PDA

View Full Version : playing in a FIDE rated event in Sydney



Vlad
26-01-2006, 11:29 AM
Somehow I find Sydney has a very few tournaments which are FIDE rated. On top of that (a huge surprise at least for myself) I have found that some of them are closed!?

Below is my experience. I have looked in the internet and found that the earliest FIDE rated event is the North Sydney chess club championship starting on the 14-th of February. I have contacted Norm Greenwood asking if I could play in this event. He was very sceptical if the club will let me play. The reasons are as follows.

1) I live in Rosebery which does not have any chess club around. The closest one is probably St George (about 20 minutes drive), the next one is North Sydney (about 25 minutes drive). So nominally I do not live in the area of the North Sydney club.

2) According to Norm, to play in the championship one has to be a member for years. I am not a member of this club because I have not played there, even though I have been coming there quite often in the last year.

3) They are worried that I will steal the trophy from them. Frankly speaking I do not care about the trophy I just want to play in the FIDE rated event.

I think pretty much what they want is that I play in some other event in the North Sydney before I play the championship. It looks to me (even though the club has players rated higher than me) most likely if I play I will be the highest rated. Asking me to play in some kind of pre-qualifier seems to be at least unfair.

I think this story is a good explanation why 2200+ chessplayers do not play in Sydney. They are being discouraged by organizers.:)

Kerry Stead
26-01-2006, 11:44 AM
Somehow I find Sydney has a very few tournaments which are FIDE rated. On top of that (a huge surprise at least for myself) I have found that some of them are closed!?

Below is my experience. I have looked in the internet and found that the earliest FIDE rated event is the North Sydney chess club championship starting on the 14-th of February. I have contacted Norm Greenwood asking if I could play in this event. He was very sceptical if the club will let me play. The reasons are as follows.

1) I live in Rosebery which does not have any chess club around. The closest one is probably St George (about 20 minutes drive), the next one is North Sydney (about 25 minutes drive). So nominally I do not live in the area of the North Sydney club.

2) According to Norm, to play in the championship one has to be a member for years. I am not a member of this club because I have not played there, even though I have been coming there quite often in the last year.

3) They are worried that I will steal the trophy from them. Frankly speaking I do not care about the trophy I just want to play in the FIDE rated event.

I think pretty much what they want is that I play in some other event in the North Sydney before I play the championship. It looks to me (even though the club has players rated higher than me) most likely if I play I will be the highest rated. Asking me to play in some kind of pre-qualifier seems to be at least unfair.

I think this story is a good explanation why 2200+ chessplayers do not play in Sydney. They are being discouraged by organizers.:)

Vlad, there's a simple explanation - its a CLUB CHAMPIONSHIP ... its not intended to be an open event, its intended to find the best player in a tournament of player from the club. That it is FIDE rated is incidental to the intention of the tournament.

So you aren't being discouraged because organisers don't want 2200+ players playing in FIDE rated events, rather you are being discouraged because you are/have not been a member of the club.

If you think about things though, most FIDE rated events in Australia are either club championship type events, or large weekenders (Doeberl Cup, NSW Open, etc), as well as the annual Australian Championship or Open, so there is a general lack of FIDE rated events in the country.

Alan Shore
26-01-2006, 11:49 AM
Vlad, there's a simple explanation - its a CLUB CHAMPIONSHIP ... its not intended to be an open event, its intended to find the best player in a tournament of player from the club. That it is FIDE rated is incidental to the intention of the tournament.

So you aren't being discouraged because organisers don't want 2200+ players playing in FIDE rated events, rather you are being discouraged because you are/have not been a member of the club.

If you think about things though, most FIDE rated events in Australia are either club championship type events, or large weekenders (Doeberl Cup, NSW Open, etc), as well as the annual Australian Championship or Open, so there is a general lack of FIDE rated events in the country.

Why can't he just play and be ineligible for the title? Then everyone wins. We do it a lot up here.. I remember the QLD Juniors in 1999 when Zong-Yuan Zhao played, got 8/8 and Matthew Sonter won the title on 6/8.

