PDA

View Full Version : Victorian Junior Open.



ursogr8
20-05-2004, 12:56 PM
Tournament 1

Under 18, Under 16, Under 14, Boys and Girls

8 rounds. Two weekends: May 22, 23; May 29, 30

Entry fee: $45

Rate of play: 90 minutes plus 30 seconds from move one.

Details at the web-site
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04jun.htm

Yes. This coming week-end.

jeffrei
22-05-2004, 09:15 PM
Very impressed to see the results for rounds 1-2 of the Victorian Juniors are up just hours after play finished! http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm Just the u18s/u16s/u14s for now - the u12s/u10s are next weekend.

Most of my students (who b.t.w. constitute exactly one-third of the field!) didn't have much to write home about, since a lot of them were either playing way up or way down. However, I'm very glad I persuaded Derek Yu to play the U18s understead of the u12s, since despite being rated only 1140 he knocked over an underrated 1821-player and then someone else rated 1614!

/jef

ursogr8
23-05-2004, 08:46 AM
Very impressed to see the results for rounds 1-2 of the Victorian Juniors are up just hours after play finished! http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm Just the u18s/u16s/u14s for now - the u12s/u10s are next weekend.

Most of my students (who b.t.w. constitute exactly one-third of the field!) didn't have much to write home about, since a lot of them were either playing way up or way down. However, I'm very glad I persuaded Derek Yu to play the U18s understead of the u12s, since despite being rated only 1140 he knocked over an underrated 1821-player and then someone else rated 1614!

/jef

Two remarkable upsets by one of your coached students...well done by coach and coachee.

For those interested in how competitive the chess is at the VIC JUNIOR >
The mean absolute deviation of pairing differentials for the first three rounds are
787, 433, 576.

starter

Kerry Stead
23-05-2004, 05:17 PM
Very impressed to see the results for rounds 1-2 of the Victorian Juniors are up just hours after play finished! http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm Just the u18s/u16s/u14s for now - the u12s/u10s are next weekend.

Most of my students (who b.t.w. constitute exactly one-third of the field!) didn't have much to write home about, since a lot of them were either playing way up or way down. However, I'm very glad I persuaded Derek Yu to play the U18s understead of the u12s, since despite being rated only 1140 he knocked over an underrated 1821-player and then someone else rated 1614!

/jef

The 'secret' prep still working the charm eh Mr Saw? :hmm:

ursogr8
24-05-2004, 09:54 AM
Tournament 1

Under 18, Under 16, Under 14, Boys and Girls

8 rounds. Two weekends: May 22, 23; May 29, 30

Entry fee: $45

Rate of play: 90 minutes plus 30 seconds from move one.

Details at the web-site
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04jun.htm



At the half-way mark of the tournament, two players are tied on 3.5/4.
Full details at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm

starter

ursogr8
24-05-2004, 09:55 AM
For those interested in how competitive the chess is at the VIC JUNIOR >
The mean absolute deviation of pairing differentials for the first four rounds are
787, 433, 576, 274.

Game files are avialble at the site quoted.

Incidentally, DGT boards are being used for the top two boards, and maybe linked to all-OZ display next week-end.

starter

ursogr8
24-05-2004, 03:33 PM
For those interested in how competitive the chess is at the VIC JUNIOR >
The mean absolute deviation of pairing differentials for the first five rounds are
787, 433, 576, 274, 424.


Unrateds and byes excluded.

Round 5 pairings now on display at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm

Incidentally, DGT boards are being used for the top two boards, and maybe linked to all-OZ display next week-end.

starter

ursogr8
27-05-2004, 02:59 PM
Tournament 1

Under 18, Under 16, Under 14, Boys and Girls

8 rounds. Two weekends: May 22, 23; May 29, 30

Entry fee: $45

Rate of play: 90 minutes plus 30 seconds from move one.

Details at the web-site
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04jun.htm

Yes. This coming week-end.

2004 Victorian Junior Championships
*
These championships are held yearly and titles are to be won for boys and girls in the under 18, under 16, under 14, under 12, and under 10
.
There are trophies and money prizes in all age groups
.
The championships this year are organised by Whitehorse Junior Chess Inc, the junior offshoot of the Box Hill Chess Club.
Whitehorse Junior Chess is separately affiliated with Chess Victoria
.
There are 33 entrants in the tournament that decides the under 18, under 16 and the under 14 titles.
This tournament is held over 2 weekends and 8 rounds are played
*
The tournament that decides the under 12 and under 10 titles has 60 entrants, and is held over one weekend and also has 8 rounds but the rounds are of a shorter duration
*
The prize giving function is set for 6 PM this Sunday and we hope that the Mayor will say a few words and then present the prizes at 6.15 and leave at 6.30. As the finish of all the games it is not always predictable [sometimes playoff games are necessary]. We expect however that the majority of the 22 prizes on offer will be decided and able to be awarded within that time frame. *Coffee tea and light refreshments will be available
*

Bill Gletsos
27-05-2004, 03:51 PM
If the SP files are sent to Milic as well as myself as soon as possible on the sunday evening they may be able to be included in the June ratings.

ursogr8
27-05-2004, 04:00 PM
If the SP files are sent to Milic as well as myself as soon as possible on the sunday evening they may be able to be included in the June ratings.

Bill
I have e-mailed those who can make it happen.
starter

ursogr8
30-05-2004, 07:34 AM
2004 Victorian Junior Championships


After 6 rounds in the U18 section (33 entrants), two players are tied on 5/6.
Details of scores, and pairings for round 7 can be seen at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm#Round%206%201


Four rounds (64 entrants) have been played in the micro-JUNIOR section (which started this week-end, whereas the U18 is run over two week-ends).
Three player are tied on 4/4. One is a surprise packet. Read the detail at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm#Cross%20Table%202

Games continue today, and the winners will be presented prizes by the Mayor just after 6pm.

starter

jeffrei
30-05-2004, 10:18 AM
Three players are tied on 4/4. One is a surprise packet.

It always amuses me when this happens. We have three players tied for =1st in the U12s, and all of them are eligible to win the U10s as well!

