PDA

View Full Version : Australian Young and Junior Masters



jenni
23-03-2004, 01:47 PM
The Australian Young and Junior Masters is to be held in Canberra from the 14th to 18th April. It will be held alongside the NECG training tournaments. In fact the line between the two is fairly blurred, with many of the NECG kids electing to play in the longer Young/ Junior Masters instead. Unfortunately many of the top juniors are involved in HSC/Uni this year, but the field assembled should lead to some exciting chess.

Participants are still being finalised and will be added to the web site as soon as confirmations are received.

Website has been created by one of the ACT's most active volunteers Ian Rout.

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

Jason Hu
28-03-2004, 08:50 PM
can i ask how the players were selected? do you have to be in the NECG squad?

jenni
28-03-2004, 11:19 PM
can i ask how the players were selected? do you have to be in the NECG squad?

No Jason you don't.

For the Australian Young Masters, I took the best players Under 20 list and worked my way down. I invited 10 players initially and as refusals came in, I asked the next person down. Once I ran out of the best under 20 list, I invited Gareth who, after scouring the ratings lists, I am pretty sure is is no 21 on the best under 20 and Raymond Song, because I thought that it would be good experience for him and get him ready for the under 10 in Crete later in the year. (obviously he is our big medal hope).

The final place is actually being held for Jonathan Humphrey - he wants to play but has the problem of a Uni assignment due the day after the comp finishes. Most of the other under 20's who turned it down, did so because of School or Uni work. Jonathan is trying to find a way to do both, but the place might still be vacant.

With the Junior masters - I have effectively turned it into an Australian Junior Masters. Last year when NSW ran it, it was designed as a local NSW tournament, although Junta Ikeda did end up playing, because they had a few vacant spots. I really didn't want another local ACT tournament, as our juniors play each other too much already. I also thought it would be nice to give some of the older NECG kids a longer tournament to play in. I thus ended up with a bit of a mixture - I gave some of our local juniors an invitation to give them the opportuntity to play in a strong tournament with out of town juniors. I added in some NECG kids and James Cronan heard the tournament was happening and asked if he could play.

Two NECG training tournaments will be running alongside the Young and Junior Masters. Doeberl finishes on Monday 12th. Tuesday 13th sees the NECG training day attended by the 20 squad members. Wednesday 14th all 36 kids will be playing in 4 tournaments. The NECG tournaments conclude on Friday 16th, with the Young and Junior Masters finishing on Sunday 18th.

The opening ceremony will happen on Wednesday 14th and will also be the official launch of the NECG squad. Tracey Fisher from NECG will be attenidng and Senator Kate Lundy and MLA Bill Stefaniak will be making speeches. I am hoping to get reasonable meda coverage.

I hope that answers your question Jason (and probably about 3 times more than you wanted to hear).

Were you interested in playing?

Jason Hu
29-03-2004, 05:10 PM
Thanks for answering. Yeah, I wanted to play. I guess i'll just have to get my rating up and get invited next year.

And good luck with all the players who are playing!

jenni
29-03-2004, 06:16 PM
Thanks for answering. Yeah, I wanted to play. I guess i'll just have to get my rating up and get invited next year.

And good luck with all the players who are playing!

Yes it is a bit of a function of rating unfortunately - however you have gone up heaps in the last year and I am sure will continue to do so!

Rhubarb
30-03-2004, 04:18 AM
Hi Jenni,

It's not surprising that you didn't consider Jason, because I for one had never heard of him until two weeks ago (!), and yet he has just finished =2nd in the (senior) City of Sydney Champs! Don't know how old he is though and I didn't play him.

I took it that his questions to you regarding the Young Masters were an appeal to the chess community in general that no one has noticed his rapid rise, although that is about to change when the chess press notice the CoS result. His rating has gone from 1590 to 1700 in March and will probably go up another couple of hundred next list.

Best wishes with the Young Masters tournaments,
Greg

jenni
30-03-2004, 08:56 AM
Hi Jenni,

It's not surprising that you didn't consider Jason, because I for one had never heard of him until two weeks ago (!), and yet he has just finished =2nd in the (senior) City of Sydney Champs! Don't know how old he is though and I didn't play him.

I took it that his questions to you regarding the Young Masters were an appeal to the chess community in general that no one has noticed his rapid rise, although that is about to change when the chess press notice the CoS result. His rating has gone from 1590 to 1700 in March and will probably go up another couple of hundred next list.

Best wishes with the Young Masters tournaments,
Greg

Hi Greg

Actually Jason was on my radar, as he played in the Aus juniors in Perth and did very well there. In fact Gareth was lucky to get a win against him, as it was a looking like heading for a draw until Jason made a mistake.

He did beat Dusan Stojic and drew with Moulthun Ly and Vincent Suttor - only a bit of a fade at the end of the tournament prevented him from a much higher finish. Jason turns 17 this year, so he still has a number of years to play the Young Masters and if he continues to improve as he has in the last year, he will definitely be qualifying for it.

Rhubarb
30-03-2004, 09:09 AM
Jenni,

Thanks for the extra info on this junior who I hitherto didn't know anything about. My surprise was partly a case of "How dare this junior I've never heard of come equal second with me in the Sydney Championship?", so I'm glad to hear you have him on the radar. :) :)

Regards,
Greg

arosar
30-03-2004, 10:02 AM
Jason Hu is a fantastic player and he has rarely failed me when I tipped him to win. Take last Sunday in the blitz. He and I were playing on adjacent boards - he against Bolens and I against Camer. Just before the start I said to Bolens that Jason would beat him. Bolens' reply was to immediately make a bet. I declined. Anyway, on we went. Half way through our games Bolens then said something like, "Put your money down, I'm going to win". Guess what happened? Jason Hu beat Bolens!

AR

Rhubarb
30-03-2004, 10:49 AM
Jason Hu is a fantastic player and he has rarely failed me when I tipped him to win. Take last Sunday in the blitz. He and I were playing on adjacent boards - he against Bolens and I against Camer. Just before the start I said to Bolens that Jason would beat him. Bolens' reply was to immediately make a bet. I declined. Anyway, on we went. Half way through our games Bolens then said something like, "Put your money down, I'm going to win". Guess what happened? Jason Hu beat Bolens!

AR

Amiel Rosario is a fantastic player and he has rarely failed to successfully tip an event after it has happened. I would say that he is close to 99.9 percent in this field, although he does even better when his beloved RP is involved.

arosar
30-03-2004, 11:08 AM
Don't be a smart-a.s.s towards me man. Listen, can I ak you when you discovered the BB? Has it changed your life at all? Better or worse?

AR

Rhubarb
30-03-2004, 11:26 AM
I tip Smerdon and Bourmistrov to clear out from the rest of the field in the Australian Young Masters, with Oliver and Song to fight it out for third.

I can't really make any tips in the Junior Masters as I don't know enough about the players.

I also tip Rosario to make some wise and knowledgeable comments about both tournaments after they're all over.

Oepty
30-03-2004, 11:52 AM
Well, surprise, surprise I will predict Smerdon for the young masters. I will be quite interested in Giang Nguyen goes as she is capable of finishing 2nd in the field but hasn't played much recently. I will predict Ly in the junior masters as I don't think Obst has played enough chess at that level to play consistently enough to win it. James Cronan to be the other big threat.
Scott

jenni
30-03-2004, 01:11 PM
I tip Smerdon and Bourmistrov to clear out from the rest of the field in the Australian Young Masters, with Oliver and Song to fight it out for third.

I can't really make any tips in the Junior Masters as I don't know enough about the players.

I also tip Rosario to make some wise and knowledgeable comments about both tournaments after they're all over.

I agree that David and Denis should be out in front, but after that it gets very hard. All of them are capable of good chess - e.g Dusan Stojic I have known for years and is very talented and a tough player or Michael Wei, whom I know will put hours of preparation into his games.

The Junior Masters is going to be really fun and it would be a brave person who made a prediction there!

Alan Shore
30-03-2004, 02:39 PM
If Jonathan Humphrey plays, I'd tip him to come second behind Smerdon.

jenni
30-03-2004, 02:57 PM
If Jonathan Humphrey plays, I'd tip him to come second behind Smerdon.

Ah well you see I have the extra knowledge - I heard from Jonathan last night that he really can't make it, because of Uni work overload. I am busy filling the final position at the moment, which might mean a shuffle from the Junior masters over to the Young Masters (Jason might get an invite yet...).

alexmdc
30-03-2004, 11:37 PM
*waves* :D

jenni
31-03-2004, 02:24 PM
Ian Rout has been busy adding profiles to the webpage. We are still missing a few and they will be added as I receive them.

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/Players.htm

arosar
31-03-2004, 04:03 PM
Hey Mrs Oliver. I think Alex wants you to invite him.

AR

jenni
31-03-2004, 05:43 PM
*waves* :D

I'll form a queue! :)

Garvinator
31-03-2004, 08:14 PM
does this mean that some players have not been considered cause they werent known to the selection committee/ :hmm:

jenni
31-03-2004, 09:59 PM
does this mean that some players have not been considered cause they werent known to the selection committee/ :hmm:

Not at all - I think I can say that I am aware of all juniors (under 18), who are rated above 1700. I also know who all the strongest under 20s are. I have communicated frequently with Ian Rogers and Kerry Stead to ensure I didn't forget anyone. e.g. Arianne Caoli who does not appear on the best under 20 list.