Bill Gletsos
26-01-2006, 11:57 AM
Why can't he just play and be ineligible for the title? Then everyone wins. We do it a lot up here.. I remember the QLD Juniors in 1999 when Zong-Yuan Zhao played, got 8/8 and Matthew Sonter won the title on 6/8.Possibly because it is the North Sydney Club Championship and North Sydney is running the event for the benefit of its members.
Also his results against actual North Sydney members vying for the Club Championship could affect the outcome of the competition. Now it could be argued that his results are just totally ignored, but it could be argued that doing so would serve no useful, purpose to the Nth Sydney club or its members.

Alan Shore
26-01-2006, 12:03 PM
Possibly because it is the North Sydney Club Championship and North Sydney is running the event for the benefit of its members.
Also his results against actual North Sydney members vying for the Club Championship could affect the outcome of the competition. Now it could be argued that his results are just totally ignored, but it could be argued that doing so would serve no useful, purpose to the Nth Sydney club or its members.

Sounds like snobbish segregation to me. Not a unique practice in NSW though.

Rincewind
26-01-2006, 12:13 PM
Sounds like snobbish segregation to me. Not a unique practice in NSW though.

It is strictly speaking segregation but it is not snobbish. Perhaps you are advocating the abolishment of all clubs and every event be run as an open. No one said their weren't some negatives to clubs. But all models have their shortcomings. If you want to argue that club should not run closed championships then do so. But you have to come up with a better argument than name-calling.

Also the other event that Vlad was asked to play in didn't sound like a qualification event to me, it just sound like a requirement that the championship participants be bona fide club members and not people who pay their membership to just play in the championship.

To my mind North Sydney has a benefit of membership which is that their championship is run as a FIDE rated event. This should encourage players to become members of the club to enjoy this benefit. It is up to each individual to decide as to whether this benefit is attractive enough warrant membership.

Organisers of opens should bear in mind that there is a market for FIDE rated events in the Sydney area.

Vlad
26-01-2006, 01:03 PM
So you aren't being discouraged because organisers don't want 2200+ players playing in FIDE rated events, rather you are being discouraged because you are/have not been a member of the club.


What does it mean a member of a club? My definition - it is somebody who comes to a club from time to time. Your definition is pretty much who has played at least one normal-time-control event in the club. I believe i have been coming to the club more often than many other "members", but I have never played there because it just does not make sense for me to play. I do not want to play in the events where to perform at my strength I have to score 90%. It is just a waste of my time.

I believe while low-rated players like you, Kerry, and others make all chess-organizing decisions in Australia, there is no future of chess in this country.

This will never happen say in Europe or America.

Spiny Norman
26-01-2006, 02:24 PM
I believe while low-rated players like you, Kerry, and others make all chess-organizing decisions in Australia, there is no future of chess in this country.
The only reason that I, a 1400-odd rated player, am President, treasurer, promoter, and God knows what else at my local club, is that nobody else seems particularly interested in doing the work required. I'm a choleric by nature, a do-er, so when a chess club needed to be organised I said "I'll do it". I expect that most other clubs and organising bodies are in the same boat.

So step up and offer your services ... and if you are already an organiser/administrator/helper, then I apologise in advance against any perceived slur against your character.

Most people seem to think that everything in chess should revolve around the needs of the top-rated players. Sorry to disillusion you, but most of it needs to revolve around the needs of the bulk of the players, and that means us 1400-1800 types. :) There should be premier events for the top players ... and there are ... so I can't see the problem there. I think a club has every right to determine what suits it best, after all, it exists for the benefit of its members. What's a member? Its what that club says is a member, no more, no less. If they say you have to stand on your head for two weeks to be a member, so be it.

jenni
26-01-2006, 02:33 PM
We have made a similar sort of rule at Belconnen Chess Club for our "Premier". Most of our events (including our club championships) are run as Open swisses and are open to anyone at all (even interstate, although I suspect they couldn't win the Club title, although I am not sure about that - maybe we need to make a rule!). We do have one tournament a year where we break into 10 player round robins and we found that players from other clubs, or inactive players, would want to play in the top event.

We made a rule that before you can be considered for the Premier, you have to play in one normal rated event at Belco in the previous 12 months. That means all the club members get the benefit of having strong competitors added to at least one open tournament and that long term club members find it a little easier to get into the Premier. It is not a huge commitment and there haven't been any complaints as yet.

