PDA

View Full Version : Mt Buller Championships



Pages : [1] 2 3

george
13-07-2004, 01:24 PM
Hi All,

I will post on here as things develop. One thing that has come to light is that we can provide free buses from Mansfield to Mt Buller and back but not Melbourne to Mt Buller - the cost of that would run to the order of $20,000 for the three events and so is impossible.

Financial guarantees deposits of monies and signed agreements are being done as we speak. In my submission to ACF I have a budget of $2,000 for buses which will cover the necessary funds for buses to get people to the venue from Mansfield and back before the tourneys and at the conclusion.

Regards
George Howard

jenni
13-07-2004, 01:47 PM
Hi All,

I will post on here as things develop. One thing that has come to light is that we can provide free buses from Mansfield to Mt Buller and back but not Melbourne to Mt Buller - the cost of that would run to the order of $20,000 for the three events and so is impossible.

Financial guarantees deposits of monies and signed agreements are being done as we speak. In my submission to ACF I have a budget of $2,000 for buses which will cover the necessary funds for buses to get people to the venue from Mansfield and back before the tourneys and at the conclusion.

Regards
George Howard

I think I am missing something - what is the point of having buses from Mansfied and back? Is there a train station there or something?

Garvinator
13-07-2004, 02:02 PM
I think I am missing something - what is the point of having buses from Mansfied and back? Is there a train station there or something?
ill help out here. there is a coach service from melbourne to mansfield. timetable is here http://www.victrip.com.au/timetables/timetable_options.php?type=vline&id=V405

jenni
13-07-2004, 02:24 PM
I just want to make sure I have things clear here. People going to Mt Buller for a 2 day schoosl comp are now expected to fly to Melbourne, get a bus to Mansfield and then another bus to the venue? I think they are going to spend more time on the bus than playing chess!

Brian_Jones
13-07-2004, 02:53 PM
Now come on Jenni - don't be negative!

jenni
13-07-2004, 03:00 PM
Now come on Jenni - don't be negative!

I am trying to be positive, but it is hard to be when I have had e-mails from parents from all over Australia saying how disappointed they are with the ACF decision.

I understand there is a group who are planning to go to the Asian Juniors in Singapore and another big tournament in China in January, rather than Mt Buller.

Bit disappointing if this happens.

george
13-07-2004, 03:11 PM
Hi ALL,

I am approaching this from a can do positive attitude as will the rest of the Core Organising Group the constitution of which will be made public after all guarantees from Mt Buller have been finalised COB thursday.

Jenni I know you wanted Canberra for the schools and I agreed with you on many points but im hoping you can be as positive as possible re Mt Buller.

If you have issues please please come up with workable solutions within the constraints of the Preliminary Working Budget you got yesterday. There will be many details and little problems but Mt Buller is where it is and the offsets are the funding etc etc Constantly talking of distance issues is not going to help anyone merely stating the obvious over and over is destructive - anyone can look at a map of Victoria see where Mt Buller is and say ok its there , alright I want to play so I make the time.

With Respect and Regards
George

arosar
13-07-2004, 03:18 PM
. . . Constantly talking of distance issues is not going to help anyone merely stating the obvious over and over is destructive - anyone can look at a map of Victoria see where Mt Buller is and say ok its there , alright I want to play so I make the time.

Oh man, you soo need a PR adviser. Where's Rambukwhatshisname?

See, you're response is not going to help. It'll just rally people to jenni's corner. What you do is this. Just bang out the positives, if any, of the MBII deal, focus on those, and try as much as possible to divert attention away from minuses and onto the pluses. The distance thing is an issue but your aim must be to dilute it.

AR

jenni
13-07-2004, 03:38 PM
Actually I don't have a corner - I would like to see Mt Buller succeed if it is what we have to have.

I do feel it is disappointing when something that was promised as a way of making things easier suddenly disappears - makes me lose a fair bit of credibility, as it is one of the things that I have been using to tell people it won't be as hard as they think, because look you can just fly into Melbourne, be picked up by a bus and whisked off to the venue.

Now I have to go back to those same people and say well actually sorry - now you have to fly into Melbourne with tired fractious kids, find some bus station, load them and the luggage on the bus get to Mansfield load it all off the bus and then get on another bus and do it all again. Probably doesn;t sound too hard to the adults, but you try doing it with a bunch of 11 year olds. And at the back of your mind you know you have to have them in good playing condition for the comp the next day. I am glad I have all older kids now.

Incidentally I didn't particularly want a schools comp for Canberra - what I wanted was a schools comp that met the needs of the parents and players. Mt Buller doesn't.

These are some of the comments I have had today.

"Thanks, Jenni. The way they treat Juniors and School events is very disappointing.

Every chess parent I have talked to in the past few days were really worried that the Juniors and Schools comp being held in Mt Buller. I will have to wait for the package coming out to make decision whether it is worth to go - even with the School Comp."

and

" sorry to bother you at such an interesting time...the whole Mt. Bulla issue etc, but I just thought you would like to know that I have spoken to many, many parents of juniors and they are very against a tourney at Mt Bulla."

I am actually doing my best to reassure people and say we can make it into a good comp, but as I said before it doesn't help to find selling points vanishing.

Can I have reassurance form George that the other things that I have been using are kind of set in concrete and won't change.

i.e.

The entry fees of $50 and $55
The prize fund (roughly $5,000)
The $4,000 development grant

Cat
13-07-2004, 03:48 PM
I am trying to be positive, but it is hard to be when I have had e-mails from parents from all over Australia saying how disappointed they are with the ACF decision.

I understand there is a group who are planning to go to the Asian Juniors in Singapore and another big tournament in China in January, rather than Mt Buller.

Bit disappointing if this happens.


As you know I've often vented my disgust at the way the ACF treats it's juniors and often pays scant regard to their interests and practical issues. I agree the situation is less than desirable.

However, George has demonstrated real leadership over this issue and rightly deserves our full support. It must have been enormously difficult for him to have rescued this situation which was not directly of his making, and he has shown a degree of self-sacrifice the ACF hardly deserves.

I agree AR that George's words taken a face value sound a little hollow. But I suspect he is working extremely hard to hold things together, and is gently trying to douse fires.

It's right that Jenni has raised these issues and the ACF should ignore it at its peril. But given an amazing effort to clutch this deal from the fire, perhaps it would be better to be resigned to the situation this year, and register our desire that the ACF gives greater consideration to the interests of its juniors.

george
13-07-2004, 03:54 PM
Hi Jenni,

Yes they are set in concrete.

Regards
George Howard

jenni
13-07-2004, 04:05 PM
Thanks George

george
13-07-2004, 05:24 PM
Hi All,

This is the official text of the minutes from last nights meeting from Jey ACF Secretary. Then follows some explanation as to what the modifications were as I explained last night.

"Item 3 - Bids for Australian Open,Junior and Schools Finals

Formal bids were submitted bt three organisations:CV (to hold all 3 events);ACTJCL (for the School events):and GH as main organiser of a revised Mt Buller bid on behalf of the ACF (to hold all 3 events).

GH stepped down as chair of the meeting, and GW,as Deputy President ,was the acting Chair for the duration of the discussion and decision on this issue.

GH presented the submission on the revised Mt Buller bid for the Australian Open,Junior and Schools events,referring to the attached documents presented to Council. GH stated that he would modify the composition of the Junior prizes,and specified that he was assured by the Mt Buller administration that they would deposit a $20,000 bond within 72 hours on a joint bank account as a token of their good faith with the ACF. In response to a query , GH also stated that whilst he would be happy to indemnify the ACF from any financial losses, he also thought that it was appropriate in that case that if there was a profit made , there should be a 50/50 split of any profits between the ACF and the organiser.

DC presented the CV bid submission, and stated that the Juniors and Schools finals would be held in Box Hill,and that the Open would be held in the Glen Era Town Hall. DC referred to the attached documents,which contained details of the CV bid.

LS presented the bid for the Australian Schools Finals on behalf of the A CTJCL,and referred to the attached documents that contained details of the ACTJCL bid. The ACTJCL bid would ensure that the School events would be held in December,separate from the Mt Buller Open and Junior Events.

After the presentations there were numerous questions asked of GH,DC and LS by Council Members and Representatives from Associated Bodies.

Motion:"that the ACF Mt Buller bid,with changes and assurances as given ,for the Australian Open,Australian Junior and the 2004 Australian School finals be accepted
Moved:GH
Seconded DM

For - BG,NG,IM,TC,DM,DJ,KB
Against - DC
Abstain - GH,JH,GW
Outcome - Motion carried 7-1

GH stated that he would inform Mt Buller of the outcome of the Council decision , and request Mt Buller to lodge the $20,000 bond into the joint account,as agreed by the Mt Buller management. In response to a question,GH stated that if this were not undertaken within 72 hours , he would come back to Council so that the other bids could be considered. GH also stated that the contract would be signed with Mt Buller within 72 hours of the Council decision.

DC stated that the CV bids were still available for Council consideration if after 72 hours,the contracts were not signed and the $20,000 bond not lodged. DC asked,and received a guarantee from GH,that the ACF would not suffer any financial loss from GH running the Australian Open,Junior and Schools events on behalf of the ACF in Mt Buller. Gh in response to a question from KB, also stated that he would try to get the local supermarket to deliver food daily.

DC,on behalf of CV , also wanted it explicitly stated in the official Minutes,that CV did not endorse or support the Mt Buller events,even though the event is being held in Victoria. He pointed out that if there was any adverse outcome from the organization and/or conduct of the events in Mt Buller,it should be acknowledged that this Council decision was made without the support of CV.

Council also agreed to GH's suggestion that GW be the official ACF liaison inany dealings with the Mt Buller issue.