James Morris (one of Denis Bourmistrov's students)
Eugene Schon (well-known from the 'underrated juniors' thread)
&
Shuyu Wang (<---this one's a girl, and I'm guessing she was the surprise packet? I must say I think she's improved a lot since the start of the year, although she faces the defending champion this morning and that will be a tough challenge.)

jeffrei
30-05-2004, 09:22 PM
I'd like to thank the organizers for doing such a good job. No doubt starter will post a link to the final results, but I can recite the titlewinners from memory:

Denis Bourmistrov - VICTORIAN JUNIOR CHAMPION
Dusan Stojic - VICTORIAN UNDER-16 CHAMPION
Ruperto Lugo – VICTORIAN UNDER-14 CHAMPION
Rengan Vijayakumar – VICTORIAN UNDER-12 CHAMPION
Eugene Schon – VICTORIAN UNDER-10 CHAMPION
Casey Hickman – VICTORIAN GIRLS CHAMPION
Elena Galiabovich - VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-16 CHAMPION
Vanja Rozenblat – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-14 CHAMPION
Sally Yu – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-12 CHAMPION
Shuyu Wang – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-10 CHAMPION

- Denis beat Dusan in a playoff
- Ruperto beat Rukman Vijayakumar in a playoff
- Rengan beat Alan Genton in a playoff
- Eugene beat James Morris in a playoff
- Casey beat Elena in a playoff
- Shuyu beat Chloe Lauder in a playoff

A little trivia question: what do all of the title-winners have in common? (And no, I don't coach ALL of them)

jenni
30-05-2004, 09:39 PM
I'd like to thank the organizers for doing such a good job. No doubt starter will post a link to the final results, but I can recite the titlewinners from memory:

Denis Bourmistrov - VICTORIAN JUNIOR CHAMPION
Dusan Stojic - VICTORIAN UNDER-16 CHAMPION
Ruperto Lugo – VICTORIAN UNDER-14 CHAMPION
Rengan Vijayakumar – VICTORIAN UNDER-12 CHAMPION
Eugene Schon – VICTORIAN UNDER-10 CHAMPION
Casey Hickman – VICTORIAN GIRLS CHAMPION
Elena Galiabovich - VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-16 CHAMPION
Vanja Rozenblat – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-14 CHAMPION
Sally Yu – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-12 CHAMPION
Shuyu Wang – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-10 CHAMPION

- Denis beat Dusan in a playoff
- Ruperto beat Rukman Vijayakumar in a playoff
- Rengan beat Alan Genton in a playoff
- Eugene beat James Morris in a playoff
- Casey beat Elena in a playoff
- Shuyu beat Chloe Lauder in a playoff

A little trivia question: what do all of the title-winners have in common? (And no, I don't coach ALL of them)

They all play at Box Hill?

jeffrei
30-05-2004, 09:50 PM
They all play at Box Hill?

:D Indeed. Thus demonstrating the importance of a solid base of those much maligned volunteers to a successful club. Obviously I'm not talking about myself here (although I'm a volunteer for the club in my capacity as an archivist) but guys like Phil and Trevor and Gerrit and others too who keep everything running smoothly. Seriously I wonder why someone in, say, Sydney doesn't try the idea moving out of the Leagues clubs and creating a junior-friendly place like Box Hill.

On the other hand, I'm well aware that there are certain ways in which NSW chess is much much better than Victorian chess (e.g. we have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league).

Rincewind
30-05-2004, 09:55 PM
On the other hand, I'm well aware that there are certain ways in which NSW chess is much much better than Victorian chess (e.g. we have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league).

Not to mention the weather! ;)

Lucena
30-05-2004, 09:56 PM
Not to mention the weather! ;)

:D :clap: Hear, hear! Although with the weather at the moment you could be forgiven for thinking otherwise... :doh:

StakesIsHigh
30-05-2004, 10:08 PM
hey,

Can someone explain why is there no junior league in victoria? it seems that we are very disadvantaged in victoria because we have no (not-for-profit) junior league. Those constant dirty fights between chess ideas and chess kids might have been good for them but theyre not very useful for the kids. It’s really annoying especially there is no good way of organizing accommodation at the Australian juniors so everyone has to end up staying with their parents or paying cordover for being looked after. Also I heard that other states get coaching sponsored by their junior league is that true?

We have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league.

Rincewind
30-05-2004, 10:17 PM
hey,

Can someone explain why is there no junior league in victoria? it seems that we are very disadvantaged in victoria because we have no (not-for-profit) junior league. Those constant dirty fights between chess ideas and chess kids might have been good for them but theyre not very useful for the kids. It’s really annoying especially there is no good way of organizing accommodation at the Australian juniors so everyone has to end up staying with their parents or paying cordover for being looked after. Also I heard that other states get coaching sponsored by their junior league is that true?

We have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league.

Hey Stakes. I don't have an answer for you being as I am from a less celcius challenged locale. However, your argument of disadvantage does seem to have one minor flaw. Victorian juniours seem to be very strong indeed. Surely if there was a disadvantage, and all other things being equal, one would expect a measureably weakness in Vic juniors.

Perhaps it is a case of what you mis on the junior league you pick up by having clubs like Box Hill (and the MCC of course) around. Or maybe free enterprise is the way to run junior chess. :eek:

If it ain't broke...

jenni
30-05-2004, 10:18 PM
hey,

Can someone explain why is there no junior league in victoria? it seems that we are very disadvantaged in victoria because we have no (not-for-profit) junior league. Those constant dirty fights between chess ideas and chess kids might have been good for them but theyre not very useful for the kids. It’s really annoying especially there is no good way of organizing accommodation at the Australian juniors so everyone has to end up staying with their parents or paying cordover for being looked after. Also I heard that other states get coaching sponsored by their junior league is that true?

We have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league.

Both the ACT and NSW sponsor coaching for their Juniors. I am not aware of what the other states do.

The ACT uses money made by our schools competitions and weekend competitions to heavily subsidize coaching at the Aus Juniors. We also run 2 junior clubs where coaching is subsidized and run at least one "grandmaster" coaching weekend, which is very subsidised as well.

It doesn't take much to start a JCL - a couple of fanatical parents with the help of some community minded chess adults would be enough to do it. However you probably need to have your state body i.e. Chess Victoria on side.

Bill Gletsos
30-05-2004, 11:59 PM
Bill
I have e-mailed those who can make it happen.
starter
Well starter, I dont have the SP files yet so it looks like it hasnt happened.
As I said before get them to email them directly to me.

ursogr8
31-05-2004, 01:52 PM
2004 Victorian Junior Championships


A tie for first place in the JUNIOR Championship.
Full results at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm

A tie for first place in the U12.
Full results at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/04vicjunres.htm

See jeffrei's post #13 for a mini-bulletin.

starter

ursogr8
31-05-2004, 02:12 PM
hey,

Can someone explain why is there no junior league in victoria? it seems that we are very disadvantaged in victoria because we have no (not-for-profit) junior league. Those constant dirty fights between chess ideas and chess kids might have been good for them but theyre not very useful for the kids. It’s really annoying especially there is no good way of organizing accommodation at the Australian juniors so everyone has to end up staying with their parents or paying cordover for being looked after. Also I heard that other states get coaching sponsored by their junior league is that true?

