders in Sydney and other places as well as the 3 major local weekenders a year all help. I would suggest things are much easier for juniors in ACT with its central proximity to both chess 'captials' than say those in Perth, Adelaide, Hobart or Brisbane.

Hmm. In some ways - yes. We are physically closer.

However playing a weekender brings costs. For a junior, this is inevitably a minimum of one night's accommodation (and many times, two nights) for the junior plus at least one adult.

There is much moping here from students who find entry fees expensive. Spare a thought for some of us who are not students and who regularly have a $0.00 bank balance - not exaggerating. A junior is just one member of a family after all.

So while not all players would need to travel I'd suggest a significant number would need to travel on a significant number of weekends to make any appreciable difference to our rating pool at all.

So whilst we may be less geograpically disadvantaged than the other locales you mention, show me a ratings parallel in any of them? Show me that the proportion of players over 2000, in the 1600-1900 band, and under 1200 is the same elsewhere - even elsewhere with growing & active junior populations.

Rincewind
09-10-2005, 04:16 PM
Absolutely - much easier for our kids to travel to Sydney particularly - an 8 hour trip to Melbourne is a little bit too far for a weekender, particularly if you have high school kids. You also have to have devoted parents and preferably no other siblings, or siblings who take second place, in order to make it feasible.

However it still doesn't stop the problem of the incestousness of the ACT scene. Apart from drooling with envy over Box Hill's fabulous premises, the list of people playing in the current Box Hill tournament had me equally envious.

Box Hill has a huge number of people in that 1400 to 2000 range, making it much easier for an up an coming junior to rise to 1500 or 1600. In the ACT you tend to get to around 1300 and then stick, until your strength is really around 1500+ and then you tend to start making a bit of headway. You are just totally lacking the mid rank people to allow a progresssion. (Gold Coast probably has a similar problem. Perth, Tas, Adelaide not so much, because of the small no of Juniors playing rated games, relative to adult population).

The other thing I have noticed is that there are a lot more restricted tournaments in the other states. i.e more opportunity to play players around your rating. We do have one - the premier etc, but the rest of our tournaments tend to be a big swiss with an enormous bounce.

I went to your wonderful glicko calculator and set up two fictional tournaments.

The player in both cases had a rating of 1600. The first tournament went like this

1700 w
1675 d
1500 w
1200 w
1475 w
1580 d
1700 w

This resulted in an increase of 48 points

The second tournament was

800 w
1200 w
1990 l
500 w
1100 w
2050 l
1700 w

resulted in an increase of 16 points.

I think changing the way some of our tournaments are run, could result in juniors making more of a progression. We will of course continue to encourage our kids to play outside of the ACT. My remark was not intended to be derogatory to Vic, just pointing out that FG7's silly statement of ACT being over rated relative to Victoria, seemed to not be borne out in the recent tournament.

Jenni. There would seem to be sufficient players ni ACT in the 1400-1600 range for players to advance atleast to the 1700 range provided their results were consistent enough. Perhaps the problem is with the natural inconsistency displayed by many juniors as well as a tendency for a greater than average junior to senior ratio rather than an absence of player in the 1600-2000 range.

Regarding your fictional tournament, graded tournaments does have the advantage of finding the underrated players and propelling their rating increase. This should be something you should look at. As well as possibly funding obviously good player to play in strong Sydney weekenders.

However, please note that my statement regarding that it is not necessary for all strongly improving juniors to travel. Every ACT player who travels interstate to play helps correlate the ratings between the states. ACT seem to have the opportunity to do this more so than most other capitals.

Rincewind
09-10-2005, 04:25 PM
Hmm. In some ways - yes. We are physically closer.

However playing a weekender brings costs. For a junior, this is inevitably a minimum of one night's accommodation (and many times, two nights) for the junior plus at least one adult.

Yes of course but it is not only juniors travelling who help keep the ratnig systems relativities in place. All ACT players who play interstate and non-ACT players who travel to Canberra for the big 3 service the same end.


There is much moping here from students who find entry fees expensive. Spare a thought for some of us who are not students and who regularly have a $0.00 bank balance - not exaggerating. A junior is just one member of a family after all.

So while not all players would need to travel I'd suggest a significant number would need to travel on a significant number of weekends to make any appreciable difference to our rating pool at all.

Yes and I believe if you count all the ACT players playing outside and non-ACT players playing in Canberra in the course of a year it would be a significant number.


So whilst we may be less geograpically disadvantaged than the other locales you mention, show me a ratings parallel in any of them? Show me that the proportion of players over 2000, in the 1600-1900 band, and under 1200 is the same elsewhere - even elsewhere with growing & active junior populations.