The question of which state would have an extra team in the 2004 Mt Buller Australian Schools events (my comment - to avoid possible bye) was also deferred for email discussion at a later time"

This is what happened last night - explanation - the change that was agreed to was reducing the Junior Prizes from about $9,000 to about $5,000 still more than was offered at Adelaide Junior and that the $4,000 that would have been available be used to establish a Mercure Chalet Mt Buller Junior Chess Develpement Fund. This was agreed by myself and later agreed to by Mt Buller management.

Regards to ALL
George Howard

PHAT
13-07-2004, 06:49 PM
Hi All,

This is the official text of the minutes ...




As I said before, George has shown real spine. In appreciation, I will try very hard to go to this event to help make it a success. And if I get their, I voluneer myself for "duties".

Three cheers for GH!

Libby
13-07-2004, 08:07 PM
ggrayggray 7/7/04

I would suspect as i have said before that buses would be provided from melbourne to mt buller, so that means parents and juniors from interstate would only need to pay for flights to melbourne, so the cost is very similiar to holding the aussie juniors in melbourne.

george 9/7/04

The transport from Melbourne to Mt Buller to the Events at the commencement and conclusion will be covered with special bus transport laid on by the Organisers at no cost to the participants. then

george 13/7/04

One thing that has come to light is that we can provide free buses from Mansfield to Mt Buller and back but not Melbourne to Mt Buller - the cost of that would run to the order of $20,000 for the three events and so is impossible.

I don't think the wicked witches from Canberra are trying to be overly negative, pedantic or unreasonable. Nor are we sulking over the failure of our own bid for the Schools competition. As Jenni quite rightly asserts, we were not particularly desperate to run the schools in the ACT - we just wanted to run it in a sensible location for the benefit of our "constituents" - that is, junior chess players.

Because Mt Buller is a relatively remote location and because the schools is such a short event, getting to and from the venue is a pretty major consideration. It seems (as quoted) those organising the new bid had given assurances about transport. On what basis were these assurances made? In making such an offer who was ever going to be paying for the "free" buses - the ACF, Accor, Mt Buller (?) - they would always have been a major expense. Why was the offer ever made? Where did it sit in the budget for the events? :hmm:

I don't think those questions are unreasonable. Nor should they be read as a failure to support the event. The whole option of flying into Melbourne, finding the bus station, getting to Mansfield and then on to Buller seems so ridiculous that we will investigate what we can come up with for our own player population direct from Canberra. We will still encourage them to play. We will want the highest possible representation of ACT players at the event and we will do everything we can to make that happen. We will also be prepared to pull our weight to ensure everything runs as well as it can at the event

Irrespective of sponsorship, irrespective of the amount of work the organisers of Mt Buller have put in, junior organisations have to report to junior players and junior parents. They ask us the questions, they tell us their concerns, they express their dissatisfaction to us. It is our responsibility to follow through. This should not be seen as an attempt to stand in the way of the future of Australian chess - many of these players are the future of Australian chess.

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 08:40 PM
Hi All,

I will post on here as things develop. One thing that has come to light is that we can provide free buses from Mansfield to Mt Buller and back but not Melbourne to Mt Buller - the cost of that would run to the order of $20,000 for the three events and so is impossible.

Financial guarantees deposits of monies and signed agreements are being done as we speak. In my submission to ACF I have a budget of $2,000 for buses which will cover the necessary funds for buses to get people to the venue from Mansfield and back before the tourneys and at the conclusion.

Regards
George Howard

Poor George, your excuses are weak. Did you not know it was going to cost $20K to provide the bus from Melbourne before you made such promise?!

I also recall in your earlier BB posts you made the promise that all profits go to ACF, now you come up this good line about personal financial risk therefore only fair for you to share 50% profit etc etc.

So, george broke two major promises in as many days ... all these even before signing final contract and releasing rest of the details. Am I the only one with the feeling that we are dealing with Guru II here?! :doh:

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 08:45 PM
Constantly talking of distance issues is not going to help anyone merely stating the obvious over and over is destructive - anyone can look at a map of Victoria see where Mt Buller is and say ok its there , alright I want to play so I make the time.

With Respect and Regards
George

Well, did it ever occur to george if he try and listen to people and come up with answers that resolve these concerns then people may not be so concerned. :whistle:

Cat
13-07-2004, 10:15 PM
Poor George, your excuses are weak as piss. Did you not know it was going to cost $20K to provide the bus from Melbourne before you made such promise?!

I also recall in your earlier BB posts you made the promise that all profits go to ACF, now you come up this good line about personal financial risk therefore only fair for you to share 50% profit etc etc.

So, george broke two major promises in as many days ... all these even before signing final contract and releasing rest of the details. Am I the only one with the feeling that we are dealing with Guru II here?! :doh:

Good leadership is a commodity in very short supply. Most people become leaders out of ambition rather than talent. We often end up in a situation where general interest is sacrificed to personal gain. Even when there is little to gain, ego is the main driving force.

The ACF is in the privileged position of finding that rare jewel, a leader who really isn't motivated by self interest, the genuine article.

There's no doubt the ACF was caught with its pants down when David withdrew his bid. But what has happened since is truely inspirational.

These questions should have been raised some time before, and one can really question why they weren't. But the past cannot be changed, one can simply hope to learn from the mistakes.

George had a limited number of choices before him, none of them epecially palatable, all potentially flawed and ill prepared. There was no right way, simply the right way to make that choice and George did it where few others would have succeeded.

It is inevitable that problems will crop up, because George is holding a baby that was conceived by another - give the guy a chance, he's only had a couple of weeks to come up to speed.

As I understand it George has made some significant personal sacrifices for this, few else of us would make. He's put his integrity and much more on the line and asked for little in return. He deserves loyalty and respect.

It's true I've no intention of making the Buller trip, but I would have had no intention where ever the venue. I am a parent with 3 kids and I know what its like - I just took 6 kids to the SunCoast for a weekend and that was enough. But its leadership like this that would induce me to make an effort, where ever the venue.

I hope the views of the Canberra parents are being received with good heart, imagination and invention can overcome most difficulties. In time the ACF can hopefully adopt a more progressive attitude to the needs of juniors but a brave decision has been made, lets get behind George.

Kevin Bonham
13-07-2004, 10:25 PM
I also recall in your earlier BB posts you made the promise that all profits go to ACF, now you come up this good line about personal financial risk therefore only fair for you to share 50% profit etc etc.

That was agreed at Council last night effectively in exchange for George agreeing to indemnify the ACF against all financial loss.

It is only fair and is no different from what would have happened had a State Association been running the bid instead.

george
13-07-2004, 10:26 PM
Hi All,

I have made statements that I have had to go back on and I apologise!
It has been an enormous exercise to pull the pieces together and obviously sometimes I made decisions while under time constraints which I should not have made ie being a bit too optimistic.

The decisions I have made have basically been on my own and I've taken advice when I could - trying to tie all the loose ends together while handling the political debate with factions pulling pushing in various directions have been very tough but I have tried my best.

To call the two key female administrators from Canberra Wicked Witches is silly and I dont know why a previous poster said that or what he/she is trying to achieve. I have the utmost respect for any administrator doing their best - but by the same token Jenny is an experienced chess political player - she may well have different ways of achieving things but for anyone to think she is doing anything other than fighting for her constituency with the best of intentions is stupid in the extreme.

More power to Jenny and Libby - see you both in Mt Buller provided the Guarantees are successful in the time allowed.

Regards
George Howard

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 10:54 PM
There's no doubt the ACF was caught with its pants down when David withdrew his bid. But what has happened since is truely inspirational.

These questions should have been raised some time before, and one can really question why they weren't. But the past cannot be changed, one can simply hope to learn from the mistakes.

George had a limited number of choices before him, none of them epecially palatable, all potentially flawed and ill prepared. There was no right way, simply the right way to make that choice and George did it where few others would have succeeded.

It is inevitable that problems will crop up, because George is holding a baby that was conceived by another - give the guy a chance, he's only had a couple of weeks to come up to speed.


It is the same ACF lead by george as the president that had originally awarded the guru all three events - went for the all or nothing package without sufficient time to research, debate, and question the deal. So don't tell us george is 'holding a baby that was conceived by another".

You know the difference between leadership and dictatorship?! - you look at the original decision to award guru the baby as you call it and now the decision to pass on this little bastard to the new organisor who happens to be the president of acf.

I see no leadership, all I see is dictatorship!

Kevin Bonham
13-07-2004, 11:03 PM
I see no leadership, all I see is dictatorship!

I see no reasoned commentary, I just see someone applying a pejorative political label to a system because he dislikes its decisions, irrespective of the actual processes of that system.

Garvinator
13-07-2004, 11:12 PM
I see no leadership, all I see is dictatorship!
i didnt think dictatorships allow one vote against and some absteins :eek:

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 11:23 PM
I see no reasoned commentary, I just see someone applying a pejorative political label to a system because he dislikes its decisions, irrespective of the actual processes of that system.

I dislike the process, and therfore not surprised by the poor decision on both occasions.

Just reading on this BB I see roughly say 50:50 for and against the mt buller deal, yet from the voting results or the meeting minutes I can't see any real representation on the against side.

The only objection came from guru and we all know he is just sour grapes, so where is our voice within the running of acf?!

Garvinator
13-07-2004, 11:25 PM
I dislike the process, and therfore not surprised by the poor decision on both occasions.

Just reading on this BB I see roughly say 50:50 for and against the mt buller deal, yet from the voting results or the meeting minutes I can't see any real representation on the against side.

The only objection came from guru and we all know he is just sour grapes, so where is our voice within the running of acf?!
the acf council could only vote on the bids that were placed in front of them at the meeting, so maybe the council just decided that mt buller 2 was the best of the options, ever thought of that. Maybe you should be asking why wasnt there a stack of bids put in originally to compete with guru. :doh:

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 11:26 PM
i didnt think dictatorships allow one vote against and some absteins :eek:

well, when you know you already have the required numbers BEFORE a vote is taken, you can afford to have a few absteins just to make the process look democratic! ;)

Kevin Bonham
13-07-2004, 11:36 PM
well, when you know you already have the required numbers BEFORE a vote is taken, you can afford to have a few absteins just to make the process look democratic! ;)

I know for a fact that George did not have my vote lined up beforehand - because I made my decision based partly on info not presented to me before the meeting. I'm pretty sure this is true of at least one other state delegate too. If George did have the numbers lined up, so what? It doesn't mean it's not democratic.