We have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league.
hey
StokedOnHigh

Tell me.
Do you play Rookies Cup each month?

starter

ursogr8
31-05-2004, 02:15 PM
I'd like to thank the organizers for doing such a good job. No doubt starter will post a link to the final results, but I can recite the titlewinners from memory:

Denis Bourmistrov - VICTORIAN JUNIOR CHAMPION
Dusan Stojic - VICTORIAN UNDER-16 CHAMPION
Ruperto Lugo – VICTORIAN UNDER-14 CHAMPION
Rengan Vijayakumar – VICTORIAN UNDER-12 CHAMPION
Eugene Schon – VICTORIAN UNDER-10 CHAMPION
Casey Hickman – VICTORIAN GIRLS CHAMPION
Elena Galiabovich - VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-16 CHAMPION
Vanja Rozenblat – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-14 CHAMPION
Sally Yu – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-12 CHAMPION
Shuyu Wang – VICTORIAN GIRLS UNDER-10 CHAMPION

- Denis beat Dusan in a playoff
- Ruperto beat Rukman Vijayakumar in a playoff
- Rengan beat Alan Genton in a playoff
- Eugene beat James Morris in a playoff
- Casey beat Elena in a playoff
- Shuyu beat Chloe Lauder in a playoff

A little trivia question: what do all of the title-winners have in common? (And no, I don't coach ALL of them)

Gee jeff
That trivia question is a hard one.
Give me a hint > If all the six playoffs had gone to the opponent would your question have the same answer? :uhoh:

starter

ursogr8
31-05-2004, 02:22 PM
Well starter, I dont have the SP files yet so it looks like it hasnt happened.
As I said before get them to email them directly to me.

Thanks Bill for your encouraging approach, full of such confidence that I would carry out the mission. :rolleyes:

BTW, thanks for your sterling work as an ACF Ratings Officer; bet you are looking forward to the next release of ratings.

starter

Bill Gletsos
31-05-2004, 02:28 PM
Thanks Bill for your encouraging approach, full of such confidence that I would carry out the mission. :rolleyes:
I had every faith in you.
It was the other cogs in the machinery I was woried about.


BTW, thanks for your sterling work as an ACF Ratings Officer; bet you are looking forward to the next release of ratings.
Yes, especially the undoubtedly renewed discussions on the fresh set of underated juniors. ;)

jeffrei
01-06-2004, 12:46 AM
If all the six playoffs had gone to the opponent would your question have the same answer?

I don't think so!

ursogr8
01-06-2004, 11:18 AM
Well starter, I dont have the SP files yet so it looks like it hasnt happened.
As I said before get them to email them directly to me.

Bill

You are a bloody whiz.
We got the files to you mid-day Monday and Milic has sent me the new ratings (inclusive of the VIC Junior) this morning.
The tournament only finished on Sunday evening, and the admins have it rated and nationally distributed before lunch on Tuesday.
Well done all round you guys. :clap: :clap: :clap:

starter

ursogr8
25-04-2005, 08:21 PM
hey,

Can someone explain why is there no junior league in victoria? it seems that we are very disadvantaged in victoria because we have no (not-for-profit) junior league. Those constant dirty fights between chess ideas and chess kids might have been good for them but theyre not very useful for the kids. It’s really annoying especially there is no good way of organizing accommodation at the Australian juniors so everyone has to end up staying with their parents or paying cordover for being looked after. Also I heard that other states get coaching sponsored by their junior league is that true?

We have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league.

RM

This was a good post; and I am not sure I know the answer. But, discuss with me next Friday night after your game and we will explore.

Incidentally, perhaps the key question we need to know is whether the junior leagues in other States are commercially sponsored, or have gathered their money from the (junior) chess community.

starter

jenni
25-04-2005, 09:47 PM
RM

This was a good post; and I am not sure I know the answer. But, discuss with me next Friday night after your game and we will explore.

Incidentally, perhaps the key question we need to know is whether the junior leagues in other States are commercially sponsored, or have gathered their money from the (junior) chess community.

starter
In the ACT there is no commercial sponsor. Most of the money comes from running the schools competitions (a really big money earner, even though our fees appear to be considerably lower than Victoria's - $24 a team or $6 per person) and other weekend competitions. Junior clubs tend to be a drain on resources, as free coaching is provided.

The ACT Government provides roughly $2,000 per annum from Sport and Recreation grants and the indefatigable Libby pursues every other grant she can think of e.g. the recent grant she received to run the Chess Chicks program.

I think having a JCL has a dual benefit - you get control of the revenue from comps, thus enabling subsidised programs. Also people are more likely to offer volunteer labour if they feel it is going to a not for profit body. e..g the ACTJCL never pays for DOP's for Junior tournaments and a lot of the coaching for the Development squad and dev days is done at very cost effective rates.
We also get free venues.

ursogr8
25-04-2005, 10:26 PM
^^
Really good response jenni, tks.
(I tried to press the green button again but it doesn't seem to work..........?)

I hope Reubban dials into this thread/post and reads.


starter

jenni
25-04-2005, 10:50 PM
^^
(I tried to press the green button again but it doesn't seem to work..........?)


starter

I probably have too many. :D

firegoat7
25-04-2005, 11:04 PM
I think having a JCL has a dual benefit - you get control of the revenue from comps, thus enabling subsidised programs. Also people are more likely to offer volunteer labour if they feel it is going to a not for profit body. e..g the ACTJCL never pays for DOP's for Junior tournaments and a lot of the coaching for the Development squad and dev days is done at very cost effective rates.
We also get free venues.

Look we all understand that developing juniors involves a little bit of give and take, but what are the power relations implied from your juniorcentric biases?

Revenue control and subsidisation- pro- no i dont think so
Volunteer labour- Pro- sometimes
Not paying arbiters- Pro- definately not
Free venues- Pro- not necessarily
Payed coaches- pro- yes

Having a JCL control the revenue for junior chess is a financial disaster for the long term well being of Australian chess. I know of no other 'professional' sport in Australia, where the junior clubs,projects,competitions etc etc have more economic viability then the adult scene. To place economic power in the hands of a specialised junior body misses the whole point of competitive chess as a fraternity of chessplayers. It may be good for juniors, but this does not necessarily imply 'chess' as a competitive game.