Canberra is basically a very small capital or large regional centre. The rating profile with one or two anomolies would be reflected in most other cities of the same size. Yes Canberra has an active junior scene, but so does south-eastern Queensland. It would seem the ACT juniors have the support of a very well organised and committed group of parents and in that have many advantages over juniors in many other parts of the courty. Added to that they have a 2.5 hour drive to Sydney and still within striking distance of Melbourne and Adelaide, both of whom run a number of strong tournaments throughout the year. So the total equation would seem to favour ACT juniors significantly. It's no wonder they are doing so well.

jenni
09-10-2005, 05:02 PM
Jenni. There would seem to be sufficient players ni ACT in the 1400-1600 range for players to advance atleast to the 1700 range provided their results were consistent enough. Perhaps the problem is with the natural inconsistency displayed by many juniors as well as a tendency for a greater than average junior to senior ratio rather than an absence of player in the 1600-2000 range.


.

Did a quick analysis of the current Belco and Box Hill tournaments. (My figures may be out slightly as it was a very quick count. :) )

BCC has 50 and Box hill roughly 100.

In the 1700 and above category, Belco has 10 players and Box Hill 20, so about the same %, although Belco tops out at 2029, while Box Hill goes to 2376.

In the category 1400 to 1700, Belco has 5 players, while Box Hill has 21 - in % terms that is double. Of more consequence, almost all of Belco's 5 are "improving juniors" e.g Yi Yuan, who caused havoc in Melbourne and who is most definitely a lot stronger than 1450. Andrew Brown is another, Khoi Hoang who is always dangerous etc. While the same is true of Box Hill (Eugene, Alan Glenton, Derek Yu are all in this band, there seems to be a much higher % of stable adults in there).

The band 900 to 1400 is about the same % wise at the 2 clubs, with Belco then having about twice as many (% wise) in the under 900 category.

So yes junior inconsistency and junior to adult ratios are all a factor, but the missing band of adults makes it very hard for a junior to jump from 1200 to 1700 and the juniors in the 1000 to 1300 band are constantly cannibalising each other.

jenni
09-10-2005, 05:04 PM
Canberra is basically a very small capital or large regional centre. The rating profile with one or two anomolies would be reflected in most other cities of the same size. Yes Canberra has an active junior scene, but so does south-eastern Queensland. It would seem the ACT juniors have the support of a very well organised and committed group of parents and in that have many advantages over juniors in many other parts of the courty. Added to that they have a 2.5 hour drive to Sydney and still within striking distance of Melbourne and Adelaide, both of whom run a number of strong tournaments throughout the year. So the total equation would seem to favour ACT juniors significantly. It's no wonder they are doing so well.

This is true and I have actually stopped whining about ratings for a long time - it took the goat's silly utterances to annoy me enough to start whinging again.

Mischa
09-10-2005, 05:26 PM
I thought the Gold Coast juniors to be at least as under rated and with the same difficulties as the ACT juniors...more so in fact.
Is this the case?

jenni
09-10-2005, 05:28 PM
I thought the Gold Coast juniors to be at least as under rated and with the same difficulties as the ACT juniors...more so in fact.
Is this the case?

I don't think more so, but definitely similar problems.

South Australia can be a mixed bag as well. The juniors that play the adult tournaments tend to be a bit more accurate (or at least as accurate as any junior can be). They used to have a pool of juniors who only played 45 minute chess and these used to be severely under-rated (or even unrated), when they turned up to play the Aus Juniors.

Rincewind
09-10-2005, 05:53 PM
I thought the Gold Coast juniors to be at least as under rated and with the same difficulties as the ACT juniors...more so in fact.
Is this the case?

Not sure if the 'problem' of underratedness is more promenent but they certainly suffer the tyranny of distance to a greater degree than the ACT crowd and therefore I would expect less intermingling of interstate games in their rating pool.

jenni
09-10-2005, 06:16 PM
Not sure if the 'problem' of underratedness is more promenent but they certainly suffer the tyranny of distance to a greater degree than the ACT crowd and therefore I would expect less intermingling of interstate games in their rating pool.

Its not totally a function of distance. e.g. WA would have to be the most isolated, but historically their juniors have not been under rated. It is more a function of pool composition.

Rincewind
09-10-2005, 06:32 PM
Its not totally a function of distance. e.g. WA would have to be the most isolated, but historically their juniors have not been under rated. It is more a function of pool composition.

This is true but Queensland (like the ACT) would seem to have an active junior scene.

ursogr8
09-10-2005, 06:50 PM
<snip>While the same is true of Box Hill (Eugene, Alan Glenton, Derek Yu are all in this band, there seems to be a much higher % of stable adults in there).