Our Premier was FIDE rated for the first time last year, but I am not sure whether anyone sees that as an added attraction..

auriga
26-01-2006, 02:42 PM
Somehow I find Sydney has a very few tournaments which are FIDE rated. On top of that (a huge surprise at least for myself) I have found that some of them are closed!?


drug, maybe try the st george club championships.
this is fide-rated but with less restrictions :)

Bill Gletsos
26-01-2006, 02:56 PM
The North Sydney run Ford Memorial is open to all and is FIDE rated.

shaun
26-01-2006, 02:57 PM
Our Premier was FIDE rated for the first time last year, but I am not sure whether anyone sees that as an added attraction..
To me it was an added attraction and was the reason that I played. It is important not just for the club, but for Australian chess that we have these local tournaments as not everyone has the money,drive or opportunity to travel overseas to get their first FIDE rating.

The_Wise_Man
26-01-2006, 03:04 PM
The following tournaments are FIDE rated:

St George Club Championship (Open Division and Reserves Division 1 (and potentially Reserves Division 2) organised by the St George Leagues Club Chess Club at Kogarah

Canterbury Open organised by the Canterbury Leagues Club Chess Club now playing at Lakemba.

Wise

jenni
26-01-2006, 03:05 PM
To me it was an added attraction and was the reason that I played. It is important not just for the club, but for Australian chess that we have these local tournaments as not everyone has the money,drive or opportunity to travel overseas to get their first FIDE rating.

Oh good - we are FIDE rating it again this year, so I hope that means you will play - although does it conflict with Turin?

It was interesting that some of the people who were most against FIDE rating it, did end up playing in it.

Trent Parker
26-01-2006, 03:41 PM
Does Hakoah have any FIDE rated Events?

jase
26-01-2006, 04:27 PM
What does it mean a member of a club? My definition - it is somebody who comes to a club from time to time.

This is a rather ignorant definition. I go to many places from time to time, where memberships are available (eg clubs, sporting events) but this does not qualify me as a member.


I do not want to play in the events where to perform at my strength I have to score 90%. It is just a waste of my time.

A rapid browse of the North Sydney Leagues Chess Club site discredits this statement. Their Ford Memorial tournament, held late last year, was FIDE rated, and contained 15 players with FIDE ratings exceeding 2000; 5 players had +2100 ratings. This would have been an excellent tournament for you to compete in.


I believe while low-rated players like you, Kerry, and others make all chess-organizing decisions in Australia, there is no future of chess in this country. This will never happen say in Europe or America.

This is not correct. Most organisers tend to be lower rated, non-titled players, both here and abroad. A minute percentage of top players become involved in chess administration. Kerry (whose FIDE is about 100 less than your own) has experience in organising FIDE rated events.

The chess community in Australia is a relatively small one, however as per some of the informed posts on this thread, opportunity for strong competition does exist.


I think this story is a good explanation why 2200+ chessplayers do not play in Sydney. They are being discouraged by organizers.

Is this why you play so infrequently? I think your understanding of why so many 2100-2400 players are inactive is inaccurate and superficial.

Kerry Stead
26-01-2006, 05:31 PM
We made a rule that before you can be considered for the Premier, you have to play in one normal rated event at Belco in the previous 12 months. That means all the club members get the benefit of having strong competitors added to at least one open tournament and that long term club members find it a little easier to get into the Premier. It is not a huge commitment and there haven't been any complaints as yet.

I think this is a great idea Jenni.

Vlad, Jenni makes a valid point. Why should club events simply be a question of whoever waves a higher rating getting in the tournament when they only play infrequently, if at all, at the club? Think about the other players at the club. Yes, you may have to score at 90% to maintain your rating, but if you are as strong as your rating suggests, then 90% should not be a problem! It also gives th others at the club a chance to learn from playing a highly rated opponent, as well as having the opportunity to take some of that persons rating points if they play a good game.

You must learn to give as well as take ...

jenni
26-01-2006, 06:19 PM
I think this is a great idea Jenni.

..

Can't take the credit - it was Ian Rout's idea. :)

ElevatorEscapee
26-01-2006, 06:23 PM
Hi Drug,

At the Bendigo Chess Club, a member is someone who pays their yearly membership. We have some members who only show up to play in the Club Championship, others who only show up infrequently, and still others who show up almost every week, come rain, hail or shine.

For the past four years, our tournament director has run our Club Championship in two blocks:

First a couple of qualifying tournaments which everyone who wants to compete in the Club Championship must enter (even the champ from the previous year!).