Just reading on this BB I see roughly say 50:50 for and against the mt buller deal, yet from the voting results or the meeting minutes I can't see any real representation on the against side.

Many councillors thought the issue was quite close and would have liked to seperate off the schools event if it was possible to do that without the rest of the Buller bid collapsing. It just happened that everyone in this category voted for the bid.

jeffrei
13-07-2004, 11:40 PM
Maybe you should be asking why wasnt there a stack of bids put in originally to compete with guru.

Interesting comment. Does anyone know why?

Garvinator
13-07-2004, 11:41 PM
Many councillors thought the issue was quite close and would have liked to seperate off the schools event if it was possible to do that without the rest of the Buller bid collapsing. It just happened that everyone in this category voted for the bid.
i think in an ideal world, the schools champs not being held at buller is the best idea, but basically all three had to be together or buller went bust. So it was either all three or nothing for buller.

Garvinator
13-07-2004, 11:44 PM
Interesting comment. Does anyone know why?
i think most of it is the usual, no one willing to put up there hand, others not having enough time, some ppl not having the skills etc etc and any others you want to name :eek:

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 11:56 PM
Many councillors thought the issue was quite close and would have liked to seperate off the schools event if it was possible to do that without the rest of the Buller bid collapsing. It just happened that everyone in this category voted for the bid.

There are many others like myself that are against the idea of having the open or any event to be held in a resort where we have no options but to pay for over-priced rooms and food. From your statements, I am surprised councillors only expressed concerns about the schools event. Did anyone ask question about the open?? :eek:

We are still waiting for the details for the open to be announced, but the few info so far released about junior and school events has certainly given me no confidence.

peanbrain
13-07-2004, 11:59 PM
i think most of it is the usual, no one willing to put up there hand, others not having enough time, some ppl not having the skills etc etc and any others you want to name :eek:

OR if it was announced in ADVANCE that organisors get to keep 50% of the profit you think we may have more bids? :whistle:

Kevin Bonham
14-07-2004, 12:05 AM
There are many others like myself that are against the idea of having the open or any event to be held in a resort where we have no options but to pay for over-priced rooms and food.

(i) Rooms - actually the rooms were not that much more expensive than those quoted in the other bids. Plus while Mt B will supply rooms at the agreed prices to those who want them, you are still free to stay at other venues on Mt B if you can find cheaper/better elsewhere.

(Also worth noting that the Mt B entry fees were massively lower than the only other Open bid on the table, and the prizes apparently better.)

(ii) Food - there is a supermarket 30km away + cooking facilities available in the rooms. It sounds like, although it will take a bit of work, it is not going to be quite the living-at-the-ends-of-the-earth experience people imagine.


From your statements, I am surprised councillors only expressed concerns about the schools event. Did anyone ask question about the open?? :eek:

People were generally quite satisfied with the Mt B Open and Juniors bids.

Kevin Bonham
14-07-2004, 12:07 AM
OR if it was announced in ADVANCE that organisors get to keep 50% of the profit you think we may have more bids? :whistle:

Um, that's in the by-laws actually. Every state association knows that if your bid makes a profit the organisers get 50% and the ACF gets 50%.

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 12:08 AM
OR if it was announced in ADVANCE that organisors get to keep 50% of the profit you think we may have more bids? :whistle:
More to the point they also gets to keep 100% of the losses.

Kevin Bonham
14-07-2004, 12:13 AM
Interesting comment. Does anyone know why?

ACF Conference in Jan recommended the Mt Buller I bids to Council, and Council in Jan passed motions in support of them. Then when it came to April Mt B I was the only set of bids on the table because of the earlier motions.

I wasn't at either of the January meetings so I can't tell you how close the vote was at either (margin isn't minuted) but I do know that some state association delegates tried to get an extension of time to give NSW time to consider a bid in opposition to Mt B. However this motion was lost.

Not being there and not having heard the debate at the time I can't really comment on why this all occurred.

peanbrain
14-07-2004, 12:14 AM
(i) Rooms - actually the rooms were not that much more expensive than those quoted in the other bids. Plus while Mt B will supply rooms at the agreed prices to those who want them, you are still free to stay at other venues on Mt B if you can find cheaper/better elsewhere.

You said "rooms were not that much more xepensive than those quoted in the other bids" - and this is precisely my point. Why should we even pay more for a room in a winter resort in the middle of summer?!

The cost of transport to mt buller is more than venues from other bids, so why should we not rightly expect the rooms to be cheaper at the venue?

Also I note the bus from Melburne to Mansfield cost about $60 each way and according to the website it only operates during winter. :confused:

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 12:15 AM
More to the point they also gets to keep 100% of the losses.
:lol: i am certainly well aware of that :whistle:

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 12:22 AM
ACF Conference in Jan recommended the Mt Buller I bids to Council, and Council in Jan passed motions in support of them. Then when it came to April Mt B I was the only set of bids on the table because of the earlier motions.

I wasn't at either of the January meetings so I can't tell you how close the vote was at either (margin isn't minuted) but I do know that some state association delegates tried to get an extension of time to give NSW time to consider a bid in opposition to Mt B. However this motion was lost.

Not being there and not having heard the debate at the time I can't really comment on why this all occurred.
My understanding was the that the guru was saying that if there was any delay in accepting the Mt. Buller bid it would disappear.
Although most NSW delegates seriously doubted this, it appears other state delegates did not.
Also at the time NSW was not suggesting the vote be delayed so they could put in a counter bid but that it be delayed so that a more considered decision could be reached rather than a rushed decision based on the claims of the organiser. Unfortunately NSW delegates could not find any support from other state delegates.

Too bad it didnt require the same voting percentage as a constitutional amendment, as NSW could then have vetoed it. ;) :hand: :whistle:

peanbrain
14-07-2004, 12:22 AM
More to the point they also gets to keep 100% of the losses.

Profit = revenue - cost.

Since there is no requirement to fill the rooms there is virtually no liability to mercure. On the plus side the organisers gets a lot of free rooms and beds to do what they like including selling them as source of revenue.

Going to the cost side, if you take back the promised free bus from Melbourne that's another $20k you goes straight to your (and acf's) pockets.
As the organisor you get to make and change decisions to balance the book and make profit. This why I am not impressed with the lack of details or claw back on promises made.

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 12:28 AM
Profit = revenue - cost.
God damn I doubt anyone else realised that.


Since there is no requirement to fill the rooms there is virtually no liability to mercure. On the plus side the organisers gets a lot of free rooms and beds to do what they like including selling them as source of revenue.
So they get a lot of free rooms.
You know this how?


Going to the cost side, if you take back the promised free bus from Melbourne that's another $20k you goes straight to your (and acf's) pockets.

Try not to demonstrate you are a complete clown.
There was never any intention to spend 20k on buses hence there is no 20k to go back anywhere. As george explained it never occurred to him that the bus costs would be anywhere near that high.

peanbrain
14-07-2004, 12:30 AM
Um, that's in the by-laws actually. Every state association knows that if your bid makes a profit the organisers get 50% and the ACF gets 50%.

Yes, but big difference between individual organisors vs state association.
If state association made the profit it becomes a benefit to all its members, whereas individual organisors gets to pocket the difference. Nothing wrong with professional organisors getting fair share of profit but that's why all contract conditions need to be sorted not as an after thought.

As with the free bus example, if the state association has the choice to make $20k profit or to make no profit and provide the free bus which one would they go for? But when the organisor is an individual you know they can just cut cost here and there to ensure maximum profits right? ;)

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 12:36 AM
As with the free bus example, if the state association has the choice to make $20k profit or to make no profit and provide the free bus which one would they go for?
There is no 20k profit saving because of lack of buses. so your continual mention of is just rubbish.
No one except a complete moron would spend 20k on buses.
In fact if they did, you would no doubt be the first to complain about such a thing.

If george had realised up front the cost of buses was 20k he would never have made such an offer.

Kevin Bonham
14-07-2004, 12:38 AM
Yes, but big difference between individual organisors vs state association. If state association made the profit it becomes a benefit to all its members, whereas individual organisors gets to pocket the difference.

A bid normally only has to be approved by a State Association, not necessarily run by one. If a State Association ran a bid itself it would surely keep the 50%. However if a State Association approved a private organisers' bid, the private organiser would probably keep the 50%. I think this happened last Open actually.

In this case, George's bid is only budgeted to break even anyway. I will be surprised if it makes a large profit.

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 12:40 AM
A bid normally only has to be approved by a State Association, not necessarily run by one. If a State Association ran a bit itself it would surely keep the 50%. However if a State Association approved a private organisers' bid, the private organiser would probably keep the 50%. I think this happened last Open actually.
No the ACF got 50% of the profits and the NSWCA split its 50% share of the profits with the organiser.

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 12:44 AM
complete moron
moron and clown, all you need is goose and you have a complete set :whistle:

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 12:56 AM
moron and clown, all you need is goose and you have a complete set :whistle:
Yep, two more, say a cretin and a dipstick and I'll have a flush or maybe five of a kind. :whistle:

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 12:58 AM
Yep, two more, say a cretin and a dipstick and I'll have a flush or maybe five of a kind. :whistle:
and you could have the joke card up your sleeve too ;)

Kevin Bonham
14-07-2004, 01:10 AM
You said "rooms were not that much more xepensive than those quoted in the other bids" - and this is precisely my point. Why should we even pay more for a room in a winter resort in the middle of summer?!

If the bid works and this becomes a long-term arrangement the potential for Australian chess in terms of both sponsorship and frequent free access to cheap city venues is very large. This is a big "if" but one that is well worth a try.