<snip>
jenni
That is perhaps overstating it. :P

But what you may have overlooked are the aged stalwarts who have lost bulk rating points over the past 5 years. John Butler, Anton Nincevic, Eric Neymanis, Arthur Goudy, et al.

starter

jenni
09-10-2005, 08:51 PM
This is true but Queensland (like the ACT) would seem to have an active junior scene.

Yes exactly - which is why in an earlier post I said that they had similar problems to us. Also they seem to have, like in the ACT, had a massive loss of adult players. DR R used to maintain that was because they were tired of seeing their rating go down, not sure if this is the reason in the ACT, or whether there are other reasons.

Denis_Jessop
09-10-2005, 09:41 PM
Yes exactly - which is why in an earlier post I said that they had similar problems to us. Also they seem to have, like in the ACT, had a massive loss of adult players. DR R used to maintain that was because they were tired of seeing their rating go down, not sure if this is the reason in the ACT, or whether there are other reasons.

One other reason why the ACT has had a massive loss of adult players is that older players have given up from death, age or no wish to play competitively or whatever and they have not been replaced by younger recruits. Thus there is a great lack of 20 - 40 y.o. players and no sign of many on the horizon despite the large number of juniors. Most of the juniors are at Primary School and High School levels with a great drop-out rate by College time.

DJ

Rincewind
09-10-2005, 10:25 PM
Perhaps the problem is the junior ranks are actually over stimulated. You have a lot of chess activity for juniors and thus you get a lot of kids playing. However, when they turn adult the ones who keep playing may well be the same ones that would play as an adult anyway. Not saying this is true just a possible explanation. The high dropout might not be anything more than an artifact of the high junior participation rate. :hmm:

Davidflude
10-10-2005, 05:09 PM
I suspect that the lack of adults playing may be due to people putting in extra hours to keep their jobs and having less time for chess.

four four two
10-10-2005, 06:14 PM
What I want to know is,how can these juniors in the ACT be so underrated if they have the annual oppurtunity of playing in Doeberl,australia's strongest weekender? :hmm: Surely this is the perfect tournament for a 1200-1600 "underrated" junior to play in,there are plenty of "scalps" on offer.100 rating points isnt far fetched for a true underrated junior to gain from this tournament.If they played this tournament 3 years in a row and played well then you would have more 1600-2000 players in the ACT. ;)

jenni
10-10-2005, 09:33 PM
They do play in Doeberl and ANU in big numbers, but it is a yo yo effect - grab rating points off out of towners and then share them around with the people back at the club.

e.g In each section of Doeberl the top performing ACT kid gained points - in the open 40 points in the major and minor 30 apiece. These 3 juniors played Premier and supporting events and promptly lost between 10 and 30 each.

In the ANU there were large gains - 35, 60, 35, 67, 50 were some of them. The girl who gained 50 had lost most of them in a local tournament the week before. The boy who gained 67, had lost points in both the ACT Champs and Belconnen Premier.

The kids do make progress, but our sub 1600 players tend to be really under rated.

GloryGlory
20-10-2005, 11:42 PM
They do play in Doeberl and ANU in big numbers, but it is a yo yo effect - grab rating points off out of towners and then share them around with the people back at the club.

e.g In each section of Doeberl the top performing ACT kid gained points - in the open 40 points in the major and minor 30 apiece. These 3 juniors played Premier and supporting events and promptly lost between 10 and 30 each.

Sorry bout not being able to quote it properly havnt learnt that yet.
Anyway I know Jenni was talking about me :D Jenni is right Rincewood you said we should go out more to say Adelaide and Melbourne. Sydney is much easiar to. There is only about 15 max amount of juniors going outside the ACT for tourns (not including juniors, aussie open, and schools). If it was as easy as you said it is. Then that amount should double atleast. If you observe the ACT ratings as a whole you will see that alot of ratings rocket the rating list after doeberl (not so much ANU). Take my rating. I picked up 30 rating points from that. Now if we do a time line of where those points go.
timeline 1, i drew with kayleigh :P then kayleigh smith who lost to Emma who lost to a girl called Alanah Chibnall and she lost to a yound guy called benjamin xing. Now a draw with kayleigh lost me say 7 points. From me to Benjamin thats about 1200 points so 7 of my gained points from doeberl have trickelled down to a 500 rated player. Now if you let this happen continuously to everyone. The top ACT players will have the same problem. So even though the rough raises say 15 points. It will slowly keep trickeling down to lower rated players. So our rating 'Roof' will advance only slowly while other states continue to have their players jump upwards at a much faster pace. So yes the ACT's players are slowly getting ratings they deserve. But we get them 2morrow while nearly everyone else already had them yesterday.

Sorry if none of it made sense