Relying on volunteers and not paying organisers/arbiters is a recipe for 'amatuerisation'.In someways it actually negates the development of chess (as a sport) because it suggests that running tournaments is a 'social good', instead of a necessary.

While sometimes it is necessary, to avoid making financial losses, it ought to be remembered that organising and arbiting is a skill that Australian chess needs. We ought to reimburse anybody who is willing to devote time to such pursuits as equally as the strong players we employ to coach. I do believe that these arbiters/organisers ought to be trained by the ACF/States/Clubs.

Venues- All chessclubs ought to be offered financial incentives for holding chess tournaments. The aim ought to be one of building vibrant cultural spaces within communities. As such, we ought to support those communities where most competive chess is played. Strong institutions means strong chess. However, I do believe that sometimes for promotional and practical purposes non club facilities are useful. As a practical example, I would always vote for a junior event to be held in a club instead of a school, for one simple reason, that is the best place to get kids playing open competitive chess, as a vibrant lived cultural pursuit.

Cheers Fg7

firegoat7
25-04-2005, 11:12 PM
hey,

Can someone explain why is there no junior league in victoria? it seems that we are very disadvantaged in victoria because we have no (not-for-profit) junior league. Those constant dirty fights between chess ideas and chess kids might have been good for them but theyre not very useful for the kids. It’s really annoying especially there is no good way of organizing accommodation at the Australian juniors so everyone has to end up staying with their parents or paying cordover for being looked after. Also I heard that other states get coaching sponsored by their junior league is that true?

We have have no group of dedicated volunteers running a junior league.

A long time ago in a land far far away a chess kid had the idea of creating a junior chess league. He worked very hard but then struggled with the concept of a democratically elected board, that would allow people to express an opinion different from him. Meanwhile, a couple of guys had chess ideas, they thought if they could get the kid to join them they would get control of the league. The kid sold out, the league went belly up. Soon after this event the kid and the ideas men had a big falling out. The kid joined up with the goose and gabbo, and the rest is history. Meanwhile, neither of the ideas founders seem to teach much chess anymore, nor do they ever play.

Cheers fg7

ursogr8
26-04-2005, 08:07 AM
Look we all understand that developing juniors involves a little bit of give and take, but what are the power relations implied from your juniorcentric biases?

Revenue control and subsidisation- pro- no i dont think so
Volunteer labour- Pro- sometimes
Not paying arbiters- Pro- definately not
Free venues- Pro- not necessarily
Payed coaches- pro- yes

Having a JCL control the revenue for junior chess is a financial disaster for the long term well being of Australian chess. I know of no other 'professional' sport in Australia, where the junior clubs,projects,competitions etc etc have more economic viability then the adult scene. To place economic power in the hands of a specialised junior body misses the whole point of competitive chess as a fraternity of chessplayers. It may be good for juniors, but this does not necessarily imply 'chess' as a competitive game.

Relying on volunteers and not paying organisers/arbiters is a recipe for 'amatuerisation'.In someways it actually negates the development of chess (as a sport) because it suggests that running tournaments is a 'social good', instead of a necessary.

While sometimes it is necessary, to avoid making financial losses, it ought to be remembered that organising and arbiting is a skill that Australian chess needs. We ought to reimburse anybody who is willing to devote time to such pursuits as equally as the strong players we employ to coach. I do believe that these arbiters/organisers ought to be trained by the ACF/States/Clubs.

Venues- All chessclubs ought to be offered financial incentives for holding chess tournaments. The aim ought to be one of building vibrant cultural spaces within communities. As such, we ought to support those communities where most competive chess is played. Strong institutions means strong chess. However, I do believe that sometimes for promotional and practical purposes non club facilities are useful. As a practical example, I would always vote for a junior event to be held in a club instead of a school, for one simple reason, that is the best place to get kids playing open competitive chess, as a vibrant lived cultural pursuit.

Cheers Fg7

fg7

An amazing post of yours.
I disagree with a mountain of things in it, but it is very well written. Perhaps the first time I have seen this important defence articulated on the bb.
Well done.
I will come back to it. (Here or There........... ;) )

regards
starter

Spiny Norman
26-04-2005, 08:14 AM
Revenue control and subsidisation- pro- no i dont think so
Volunteer labour- Pro- sometimes
Not paying arbiters- Pro- definately not
Free venues- Pro- not necessarily
Payed coaches- pro- yes

fg7, one person's "pro" is another person's "con", so in that I think its fair to say:

Jenni ... I agree with you; and
fg7 ... I agree with you too!

Perhaps what is needed is someone at the top level to do a stakeholder analysis ... it doesn't take long to put one together. It should cover:

- junior players
- junior players' parents/guardians
- adult players
- clubs
- club committee members/volunteers
- tournament organisers
- d.o.p.'s and arbiters
- venues
- coaches (individuals)
- coaching organisations
- state bodies
- national body
- sponsors
- ... there are probably other stakeholders that I can't even think of ...

From my perspective as the organiser of a small/new club, I have NO IDEA what all these different people are trying to achieve. Some of them are easy to guess at, others are a complete mystery!

Rather than "shooting fish in a barrel" (we know what we're aiming for, everything is clearly defined) we find ourselves utilising the famous technique:

Ready, Fire ... Aim.

Without the support of nearby clubs like BHCC we would have had no hope of getting started I think. Enough raving from me, I'm off to work ... if anyone has answers for the questions above, I (for one) would be forever indebted to them if they could provide some answers to the various motivations of chess stakeholders.

jenni
26-04-2005, 09:59 AM
I know of no other 'professional' sport in Australia, where the junior clubs,projects,competitions etc etc have more economic viability then the adult scene. To place economic power in the hands of a specialised junior body misses the whole point of competitive chess as a fraternity of chessplayers. It may be good for juniors, but this does not necessarily imply 'chess' as a competitive game.


The problem in chess is that the adult scene is just so bad. The juniors are not doing particularly well in financial terms, but the adult scene is so incapable of financing anything that it makes the juniors look good. In other sports the juniors do in fact have control of hte revenues they earn. have a look at softaball, little athletics etc etc. Any revenues earned from junior activities stay with the juniors. The difference is that the adult sports are also doing well and in fact sponsorships travel from the adults to the juniors. Registration fees are paid to the adult environment, but they are in chess as well.



Relying on volunteers and not paying organisers/arbiters is a recipe for 'amatuerisation'.In someways it actually negates the development of chess (as a sport) because it suggests that running tournaments is a 'social good', instead of a necessary.