Also you've disregarded my point about not having to stay at the Mercure venues if you don't want to. They do have competition up there.

PS Thanks Bill for the correction.

Trent Parker
14-07-2004, 01:36 AM
I would like to quote myself from the original (now closed) thread about Mt Buller on 14/4/2004

Hey chessguru, i am considering going down to mount buller if i have enough money to go down there. But another issue you might be able to help me with is transport. I am vision impaired and cannot drive because of this vision impairment so:
1) What type of transport arrangements are there to the venue at the start of the tourament and from the venue at the end of the tournament.
2) What is the local transport like in terms of accessing other "touristy" things to do?

Mr ACF President
Can you please answer the above questions considering that I will probably catch a XPT to..... where ever.

Actually it is looking less and less likely that I can afford to go due to......



(ii) Food - there is a supermarket 30km away


30 kms away????????
I don't think i'll be able to afford to buy meals from restaurants for the whole tourney.

And I don't.............................. think ........................... I can walk that distance. :rolleyes: Although I have walked from my place to Tahmoor and back before which would be about 22-24 kms total - took me 4 hours. :uhoh:

Therefore there would need to be adequate Public transport arrangements for me to consider going down to the Open. :evil:

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:40 AM
trent, in reply to kevin's post about the supermarket being 30kms away, what would seem to make sense is that each person would place their order and money with a couple of people in charge and then they would take the complete orders and get the items from the supermarket. Or something like that.

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:43 AM
Can you please answer the above questions considering that I will probably catch a XPT to..... where ever.
tparker, your best would be either to catch a train from picton to sydney central area and maybe plane it down to melbourne, or catch the xpt to canberra i think(dont hold me to that idea as i dont really know) and arrange something with the act ppl. Just a couple of thoughts :hmm:

Trent Parker
14-07-2004, 01:49 AM
thanks ggray. I just thought i'd use the xpt because I get 1 free return countrylink journey within NSW each year and only would have to pay for the % of the journey that is in Victoria. Thought it might be cheaper.

Trent Parker
14-07-2004, 01:51 AM
trent, in reply to kevin's post about the supermarket being 30kms away, what would seem to make sense is that each person would place their order and money with a couple of people in charge and then they would take the complete orders and get the items from the supermarket. Or something like that.

oh of course.... :uhoh:
Need sleep... going to sleep :lol:

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:53 AM
oh of course.... :uhoh:
Need sleep... going to sleep :lol:
but if you want to walk to the supermarket, that is your choice :lol: i wanna see you get the ice cream back from the supermarket before it melts though at buller in summer :lol: :whistle:

Trent Parker
14-07-2004, 01:57 AM
but if you want to walk to the supermarket, that is your choice :lol: i wanna see you get the ice cream back from the supermarket before it melts though at buller in summer :lol: :whistle:
yeah right! rotfl :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Kevin Bonham
14-07-2004, 02:17 AM
Hmmm. I just found a map that gave the actual distance from Mansfield to Mt Buller as 48 km and not "about 30 km" as previously advertised, and have confirmed this through other sources.

I also found this, at this (http://www.latrobe.edu.au/vet/living.html ) address (a site dealing with student courses on Mt B in summer):

What facilities are available on Mt. Buller during summer?
There is no supermarket, chemist, newsagent, medical centre or public transport on Mt. Buller during the summer months. Mansfield (45 minutes away) is the nearest town for such services. It is possible to rely on the courier services that regularly run between Mansfield and Mt. Buller for deliveries from any Mansfield outlet including the supermarkets.

Where can I buy my weekly food supplies?
Both Mansfield supermarkets offer a reliable fax /delivery service to Mt. Buller. Students fax their orders and the supermarkets, for a small charge, will arrange for the items to be delivered. Students will need a credit card to pay for groceries and other items using this service. Orders can be faxed from the post office or the campus administration office.

Libby
14-07-2004, 07:36 AM
Hmmm. I just found a map that gave the actual distance from Mansfield to Mt Buller as 48 km and not "about 30 km" as previously advertised, and have confirmed this through other sources.

I also found this, at this (http://www.latrobe.edu.au/vet/living.html ) address (a site dealing with student courses on Mt B in summer):

What facilities are available on Mt. Buller during summer?
There is no supermarket, chemist, newsagent, medical centre or public transport on Mt. Buller during the summer months. Mansfield (45 minutes away) is the nearest town for such services. It is possible to rely on the courier services that regularly run between Mansfield and Mt. Buller for deliveries from any Mansfield outlet including the supermarkets.

Where can I buy my weekly food supplies?
Both Mansfield supermarkets offer a reliable fax /delivery service to Mt. Buller. Students fax their orders and the supermarkets, for a small charge, will arrange for the items to be delivered. Students will need a credit card to pay for groceries and other items using this service. Orders can be faxed from the post office or the campus administration office.

Thanks Kevin. Actually that is a bit more reassuring than the advice from the lodge where we had booked. They told me the courier arrangements only happen in Winter but maybe that is a reflection on their own particular relationship or the needs of their usual range of clients.

Libby
14-07-2004, 08:01 AM
Hi All,

I have made statements that I have had to go back on and I apologise!
It has been an enormous exercise to pull the pieces together and obviously sometimes I made decisions while under time constraints which I should not have made ie being a bit too optimistic.

The decisions I have made have basically been on my own and I've taken advice when I could - trying to tie all the loose ends together while handling the political debate with factions pulling pushing in various directions have been very tough but I have tried my best.

To call the two key female administrators from Canberra Wicked Witches is silly and I dont know why a previous poster said that or what he/she is trying to achieve. I have the utmost respect for any administrator doing their best - but by the same token Jenny is an experienced chess political player - she may well have different ways of achieving things but for anyone to think she is doing anything other than fighting for her constituency with the best of intentions is stupid in the extreme.

More power to Jenny and Libby - see you both in Mt Buller provided the Guarantees are successful in the time allowed.

Regards
George Howard

First point - I think I am transparently a "she" and I had no special agenda with the use of the "wicked witch" statement other than as a response to the immediate responses to Jenni's email that we were all for being negative or the possible inference that her questions about the promised buses might reflect our disappointment at the failure to move the schools comp to the ACT.

For what it is worth - I thought peanbrain was unneccesarily hard on George who clearly is doing the very best he can to pull together what may be a great deal for Australian chess. And all along I think it's pretty clear the ACT does a good job of trying to encourage parents and players to attend these events whether we are off to Perth, Mt Buller or anywhere. Excuse our frustration at the continual shifting of the goal posts. The now-recinded bus offer simply moves those posts from the forward pocket right into the midfield.

Can I ask if this proposal was costed on transporting players via the commercial bus services (ie as timetabled by Vic rail) or did organisers consider chartering their own buses? As one of the wretched "fundraising mums" at pre-school I did charter buses from Canberra to Sydney (3hrs each way) and we made over $1000 profit (2 buses) and charged about $30 per person. In my experience you could be looking at several hundred dollars difference if you went for a smaller "no-frills" company ahead of the major bus companies - and still get a nice bus, cloth seats, air conditioning and I think we got to sit through Jurassic Park on video.

I think it is actually worth the organising committee pursuing this idea a little further. If there is a demand for a bus/buses from Melbourne to Buller, wouldn't it be better to charter something just for the chess people and run it at either cost price, or at minimum profit? If there is no demand - no worries. I will be making some enquiries for a bus from Canberra to Buller and can let everyone know what that comes up with. At least we have that option but some states have far greater distances to travel and getting from their location to Buller may be much more difficult.

DoroPhil
14-07-2004, 08:05 AM
What an incredibly stupid decision to hold Australian Open at Mount Buller when there is a Melbourne option available!

As someone who lives in Melbourne and works full-time, I would consider taking time off work in order to play in Melbourne, but no effing way I am going to Mount bloody Buller in summer!

The only group of people who'd play in Aus Open now, are the so-called chess "enthusiasts", who'd put up with any crap conditions, so that they can play chess. ACF should really stop looking at this group of losers as their target audience!

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 08:22 AM
i think most of it is the usual, no one willing to put up there hand, others not having enough time, some ppl not having the skills etc etc and any others you want to name :eek:

gg''
I think you are probably correct on this list of reasons.
What is likely to turn around this situation so that the ACF has multiple proposals to choose from? A reversal of the 50-50 rule in the future? A spotters fee for failed bids (the GURU would at least pocket something for all his work on the past two)? More lead-time for planning (I wonder if the ACF has called for bids on the next cycle)? Elimination of the rotation rule?
What are your thoughts gg''''?

starter

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 08:30 AM
What an incredibly stupid decision to hold Australian Open at Mount Buller when there is a Melbourne option available!

As someone who lives in Melbourne and works full-time, I would consider taking time off work in order to play in Melbourne, but no effing way I am going to Mount bloody Buller in summer!

The only group of people who'd play in Aus Open now, are the so-called chess "enthusiasts", who'd put up with any crap conditions, so that they can play chess. ACF should really stop looking at this group of losers as their target audience!

Phil o'Dor

You are back mate. :eek: Long time since you posted. Did you actually get to the VIC OPEN week-ender mate?
Notice you have a job; a nice plus; should take the pressure off the entry fees issue you had.

starter

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 09:55 AM
gg''
I think you are probably correct on this list of reasons.
What is likely to turn around this situation so that the ACF has multiple proposals to choose from? A reversal of the 50-50 rule in the future? A spotters fee for failed bids (the GURU would at least pocket something for all his work on the past two)? More lead-time for planning (I wonder if the ACF has called for bids on the next cycle)? Elimination of the rotation rule?
What are your thoughts gg''''?

starter
since the aussie open deal is hoped to be a long term deal with the accor chain, i think :uhoh: i guess some part of the next aussie open should be locked in at least partly.
As the situation stands and this applies to all australian tournaments(i mean tournaments for australian titles, junior, ascc, champs, open etc) i think the 50/50 rule is a fair one. As organisers for large tournaments are thin on the ground at best, having an option where the organiser can make some money out of the time and effort might encourage more ppl to come forward if they were more aware of this deal.