The Australian Young Masters is for the best players in Australia - basically if you are not on the best under 20 list, or very close to it, it is unlikely that you are going to be invited. We have had a big drop out rate this year because of HSC and Uni, so we are going down a bit lower than normal. (If anything can be regarded as normal in the second year of a competition).

When it comes to the Junior Masters, I have a lot more discretion. As I have stated above, last year it was very much a local NSW comp. This year I am turning it into a comp for younger juniors who are aspiring to become the best in Australia (while still reserving some places for local ACT kids). There I am more than happy to include someone like Jason, as he is showing a big jump in ability over the last year and also is very enthusiastic. I would rather put someone like him into the Junior Masters than someone who is higher rated, but a bit half hearted about it all.

To be quite honest, alexmdc is not going to get in, because his rating is not high enough to get into the Young Masters and he is too old to get into the junior masters (he turns 19 this year and it is for under 18's). However I was trying to be nice!

I don't think anyone is being "selected" - just getting an invitation based on rating and enthusiasm. I think it is great that the "up and coming" juniors want to play and are pushing to get in.

Davidflude
01-04-2004, 07:40 PM
Let me say that it is great to see that this tournament is obviously being organised with great care.

Ian Rout
13-04-2004, 03:32 PM
For those who haven't checked for a while, the full set of player profiles is up

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/players.htm

It's all in a long string (too occupied to do any clever formatting) so just scroll to where it finished when you last read them.

Ian Rout
14-04-2004, 01:38 PM
The draws for the two tournaments are now up on the News page.

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/news.htm

Round 1 is currently in progress and results will be posted as they come to hand.

Alan Shore
14-04-2004, 03:03 PM
I like the profile questions, would be nice if everyone answrered these: (I tried to get something going on anoher thread in this vein)

School/Uni: Uni of QLD

Envisaged career: Professor/Lecturer

Favourite sport/hobby: Games/Golf/Bowls

Notable chess achievement: Beating IM Smerdon in Dec 2003

Favourite player: Emanuel Lasker

Favourite book: Watership Down by Richard Adams

First learned chess: Age 12

First taught by: Nathan Anderson

Chess club: UQ

Things I like about chess comps: The people to chat to and sports like cricket/soccer to play

Things I don't like about chess comps: Long time controls that are boring

Anything else we should know about you : I like transfer chess and suicide/losers chess, video games, philosophy, psychology and religion discussions.

Ian Rout
14-04-2004, 03:06 PM
First round results now up at

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

David Smerdon and Denis Bourmistrov both drew their first round games.

Oepty
14-04-2004, 04:39 PM
If it is true Moulthun Ly only learnt chess in 2002, that is scary. To be as good as he that quickly is a remarkable achievement.
Scott

Alan Shore
14-04-2004, 04:44 PM
If it is true Moulthun Ly only learnt chess in 2002, that is scary. To be as good as he that quickly is a remarkable achievement.
Scott

Yeah Moulthun is a champ.. if he maintains his interest he could be a very strong player, ratty too :)

Oepty
14-04-2004, 04:50 PM
ratty is James Obst for those who don't know, it is his name on ICC. I agree about Obst as well, although I must admitt I was surprised about his performance at Doeberl. Thought he was still a bit inconsistent to do it. It will be as tough a decision as Ikeda vs Jia if Obst and Ly both want to go to the World Juniors.
Scott

arosar
14-04-2004, 07:13 PM
Hey Mr Rout - I don't think the HTML is rendering the "1/2" correctly in the table data tag. Maybe you should use 0.5 instead.

AR

Lucena
14-04-2004, 07:32 PM
does this mean that some players have not been considered cause they werent known to the selection committee/ :hmm:

you old stirrer you...almost as bad as AR :D

Garvinator
14-04-2004, 07:46 PM
you old stirrer you...almost as bad as AR :D

sheesh, hasnt been here as long as some and knows me so well already :p ;)

But i must admit that on that one about the selections, it was just a question. It was not meant to cause any trouble.

jeffrei
14-04-2004, 09:06 PM
Having had a chance to see the fields for all four tournaments I must admit I'm a bit confused. The "Australian Young Masters" contains the 10 highest-rated players overall, which seems very sensible. But on the other hand we have two players in the "Training Group 1" tournament (Ruperto Lugo and Tristan Stevens) who would be the second and fourth seeds respectively if they were in "Australian Junior Masters" instead of their own (MUCH MUCH weaker) tournament! What is the thinking behind that? It just seems to me that huge rating differentials should be avoided if at all possible in these events.

I guess I'm really asking 3 questions here:
1. Who selected which kids would go in which tournaments?
2. Who selected the selector(s)?
3. How can they justify their selections?

/jef

PS: Here's the link for anyone who wants to check what I'm talking about:
http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

Garvinator
14-04-2004, 09:09 PM
It just seems to me that huge rating differentials should be avoided if at all possible in these events.

/jef

that wouldnt be to ensure that the players got more competitive games against players near their own standard would it? ;) :whistle: seems like a smart idea to me :lol:

Machiavelli
14-04-2004, 09:15 PM
You beat me to the question, Jeffrei!

Ian Rout
14-04-2004, 09:31 PM
Round 2 scores now up

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

Jovanovic, Oliver and Smerdon share the lead.

Possibly some games available later tonight.

Ian Rout
14-04-2004, 10:30 PM
Games of rounds 1 and 2 now up:

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/games.htm

At this stage just PGN - will be up in Palview at some point, but how quickly depends whether I really have Palview4 sorted out yet.

jenni
14-04-2004, 11:11 PM
Having had a chance to see the fields for all four tournaments I must admit I'm a bit confused. The "Australian Young Masters" contains the 10 highest-rated players overall, which seems very sensible. But on the other hand we have two players in the "Training Group 1" tournament (Ruperto Lugo and Tristan Stevens) who would be the second and fourth seeds respectively if they were in "Australian Junior Masters" instead of their own (MUCH MUCH weaker) tournament! What is the thinking behind that? It just seems to me that huge rating differentials should be avoided if at all possible in these events.

I guess I'm really asking 3 questions here:
1. Who selected which kids would go in which tournaments?
2. Who selected the selector(s)?
3. How can they justify their selections?

/jef

PS: Here's the link for anyone who wants to check what I'm talking about:
http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

There were not any "selectors" - this is not overseas representation, just a series of tournaments. I was the organiser (and Sponsor ) for the Aus Young and Junior Masters and the Canberra NECG training tournaments and all invitations were done by me, in consultation with Kerry Stead.

Ruperto and Tristan were NECG kids - in future they will probably be in a round robin that consists of Gareth, Denis, Michael, Dusan etc.

The strongest kids from NECG went into the Young Masters together with other strong kids from around Australia - it was done rigidly on rating and the NECG kids were given free entry to both the Young Masters and Junior Masters.

The Junior Masters last year was supposed to be a local tournament and had alomost all NSW kids in it. It seemed to me that it would be a better tournament if it had a more general mix of kids. 5 places were reserved for ACT kids and 3 for NECG kids. James Cronan asked very early on if he could have a place and Jason Hu got a place after Jonathan Humphrey was unable to come and James Obst moved into the Young Masters. I asked a number of strong NECG players - Ruperto and Tristan were very late in replying to say they were coming to the NECG training, so the places for the Junior MAsters were filled by that time. The 3 NECG kids who got in, were Heather Huddleston, Justin Huang and Moulthun Ly - while Ruperto and Tristan are probably as good as these, I wouldn't say they are much better.

Finally the 2 NECG tournaments were put together - some extra ACT kids were added in to bring the numbers up to 16, to allow 2 8 player round robins.

I think before going on ratings, I would look at results. I suspect that all the players in the 2 NECG tournaments are a lot closer than you would think from ratings. The only player who I think will totally struggle is Emma Guo, but as she is a strong possibility for overseas representation this year I wanted her to have a chance to play a strong competition like this.

some results so far - Rebecca has drawn with Ruperto, Angela drawn with Miona. Max crunched Tristan.

The NECG tournaments are training tournaments and not meant to be highly competitive - the major benefit is the analysis which is being done by Ian Rogers.

Ian Rout
14-04-2004, 11:12 PM
OK, the Palview is up and everything is complete for today, I think, so I'm retiring for the night.

Is anybody else having trouble reading halfs? I have visions of changing it and somebody else finding the lines wrap on 600x800 or whatever.

chesslover
14-04-2004, 11:24 PM
There were not any "selectors" - this is not overseas representation, just a series of tournaments. I was the organiser (and Sponsor ) for the Aus Young and Junior Masters and the Canberra NECG training tournaments and all invitations were done by me, in consultation with Kerry Stead.


she who wields the money calls the tune!!!

I have no probs with the way you chose the team or who got selected. Seems a very strong tournament and good luck and best wishes and hope it is successful and enjoyable to all

jenni
15-04-2004, 01:46 AM
she who wields the money calls the tune!!!

I have no probs with the way you chose the team or who got selected. Seems a very strong tournament and good luck and best wishes and hope it is successful and enjoyable to all

Thank-you!

I think the Juniors are all enjoying it, although already there have been a few heart-breaking losses. Heather Huddleston was up 2 exchanges and a passed pawn against Jason Hu, but he went for her very exposed king and won.