Once again looking at other sports the volunteer ethos is alive, well and promoted. When Gareth was playing soccer, his coaches were always free. In fact it was compulsory for any juniors playing soccer above the age of 14 to have to take on a coaching role (free) with a peewee or under 12 soccer team.

In basketball it is compulsory for each team to provide bench duty people and in some cases referees.


I would always vote for a junior event to be held in a club instead of a school, for one simple reason, that is the best place to get kids playing open competitive chess, as a vibrant lived cultural pursuit.

Cheers Fg7

Kids belong in environments where they can be kids as well as chess players. This means having access to playing fields so they can run around and have some fun after their games (particularly the under 12 group).

Obviously the aim of every good junior organiser would be to migrate kids from the more accepting junior environment into the less tolerant adult environment - something we do very well in the ACT.

jenni
26-04-2005, 10:08 AM
A long time ago in a land far far away a chess kid had the idea of creating a junior chess league. He worked very hard but then struggled with the concept of a democratically elected board, that would allow people to express an opinion different from him. Meanwhile, a couple of guys had chess ideas, they thought if they could get the kid to join them they would get control of the league. The kid sold out, the league went belly up. Soon after this event the kid and the ideas men had a big falling out. The kid joined up with the goose and gabbo, and the rest is history. Meanwhile, neither of the ideas founders seem to teach much chess anymore, nor do they ever play.

Cheers fg7

StakesIsHigh - you may not understand all this, but then again maybe you will. A rough translation - Victoria is well known as a snakepit of political aspirations and feuding. This killed a very viable VICJCL - I remember speaking to one of the volunteers at that time and he said that he and his wife had never come across anything so vicious in all their years of volunteering for junior sporting bodies....

I would be inclined to write off Victoria as a state capable of generating decent numbers of juniors, except for the light of Box Hill shining in the darkness........

Libby
26-04-2005, 10:35 AM
Relying on volunteers and not paying organisers/arbiters is a recipe for 'amatuerisation'.In someways it actually negates the development of chess (as a sport) because it suggests that running tournaments is a 'social good', instead of a necessary.

While sometimes it is necessary, to avoid making financial losses, it ought to be remembered that organising and arbiting is a skill that Australian chess needs. We ought to reimburse anybody who is willing to devote time to such pursuits as equally as the strong players we employ to coach. I do believe that these arbiters/organisers ought to be trained by the ACF/States/Clubs.

Well I would be making a lot of money in the ACT I suppose :owned:

One part of why we do not pay organisers/arbiters is that they are generally members of our parent community or our older junior players. This is speaking for JCL events only.

When we involve our older juniors as arbiters/organisers (always with adult support) it is because our intention is to develop their abilities in this respect. By allowing them to manage small tournaments and gain familiarity with the procedures so that they can become -

1. more capable
2. more rounded players who do not limit their involvement in chess to just playing
3. an example & mentor for beginning players
4. be prepared & willing for this role as part of the adult chess community

I have heard the "amateurism" arguments before. How do people think other sports run? Other "professional" sports when we are talking about junior & club (even state) level?

I coached representative junior sport. I was a statistician for representative sport. I umpired junior & senior sport. I organised major carnivals attracting interstate teams. What did I receive? :hmm: :wall: :hmm: Nothing but maybe a nice thank you, a card, a bottle of wine etc.

What did I expect to receive? Nothing. Because that's the reality of most sport, especially women's sport, unless you are talking about the absolute top level people - and even then I think you will find that many people in administration in many "minor" sports are getting next to nothing. They are doing things for "social good" but that doesn't impact on their recognition as a sport?

I even met my own travel & accommodation when I took teams to Sydney & Melbourne and - honestly - thought nothing of it because I had asked for the gig.

If the sport can afford to pay people - great. Before it does so, I would like to see the establishment of a base level of qualification for payment. Even kids who get their $5/hour (My daughter coaches junior gymnastics) are expected to spend a number of hours in unpaid training & observation before they get a paid job. Most sports referees have to at least complete a questionnaire on the rules of the game and may have a requirement for time spent observing or assisting before they get paid themselves.

Paying people isn't the answer for professional conduct and broad public recognition of the game. Chess needs to be in a position to be "professional" and to be taken seriously before you want to start pinning this as a big issue. We are never going to be Aussie Rules but we don't even behave like we are badminton (apologies to proponents) at times.

There's all this whinging and not much doing. Strong state organisations (and I consider ACTJCL to be one) and private interests seem to be doing great work themselves but where is that taking Australian chess except nowhere very much?

Even with our payment of ACTJCL coaches I am well aware that we pay less than probably anyone else. In response to that I guess I just come from a position of having a HUGE potential bank balance for my husband & myself for years and years and years of unpaid coaching in softball, baseball, netball, soccer, athletics etc etc. What makes chess such a compelling case for payment? After all, I had to do my accreditation through the Australian Sports Commission, sit a test and practical exam. I had to prepare plans for training sessions, understand safe techniques to prevent injuries, know a whole raft of technical rules, manage large groups of children, develop them as both beginners and representative players.

And if I'm trying to sound saintly, I'm not. Because you can find the same people at every sports field every weekend. My eldest daughter has a soccer coach who is training 4 teams, 4 hours per week each team. The Club doesn't pay him but he has a whole package of qualifications and experience that make him an extremely capable coach.

Am I objecting to people getting paid? No. No. No. But why, as what must still be regarded as a very minor sport in this country (both profile and competitive participation) should we believe that our sport must be administered differently to others? Isn't that an example of how we are not behaving like the majority of people involved in sport at a junior and club level in this country?

jenni
26-04-2005, 10:42 AM
Go Libby

It is so nice to have someone with such a long history in sports administration to counter the sort of nonsense that chess people dream up about sport.... :whistle:

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 11:17 AM
The problem in chess is that the adult scene is just so bad.
This is simply not true. While the adult scene could always be better, Australian chess has been producing great 'chess' for over 130 years.



The juniors are not doing particularly well in financial terms, but the adult scene is so incapable of financing anything that it makes the juniors look good.

Not true, Ever been to Box Hill or MCC and seen what Victorians have? Last time our club was involved with the Australian championships we were able to obtain big money for the event. Dollars that a junior event simply could not attract! If the adult scene is failing financially (debatable) it is only because the organisation that ultimately runs the show, the ACF, is hampered by outdated State beauracracy and is unable to effectively govern and grow the product it produces. Although I will add that I am not sure anybody from the ACF has effectively articulated what that product is.



In other sports the juniors do in fact have control of hte revenues they earn. have a look at softaball, little athletics etc etc. Any revenues earned from junior activities stay with the juniors.