Ah the rotation rule, well i notice the aussie champs is due to come to caq in 2006 :hmm: ;) I actually think the rotation rule is a good rule in theory, but as there arent a huge amount of bids each time, it is in reality still a case of if any state puts in a good bid, it will most likely be accepted.

I dont at this time have any real ideas for how to get more bids happening, but i will keep thinking about it as i do see it as a real cause for concern.

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 09:56 AM
What an incredibly stupid decision to hold Australian Open at Mount Buller when there is a Melbourne option available!

As someone who lives in Melbourne and works full-time, I would consider taking time off work in order to play in Melbourne, but no effing way I am going to Mount bloody Buller in summer!

The only group of people who'd play in Aus Open now, are the so-called chess "enthusiasts", who'd put up with any crap conditions, so that they can play chess. ACF should really stop looking at this group of losers as their target audience!
any danger that you might have read all the threads on these points so maybe you might understand at least a bit of how all this came about. If not then :hand: for you. If you have read them, then i will try and debate with you more. :uhoh:

I can see though from this post why bill has to keep repeating himself in ratings debates. :(

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 10:20 AM
since the aussie open deal is hoped to be a long term deal with the accor chain, i think :uhoh: i guess some part of the next aussie open should be locked in at least partly.



What are you hinting at gg’’? That there will be 2 or more OPENS at Mt B.?




As the situation stands and this applies to all australian tournaments(i mean tournaments for australian titles, junior, ascc, champs, open etc) i think the 50/50 rule is a fair one. As organisers for large tournaments are thin on the ground at best, having an option where the organiser can make some money out of the time and effort might encourage more ppl to come forward if they were more aware of this deal.


I was asking your thoughts on increasing the payout to organisers to 100%.





Ah the rotation rule, well i notice the aussie champs is due to come to caq in 2006 :hmm: ;) I actually think the rotation rule is a good rule in theory, but as there arent a huge amount of bids each time, it is in reality still a case of if any state puts in a good bid, it will most likely be accepted.



Do you think the rotations are causing off-schedule STATES to not even consider a bid?





I dont at this time have any real ideas for how to get more bids happening, but i will keep thinking about it as i do see it as a real cause for concern.



W.i.p.


starter

ps You did not comment on the spotter's fee idea?

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 10:35 AM
A spotters fee for failed bids (the GURU would at least pocket something for all his work on the past two)?
sorry starter on this idea, i missed it :doh: i dont know, my gut tells me bad idea, what would be the criteria for it to be paid, who pays it?

Brian_Jones
14-07-2004, 10:42 AM
Maybe the rotation system should end now and the ACF continue to appoint organisers directly for future years.

As the principal organiser of two previous events (Sydney 1990 and Penrith 2003), I would not even have considered bidding unless I had a good chance of success. So where it is other states' turns I would always hang off - a bid in these circumstances takes lots of time is unlikely to be successful unless it is a rescue bid eg Penrith.

It is no good people working hard on multiple bids then losing and getting disappointed when there are so many other worthwhile projects sitting idle eg Australian Grand Prix, Asian Juniors etc.

Yes, ACF should invite bids for 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 now. Also, Schools and Juniors should be kept separate with decisions made by the ACF.
Again invite bids for these and decide where these are to be held at least 12-18 months in advance.

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 10:42 AM
That there will be 2 or more OPENS at Mt B.? not hinting at anything actually, perhaps that the next time the open might be played at an accor chain in a different city depending on who is up. Looking at the acf procedure for allocating tournaments, it is SA up for the next aussie open in 2007, which is quite interesting actually :uhoh:


I was asking your thoughts on increasing the payout to organisers to 100%. I think the acf should get some money as it is played under the acf banner and keeps the funds coming in. Also as has been noticed here, as soon as some ppl suggest that the organisers make any money out of a tournament, ppl view it will suspicision. Maybe that might not deter the guru, but im sure alot of ppl would be deterred with this mindset.



Do you think the rotations are causing off-schedule STATES to not even consider a bid?I dont even know if most ppl know that there is a rotation schedule :eek: I dont think they do.

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 10:47 AM
sorry starter on this idea, i missed it :doh: i dont know, my gut tells me bad idea, what would be the criteria for it to be paid, who pays it?

Dunno gg''.
But we do have to encourage our entrepeneur's like the GURU. After all he is the one that found this great Mt B. deal. Look at all his hard formative work that we are now going to leverage off. He should be recognised.
Instead I fear that he may scale-back his Committee work and just concentrate on making money. I hear there is now a new vacancy on the CV Committee, and when fg hears who caused this vacancy then he will be ready to step in.

starter

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 10:50 AM
Australian Grand Prix
i take it you mean the 2004 australian grand prix which i am assistant co-ordinator. It is not sitting idle i assure you, just that I am working from the structures already in place as it is my first year in any type of gp position and acf position of any sort.

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 11:17 AM
A spotters fee for failed bids (the GURU would at least pocket something for all his work on the past two)?
My understanding is that the guru already received some money from Mt. Buller out of the original $10,000 organiser fee from Mt. Buller.

george
14-07-2004, 11:18 AM
Hi All,

We will charter a minibus to take people from Mansfield to Mt buller on arrival and departure for the tourneys. We will also have a minibus do a daily run to Mansfield wait sufficient time for people to do shopping then come back to Mt Buller.

We will find the money if the budgeted amount is insufficient. This arrangement will be at no cost to the participants.

Also the local supermarket does take orders and does deliveries at a surcharge of $3.50 a box which I have been told "holds a lot". This may be unnecessary.

For those who stay at the Chalet it has a fully equipped large Gym,an indoor pool and spa ,a squash court and another squash court converted to an indoor half basketball court. These will be at the disposal of people staying at the Chalet.

Anyway the agreement should be signed off today.

Regards to ALL
George

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 11:23 AM
I dont even know if most ppl know that there is a rotation schedule :eek: I dont think they do.
Of course the rotation schedule just gives that particular state the first option. If they decide not to exercise their option then there is a call for bids.
I believe the right to exercise options for the 2005 schools, the 2005-2006 Australian championship and the 2006 juniors lapsed on June 30th.
The NSWCA has supported a bid by the NSWJCL to host the 2005 schools event.

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 11:26 AM
My understanding is that the guru already received some money from Mt. Buller out of the original $10,000 organiser fee from Mt. Buller.
Bill
Ah. Well. Then lets call it a spotter's fee, paid by the spotted. ;)
starter

arosar
14-07-2004, 11:39 AM
I will not be going to this Mt Buller tourn. And I certainly will not be an advocate for it either. A coupla things: (1) claims that this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship for the benefit of Aussie chess overall sounds optimistic to me. I mean, how much pull does this fella have within the Accor world exactly? (2) After two failures now - the whole mountain experience tastes a bit sour. I'm just scared that as soon as I go and make bookings, we get another bloody announcement saying, 'Deals off boys!' So I say, f**k that! On this note, I strongly urge the junior mob to examine their cost-benefit calculations. I mean, aren't some of them only up there for a coupla days? Seems like a lot of effort and spend for small ROI. And (3), let's not forget that, as it now turns out, food supply will be an issue. But more alarmingly - there's no grog up there, is there?

AR

george
14-07-2004, 11:45 AM
Hi ALL

There is a fully equiped restaraunt and bar - did you really think a ski Chalet would not have a bar?

The signed agreements when achieved today are exactly that signed off agreements that neither Mt buller nor ACF can back out of.

George

Brian_Jones
14-07-2004, 12:11 PM
i take it you mean the 2004 australian grand prix which i am assistant co-ordinator. It is not sitting idle i assure you, just that I am working from the structures already in place as it is my first year in any type of gp position and acf position of any sort.

I was not talking about the unsponsored (and low key) 2004 Grand Prix. I was talking about major sponsorship and the relaunch of the 2005 Grand Prix (back to the level of Mercantile Mutual in the early 1990's.

george
14-07-2004, 12:12 PM
Hi All,

Let me explain the complexity of the negotiations that have been undertaken.

Firstly and correctly BOTH parties ACF and Mt Buller have been hurt and embarrassed in the distant past. I suspect David has also been embarrassed and inconvenienced greatly by things some or all of which were out of his control.

Therefore it was a matter of convincing Mt Buller we are a serious organisation who takes obligations seriously. Secondly it was obviously essential to convince the ACF Council that Mt Buller was a serious organisation that takes its obligations seriously. Then I had to put together a submission with as accurate a budget as I could sort out in a short space of time - apart from the bus thing all other items seem accurate and within the scope of the proposed budget.

I got from David tuesday morning the Budget etc and all other information he had which will prove very useful.

Because of the sensitive nature of negotiations and assurances given I was the only one with sufficient clout it seemed in the ACF to swing this thing around ( just plain fact nothing else) and was empowered to investigate matters not necessarily be the Organiser but it became obvious Mt Buller needed quick assurances with whom they would be dealing and face to face meetings to ascertain integrity etc (again just plain fact).

Usually I would consult with my wife of 26 years on important changes to my working life but she is in Mexico ,then London on business. Therefore my support network was of necessity very small and negotiations were taking place and changing on an hourly basis as details were negotiated and tidied up.

As well there were conflicting bids for Events and much negative reaction based on little knowledge of the situation from various people involved in chess in Australia which needed responses.

Many chess players political and otherwise contacted me and put in their preferences for what they wanted to see happen. I listened to anyone wanting to talk either on Bulletin Board or by email or phone.
Then I had to weigh up the various pros and cons and look at things as is my brief from the point of view of the good of chess in Australia overall, and i had to make some important direction perspectives with many conflicting needs.

From Friday all being well the Key Organising group of which as Garvin has already said here he is one will get active. There are sufficient funds in a particular budget line to allow for some flexibility which may end up damaging my hip pocket but such is life.