Kostia Lubarsky played an excellent game against David Smerdon and was definitely winning against Gareth, although Gareth played well to get back into the game.

jenni
15-04-2004, 09:34 AM
I was worried as to why Jeffrei was so cranky, but have just remembered that someone told me that he was coaching Ruperto now.

I would like to reassure him that Ruperto was not overlooked deliberately. He is a very talented young man, who could play the Young Masters and do very well and would have fitted into the Junior Masters. He didn't get into the Young masters, because of rating and missed out on the Junior Masters because others said they were coming to the NECG training much earlier. The lower rated players who are in the Junior Masters, are there because they are ACT players and 5 places were reserved for them.

My money is on Ruperto to win the 1st NECG training tournament, although I am very impressed with Max Illingworth, having watched a lot of his games at Doeberl.

They meet in the second round today and I intend to watch that game (if I don't have too many hotdogs to make). The tournament is not a waste for Ruperto, as the other kids are all good and will give Ruperto a run for his money (as Rebecca has already shown). If the Young Masters/Junior Masters was not being run alongside, then Denis Bourmistrov would have been the top seed and he would have been many hundreds of rating points above the 10th - this is always going to happen in the NECG tournaments where you have a wide range of ratings in the squad.

ursogr8
15-04-2004, 10:11 AM
I was worried as to why Jeffrei was so cranky, but have just remembered that someone told me that he was coaching Ruperto now.

I would like to reassure him that Ruperto was not overlooked deliberately. He is a very talented young man, who could play the Young Masters and do very well and would have fitted into the Junior Masters. He didn't get into the Young masters, because of rating and missed out on the Junior Masters because others said they were coming to the NECG training much earlier. The lower rated players who are in the Junior Masters, are there because they are ACT players and 5 places were reserved for them.

My money is on Ruperto to win the 1st NECG training tournament, although I am very impressed with Max Illingworth, having watched a lot of his games at Doeberl.

They meet in the second round today and I intend to watch that game (if I don't have too many hotdogs to make). The tournament is not a waste for Ruperto, as the other kids are all good and will give Ruperto a run for his money (as Rebecca has already shown). If the Young Masters/Junior Masters was not being run alongside, then Denis Bourmistrov would have been the top seed and he would have been many hundreds of rating points above the 10th - this is always going to happen in the NECG tournaments where you have a wide range of ratings in the squad.

hi jenni

Your logic and outcomes look fine to me.
Coaches always like to see their charges stretched and locally (at Box Hill) jeffrei would be accustomed to us creating competitions that stretch the up-and-comers.
But eventually all strong juniors will find themselves in a field where they are the highest ranked. That just presents a new learning challenge; how to win when every one expets you to win.
And forget what that old gg'' posted; he failed to calculate the competitive index, your pairings are satisfactorily competitive.
Good luck, and thanks for your efforts.

starter

Kerry Stead
15-04-2004, 02:40 PM
For what its worth, thought I might as well post my tips for the tourney (also having the benefit of the day 1 results helps! :p )

Young Masters:
David Smerdon
Ones to watch - Kostia Lubarsky, Michael Wei, Peter Jovanovic

Junior Masters:
Moulthun Ly
Ones to watch - Jason Hu, Justin Huang

Training group 1:
Max Illingworth
Ones to watch - Ruperto Lugo, Rebecca Harris

Training group 2:
Amy Evans
Ones to watch - James Morris, Andrew Brown

I think these tournaments should all be very hard fought. The Young Masters should be interesting to see how it pans out - last year Smerdon was also hot favourite, but Ronald Yu stepped up and put his name on the chess map for those that thought his pre-tourney form in Sydney was a fluke, and he's remained a 2000+ player since. Hopefully this year can have a similar outcome - although I would like to see David win the event, I also want to see who emerges from the 'pack'.
As for possible people to shine, Kostia Lubarsky is someone who hasn't played much (if at all) outside NSW, and he's already given GM Rogers a run for his money in a weekender. He has a solid style and is not really prone to blundering that often and seems to be improving his defense all the time. Michael Wei is another one who has the potential to stand out from the crowd - I think he probably puts the most work into his chess out of the entire field, and if it can all come together during the tournament, he has every chance of challenging David for top spot. Peter Jovanovic has been a bit quiet of late in the chess scene, preferring to concentrate on his studies, and the break may prove beneficial. He's the kind of player you always have to be wary of, especially now that he seems to have taken the Peter Leko road and greatly reduced the quick draw quota.
Of the others, Denis Bourmistrov is an obvious choice for a placing, and he may well be up there. The thing that Denis lacks however, in my opinion, is an expansive opening repetoire. If there are any problems with his openings, this is just the kind of tournament that will expose them. His 'stodgy' style is also very good in blocked positions (and he tries to steer games in that direction), but I'm not sure that his oponents will head in that direction and he may struggle a little because of it. Giang Nguyen is also right up there in terms of rating, and although she is definitely a good player, I'm not sure that she is quite at the level where she can really step forward in a field such as this. James Obst seems to be in good form after Doeberl, so could be one to watch, although an U2000 swiss is a far cry from a 10 player round robin where there are no easy games. Gareth Oliver is someone who could potentially slip under the radar. His style isn't too flashy, yet seems to get the job done, so you can't count him out of contention. Raymond Song's potential is well known, however he still suffers from inconsistency, so although he could do well in this event, I don't think he'll be right at the top of the cross table. Dusan Stojic is a player who again could potentially slip under the radar like Gareth, but I think a mid-field placing is probably what Dusan will be aiming for - I don't think he quite yet has the 'killer instinct' to take him to the next level.

I think the Junior Masters will be a two-horse race. Moulthun Ly and Jason Hu stand out to my mind from the rest of the field. I've been very impressed with Moulthun whenever I've seen him play a tournament, and his attitude is fantastic - he's very keen and always looking to learn more. Jason Hu is someone who has surprised me in recent times. His openings are solid, without being anything special, yet he seems to be able to turn things in his favour tactically at exactly the right time. It seems there's something about him and chess that clicks - he's a bit absent-minded away from the board, but nothing like it when playing chess. The only question I have over Jason is his ability to handle pressure - if he's near the top at the end of the event he may struggle to hold things together.
Of the others, Justin Huang is probably the best bet. He has a good feel for the game, and his tactics are improving all the time. Junta Ikeda is the 'iceman' of the field, and has the ability to sit and concentrate for hours on end, even in time pressure. He only has to work on his technique in finishing off some of the good position he gets to take that next step in my opinion, but I'm not quite sure he's there yet, so I expect a solid performance, but not a finish at the very top of the field. Heather Huddleston keeps improving all the time, and she will definitely have a good tournament, but like a few of the others I don't think she's quite at the level of the top few, although the potential is definitely there. Jeremy Neeman is someone who I really don't know that well. He's slipped under my own junior radar a bit, and it was only after his recent performances in Canberra and then the Australian Junior in Perth that I really started taking notice of him, and he seems to have a lot of potential, but I can't really say how far he might go with it. James Cronan has been a bit out-of-sorts of late - he has a good feel for the game most of the time, but of late seems to be prone to the occasional howler slipping into his game. Hopefully he can get out of the rut he's in at the moment quickly. The remaining ACT contingent of SHannon Oliver, Khoi Hoang and Chris Tran will struggle to finish in the top half of the event, however I think they will alol put in a good showing - none of them are clearly outclassed, I just don't think they are quite at the level of the Ly's or Hu's yet, but that's something that can change over time.

Also a big thanks to Jenni Oliver for getting this squad session up and running. The coaching on Tuesday worked out really well, and everything seemed to be well and truly under control for the rest of the week. Well done!

Ian Rout
15-04-2004, 04:13 PM
Round 3 results are up at

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

and there are multiple ties at the top of both tables.

To avoid flooding the board, from here I won't announce updates unless something dramatic happens, as I assume those who are interested have worked out where results and games are and will be checking periodically.

Machiavelli
15-04-2004, 09:12 PM
I was worried as to why Jeffrei was so cranky, but have just remembered that someone told me that he was coaching Ruperto now.

To be perfectly honest, I quite disappointed at the tone of the replies to Jeffrei's post. To suggest any kind of a conflict of interest is especially out of order. Instead of questioning his motives, it would seem reasonable to address the post on its merits. In this respect, I think that a retraction from Jenni is warranted.

Jenni's argument of precedent is particularly feeble. Kerry Stead can make corrections where necessary, and I trust that he will gladly do so. To the best of my recollection, the Young and Junior Masters were organised in fairly quick fashion, as Stead himself attested to. By his own admission, this meant that the circumstances of the two tournaments were imperfect, and he expected that relevant amendments to the two tournaments in future years would be made with the benefit of foresight. At late notice, he actually asked me if I could fill the position of a late withdrawer, an offer which I politely declined. Arthur Huynh, aged 19 at the time then became a confirmed starter.

It seems that "precedent" is not being adopted in the following regards:

1) There is no 19 year-old ringer for the Under 18 event
2) The event is being called the "Australian Junior Masters", as opposed to the "ACT Junior Masters", which would correspond with the "NSW Junior Masters" held last year.

To the best of my knowledge, Jenni has also set new precedent in rejecting higher rated players in favour of lower rated local players. This was never part of the Stead model.