I agree with you that begineers and players probably under 1000 ought to play in kid only events. I have no problem with this concept. Unlike these sports to develop chess talent you need kids to play adults, when they are ready for it.

But if you seriously want Australian chess to be recognised as a 'professional sport', then it has to be administered properly. IMO, every child who moves a chesspiece in a competitive game, be it at a school, a private company tournament, or a training competition for trophies ought to be registered with the ACF. That registration fee ought probably be somewhere between one and five dollars, and that revenue ought to be put into a development fund for junior chess administered by the ACF. Who knows we might have the actual side effect of being able to show any interested sponsor our membership of over 30,000 players. I would like to say I don't think JCL are a bad concept as such, I just believe that they ought to be integrated into the stuctures that we already have, instead of creating entities that effectively only exist and answer to themselves and more importantly seem to fall by the way side when kids get to old for junior chess and their parents are no longer interested in chess.




The difference is that the adult sports are also doing well and in fact sponsorships travel from the adults to the juniors. Registration fees are paid to the adult environment, but they are in chess as well.



Sponsorship will travel from adults to juniors when the product is managed and administrated properly. You did hit the nail on the head, adult and junior chess ought to be structured so that both thrive. To do this they must be closely integrated.



Once again looking at other sports the volunteer ethos is alive, well and promoted. When Gareth was playing soccer, his coaches were always free. In fact it was compulsory for any juniors playing soccer above the age of 14 to have to take on a coaching role (free) with a peewee or under 12 soccer team.

We are talking oranges and lemons here. Sure, at certain levels volunteering is an absolute necessity, but we are both aware that as you progress in quality the umpires get paid and more importantly trained.



Obviously the aim of every good junior organiser would be to migrate kids from the more accepting junior environment into the less tolerant adult environment - something we do very well in the ACT.

This statement really annoys me. There is no logical reason why an 'adult environment' ought to be 'less tolerant'. Why don't you ask some of the stronger players, how they became chessplayers? The answers may surprise.

cheers fg7

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 11:38 AM
I would be inclined to write off Victoria as a state capable of generating decent numbers of juniors, except for the light of Box Hill shining in the darkness........

Jenni,

Before you were involved in chess, MCC had a junior chess club that met every Saturday. That club has effectively been killed and resurrected numerous times.

As somebody who coached in the initial club we had these names pass through our doors at different stages.
Sam Chow, Denis Boumistrov, Gordon and Douglas Lindberg, and Andjelija Zivanovic along with a huge supporting cast who never went on to play adult chess.

That club has been run with volunteers, professionals and privatised firms. It is currently run by former Australian champion Nick Speck and his company Chess Ed. Chess kids, Chess ideas and Chess World have all had some involvement in a junior club at MCC, in various stages.

While I agree with you that Box Hill chess club (and Dark Horse chess club) are shining example of Victorian junior chess. I also believe you underestimate the benefits that ChessWorld/Kids, Chess Ideas, Chess Ed, MCC and all of the other entities provide for Victorian Chess.

Cheers Fg7

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 12:47 PM
One part of why we do not pay organisers/arbiters is that they are generally members of our parent community or our older junior players. This is speaking for JCL events only. The arguement is not about whether you currently pay arbiters or not.... The arguement is an ideal to be aimed for. I believe this ideal is realistically achievable for Australian Chess. Furthermore, I dont think think the money ought to come from hand to mouth tournaments. It should be planned long term. If your not sure what I am talking about then consider this. Chess is taught in over 220 schools in Victoria. All run professionally and payed for, this includes coaching, arbiters, tournaments and equipment. Did it cost the ACF anything? Nor should this be the only model for junior chess, but notice it is distinctly different to the context of the ACTJCL.




I have heard the "amateurism" arguments before. How do people think other sports run? Other "professional" sports when we are talking about junior & club (even state) level? In my initial quote I never said that volunteering is not important. It is simply not the only way to do things. Paying arbiters and organisers is not a bad thing, in itself, if it contributes to a structure that is not reliant on individual power.




I coached representative junior sport. I was a statistician for representative sport. I umpired junior & senior sport. I organised major carnivals attracting interstate teams. What did I receive? :hmm: :wall: :hmm: Nothing but maybe a nice thank you, a card, a bottle of wine etc.

What did I expect to receive? Nothing. Because that's the reality of most sport, especially women's sport, unless you are talking about the absolute top level people - and even then I think you will find that many people in administration in many "minor" sports are getting next to nothing. They are doing things for "social good" but that doesn't impact on their recognition as a sport?


I understand where both you and Jenni are coming from in regards to this issue. Both Starter and I could also show you a resume of umpteen years of volunteering, and yes we don't necessarily expect to get paid. That of course does not mean that we do not get 'nothing' out of it. The arguement is to avoid being reliant on this 'social goodness' it dosen't mean get rid of it. It means working towards a goal of professionalism, regardless of whether that goal is achievable or not.

We do not have even one paid professional organiser/arbiter working for the ACF/States/clubs etc. Get one person to cover the whole of Australian chess, professionally and we may be on to something.

What I would like to see is a job advert thats says "ACF- looking for competent administrator...will be employed on a part time basis with the aim of becoming full time". Maybe with all your experience with grant applications you might be able to convince the ACF that this is achievable now. If either you or Jenni wanted job, even better. How good would it be to have a competent female CEO of Australian chess, brought up through the ranks of chess volunteering?




Paying people isn't the answer for professional conduct and broad public recognition of the game. Chess needs to be in a position to be "professional" and to be taken seriously before you want to start pinning this as a big issue. We are never going to be Aussie Rules but we don't even behave like we are badminton (apologies to proponents) at times.


I disagree. Our whole history as a cultural/sporting pursuit is based on volunteering. We need one professional arbiter/organiser working for the ACF, to ensure that at the top levels it gets the exposure and recognition that it deserves in a world context. The infrastucture is already there, it is the leadership/relationship issue that is the seriously problem for Australian chess. Chess is already professional, only some people in Australia cannot see that.


What makes chess such a compelling case for payment?

Its unique position in the world as a popular, non-biased gender,racial, generational and social game with a very real social/historical world culture, that quite frankly, is universally appealing at an International level. Chess is bigger the AFL.



After all, I had to do my accreditation through the Australian Sports Commission, sit a test and practical exam. I had to prepare plans for training sessions, understand safe techniques to prevent injuries, know a whole raft of technical rules, manage large groups of children, develop them as both beginners and representative players.