Then the event is split into two sections, with the finalists from the qualifying tournaments playing for the Club Championship, and the rest entering a tournament for Reserve's Champion.

This approach has had it's critics, but it seems to have worked quite well for us for the past four years.

One of its main advantages is that a club member who has been coming along all year is given an equal chance of competing in the Club Championship as a higher rated player who comes just for the Club Championships (ie the higher rated player doesn't automatically qualify ahead of the lower rated player).

You would be most welcome to play in our event, however, I must warn you it is not FIDE rated! :D

Vlad
26-01-2006, 10:04 PM
We made a rule that before you can be considered for the Premier, you have to play in one normal rated event at Belco in the previous 12 months. That means all the club members get the benefit of having strong competitors added to at least one open tournament and that long term club members find it a little easier to get into the Premier. It is not a huge commitment and there haven't been any complaints as yet.


The problem with your argument, Jenni, is that the only people whom you punish by this rule are people who are rated significantly higher than other people playing in the club. For everybody else it is a very good rule. In short run it is like a majority punishing a minority. In the long run though, it is a majority punishing themselves.

I remember you were telling me that you (read Canberra) would be very glad to get somebody highly rated. Now you are saying that you invent rules like this. I canít believe it!?

arosar
27-01-2006, 07:25 AM
Does Hakoah have any FIDE rated Events?

If you fancy a FIDE rating and you like a bit of a beach holiday, you could always go to Palau. Bekker is organising one over there.

AR

Ian Rout
27-01-2006, 09:13 AM
The problem with your argument, Jenni, is that the only people whom you punish by this rule are people who are rated significantly higher than other people playing in the club. For everybody else it is a very good rule. In short run it is like a majority punishing a minority. In the long run though, it is a majority punishing themselves.

I remember you were telling me that you (read Canberra) would be very glad to get somebody highly rated. Now you are saying that you invent rules like this. I canít believe it!?
Like any "rule" it can be changed or broken. For instance if Ian Rogers wanted to play in the Premier we would proabably waive the rule; or if somebody had just arrived in Canberra and indicated an intention to play regularly at the club it would be looked at. Also it doesn't apply to people who are seeded by virtue of finishing in the top three last year.

The rule is more about people who are comparable with the rest of the field or not significantly higher, and there is somewhat less public interest in somebody missing out to fit them in.

On the general subject of the thread, there's no rule stopping clubs having more than one FIDE-rated tournament; it doesn't have to just be the club championship. Perhaps clubs in Sydney just haven't been made aware that there is a demand for more?

Carl Gorka
27-01-2006, 10:48 AM
I think this is a great idea Jenni.

Vlad, Jenni makes a valid point. Why should club events simply be a question of whoever waves a higher rating getting in the tournament when they only play infrequently, if at all, at the club? Think about the other players at the club. Yes, you may have to score at 90% to maintain your rating, but if you are as strong as your rating suggests, then 90% should not be a problem! It also gives th others at the club a chance to learn from playing a highly rated opponent, as well as having the opportunity to take some of that persons rating points if they play a good game.

You must learn to give as well as take ...

I agree with this sentiment 100%. Twice since being in Aus I have played in tournament's where perhaps I could have been included in a higher section, once in the Vic Champs, and then again in my local club champs. In both events I was told by various people that I should be playing the higher event, but my answer was always, if I do well here, I'll play the higher event next year. And I would personally feel bad if I knew that my inclusion in an event meant that someone who may have spent a great deal of time trying to qualify for, missed out. While clubs/organisations have responsibilities to all their members, those members in turn have a certain responsibility to give back.

jenni
27-01-2006, 12:26 PM
The problem with your argument, Jenni, is that the only people whom you punish by this rule are people who are rated significantly higher than other people playing in the club. For everybody else it is a very good rule. In short run it is like a majority punishing a minority. In the long run though, it is a majority punishing themselves.

I remember you were telling me that you (read Canberra) would be very glad to get somebody highly rated. Now you are saying that you invent rules like this. I canít believe it!?

Well for a start Belco now has almost all the active highest rated players playing at it, so it probably isn't an issue, which is also why we probably haven't had any complaints.

What it does ensure is that players like Gareth and Michael Wei, who are in the top 5 in Canberra and who are perhaps getting a little bored with playng the same people continually at Belco are pushed into playing at least one other open swiss tournament if they want to play the Premier (although as Ian has pointed out, they usually come in the top 3 anyway, so are automatically seeded in the following year. I haven't told Gareth that bit!). This helps our up and comers like Yi or Edward, as they have the opportunity to have a go at Gareth or Michael.