People who have known me for some time and my history know I have never "ripped off" any chess organisation and I have no intention of starting now.

I hope this puts some things into perspective - I realise some people will continue to bag me and the Mt Buller comps but thats their problem not mine.

George

jeffrei
14-07-2004, 12:23 PM
I will post on here as things develop. One thing that has come to light is that we can provide free buses from Mansfield to Mt Buller and back but not Melbourne to Mt Buller - the cost of that would run to the order of $20,000 for the three events and so is impossible.


I do feel it is disappointing when something that was promised as a way of making things easier suddenly disappears - makes me lose a fair bit of credibility, as it is one of the things that I have been using to tell people it won't be as hard as they think, because look you can just fly into Melbourne, be picked up by a bus and whisked off to the venue. Now I have to go back to those same people and say well actually sorry - now you have to fly into Melbourne with tired fractious kids, find some bus station, load them and the luggage on the bus get to Mansfield load it all off the bus and then get on another bus and do it all again. Probably doesn;t sound too hard to the adults, but you try doing it with a bunch of 11 year olds. And at the back of your mind you know you have to have them in good playing condition for the comp the next day.


Jenni I know you wanted Canberra for the schools and I agreed with you on many points but im hoping you can be as positive as possible re Mt Buller. If you have issues please please come up with workable solutions within the constraints of the Preliminary Working Budget you got yesterday. There will be many details and little problems but Mt Buller is where it is and the offsets are the funding etc etc Constantly talking of distance issues is not going to help anyone merely stating the obvious over and over is destructive - anyone can look at a map of Victoria see where Mt Buller is and say ok its there , alright I want to play so I make the time.


And all along I think it's pretty clear the ACT does a good job of trying to encourage parents and players to attend these events whether we are off to Perth, Mt Buller or anywhere. Excuse our frustration at the continual shifting of the goal posts. The now-recinded bus offer simply moves those posts from the forward pocket right into the midfield.

I think this is the point – Jenni and Libby aren’t rehashing old complaints, they’re complaining about the new developments re: the buses. I hope and trust that there are no more movements of the ‘goal-posts’ in store.

george
14-07-2004, 12:32 PM
Hi All,

The shuttle bus Mt Buller /Mansfield on a daily basis and several trips on arrival and departure will cost in the order of $3,000 information from Mt Buller - the budget was $2,000 so that can certainly be achieved and as per earlier post a bus shuttle of a minibus every day will happen.

I hope this allays some fears.

Regards
George

DoroPhil
14-07-2004, 12:34 PM
any danger that you might have read all the threads on these points so maybe you might understand at least a bit of how all this came about. If not then :hand: for you. If you have read them, then i will try and debate with you more. :uhoh:

I can see though from this post why bill has to keep repeating himself in ratings debates. :(

Surely, you can't be that stupid! Debate what? Do you really think that there is a chance that Mt. Buller event can attract more people than Melbourne??

Only chess nutters dead-set on wasting their summer vacation will consider Mt.Buller - and once again those people should not be seen by ACF as their target audience!

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 12:38 PM
Of course the rotation schedule just gives that particular state the first option. If they decide not to exercise their option then there is a call for bids.
I believe the right to exercise options for the 2005 schools, the 2005-2006 Australian championship and the 2006 juniors lapsed on June 30th.
The NSWCA has supported a bid by the NSWJCL to host the 2005 schools event.

Thanks Bill
A good post, up to your usual standard. So I clicked on that thingy on the left that increases your reputation.

Am I reading correctly that VIC can now bid for the 2006 Juniors? We particularly want to hold one because we have repaired the trophy and would like to present.
And about bundling Bill, do we have to bid in conjunction with another entity who has their eye on the seniors only. Or can we bid for just one. We want to improve on being declared the best bid, but not actually getting the job.

starter

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 12:47 PM
Thanks Bill
A good post, up to your usual standard. So I clicked on that thingy on the left that increases your reputation.

Am I reading correctly that VIC can now bid for the 2006 Juniors? We particularly want to hold one because we have repaired the trophy and would like to present.
And about bundling Bill, do we have to bid in conjunction with another entity who has their eye on the seniors only. Or can we bid for just one. We want to improve on being declared the best bid, but not actually getting the job.

starterare you talking about the 2006 australian championships or 2007 open? i have very small ideas so far about the 2006 australian championships atm

Trent Parker
14-07-2004, 12:50 PM
Dorophil don't forget that it was cardover who first proposed Mt Buller! Not ACF!
And it is Cardover who is offering the Melbourne Bid. I think there are a lot of people who have lost trust in cordover hence (perhaps) the choice to keep Mt Buller. Although I do have my questions about Mt Buller.

arosar
14-07-2004, 12:53 PM
Surely, you can't be that stupid! Debate what?

Pershaps not stupid. Here he thinks he sounds clever by dropping the word 'debate'.

He's just a Bill wanna-be. He 'almost' posts like Bill, sounds like Bill, and even uses the same words as Bill. While Bill is 'Defender of the Faith', gray is surely the ACF's altar-boy you see.

AR

george
14-07-2004, 01:02 PM
Hi All,

If you want to hassle Organisers hassle me not others if you dont mind , its part of my job to take criticsms on the Mt Buller comps and hopefully answer them.

More activities on Mt Buller.

Helicopter tours , four wheel drive tours and horse riding will all be available as will of course the opportunity for some of the best walking scenery in the world. I am constantly talking to Mt Buller and getting updates.

Regards
George

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 01:04 PM
Thanks Bill
A good post, up to your usual standard. So I clicked on that thingy on the left that increases your reputation.
Thanks starter.


Am I reading correctly that VIC can now bid for the 2006 Juniors? We particularly want to hold one because we have repaired the trophy and would like to present.
I would see no reason why you could not bid for the 2006 Juniors.
As for the Junior trophy. We would like to arrange for it to most likely be replaced by a new trophy with correct years etc on it. Therefore it would be desirable for the junior trophy to be shipped to Norm Greenwood.


And about bundling Bill, do we have to bid in conjunction with another entity who has their eye on the seniors only. Or can we bid for just one.
You can bid for just one.


We want to improve on being declared the best bid, but not actually getting the job.
Who made that declaration?

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:11 PM
Hi All,

If you want to hassle Organisers hassle me not others if you dont mind , its part of my job to take criticsms on the Mt Buller comps and hopefully answer them.
its cool George but thank you for your concern, if what doro phil is dishing up is the worst i get, i will sleep very well at night ;)

Libby
14-07-2004, 01:19 PM
Hi All,

If you want to hassle Organisers hassle me not others if you dont mind , its part of my job to take criticsms on the Mt Buller comps and hopefully answer them.

More activities on Mt Buller.

Helicopter tours , four wheel drive tours and horse riding will all be available as will of course the opportunity for some of the best walking scenery in the world. I am constantly talking to Mt Buller and getting updates.

Regards
George

Anybody who wants to know what can be done at Mt Buller in summer can find this pretty quickly @ www.mtbuller.com.au or - totally specific - http://www.mtbuller.com.au/activities/summer.html Not quite sure if this will qualify as a "positive" post. :rolleyes:

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:21 PM
Anybody who wants to know what can be done at Mt Buller in summer can find this pretty quickly @ www.mtbuller.com.au or - totally specific - http://www.mtbuller.com.au/activities/summer.html Not quite sure if this will qualify as a "positive" post. :rolleyes:
this is a positive post :D cause it adds something new to the discussion.

arosar
14-07-2004, 01:24 PM
this is a positive post :D cause it adds something new to the discussion.

I didn't know altar-boys could bless.

AR

Libby
14-07-2004, 01:27 PM
this is a positive post :D cause it adds something new to the discussion.

As opposed to asking, and not getting a response, to the question as to why the bus promise was ever made and what sort of costing was ever made BEFORE putting the offer out there?

I wasn't ever that fussed personally on getting the bus from Melboune to Buller - I just wondered why it got floated only to be pulled almost immediately after the decision was made. That's not intended to be a conspiracy theory but I am curious about the process that went into making the initial offer?

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:31 PM
As opposed to asking, and not getting a response, to the question as to why the bus promise was ever made and what sort of costing was ever made BEFORE putting the offer out there?

I wasn't ever that fussed personally on getting the bus from Melboune to Buller - I just wondered why it got floated only to be pulled almost immediately after the decision was made. That's not intended to be a conspiracy theory but I am curious about the process that went into making the initial offer?
sorry for not answering, i thought George actually answered it. I had thought when i made my first post that the budgeted money would cover bus cost from melbourne to mt buller, as it turns out the figure so far is more like $20,000 not $2000 or so. To those who have claimed we are then making a huge profit from this, that is clearly not so.

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 01:35 PM
Pershaps not stupid. Here he thinks he sounds clever by dropping the word 'debate'.
Well doro wasnt debating just making claims.


He's just a Bill wanna-be. He 'almost' posts like Bill, sounds like Bill, and even uses the same words as Bill. While Bill is 'Defender of the Faith', gray is surely the ACF's altar-boy you see.
At least he is a do'er and volunteer AR which is more than you.

george
14-07-2004, 01:37 PM
Hi Libby,

I removed the offer of bus to Mt Buller from Melbourne almost as fast as I put it up because confirmation came back as to cost. I repeat in the Bid document the budget for buses was $2,000 which was for the shuttle which as per earlier post is now $3,000 but can be covered in the budget.

cheers
George

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:39 PM
At least he is a do'er and volunteer AR which is more than you.oh no this will make arosar post more:hand:

PHAT
14-07-2004, 01:42 PM
More activities on Mt Buller.

Helicopter tours ...


:D Who are we gonna blindfold and chuck out ?

skip to my lou
14-07-2004, 01:45 PM
:D Who are we gonna blindfold and chuck out ?
jose

Garvinator
14-07-2004, 01:46 PM
:D Who are we gonna blindfold and chuck out ?
the first person who gets nailed for a fone going off in the tournament hall :whistle:

arosar
14-07-2004, 02:27 PM
:D Who are we gonna blindfold and chuck out ?