This is a good thing. Yes, chess ought to have this sort of 'professionalism'.




what must still be regarded as a very minor sport in this country (both profile and competitive participation) should we believe that our sport must be administered differently to others? Isn't that an example of how we are not behaving like the majority of people involved in sport at a junior and club level in this country?

Chess is not the same as some other 'sports'. It belongs to an International community. Our goal ought to be to get somebody operating on a level where International tournaments are played in Australia. To reach that goal we cannot simply rely on volunteers. We need a professional. Australian chess needs a recognisable face lobbying for its interests, firstly part-time then full time. It needs to understand that the club aparatus is a social/cultural space for building the long term culture of Australian chess and that all this infrastructure ought to be integrated with all aspects of chess including private operators and junior/parent communities.

cheers Fg7

P.S Please remember that a good professional, not only gets paid but they also create. Having an employed ACF rep, ought to bring more to chess then they take.

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 12:56 PM
It is so nice to have someone with such a long history in sports administration to counter the sort of nonsense that chess people dream up about sport.... :whistle:

Hey human!
What do u think we are running at MCC a friggen lemonade stand for rich kids? Open your eyes and smell the cheese. Then you may be able to talk with some authority about nonsense and dreams.

Cheers Fg7

arosar
26-04-2005, 01:06 PM
Hey human!
What do u think we are running at MCC a friggen lemonade stand for rich kids? Open your eyes and smell the cheese. Then you may be able to talk with some authority about nonsense and dreams.

Cheers Fg7

Genius! :clap: :clap:

AR

jenni
26-04-2005, 01:22 PM
I agree with you that begineers and players probably under 1000 ought to play in kid only events. I have no problem with this concept. Unlike these sports to develop chess talent you need kids to play adults, when they are ready for it.


Then I am not sure what we are argueing about. JCL's are for chess development. No-one tries to be keep kids quarantined as they get better. If you have a look at the ACT you will find that although the JCL runs as a separate body, it is actually very closely integrated with the adult environment. There is a large flow of better juniors to adult events and the JCL measures its success by the number of JCL members who move on to play in adult clubs. Both Belconnen Chess Club and Tuggeranong were either dead or dying until resurrected by the work of the JCL. JCL parents are now running everything from Clubs to major events like the ANU Open.

I do not know an adult in Canberra who does not believe that the JCL has been a positive force.



But if you seriously want Australian chess to be recognised as a 'professional sport', then it has to be administered properly. IMO, every child who moves a chesspiece in a competitive game, be it at a school, a private company tournament, or a training competition for trophies ought to be registered with the ACF. That registration fee ought probably be somewhere between one and five dollars, and that revenue ought to be put into a development fund for junior chess administered by the ACF. Who knows we might have the actual side effect of being able to show any interested sponsor our membership of over 30,000 players. I would like to say I don't think JCL are a bad concept as such, I just believe that they ought to be integrated into the stuctures that we already have, instead of creating entities that effectively only exist and answer to themselves and more importantly seem to fall by the way side when kids get to old for junior chess and their parents are no longer interested in chess.



Obviously the model you have had experience with bears no resemblance to the model running in Canberra.




We are talking oranges and lemons here. Sure, at certain levels volunteering is an absolute necessity, but we are both aware that as you progress in quality the umpires get paid and more importantly trained.



You chose to criticise what I wrote initially. I was talking about volunteering at the JCL level - if you choose to run with it as a total principle that is your problem. I have no objection to Dop's being paid for ANU, Doeberl, etc etc. At the JCL level every cent we save, is turned into support for our juniors travelling to the Nationals - that is why we can afford to subsidise coaching for them at the juniors, give them travel subsidies for the Aus schools and help them with overseas travel as well as running many development days in town at very cost effective rates. Incidentally these days are also used as a training ground for our older juniors to give them experience in coaching and chess administration.



This statement really annoys me. There is no logical reason why an 'adult environment' ought to be 'less tolerant'. Why don't you ask some of the stronger players, how they became chessplayers? The answers may surprise.

cheers fg7

You must either have incredibly tolerant adults in Victoria or exceptionally well behaved kids. We migrate kids as young as 6 into the adult environment. The average parent and older junior is very tolerant of a noisy 6 (or 7, 8, 9. 10 etc) year old. The average adult is not. In fact I am often not - I lost it with the kids at Belco a couple of weeks ago and have introduced a "black mark" system (and a 1 strike and you are out). At the moment I have them so terrified of me that they ask permission for everything and behaviour is immaculate. I know it won't last and behaviour will deteriorate again.

The junior environment allows for these behaviour problems, as you can always shunt them onto a playing field and get them to run off their excess energy. This is not so easy to achieve in an adult club. There is no problem with the older juniors, but when we come across a talented little kid our aim is to move them into the adult environment as soon as we can.

Bill Gletsos
26-04-2005, 01:23 PM
Genius! :clap: :clap:

ARUndoubtedly a genius who graduated from the Wyle Coyote school of genii.

jenni
26-04-2005, 01:36 PM
While I agree with you that Box Hill chess club (and Dark Horse chess club) are shining example of Victorian junior chess. I also believe you underestimate the benefits that ChessWorld/Kids, Chess Ideas, Chess Ed, MCC and all of the other entities provide for Victorian Chess.

Cheers Fg7

Actually I don't. I think Chess businesses are critical in helping to develop grass roots chess. In fact Canberra is suffereing at the moment, because we no longer have a chess business in town, to do the valuable work in schools that we do not have the resources to do. We do have some Uni students doing some coaching around the schools, but could do with a well managed and professional business to drive things.

However you need a good JCL to provide overall direction and further development. It doesn't really matter whether the organistion is integrated into the adult body or not, as long as it co-operates strongly. The same applies to the businesses. What is holding Victoria back is the lack of co-operation among the various factions. I don't necessarily like everyone, but I will work with anyone if it has a positive outcome for chess development.

Victoria is swimming in strong players/coaches - it should have everything going for it in terms of generating strong juniors. Queensland and especially the ACT should not be able to come within coee of it in terms of titles won at Aus juniors, or selection overseas.

jenni
26-04-2005, 01:54 PM
Hey human!
What do u think we are running at MCC a friggen lemonade stand for rich kids? Open your eyes and smell the cheese. Then you may be able to talk with some authority about nonsense and dreams.

Cheers Fg7

I tell you what - next time an MCC committee person approaches me for help on junior ideas, rather than spending time talking to him and sending a follow up e-mail as requested, as I did last month, I'll just send him to you. Obviously you know all - I just don't know why you aren't sharing it with your fellow club members.......

arosar
26-04-2005, 02:33 PM
Undoubtedly a genius who graduated from the Wyle Coyote school of genii.