Chess can be a very selfish sport, with people grabbing opportunities to play against higher rated players, but never wanting to be the top seed themselves. So you are to be congratulated that you are prepared to go into the North Sydney tournament, where I assume you would be a top seed?

However I was just pointing out that these sorts of rules are quite common in club tournaments and do have some logic behind them.

As you know I am always in the market to get a 2200+ player in Canberra, particuarly one who wants to coach. I just keep on having them slip through my fingers....

Obviously if someone like that arrived in Canberra and wanted to play the Premier, we would be bending our rules to allow it. However I am not sure they would want to risk their rating!

Vlad
27-01-2006, 01:24 PM
Obviously if someone like that arrived in Canberra and wanted to play the Premier, we would be bending our rules to allow it. However I am not sure they would want to risk their rating!

The last time I played there I lost about 40 points. The main problem is not that ACT players are highly underrated (I was as well at the time I played) but rather that it is difficult to push yourselve to win every game because you have nothing to prove. You just do not have incentives to work very hard. This is partly what I was saying. I was kind of already sacrificing by agreeing to play in this competition and apparently that was not enough. Well, that is fine. I will play in the St George then (if my wife will let me:)).

Spiny Norman
27-01-2006, 01:34 PM
For the past four years, our tournament director has run our Club Championship in two blocks:

First a couple of qualifying tournaments which everyone who wants to compete in the Club Championship must enter (even the champ from the previous year!).

Then the event is split into two sections, with the finalists from the qualifying tournaments playing for the Club Championship, and the rest entering a tournament for Reserve's Champion.
At Croydon we decided to start based on a points system. A win or a draw in any game in every event throughout the year earns a player a certain number of points (e.g. 1 point/game for Blitz, 2 points/game for Rapid, 8 points/game for ACF-rated games under the "Classic" rating system).

This means that a strong player could play a much smaller number of games and yet still qualify for the club championship. It also gives lower-rated players a chance if they play reasonably well and compete in just about every event. People who arrive part way through the year are at a pro-rated disadvantage for that year.

Oh, and those that don't qualify for the main championship tournament can compete in the Reserves ... and the winner of that pre-qualifies for the following year's Championship event.

It worked okay for us last year. Certainly made that last tournament a bit of a nail-biter, as we had about 3 people in contention for the last Championship spot right up to the last week.

Kerry Stead
31-01-2006, 11:35 AM
The last time I played there I lost about 40 points. The main problem is not that ACT players are highly underrated (I was as well at the time I played) but rather that it is difficult to push yourselve to win every game because you have nothing to prove. You just do not have incentives to work very hard. This is partly what I was saying. I was kind of already sacrificing by agreeing to play in this competition and apparently that was not enough. Well, that is fine. I will play in the St George then (if my wife will let me:)).

So why do you play Vlad? What are your own motivations/incentives?

pax
31-01-2006, 12:55 PM
I believe while low-rated players like you, Kerry, and others make all chess-organizing decisions in Australia, there is no future of chess in this country.

It's comments like that that make "low rated" chess organisers give up organising events altogether. Then you end up with nothing.

Seriously, chess rating has nothing whatsoever to do with organising ability. A good organiser needs to appreciate the needs of top players, but that is one skill among many, and does not require the organiser to themselves have a high rating.

Vlad
31-01-2006, 01:21 PM
So why do you play Vlad? What are your own motivations/incentives?

Kerry, what is your objective? Are you trying to provoke me again to collect cheap points?

Kerry Stead
31-01-2006, 01:29 PM
Kerry, what is your objective? Are you trying to provoke me again to collect cheap points?
Cheap points? There's too many punchlines to choose one.

What I was trying to get at was that you seem to want to play in events where the opposition is all fairly highly rated (such as the North Sydney Club Championship), yet you object to playing in events such where there are numerous lower rated players (such as Canberra clubs) saying that you are not motivated to achieve the 90% or thereabouts to maintain or increase ones rating in such events ... which led to my question ... what is your motivation for playing? Is it the competitive aspect, the mental challenge, the prizes, the rating ... and why does this motivation disappear when you have few high rated opponents?