Regards,
Machiavelli

chesslover
15-04-2004, 09:14 PM
anyone prepared to offer odds on Smerdon?????

I think he will win for he has the most to prove in this Olympiad win. A strong dominant win will impress the selectors, especially after his equal second place in Doberl and strong performance in ballarat.

If he wins and follows up with good results in the Queens Birthday and Gold Coast, David will have erased his poor performance in the Aust Champs and will be a good chance in the scrap for the 6th Olympiad spot

Was Zhou invited to the Masters???

jenni
15-04-2004, 10:08 PM
To be perfectly honest, I quite disappointed at the tone of the replies to Jeffrei's post. To suggest any kind of a conflict of interest is especially out of order. Instead of questioning his motives, it would seem reasonable to address the post on its merits. In this respect, I think that a retraction from Jenni is warranted.

Jenni's argument of precedent is particularly feeble. Kerry Stead can make corrections where necessary, and I trust that he will gladly do so. To the best of my recollection, the Young and Junior Masters were organised in fairly quick fashion, as Stead himself attested to. By his own admission, this meant that the circumstances of the two tournaments were imperfect, and he expected that relevant amendments to the two tournaments in future years would be made with the benefit of foresight. At late notice, he actually asked me if I could fill the position of a late withdrawer, an offer which I politely declined. Arthur Huynh, aged 19 at the time then became a confirmed starter.

It seems that "precedent" is not being adopted in the following regards:

1) There is no 19 year-old ringer for the Under 18 event
2) The event is being called the "Australian Junior Masters", as opposed to the "ACT Junior Masters", which would correspond with the "NSW Junior Masters" held last year.

To the best of my knowledge, Jenni has also set new precedent in rejecting higher rated players in favour of lower rated local players. This was never part of the Stead model.

Regards,
Machiavelli

I am certainly not going to retract anything!

I was very surprised a the aggressive tone of Jeffrei's post - particularly when he could have contacted me for a chat if he was concerned about anything. How on earth is there a conflict of interest!! That's a silly thing to say no-one is implying geoff has done anything wrong, or sly or whatever. I was just puzzled as to why Jeffrei would be so cross, when I have always found him a very pleasant young man and when I realised that he was coaching Ruperto, it seemed to make sense. I think most coaches would be protective of their pupils, if they thought they were being overlooked for other less talented people.

The first tournament had definite guidelines and I was very careful to follow them. I was told the Junior Masters was a local tournament and I could organise it as I liked. I changed the name to Australian Junior Masters, as it seemed silly to call it an ACT one, when it had Juniors from NSW, Qld and SA (initially anyway before).

Anyway I've had chess administration - this is the last tournament I will organise and sponsor. I've had fighting with stupid self centred egotistic morons in order to try and create a decent environment where chess can move forward. I have better things to do with my life!

chesslover
15-04-2004, 10:49 PM
For what its worth, thought I might as well post my tips for the tourney (also having the benefit of the day 1 results helps! :p )

Young Masters:
David Smerdon
Ones to watch - Kostia Lubarsky, Michael Wei, Peter Jovanovic

Junior Masters:
Moulthun Ly
Ones to watch - Jason Hu, Justin Huang

Training group 1:
Max Illingworth
Ones to watch - Ruperto Lugo, Rebecca Harris

Training group 2:
Amy Evans
Ones to watch - James Morris, Andrew Brown

I think these tournaments should all be very hard fought. The Young Masters should be interesting to see how it pans out - last year Smerdon was also hot favourite, but Ronald Yu stepped up and put his name on the chess map for those that thought his pre-tourney form in Sydney was a fluke, and he's remained a 2000+ player since. Hopefully this year can have a similar outcome - although I would like to see David win the event, I also want to see who emerges from the 'pack'.
As for possible people to shine, Kostia Lubarsky is someone who hasn't played much (if at all) outside NSW, and he's already given GM Rogers a run for his money in a weekender. He has a solid style and is not really prone to blundering that often and seems to be improving his defense all the time. Michael Wei is another one who has the potential to stand out from the crowd - I think he probably puts the most work into his chess out of the entire field, and if it can all come together during the tournament, he has every chance of challenging David for top spot. Peter Jovanovic has been a bit quiet of late in the chess scene, preferring to concentrate on his studies, and the break may prove beneficial. He's the kind of player you always have to be wary of, especially now that he seems to have taken the Peter Leko road and greatly reduced the quick draw quota.
Of the others, Denis Bourmistrov is an obvious choice for a placing, and he may well be up there. The thing that Denis lacks however, in my opinion, is an expansive opening repetoire. If there are any problems with his openings, this is just the kind of tournament that will expose them. His 'stodgy' style is also very good in blocked positions (and he tries to steer games in that direction), but I'm not sure that his oponents will head in that direction and he may struggle a little because of it. Giang Nguyen is also right up there in terms of rating, and although she is definitely a good player, I'm not sure that she is quite at the level where she can really step forward in a field such as this. James Obst seems to be in good form after Doeberl, so could be one to watch, although an U2000 swiss is a far cry from a 10 player round robin where there are no easy games. Gareth Oliver is someone who could potentially slip under the radar. His style isn't too flashy, yet seems to get the job done, so you can't count him out of contention. Raymond Song's potential is well known, however he still suffers from inconsistency, so although he could do well in this event, I don't think he'll be right at the top of the cross table. Dusan Stojic is a player who again could potentially slip under the radar like Gareth, but I think a mid-field placing is probably what Dusan will be aiming for - I don't think he quite yet has the 'killer instinct' to take him to the next level.
!

good review kerry. I am only following the Young masters as that is the elite event and I only want to follow the best :p

Good summary of the players but way to go out on a limb with naming 4 players in the YM :p You sure you do not want to have another..oh say...6 more picks just in case? :lol:

I too think David will win and have said that in another post. As an Olympiad candidate he will also be under the most pressure as he is "expected" to win and how he handles this pressure will be interesting. I bet that he will handle it well and win this tournament

Kevin Bonham
15-04-2004, 11:34 PM
I think the Juniors are all enjoying it, although already there have been a few heart-breaking losses. Heather Huddleston was up 2 exchanges and a passed pawn against Jason Hu, but he went for her very exposed king and won.

I have looked at this game a bit after seeing these comments. By the time Hu plays the second exchange sacrifice Huddleston's material advantage is meaningless, the position is apparently drawn with best play.

skip to my lou
16-04-2004, 12:39 AM
Anyway I've had chess administration - this is the last tournament I will organise and sponsor. I've had fighting with stupid self centred egotistic morons in order to try and create a decent environment where chess can move forward. I have better things to do with my life!

Im glad I realized this before becoming your age!! :eek:

jenni
16-04-2004, 01:13 AM
anyone prepared to offer odds on Smerdon?????

I think he will win for he has the most to prove in this Olympiad win. A strong dominant win will impress the selectors, especially after his equal second place in Doberl and strong performance in ballarat.

If he wins and follows up with good results in the Queens Birthday and Gold Coast, David will have erased his poor performance in the Aust Champs and will be a good chance in the scrap for the 6th Olympiad spot

Was Zhou invited to the Masters???

Everyone was invited to the masters who qualified on rating - I basically started at the highest rated person and worked down. As people refused, I asked the next person. Zong-Yuan Zhao was keen to play initially, but in the end preferred to return home to spend some time with his family in his very short Uni break.

jenni
16-04-2004, 01:19 AM
To the best of my knowledge, Jenni has also set new precedent in rejecting higher rated players in favour of lower rated local players. This was never part of the Stead model.

Regards,
Machiavelli

The Stead model was to invite 10 local players - the idea was to give local players a chance to play a strong round robin - which is probably why they asked you, Castor. I decided to reduce the local component to only 5 and to allow other non-local juniors an opportunity to play. You seem to have a fundamental breakdown in logic, as one minute you are berating me for allowing weak local players to play and the next for not following the Stead model. If I was following the Stead model, I would have had 9 local players.

jenni
16-04-2004, 01:45 AM
Im glad I realized this before becoming your age!! :eek:

I don't think it is a matter of age - it is the amount of time you are exposed to the chess scene. It is 9 years for me, which is probably about 1 year too long

I don't mind standing up to people and fighting for what I think is right e.g the recent debacle with the proposals for the schools comp next year.

However on the whole I don't like to fight people - I like to work with people and create a better environment. We all have our faults but we can learn from each other and compromise. However I have come to the conclusion that there are too many people in chess who don't want to create things. They just want to either sit on the sidelines and make constant destructive criticisms, or do things but it is win at all costs and their way is the only way.

Some suggestions were made to me recently, which required me to really evaluate what I wanted to do and what I was prepared to do. I have come to a point where I either have to be prepared to fight constantly to try and make some improvements, or just give up. I have been very unable to decide (unusual for me), but this stupidity has tipped me into a decision.

skip to my lou
16-04-2004, 01:50 AM
I don't think it is a matter of age - it is the amount of time you are exposed to the chess scene.

I don't mind standing up to people and fighting for what I think is right e.g the recent debacle with the proposals for the schools comp next year.

However on the whole I don't like to fight people - I like to work with people and create a better environment. We all have our faults but we can learn from each other and compromise. However I have come to the conclusion that there are too many people in chess who don't want to create things. They just want to either sit on the sidelines and make constant destructive criticisms, or do things but it is win at all costs and their way is the only way.