How about the Guru?

AR

jeffrei
14-07-2004, 03:33 PM
The signed agreements when achieved today are exactly that signed off agreements that neither Mt buller nor ACF can back out of.

I think Kevin (amongst others) has pointed out that this really is the key issue. When a satisfactory contract in line with the bid presented at the Council meeting is signed today*, I'll certainly be happy about it. For one thing I can start planning my trip! :)

I'm certainly hoping the contract contains some details about FOOD arrangements at the Mercure, since that's one important issue that's been flagged here but I think has not been discussed in enough detail.

*I'm using future tense but - reading George's message more carefully - I'm not sure if that's accurate, since maybe the contract has already been signed! Does anyone know?

PHAT
14-07-2004, 03:49 PM
I think Kevin (amongst others) has pointed out that this really is the key issue. When a satisfactory contract in line with the bid presented at the Council meeting is signed today, I'll certainly be happy about it. For one thing I can start planning my trip! :)


I think I was first to sink the slipper. :wink:

On 28-06-2004

Has there been a contract signed anywhere?
Has that contract been broken?
Can the ACF take Sum-Kun to the cleaners?


On 01-07-2004

Now let me ask ths curly question.

When the ACF was considering the bid(s)[the first round-MS], did it ask the critical question:

"Do all relavent parties (sponsors, promotors, commercial entities) have written and signed, in principle agreements, continingent upon mutual acceptance, to be formally entered into within 28 days, if/when the ACF accepted the bid?"

If not, the ACF has shown one of the most fantasic examples of incompetance I have ever known in a peak sporting body. Every ACF executive and the representives who voted for them should appoligise to the Australian chess community.

An ACF that cannot run its own Open, is not worth feeding. It is time for all states to kill it off and start again.

Well, it looks like the ACF is now running its own Open. :D

jeffrei
14-07-2004, 03:50 PM
I think I was first to sink the slipper.

Well done Matthew! :) :clap: :)

Cat
14-07-2004, 04:22 PM
It is the same ACF lead by george as the president that had originally awarded the guru all three events - went for the all or nothing package without sufficient time to research, debate, and question the deal. So don't tell us george is 'holding a baby that was conceived by another".

You know the difference between leadership and dictatorship?! - you look at the original decision to award guru the baby as you call it and now the decision to pass on this little bastard to the new organisor who happens to be the president of acf.

I see no leadership, all I see is dictatorship!

I agree, there was a ball's up, no doubt about it and the ACF needs to look carefully at its procedures to ensure mistakes aren't repeated. Once a mistake has been made, and we all make them, all one can do is one's level best to correct it.

Sometimes there is no difference between leadership and dictatorship, sometimes the measure of a good leader is to know when to dictate, to have the wisdom to intervene effectively. What's most important is an effective outcome. Not all decisions can be made by commitee, this can lead to paralysis, that's why we elect leaders. As long as the leader acts in the communal interest, as long as the process exists to remove the leader, then community interest can be preserved.

Cat
14-07-2004, 04:36 PM
Surely, you can't be that stupid! Debate what? Do you really think that there is a chance that Mt. Buller event can attract more people than Melbourne??

Only chess nutters dead-set on wasting their summer vacation will consider Mt.Buller - and once again those people should not be seen by ACF as their target audience!

I agree, Mt Buller seems a big risk. But it's also a big risk taking on any other venue. The reason why the problem arose in the first place is that the proper checks weren't complete. The Chess public need some certainty and a decision needed to be made. All the options were risky, but at least many of the feasiblity checks at Mt Buller were already in place.

Life is a risk, you get no where without taking chances and this is as good a year as any to test Mt Buller, the sponsorship may not come 'round again. There was no way to satisfy everybody, what was important was to steady the ship. Its George thats taken the risk, he's the one who people will look to if Mt Buller fails, and there will always be Melbourne.

Cat
14-07-2004, 04:46 PM
I will not be going to this Mt Buller tourn. And I certainly will not be an advocate for it either. A coupla things: (1) claims that this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship for the benefit of Aussie chess overall sounds optimistic to me. I mean, how much pull does this fella have within the Accor world exactly? (2) After two failures now - the whole mountain experience tastes a bit sour. I'm just scared shch.itless that as soon as I go and make bookings, we get another bloody announcement saying, 'Deals off boys!' So I say, f**k that! On this note, I strongly urge the junior mob to examine their cost-benefit calculations. I mean, aren't some of them only up there for a coupla days? Seems like a lot of effort and spend for small ROI. And (3), let's not forget that, as it now turns out, food supply will be an issue. But more alarmingly - there's no grog up there, is there?

AR

I have my reservations too, and I would never trust a corporation to deliver anything. They never offer anything without getting a lot more in return. But it does seem the best choice from what's on offer and what really counts at this point in time is decisive action. I'm sure Matt can fix the grog.

george
14-07-2004, 05:14 PM
Hi ALL

I am waiting for a return fax hopefully today - when received i will let the Council know first. Negotiations on text etc have been made and advice taken from Denis Jessop a retired barrister whom has been extremely helpful in this matter and is the ACF Councillor for the ACT. Thanks Denis!!

Kindest Regards
George Howard

Libby
14-07-2004, 06:32 PM
sorry for not answering, i thought George actually answered it. I had thought when i made my first post that the budgeted money would cover bus cost from melbourne to mt buller, as it turns out the figure so far is more like $20,000 not $2000 or so. To those who have claimed we are then making a huge profit from this, that is clearly not so.

Not quite sure that I thought there was a lot of money be made from it but if $2000 was supposed to cover the cost (to and from Melbourne for 3 separate events) people must have been imagining Mt Buller to be something of an outer suburb? :confused:

We have a first quote of about $1500 each way (from Canberra) for 53 seats and an estimate of a 6 hour trip. Not sure how that will match up with other providers. Anybody from NSW interested in sharing a bus to originate in Sydney? Obviously we will make a more formal approach to NSWJCL if that looks a real option. That would add $600 and 3.5 hours. I guess anyone between Canberra and Mt Buller could also look to hitch a ride. I am talking about the juniors at this stage and not sure if we will go ahead (depends on local level of interest in this mode of transport) but it is a door-to-door option. :D have to be positive about that! (We might even try for a shopping stop in Mansfield enroute).

I'd also like to offer a personal raspberry to anybody blowing a lot of steam about boycotting the event :P If you choose not to play - fine. If enough people choose not to play I guess the tournament will probably be a flop, everyone can happily point the finger at George and say I told you so. But honestly, is it such an ordeal to turn up and give it a go? At least then you can offer some informed sledging and you may even have enjoyed some good chess. I may have looked a pedantic woman happy to pester the organisers and run down the event, and I still don't think it has any real value or benefit as a junior venue BUT I am more than likely to be there because my child wants to play. Hopefully when she's a jaded adult she might still give it a go, even with the odd whinge or two about the organisers.

And again - so many questions can be answered @ www.mtbuller.com.au. There are loads of accommodation options and you can pick your price. If you don't like the accommodation, transport. food., grog and entertainment on offer from the organiser get off your bum and find something better. We went down that road even when it was David in charge.

arosar
14-07-2004, 06:52 PM
. . . is it such an ordeal to turn up and give it a go?

It's not an ordeal. Try being stuck in a Manila traffic. That's an ordeal! Some 5-6 months ago, I was ready to head down. Even spoke to CG myself to get more info. Now, after two mishaps, my instincts are beginning to tell me that this is far too risky - financially, chess-wise (not too many good players), fun-wise and health-wise (we're all gonna bloody run out of food and die of starvation by the 3rd day I reckon). Ok, so I'm stretching on the last bit - but you get the drift.

AR

jenni
14-07-2004, 07:00 PM
And again - so many questions can be answered @ www.mtbuller.com.au. There are loads of accommodation options and you can pick your price. If you don't like the accommodation, transport. food., grog and entertainment on offer from the organiser get off your bum and find something better. We went down that road even when it was David in charge.

And you thought I was blunt :) Wait til you've had a few months of Libby.

However she is right. Allowing the Schools comp to be bundled into this exercise is just plain silly and I will continue to say this. The schools comp has to be delinked from this package if the Aus Open is held in Mt Buller again in 2007.

However I am still planning to take my family to Mt Buller to the Juniors. Shannon will play the Aus Open and if my school qualifies as an ACT rep I'll take them to the schools comp as well.

At the end of the day you make the best of the situation - it will still be fun. In many ways being in a place like Mt Buller will be more sociable, as eveyone will be staying close to each other and it maximises the socialising opportunities. If you are in Melbourne and Sydney and spread all over it is a lot harder.

Libby
14-07-2004, 07:09 PM
It's not an ordeal. Try being stuck in a Manila traffic. That's an ordeal! Some 5-6 months ago, I was ready to head down. Even spoke to CG myself to get more info. Now, after two mishaps, my instincts are beginning to tell me that this is far too risky - financially, chess-wise (not too many good players), fun-wise and health-wise (we're all gonna bloody run out of food and die of starvation by the 3rd day I reckon). Ok, so I'm stretching on the last bit - but you get the drift.

AR

I know where you are coming from and parents are in a different position as we go all ridiculous and selfless and even seem happy to flog ourselves to make sure the kids do what they want :eek: sounds pretty lame and disgusting.

I have a fair bit of sympathy on the fun angle. I'm no bushwalker. In Perth and Adelaide we have put the rest days/arrival & departure days/early afternoon finishes to good use with visits to Perth Zoo, WA Museum, Fremantle Markets, Adelaide Zoo, SA Museum, Adventure World, the water park, the beach, a movie, shopping etc etc. I don't quite see us coughing up for a helicopter or hot air balloon ride on the mountain so the tourist value of travelling to a new place (Mt Buller) doesn't "light my fire" in quite the same way. Of course the activities I quoted from Perth and Adelaide wouldn't be lighting my fire either if it wasn't for an accompanying 9 or 10 year old.