What's the problem now Bill? This is why you always get into trouble with them Mexicans. Always making snide remarks like that. Totally unnecessary.

AR

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 02:41 PM
What is holding Victoria back is the lack of co-operation among the various factions. I don't necessarily like everyone, but I will work with anyone if it has a positive outcome for chess development.



If you think Victorains are being held back by their lack of co-operation, then you may want to think again. Victorian chess is growing, it continues to maintain the highest quality of chess, of all the states in Australia, something it has done for at least the last 20 years.



Victoria is swimming in strong players/coaches - it should have everything going for it in terms of generating strong juniors. Queensland and especially the ACT should not be able to come within coee of it in terms of titles won at Aus juniors, or selection overseas.

And so we reach full circle again. What is chess? Is it quality, quantity, a bit of both or something else all together?

Cheers Fg7

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 03:04 PM
I tell you what - next time an MCC committee person approaches me for help on junior ideas, rather than spending time talking to him and sending a follow up e-mail as requested, as I did last month, I'll just send him to you.


Is that a bad thing that an MCC committee member approached you?



Obviously you know all - I just don't know why you aren't sharing it with your fellow club members.......

Why must you make this personal? It seems to me your selling MCC short again, (why is this happening again, why do people always go down this road?).

If MCC was really the incompetent organisation that you seem to want to make it out to be, then why was the treasurer talking to you? Do you honestly believe MCC has learnt nothing from 135 years of chess? Do you understand why we argue so strongly for democracy in chess? Look at chess! Look at its power relations, understand what the arguements mean.

Cheers Fg7

jenni
26-04-2005, 03:10 PM
If you think Victorains are being held back by their lack of co-operation, then you may want to think again. Victorian chess is growing, it continues to maintain the highest quality of chess, of all the states in Australia, something it has done for at least the last 20 years.


Easy to say - I can't see anything to demonstrate it though. Remember this thread is about Junior chess. Victoria is still a powerhouse in the adult stakes, but where is it heading. Believe it or not people die and you have to replace them.....

Talking quantity

Per head of population the ACT has something like 8 times as many juniors playing chess as Victoria.

Talking quality

Overseas selections in 2005. (As initially announced).

NSW 5, QLD 2, ACT 2, SA 1, Vic 0

Junior Titles in 2005

ACT 4, QLD 3, NSW 2, Vic 1

Top 5 in Junior lists (and remember if you equated these to per head of population then VIC should be light years in front of country town Canberra with our 300,000 people).

U20

NSW 3, QLD 1, Vic 1

U18

NSW 2, ACT 2, Vic 1

U 16

ACT 2, NSW 1, Qld 1, Vic 1

U 14

NSW 2, ACT 1, QLD 1, Vic 1

U12

NSW 2, Vic 2, QLD 1

U10

ACT 4, Qld 1

Victoria has some superb juniors coming up through the ranks - but with all the riches you have in terms of strong adults and coaches available it should be 10 times as many.

jenni
26-04-2005, 03:15 PM
Is that a bad thing that an MCC committee member approached you?



Why must you make this personal? It seems to me your selling MCC short again, (why is this happening again, why do people always go down this road?).

If MCC was really the incompetent organisation that you seem to want to make it out to be, then why was the treasurer talking to you? Do you honestly believe MCC has learnt nothing from 135 years of chess? Do you understand why we argue so strongly for democracy in chess? Look at chess! Look at its power relations, understand what the arguements mean.

Cheers Fg7

You were the one who got nasty (as you always do - when in doubt use aggression).

I have nothing against MCC at all - it seems to be a well run club that is attempting to do things. It was why I was more than happy to spend time with the person in question to help him.

I have a lot of problems with you, as you are never able to have a discussion without attacking, denigrating and trying to thump people into the dust.

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 03:43 PM
Easy to say - I can't see anything to demonstrate it though. Remember this thread is about Junior chess. Victoria is still a powerhouse in the adult stakes, but where is it heading. Believe it or not people die and you have to replace them.....

Talking quantity ..........



Dear Jenni,
Thanks for the statistics, remember there is statistics and then there is evidence.

You are naive when it comes to the Victorian chess scene. What do you think Starter and myself have been talking about when we keep on harping on about official and unofficial chess?
Victoria has more juniors the you can poke a stick at thats not the problem.

What do you think the debate about chess as a lived cultural place and space is about?


Cheers fg7

firegoat7
26-04-2005, 03:48 PM
You were the one who got nasty (as you always do - when in doubt use aggression).

I have a lot of problems with you, as you are never able to have a discussion without attacking, denigrating and trying to thump people into the dust.

Amazing. Yes, I have to agree, you, 'have a lot of problems'. I think you will find it pretty hard to qualify your statement 'never'.

Cheers Fg7

Garvinator
26-04-2005, 06:54 PM
i have been wondering, why do we have two victorian junior open threads????

jenni
26-04-2005, 07:37 PM
i have been wondering, why do we have two victorian junior open threads????
This one is the 2004 Junior Open thread that Starter revisted for some reason known only to him. I put what I thought was a helpful answer to a question and as usual Mr Smarty Pants leaped in with lots of attacking stuff. Next thing we have 2 threads going. Very confusing for some, particularly if you read the beginning without realising it is 2004 comments. :eek:

ursogr8
26-04-2005, 08:10 PM
This one is the 2004 Junior Open thread that Starter revisted for some reason known only to him. I put what I thought was a helpful answer to a question and as usual Mr Smarty Pants leaped in with lots of attacking stuff. Next thing we have 2 threads going. Very confusing for some, particularly if you read the beginning without realising it is 2004 comments. :eek:

hi jenni
How are you.

Starter got startled when StakesareHigh posted on the 2005 thread and I went looking for his previous posts. I found a beauty on the 2004 thread ...dated a year back...that Barry had well answered as he (nearly) always does. It deserved resurrection, and you provided some good detail. You and I are the culprits of the 2004 thread having a new lease of life. (Greg...go away, I am not necromancing with you again).

starter

jenni
26-04-2005, 08:17 PM
hi jenni
How are you.



Feathers are a bit ruffled at the moment. Never mind - in spite of spending half the day on here, I still managed to get the dreaded BAS out the way and the FBT, so life can only get better.......

Bas
26-04-2005, 08:28 PM
..... I still managed to get the dreaded BAS out the way, so life can only get better.......

me dreaded? hmmm..

jenni
26-04-2005, 09:50 PM
me dreaded? hmmm..

Oops sorry - you of course precede the other one and are admired not dreaded. ....