Some suggestions were made to me recently, which required me to really evaluate what I wanted to do and what I was prepared to do. I have come to a point where I either have to be prepared to fight constantly to try and make some improvements, or just give up. I have been very unable to decide (unusual for me), but this stupidity has tipped me into a decision.

I totally understand!

Machiavelli
16-04-2004, 01:55 AM
The Stead model was to invite 10 local players - the idea was to give local players a chance to play a strong round robin - which is probably why they asked you, Castor.

The only problem with this statement is that I was 20 at the time! Actually, I had turned 20 in August the previous year, which rendered me ineligible to play in the Young Masters - I believe I would have been seeded 8th or 9th out of the 10 players and hence qualified to play if I were four months younger! Incidentally, I think that Laura Moylan played when she was 20, but had turned 20 in the January, and was hence eligible to play under FIDE rules.


I decided to reduce the local component to only 10 and to allow other non-local juniors an opportunity to play. You seem to have a fundamental breakdown in logic, as one minute you are berating me for allowing weak local players to play and the next for not following the Stead model. If I was following the Stead model, I would have had 9 local players.

My understanding is that Kerry did indeed try to rope in the 10 strongest players under 18 for the Junior Masters who were not already playing in the Young Masters. Because of the constraints of time, it so happened that the vast majority of the 10 players that he could get were in fact, from NSW (understandable, when you consider that players from interstate would have had to make transport and accomodation arrangements and for most this would have been impossible at such short notice). Kerry then decided to call the tournament the "NSW Junior Masters", in keeping with the majority of players constituting the tournament. I guess my confusion (and presumably, Jeffrei's) is thus: If the tournament is truly an "Australian" Junior Masters, then it would make sense for the 10 highest rated eligible players who have accepted to play, regardless of their state. If the tournament is instead an ACT Junior Masters, then it would make sense for the 10 highest rated eligible from the ACT who have accepted their invitation, insofar as this is possible.

Jenni, I'm sorry if you feel that I am "berating" you - this was never my intention. I am simply one of the many people who have appreciated the contribution that you have made towards ACT and Australian Chess, and I'm sure that Jeffrei would agree with that sentiment. I wish the respective tournament every success possible, and am glad that such events are taking place. I was simply taking issue with your response to Jeffrei's post, which I felt was rather unjustified. From my reading, it seems as though Jeffrei's only crime was to have the audacity to try to ask a few questions and seek clarification on matters he was, by his own admission, confused about.

Regards,
Machiavelli

arosar
16-04-2004, 09:59 AM
Anyway I've had [it] chess administration - this is the last tournament I will organise and sponsor. I've had fighting with stupid self centred egotistic morons in order to try and create a decent environment where chess can move forward. I have better things to do with my life!

The heavens above cannot permit this to happen. Based on my tourn experience and observations on this BB, here is my dream team list of chess admin people in no particular order:

Mr Rout, Jason Lyons, Paul Sike, Graeme Gardiner, the Saint brothers, Mr Press, J Oliver, Mr Stanning, Bryan Jones, R McCart, Bob Keast, D Cordover, K Stead, Matt Sweeney. I also want to add that bloke who organised the 1999 Aus Open in Sunshine Coast - he had a funny name that I can't recall.

Now I reckon if we lose anymore from that mob, we're basically f**ked! All the rest like arbiters and ratings people can simply be employed by the admin people but they must not form the core thought leadership team - though they may contribute.

AR

Garvinator
16-04-2004, 10:37 AM
The heavens above cannot permit this to happen. Based on my tourn experience and observations on this BB, here is my dream team list of chess admin people in no particular order:

Mr Rout, Jason Lyons, Paul Sike, Graeme Gardiner, the Saint brothers, Mr Press, J Oliver, Mr Stanning, Bryan Jones, R McCart, Bob Keast, D Cordover, K Stead, Matt Sweeney. I also want to add that bloke who organised the 1999 Aus Open in Sunshine Coast - he had a funny name that I can't recall.

Now I reckon if we lose anymore from that mob, we're basically f**ked! All the rest like arbiters and ratings people can simply be employed by the admin people but they must not form the core thought leadership team - though they may contribute.

AR


i notice that Bill Gletsos, Kevin Bonham or myself appear in that list, interesting.

arosar
16-04-2004, 10:56 AM
I can understand you questioning my omission of monsieurs Gletsos and Bonham - but yourself? FMD! Talk about patting yourself on the back mate.

I knew I forgot one: Barry Cox! I'd add him in cos he's smart.

I'd get rid of Gletsos cos he's been there too long and, in my observation, is against change. Bill is the obstructionist type. I think Kevo is good, open to change I think, but he's too establishment to be of any use.

AR

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 11:57 AM
I'd get rid of Gletsos cos he's been there too long and, in my observation, is against change. Bill is the obstructionist type.
With regards to the ACF Commission my view was the same as that of the vast majority of the NSWCA Council.
So apart from that could you possibly provide some feedback and list some items where I have been obstructionist.

skip to my lou
16-04-2004, 12:07 PM
I can understand you questioning my omission of monsieurs Gletsos and Bonham - but yourself? FMD! Talk about patting yourself on the back mate.

I knew I forgot one: Barry Cox! I'd add him in cos he's smart.

I'd get rid of Gletsos cos he's been there too long and, in my observation, is against change. Bill is the obstructionist type. I think Kevo is good, open to change I think, but he's too establishment to be of any use.

AR

What about Dr. Z, Mr. PC etc?

I can think of a handful of names that you have missed.

Machiavelli
16-04-2004, 12:09 PM
The irony is Amiel's post is that a large proportion of the people he mentioned are in fact, volunteers.

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 12:13 PM
The irony is Amiel's post is that a large proportion of the people he mentioned are in fact, volunteers.
Yes, strange about that.
Cordover clearly is interested in making money from chess. I wonder how motivated he would be if this wasnt the case.

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 12:16 PM
What about Dr. Z, Mr. PC etc?

I can think of a handful of names that you have missed.
Yes, like Norm Greenwood, Richard Gastineau-Hills and Margaret Cuckson.
I noticed he even left off his mate Peter Parr.

arosar
16-04-2004, 12:23 PM
Yes, strange about that.
Cordover clearly is interested in making money from chess. I wonder how motivated he would be if this wasnt the case.

Whether or not the Guru does work for aussie chess overall is not important in the context of my list. The reason why I included him is that I like his risk-taking. I had a rather interesting talk last night with a coupla prominent personalities over the Buller Affair, and the more I think about this the more I tend to think that we ought to give this Guru a go. OK, there are problems ...ok.... I also included B Jones cos I've always believed that some of his ideas are the way of the future (e.g. compressed States Chmp, w/end Grades, etc).

AR

arosar
16-04-2004, 12:28 PM
Yes, like Norm Greenwood, Richard Gastineau-Hills and Margaret Cuckson.
I noticed he even left off his mate Peter Parr.

You goose, I only included the ones I directly observed. And I know there are a few others that I have observed in action but excluded mainly because of my particular attitude towards them. Sheesh!

As for me mate Peter Parr . . . he's too busy.

AR

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 01:18 PM
Whether or not the Guru does work for aussie chess overall is not important in the context of my list. The reason why I included him is that I like his risk-taking. I had a rather interesting talk last night with a coupla prominent personalities over the Buller Affair, and the more I think about this the more I tend to think that we ought to give this Guru a go. OK, there are problems ...ok.... I also included B Jones cos I've always believed that some of his ideas are the way of the future (e.g. compressed States Chmp, w/end Grades, etc).
Unfortunately Brians idea of compressed state champs did not receive much support in the survey.
As for w/end grades that also doesnt seem a goer, but the NSW teams comp seems a good addition rather than a replacement for the weeknight grade matches.

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 01:22 PM
You goose,
The only goose is you.


I only included the ones I directly observed. And I know there are a few others that I have observed in action but excluded mainly because of my particular attitude towards them. Sheesh!
I figured that was your attitude but wanted to see you actually state it and prove what a goose you are.


As for me mate Peter Parr . . . he's too busy.
Poor excuse AR.
Everyone is busy.
Some just make the effort and make time.
Of course you wouldnt know anything about that because after all they are volunteers, something that is foreign to your psyche.

Libby
16-04-2004, 02:56 PM
Although I visit fairly regularly - I rarely post (seems safer). Because a.) I'm a chess-ignorant parent and b.) a volunteer so an object of some scorn and distaste in these circles! If I put myself out there (or out here) perhaps a wider circle can find a way to read conspiracies and bias into my every action as opposed to a good faith effort to do the best I can to create an environment for my child and others to enjoy playing chess.

In all this "reasoned" debate about who/what/where players find themselves at the NECG & Masters events, it seems everybody enters the debate with the assumption that a child is excluded through oversight (accidental or deliberate) rather than imagining that kids and families make themselves unavailable at these times of year. Or others who choose to RSVP so late in the day that it has been impossible not to invite others ahead of them. I forget - the rule I see constantly applied in chess - one should know that you are intending to turn up and early entries are not (as in other circles) good manners, early entries are bad form and only fascist (parent and/or volunteer) organisers wuld expect them!

I entered the ACT junior chess environment at a time when Jenni had backed out. I received many direct and indirect warnings about how I might find her difficult to deal with. However, when ACTJCL was about to collapse it was Jenni who came back in to revive it. It doesn't make her saintly, and it definitely has not always made her someone I find easy to work with, but she gets the job done. If we had a few more in Australian Chess able to get the job done as effectively as Jenni, we might even have the profile everyone constantly mopes about us missing. We regularly disagree and I have been known to quietly spit-the-dummy but we both try to get over that and compromise to get stuff done. ie we are not on the bulletin board regularly airing, or alluding to grievances from the dark ages - we get over it! The ACT is fortunate to have a really cooperative adult and junior environment with adult and junior players mixing at events, with adults and senior juniors doing some great coaching and a sense we are going forward and old grudges being left behind. Jenni is a major part of that.

It would be nice to see her receive some genuine credit for her efforts, rather than see her pilloried by "the boys club" for meddling and sticking her nose in.

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 03:11 PM
Although I visit fairly regularly - I rarely post (seems safer). Because a.) I'm a chess-ignorant parent and b.) a volunteer so an object of some scorn and distaste in these circles! If I put myself out there (or out here) perhaps a wider circle can find a way to read conspiracies and bias into my every action as opposed to a good faith effort to do the best I can to create an environment for my child and others to enjoy playing chess.

In all this "reasoned" debate about who/what/where players find themselves at the NECG & Masters events, it seems everybody enters the debate with the assumption that a child is excluded through oversight (accidental or deliberate) rather than imagining that kids and families make themselves unavailable at these times of year. Or others who choose to RSVP so late in the day that it has been impossible not to invite others ahead of them. I forget - the rule I see constantly applied in chess - one should know that you are intending to turn up and early entries are not (as in other circles) good manners, early entries are bad form and only fascist (parent and/or volunteer) organisers wuld expect them!

I entered the ACT junior chess environment at a time when Jenni had backed out. I received many direct and indirect warnings about how I might find her difficult to deal with. However, when ACTJCL was about to collapse it was Jenni who came back in to revive it. It doesn't make her saintly, and it definitely has not always made her someone I find easy to work with, but she gets the job done. If we had a few more in Australian Chess able to get the job done as effectively as Jenni, we might even have the profile everyone constantly mopes about us missing. We regularly disagree and I have been known to quietly spit-the-dummy but we both try to get over that and compromise to get stuff done. ie we are not on the bulletin board regularly airing, or alluding to grievances from the dark ages - we get over it! The ACT is fortunate to have a really cooperative adult and junior environment with adult and junior players mixing at events, with adults and senior juniors doing some great coaching and a sense we are going forward and old grudges being left behind. Jenni is a major part of that.

It would be nice to see her receive some genuine credit for her efforts, rather than see her pilloried by "the boys club" for meddling and sticking her nose in.
Well said.
I've spoken to Jenni on many occasions and always appreciated her input and views even on the rare occasions we may have disagreed.

It is of course business as usual to find those that do nothing criticising those that actually do something.
Thankfully those that are appreciative of peoples(volunteers) efforts vastly outnumber those that dont.

Garvinator
16-04-2004, 03:15 PM
Well said.

Thankfully those that are appreciative of peoples(volunteers) efforts vastly outnumber those that dont.
hmm sounds like one of my thoughts about what i perceived as the biggest problem in chess :hmm: ;)

I would also say that the reality is that most volunteers do need to hear from time to time that their efforts are appreciated and even more importantly that when push comes to shove (not literally :p ) that the back slappers are there in full support at meetings.

Oepty
16-04-2004, 04:07 PM
To critise Jenni for her efforts in organising the Young Masters and Junior masters is stupid, a bit like the saying cutting your nose off despite your face. Even if she could have done somethings better, I don't think she has done anything badly. She has got excellent fields together, and I have no problems with there being more ACT players in the field. She sould not be criticised for not putting Lugo or Stevens in the junior masters if they gave very late notice they were coming. I know Stevens had some problems organising transport which would have been the reason he notified of his attendance late. I have never meet Jenni but I have been impressed with her posting on the BB and she probably is competing with Kerry Stead as to who puts the highest percentage of well thought posts on the BB.
Scott

Kerry Stead
16-04-2004, 04:53 PM
Let me clear up some confusion and misinformation about the 'history', brief as it is, of the Young Masters event.
Basically the idea for the tournament had come about mainly through my discussions with Manuel Weeks, and his lament that there were no really top-level junior events in the country. I got in touch with some other people who were involved in junior chess and threw the idea at some of them to see what they thought of the idea, and most if not all responded favourably. So with some kind of approval for the idea, the actual tournament needed to be organised. I talked to a few of the possible participants when I was at the Ballarat tournament last year, and most seemed to be keen on playing in the event, which was good to hear - I at least had something of a field, and a strong one at that!
Then it came down to the usual tournament organisational things - finding a venue, setting entry fees, prizes, finding sponsorship, etc.
I sent out a 'feeler' email to some potential participants on March 14th and presented a proposal and discussed the tournament at the NSWJCL council meeting of March 20. At this meeting, Margaret Cuckson suggested running a NSW Junior Masters alongside the Australian Young Masters event. The attendance at the meeting itself was small, so a decision was deferred to email voting. I got a firmer budget and tournament details set up (as well as a free venue), emailed the NSWJCL council and got their approval, not only of the tournament, but also significant financial support on April 11th. I then sent out emails again to potential entrants and sorted out a field for both events. The idea of an all-NSW Under 18s tournament didn't quite eventuate, and Junta Ikeda and Arthur Huynh both ended up participating in the tournament.
As far as this year's event is concerned, Jenni asked me numerous questions about format, invitees, etc which I tried to answer. In between the 2003 event and the 2004 event, the NECG squad had also appeared, so there was an extra thing to organise. I suggested to Jenni that she run the Young Masters and an ACT Junior Masters, but it was Jenni herself who decided against this idea, as she said that the ACT juniors played against each other enough as it was. It seems the chess culture in the nations capital is a little different to Sydney - the top juniors keep playing in a number of events, rather than being selective with what they play as far as junior chess in concerned. The end result was that the Junior Masters would be an Australian-wide event (as in players from all states could play), although some places would be reserved for the host state.
As far as the NECG Squad tournaments goes, a rough list was drawn up, and places were filled. If a place was left vacant through a non-reply, then someone else was brought in to fill the gap. I think this is what happened with Ruperto and Tristan, although they were both on that borderline between playing in the Juniro Masters and the first NECG tournament. Regardless of which tournament they play in, I think they should benefit from the experience.
Remember the whole point of things such as the Young Masters, Junior Masters, NECG Squad, etc is to try to improve junior chess in Australia. Its not about who is in what tournament, who favours who, who coaches who, who is a good organiser, who can shout the loudest, who complains the most or anything like that ...

If the kids are better chess players as a result of the tournaments and squad, then they have done what they set out to achieve. Hopefully these results can then be translated into improved performances at events like the World Youth Festival. I suppose only time will tell, but bickering about it at such an early stage benefits no-one!

Bill Gletsos
16-04-2004, 04:59 PM
Kerry,
If I recall correctly, you asked for and received a donation towards it of $500 from the NSWCA.
Also you received the same amount from the ACF, didnt you?

Libby
16-04-2004, 05:40 PM
Well said Kerry. One of the reasons I helped put together the Development Squad program in the ACT was that I sent my daughter to her first Aus Jnr without any idea of what was involved, without coaching and there was no structure in the ACT at the time to equip her for the event. Not to try to win a title - just an opportunity to be pointed in the right direction and be helped to play on a level playing field. I come from a (physical) sports background and have coached representative teams myself and the chess environment was completely foreign to me.

The NECG group seems a great initiative to fill the gap at the next level. My daughter went to the World Youth Festival last year. She had a great time but I was really disappointed to discover her coach in Greece had been advised " ... not to expect much, she's pretty hopeless." Unfortunately we are not a family of chess players and we live on one income. We did the best we could to prepare her to go overseas and 5/11 is not a disgrace. Something like the NECG Squad at least gives children hoping for representative honours now, or in the future, opportunities to be seen, to be assisted and to progress their game at an elite level. I don't know who was moved to comment on my daughter's perceived ineptitude but it seems typical of the very negative attitude some people bring to the chess table.

Kerry Stead
17-04-2004, 02:48 AM
Kerry,
If I recall correctly, you asked for and received a donation towards it of $500 from the NSWCA.
Also you received the same amount from the ACF, didnt you?

Yes Bill, I also got sponsorship for the event from the ACF, NSWCA, Australian Chess Entrprises and Ian & Cathy Rogers, as well as the sizeable contribution from the NSWJCL. Without this support, I doubt that the event would have been such a success.

Ian Rout
17-04-2004, 08:29 AM
Now that we are at the two-thirds point it may be a good spot to quickly recap the scores for those who haven't been following, or have been addressing the more urgent issue of what the Junior Masters should be called.

After a couple of early draws the top seed has hit the front in the Young Masters:

5 - David Smerdon
4 - Denis Bourmistrov, Raymond Song
3 - Peter Jovanovic, Michael Wei

David plays Raymond and Denis in successive rounds today (Saturday).

Four players are still in contention in the Junior Masters:

5 - Moulthun Ly, Jeremy Neeman, Jason Hu
4½ - Justin Huang

The top three have all played and Justin meets each of them in the last three rounds.

Two eight-player tournaments were played among members of the NECG squad and local players. Best scores in the first group

5½ - Rebecca Harris
5 - Max Illingworth, Ruperto Lugo

and in the second group

6 - Andrew Brown
5½ - Benjamin Harris
5 - Amy Evans

All the tables, and all the games of the Young and Junior Masters to date, are at

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

jeffrei
17-04-2004, 10:38 PM
Have had some computer problems lately so haven’t been on to post, but I’m amazed at the firestorm my innocuous little mouse of a post has generated.


Anyway I've had chess administration

This would be very unfortunate, and I urge you to reconsider. You’re one of the most important assets Australian chess has! For one thing you’re an excellent volunteer, and for another thing you have the ability to organize other volunteers, which is probably an even rarer skill. Actually, I was going to suggest that it would be good if these events could always be in Canberra. I daresay this would be an unfair burden to put on the Canberra folks, but there are some obvious advantages. For one thing it makes sense to me that a national competition like the “Australian Young Masters” should be based in the Capital. And more importantly these kids are already in Canberra for the Doeberl Cup, so it means less traveling expenses and less traveling time for them. Furthermore, junior events seem to be done extremely well in Canberra, so it’s guaranteed that the event would be a well-organized one. Of course running successful tournaments is very difficult but it must get easier when organizing the same one several times, as you aren't always 'reinventing the wheel', and you can build up a core of experienced volunteers.

As far as I’m concerned I asked some perfectly reasonable questions in a totally straightforward manner, and I’m not going to take any sh*t for doing that. I asked for an explanation to clear up my confusion and I got one. ‘Nuff said. The explanation itself was totally fine but I am now confused by something else, namely this thread. Seriously, could someone please tell me if posts been deleted from this thread because there are zany tangents and non sequiturs all over the place.


it seems everybody enters the debate with the assumption that a child is excluded through oversight

Actually, I think the only assumptions on this thread are the ones being made about me:

1. The assumption that I only asked the question because one of my students was involved.
Well, I have about 20 private students and Ruperto is just one of them. Besides, my involvement with this squad is much more personal than that – I was one of the selectors! Obviously I was going to be interested in seeing how things turned out. More generally I have a long-term interest in junior chess in Australia.

2. The assumption that I’m being ‘cranky’ or ‘aggressive’.
It’s always a dangerous thing to try and infer someone else’s emotional state from internet missives, especially ones without emoticons :) . Furthermore, I just don’t see anything in my little post that would warrant such an inference. Even if the tone of my original post was prima facie ‘aggressive’ (and like I said, I really don’t see it), it would have been worth thinking twice before making this assumption because I’ve not made a secret of the fact that I admire the way junior chess is organized in Canberra.

I must admit I was pretty mystified when I first looked at the tournament crosstable, but it wasn’t as though I figured there would be no explanation. And yes, it's also true that the name of the tournament was largely what threw me off working things out for myself. “Australian Young Masters” and “Australian Junior Masters” sounded like synonyms to me, thus it was not so strange for me to think that they’d be put together in the same way.

Actually I don’t have any criticisms of the tournament to offer (I don’t even know anything much about it!), but what I really resent is the perception that anything that even smells remotely like criticism has to be stamped down on 10,000 times, and must obviously have been generated by some kind of know-nothing troublemaker. Even for a tournament that’s been around for decades (e.g. Doeberl Cup), the organizers should still be reviewing each year’s event thoroughly and looking for feedback. A tournament that’s only been around for 2 years is almost certain to have some kinks in it that need smoothing out. Therefore criticism should be encouraged.

/jef

PS: And as for why I didn't bring this up privately? Well, because I didn't actually know who was running the tournament! But even if I had known I would still have chosen to ask questions through the BB, because in my experience for every 1 person who asks something there are always about 20 people who were wondering the same thing. (Actually Mr Makaveli posted about 10 minutes after me!). And besides I think this board is a wonderful tool when used correctly. Sure there might be people here who occasionally post thoughtless crap or just come on to stir up trouble, but they are outnumbered.

Kevin Bonham
17-04-2004, 10:47 PM
The explanation itself was totally fine but I am now confused by something else, namely this thread. Seriously, could someone please tell me if posts been deleted from this thread because there are zany tangents and non sequiturs all over the place.

No, just internet debating as normal AFAICT.

One short and innocuous post was deleted by its author. Apart from that there are no deletions shown.

chesslover
17-04-2004, 11:27 PM
Smurf wins and has an unbeatable 2 point advantage going to the last round

well done David :clap: :clap:

this follows his great perfromance in Ballarat, a very good second place in Doeberl and now a win in the Young Masters. I think he has put to rest all the doubtsraised after his Aust Champs performance

Garvinator
18-04-2004, 06:07 AM
this follows his great perfromance in Ballarat,

sorry cl but you are WRONG on this one. Davids ballarat performance will have no effect on his chances of qualifying for the olympiad i would say. His highest rated opponent was 2276 and he only played one player in the top twelve according to the ballarat player ratings.

Ian Rout
18-04-2004, 07:35 PM
All the results and games of the Young Masters and Junior Masters are now up. I won't spoil the surprise by revealing the results, you can see them at

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/YoungMasters/

To save a bit of time, I have already asked about the score of Smerdon v Bourmistrov and I have been assured that it is accurate.

Bill Gletsos
18-04-2004, 07:48 PM
To save a bit of time, I have already asked about the score of Smerdon v Bourmistrov and I have been assured that it is accurate.
1. Na3 Nh6 2. Nb1 Ng8 3. d4 e6 4. e4 b6 5. Nf3 Bb7 6. Bd3 Nf6 7. Qe2 Be7 8. e5 Nd5 9. c4 Nb4 10. Be4 Qc8 11. a3 N4a6 12. Nc3 d6 13. Bg5 Bxg5 14. Nxg5 Bxe4 15. Ncxe4 dxe5 16. Qh5 O-O 17. Nf6+ Kh8 18. Nxf7+ Rxf7 19. Qxh7# 1-0

That makes no real sense at all.
Why doesnt White just play 17. Qxh7#

Garvinator
18-04-2004, 07:50 PM
my personal opinion is that both players werent even taking this game seriously. It is my understanding that BroadZ is Denis :hand: lets see if he is so keen to post on this issue :lol: :whistle:

bobby1992
18-04-2004, 08:11 PM
smerdon too strong for that field,no disrespect to other players who in the future might be strong.

jeffrei
18-04-2004, 08:15 PM
my personal opinion is that both players werent even taking this game seriously. It is my understanding that BroadZ is Denis :hand: lets see if he is so keen to post on this issue :lol: :whistle:

Incorrect. BroadZ bears more of a resemblance to the following personage, who was spotted plying his trade at Tullamarine Airport last Friday (photographer: Susan Sheng).

Ian Rout
18-04-2004, 08:25 PM
[pgn]That makes no real sense at all.
Why doesnt White just play 17. Qxh7#

I imagine David was just mucking round since what he played doesn't change anything. It was more Black's O-O that alarmed me a little. It could have been a humorous way of resigning but the position didn't look quite bad enough for that.

The opening Knight moves are presumably just a bit of fun arranged by the players to confuse databases.

ursogr8
18-04-2004, 08:28 PM
my personal opinion is that both players werent even taking this game seriously. It is my understanding that BroadZ is Denis :hand: lets see if he is so keen to post on this issue :lol: :whistle:

gg

I don't think you were paying attention to the VIC OPEN thread early pages. Suggest you re-read to find Denis' handle.

Whereas BroadZ = Richard Martin from the WA thread.

starter

BroadZ
18-04-2004, 08:39 PM
*cough*

jenni
18-04-2004, 11:25 PM
some of the daily reports from Charles Zworestine follow.

a large number of thank-yous

to Charles Zworestine for donating his time to DOP the AYM and AJM and who was a joy to have around and to Denis Jessop who looked after the NECG tournaments.

to Ian Rogers who included all the AYM and AJM in the games analysis he was doing for the NECG kids

to the people who provided billets and helped with transport

Terry Neeman
Hui Wei
Richard Morton and his partner
Mirabelle Guo
Hui Wei
Shun Ikeda
Osborne family
Daphne Huang
John Cronan
Shannon Oliver who has only had her license for 2 weeks, but found herself acting as a driver on many occasions!

to Mirabelle Guo for all her help in the canteen and to Libby Smith, who read the bulletin board and then came and spent a couple of hours at Campbell offering support

to all the juniors for typing in their games and being a great set of kids to have around

to the wonderful Ian Rout - what would Canberra do without him!

to Senator Kate Lundy, MLA Bill Stefaniak and NECG representative Tracey Fisher for attending the joint opening cerremony

to Kerry Stead for always answering my e-mails with patience

to Dianne Illingworth for organising the flowers and chocolates and to Giang Nguyen for organising the card from the juniors

to my husband Tony - he would much rather all the chess went away, but he is always there to help

I intend to reply to Jeffrei's post, but in a few days when I am not so tired and more rational

jenni
18-04-2004, 11:27 PM
Amazingly, nearly 50% (9 out of 20) of the games in the two tournaments were
drawn today. An indication, perhaps, of two things: that the players are tiring, but
also the competitive nature of both events. About half of these draws were short
“grandmaster draws”, supporting the first point; but the other half featured some
more narrow escapes, supporting the second point...

The other point of today was that Smurf finally began asserting his authority: he is
now outright leader on 5/6 in the Young Masters, a point ahead of Denis and Ray
in equal 2nd place. He beat Peter in Round 5 with a very convincing attack after
PJ failed to castle; but he was then once again joined in the lead by Ray, who
beat Dusan after the latter refused a couple of draw offers. Even then he was
drawing the rook and pawn ending a pawn down, until another pawn suddenly
went missing... Gareth and Michael had a medium length draw, despite Gareth
sticking to his back rank; the position was locked enough for him to get away with
it. After initial vicissitudes, Denis won a couple of pawns and then removed all
obstacles leading to James’ king; while Giang’s perfect drawing record was spoilt
when she got mated by Kostia.

Round 6 saw two quick draws; clearly Dusan and Denis were too tired to fight, as
were Giang and James. Gareth found an improvement on Radjabov and got quite
a good position against Smurf; unfortunately he was unable to go on with it, and
resigned when he lost his queen (he would have been mated if not). 2 pawns up,
Ray should have beaten Michael; but he fell for a sac on h7, ended up an
exchange down and lost. After fighting for a long time, PJ agreed to a draw with
Kostia when I thought he was winning...

All to play for still in the Junior Masters, where today’s games resulted in a three
way tie for the lead with one player just half a point further back! With Jason,
Moulthun and Jeremy on 5/6 and Justin on 4.5, it is impossible to pick a winner -
especially as Justin still has to play all of the three leaders... Round 5 saw Jason
agree a quick draw with Moulthun when he thought he was worse, while Shannon
drew with James by exhaustion of material in a much longer struggle. Junta’s
position fell apart against Jeremy when he lost his f7 pawn, while Justin took
rather longer to beat Khoi but eventually won pawns and the ending. Heather’s
luck changed for the better against Chris: instead of the winning Rxd7, he played
a line that lost a piece...

So to Round 6, where Khoi’s slugfest against Shannon resulted in a perpetual
check; while Jason made short work of a disheartened Chris when the latter failed
to castle. Heather and Justin manoeuvred and swapped off into a drawn queen
and pawn ending, but Jeremy’s draw with Moulthun was rather more eventful: 3
pawns ahead at one stage, the former was swindled out of half a point. While
Jeremy was drawing in the end without his queen, James was beating Junta
without his: his rook, two bishops and passed c pawn proved more than sufficient
compensation.

jenni
18-04-2004, 11:29 PM
Hail to the champion! With one round to spare, David Smerdon has already
assured himself of victory in the Young Masters, thus bettering his performance in
the inaugural event last year (when he came equal first with Ronald Yu). His
score of 7/8 can no longer be caught, being 2 points clear of the next placed
player. He’s sure to be happy to have won this event outright, as it is the last year
he is eligible. Well done Smurf!

Today’s Young Masters rounds were fairly uneventful, with Smurf consolidating
his lead by beating little Raymond fairly easily. His superior ending yielded first an
extra pawn, and then an extra piece - which Smurf sacrificed to reach a winning
king and pawn ending. Denis was almost as convincing in beating Michael, who
lost first a pawn then resigned when he blundered his queen. Gareth ruined a
perfectly good position against PJ by allowing a pseudo-sac on e5 that led to a
losing ending; while Giang drew yet again (with Dusan), as did the Obstacle in a
tight struggle with Kostia.

All this left Denis in second place, just a point behind Smurf ; so one would have
thought he had all to play for in trying to beat the top seed in Round 8. Pity,
therefore, that he suffered a shocking opening, then castled straight into mate!
This gave Peter the chance to join him on 5/8, which he duly did after a long
endgame struggle to consolidate the extra piece that James had kindly buried for
him on h3! The exchange Dusan had to give up to prevent Kostia from getting at
his exposed king eventually cost him the game; while Gareth’s massive White
centre dominated Ray, and eventually led to a winning passed d pawn. Giang
predictably drew again, though Michael may have been winning (a pawn ahead)
at the end when he mistakenly allowed a repetition of position...

More life still left in the Junior Masters, where the winner will not be determined
until the last round. After Round 7, Moulthun’s lucky win against Junta had given
him the outright lead on 6/7; mind you, he was lucky to get his attack through after
an early unsound piece sac. Jeremy fell victim to Chris’ best game of the event, a
crushing White attack; while Jason dropped back after losing an ending to Justin,
despite being better for much of the early part of the game. Shannon and Heather
drew quite tamely; while James is striking form at the wrong end of the event,
beating Khoi quite convincingly after a pin won him the exchange.

You need some luck to win such events; and both Moulthun and Jeremy had
plenty in Round 8! In a blunderfest, Moulthun first won the exchange then
blundered it back into a lost position; he was lucky Chris agreed to a draw...
Jeremy was also dead lost against Justin, but swindled a mate; while Jason won
handily with a kingside attack against Shannon. This left Moulthun on 6.5, Jeremy
and Jason on 6, Justin on 5.5 and all to play for in the final round... Meanwhile
Heather and James had a hard fought draw in an intriguing ending with two
connected passed pawns each, while Junta finally found some form in
checkmating Khoi.

jenni
18-04-2004, 11:33 PM
What? How could anyone be talking about excitement for an event which has
already been decided? Well, of course I am talking about the Junior Masters, not
the Young Masters - despite my usual habit of reporting on the Young Masters
first. The anticipated thrilling finish did occur in the Junior Masters - and more.
But of course I am going to keep you in suspense, so I will report on the Young
Masters first...

PJ and Denis seemed to be quite happy to share second place - so they both
drew quite quickly, with Ray and Gareth respectively. This got them to 5.5/9, an
excellent score in a very tough field. Smurf, of course, had already won the event,
but wanted more; and in the last game to finish, he denied Giang her 8th draw by
grinding her down in a bishop ending a pawn ahead. Despite an early start,
Dusan took almost as long to beat James, but ended up doing so by winning a
tough rook and pawn ending that ended in queen and pawn versus rook and
pawn. Michael and Kostia finished with a solid draw to get them both to 4/9.

The excitement in the Junior Masters began with Moulthun, who happily agreed
a short draw with Justin to remain undefeated and ensure at least equal first. By
this stage Jeremy had already missed his chance to join him on 7/9, having
misplaced an exchange to a knight fork, then lost a piece to lose to Shannon; he
thus had to content himself with equal third with Justin on 6/9. But Jason could
still join Moulthun, and duly did so by mating James in a tough double rook
ending. Khoi won his first game of the event with a nice attack against Heather,
while Junta finished well by beating Chris with devastating central passed pawns
after he had earlier won a pawn.

So to a 2 game blitz playoff between Jason and Moulthun, where the excitement
continued! Jason won the first game fairly handily after Moulthun’s Bxh7+ sac
backfired; but the youngster came back in Game 2, using less time and forcing
Jason’s resignation when he queened a pawn. This left us with a final decisive
blitz playoff game, where Moulthun (Black) had draw odds, but only four minutes
to Jason’s five. A thrilling finish ensued, where Moulthun caught up on time and
was winning; but Jason’s last ditch swindle came off, and Moulthun had to
sacrifice lots of material to avoid mate. This enabled Jason to beat him and win
the title with literally seconds to spare!

Congratulations to all the players on a great event, always played in the right
spirit and thus most enjoyable for everyone. An excellent closing ceremony
ensued, with liberal distributions of prizes, points money, trophies and thanks! I
must add my thanks at this point to the Olivers for their generous hospitality
throughout the event. A very nice touch was a letter signed by all the players and
presented to Jenni Oliver as thanks for her organisation and sponsorship of both
events. I can only hope future events are as good as this one...

Lucena
19-04-2004, 11:28 AM
nice to have plenty of info about these tournaments jenni I am keen to have a good squiz at the games when I have some time. pity I'm too old now this year to have played :sad:

jenni
19-04-2004, 07:06 PM
nice to have plenty of info about these tournaments jenni I am keen to have a good squiz at the games when I have some time. pity I'm too old now this year to have played :sad:

I think David Smerdon feels the same way about next year! Maybe we need an Australian Slightly Older Masters.

Lucena
20-04-2004, 03:56 PM
I think David Smerdon feels the same way about next year! Maybe we need an Australian Slightly Older Masters.

well I'm all for it :D

denis1
20-04-2004, 11:40 PM
Great tournament.

Haven't had that much fun at a chess tournament for a long long time. Thanks a lot to Ian Rogers, for his great analysis of our games. I learnt about 76 things during this trip. Go NECG. woo.

Denis

smurf
28-04-2004, 02:02 PM
Hey everyone. First time I've been on this place. You are completely right, Ian. The first moves against Denis were just a bit of fun, with the added database advantages. Denis' ...0-0 was effectively resigning, and the the intermediate moves before mate were also of no importance, an example of the sportsmanlike spirit in which the game was played. Before ...0-0, black was lost.

Thanks for organising the competition Jenni.. I agree, with Denis, most fun I've had at a tournament in ages. Woo.

jenni
28-04-2004, 07:35 PM
Thanks David and Denis :)

I enjoyed it too.