I think the food problem is there but George is making a fair go of trying to resolve this with his shuttle into town (not quite sure it needs to be every day from a cost angle - surely we could manage if we knew it went on odd or even days, we're used to watering our gardens on that basis!) There are bars in hotels, and restaurants. The financial risk - do you mean accommodation? Go cheap and cheerful. Hey - I've stayed in the dorms with all the kids at the Juniors and there's a lot to be said for rekindling the inner 20 year old by hanging out with people in a way you haven't done since you were in Uni or backpacking. And ultimately the chess will be as good as the people who are prepared to give it a go. :eh:

doc
14-07-2004, 07:32 PM
As i put in the other folder, WHO THE **** IS ORGANISING THIS THING?

Not enough details guys.

Get your act together-quick.

george
14-07-2004, 10:41 PM
Hi Doc,

The tourneys were only awarded to Mt Buller on Monday night. The fax I am waiting for to get the ALL GO is coming tomorrow.

Then give us a couple of weeks to Organise on line entry forms and Credit Card payment options and the few thousand glossy books with entry forms to be sent all over Australia.

Jeo has agreed to continue the work which was well on the way for Web Page which is great. Obviously the Web Page and Hard Copy Entry Forms and info books are a first priority along with accomodation possibilities at the Chalet and booking contacts for Chalet.

So please doc it will be Organised well but give the Organising Team from Friday a little time to get these fundamentals right and organised properly.

Glad your interested by enquiring.

If you or anyone else wish to chat to me about the Buller Tourneys call me on 0414 841 575. But if you dont mind wait till next week.

Regards
George Howard
Main Organiser

george
14-07-2004, 10:45 PM
Hi Libby,

I want to cover all bases re shuttle bus so there are fewer grizzles so every day it will be.

regards
George

george
15-07-2004, 02:52 PM
Hi ALL,

I have just sent the SIGNED OFF agreement to Jey who will send it to All ACF Councillors and Exec members and my personal guarantee indemnifying the ACF against a loss on All the Tourneys.

See all you fantastic chess players at Mt Buller.

George Howard
ACF President
Mt Buller Tourneys Main Organiser

Other Organisers:
Garvin Gray
Kerry Stead
Andrew Saint
Alex Saint


Open and Junior:
Chief Arbiter - Charles Zworesteine
Assistant Arbiter - Roland Eime

Web Design and Maintenance
Jeo

doc
15-07-2004, 04:40 PM
Ok, thanks for giving this goerge. Apologies for my angry sentiments.



Other Organisers:
Garvin Gray
Kerry Stead
Andrew Saint
Alex Saint


Out of interest, apart from Kerry, what have the others done towards Australian chess? Are these people new to the chess scene?

Garvinator
15-07-2004, 04:43 PM
Ok, thanks for giving this goerge. Apologies for my angry sentiments.



Out of interest, apart from Kerry, what have the others done towards Australian chess? Are these people new to the chess scene?
oh dear doc :uhoh: :doh:

Ok here is the answer to your question.

Andrew and Alex Saint were responsible for the last australian championships and are involved in running tournaments in adelaide ie the Category 3 University Open.

I, Garvin Gray am the 2004 assistant Grand Prix co-ordinator and has had experience in assisting running club tournaments. I also have done tertiary level studies in sports administration too.

doc
15-07-2004, 05:08 PM
Were these events deemed successful?

I am not trying to criticise but rather establish that we do have the best people for the job at hand. If this is so, well and good. I intend on coming myself if i feel it is in safe hands.

Garvinator
15-07-2004, 05:26 PM
Were these events deemed successful?

I am not trying to criticise but rather establish that we do have the best people for the job at hand. If this is so, well and good. I intend on coming myself if i feel it is in safe hands.
well my opinion is biased :lol: ;) so ill let others comment.

DoroPhil
15-07-2004, 05:36 PM
I, Garvin Gray am the 2004 assistant Grand Prix co-ordinator and has had experience in assisting running club tournaments. I also have done tertiary level studies in sports administration too.

Clearly not qualified to do any real job. Wouldn't you be better off assisting Gletsos in firther ruining rating system?

Cat
15-07-2004, 06:32 PM
well my opinion is biased :lol: ;) so ill let others comment.

I've met Garvin a few times. I reckon he deserves a chance to show what he can do. Who know's what potential any of us possess until we give it a shot? But Garvin, it'll be a steep learning curve.

BroadZ
15-07-2004, 06:37 PM
has the $20,000 been transferred?

Garvinator
15-07-2004, 06:43 PM
has the $20,000 been transferred?
do you read previous posts?

BroadZ
15-07-2004, 06:51 PM
do you read previous posts?

yeh n i did this time too, i didnt see anything about it being transferred
if it is there n i looked over it, humour me n give me a yes or no

Bill Gletsos
15-07-2004, 07:00 PM
Clearly not qualified to do any real job. Wouldn't you be better off assisting Gletsos in firther ruining rating system?
At least he is prepared to let everyone know who he is and not hide behind the veil of anonimity. We have no clue as to any agenda (hodden or otherwise) you might have.

As for ruining the rating system if we were still on the ELO system the howls about underrated juniors would be even worse.

Lucena
15-07-2004, 07:15 PM
yeh n i did this time too, i didnt see anything about it being transferred
if it is there n i looked over it, humour me n give me a yes or no

In one sense I think Broadz is right in that no explicit mention has been made of money changing hands however I suspect the fact that the agreement was signed implies that the money has in fact been trasferred. Can anyone confirm that?

Oepty
15-07-2004, 07:38 PM
As far as what qualifies the Saint brothers Alex and Andrew to be organisers of the Australian Open

Andrew.
Has been president of the Adelaide University Chess Club for the last two years. Before that he was treasurer of the club for at 2 years. He was founding organiser of the University Open along with Robin Wedding and myself in 2001. This was a Catergory 2 event with 40 players. It became a catergory 3 event in 2002 and has been the last 2 years. The event has grown and had 85 players this year. He has been chief organiser for the event the last 2 years. He was an organiser of the last Australian Championships which I think was viewed as being successful. He also has been on the SACA Council this year. He is still young but I believe has plenty of qualifiactions to be an organiser of the events at Mt. Buller.

I have run out of time to go through Alex's qualifactions, but he has done similar things as well. I feel you should be very confident they can do an excellent job

Scott

Alan Shore
15-07-2004, 08:36 PM
As far as what qualifies the Saint brothers Alex and Andrew to be organisers of the Australian Open

Andrew.
Has been president of the Adelaide University Chess Club for the last two years. Before that he was treasurer of the club for at 2 years. He was founding organiser of the University Open along with Robin Wedding and myself in 2001. This was a Catergory 2 event with 40 players. It became a catergory 3 event in 2002 and has been the last 2 years. The event has grown and had 85 players this year. He has been chief organiser for the event the last 2 years. He was an organiser of the last Australian Championships which I think was viewed as being successful. He also has been on the SACA Council this year. He is still young but I believe has plenty of qualifiactions to be an organiser of the events at Mt. Buller.

I have run out of time to go through Alex's qualifactions, but he has done similar things as well. I feel you should be very confident they can do an excellent job

Scott

They did a great job with Uni Open and the Champs, top events. Just don't put them on your Millionaire phone-a-friend team :confused: :eek:

george
15-07-2004, 09:20 PM
Hi All,

I have asked young energetic Organisers whom I know I can trust to do the work required. Once these four gentlemen have gone through this exercise - I think they will be ready to scale mountains.

Its the enthusiasm and ability I was after and people who had the interest and confidence to contact me when as ACF President I called for bids from any Organiser keen to take on the Mt Buller project.

I have seen Andrew and Alex Organisational work firstly on Adelaide Juniors in helping with the Alan Goldsmith team then the Adelaide Uni Chess Club - then last year we worked very closely on the Australian Championships - I get on very well with these two men.

Kerry has been willing to walk where angels fear to tread and is a proven co-ordinator of the NECG Junior Training Squad. As well as being an active player and Junior Seletion Co-ordinator.

Garvin is very keen and has training in Event Management and a keen organisational mind and his enthusiasm is infectious. Enthusiasm will be much needed in this long project.

Regards
George Howard

jeffrei
15-07-2004, 10:35 PM
has the $20,000 been transferred?


GH stated that he would modify the composition of the Junior prizes,and specified that he was assured by the Mt Buller administration that they would deposit a $20,000 bond within 72 hours on a joint bank account as a token of their good faith with the ACF.


GH stated that he would inform Mt Buller of the outcome of the Council decision , and request Mt Buller to lodge the $20,000 bond into the joint account,as agreed by the Mt Buller management. In response to a question, GH stated that if this were not undertaken within 72 hours, he would come back to Council so that the other bids could be considered. GH also stated that the contract would be signed with Mt Buller within 72 hours of the Council decision.

BroadZ, it's kinda weird for me to be answering this but since you've gone for 4 hours without a yes/no reply I'll help you out. Reading between the lines a bit, it seems highly likely that the answer is yes, since otherwise bids would have to be reconsidered by the Council, which would be extremely boring for everyone. Also, George has been nothing if not admirably open about the details of his bid right from the beginning, so I'm sure he would have mentioned it. Still, I’m not on the committee OR the Council so perhaps we should hear from someone who is?

PHAT
15-07-2004, 10:52 PM
I am not trying to criticise but rather establish that we do have the best people for the job at hand. If this is so, well and good. I intend on coming myself if i feel it is in safe hands.

"The only thing we need to fear, is fear itself."

Get the picture? Everyone should just go, and all will be well. Trust.

Kevin Bonham
15-07-2004, 11:02 PM
Clearly not qualified to do any real job. Wouldn't you be better off assisting Gletsos in firther ruining rating system?

Garvin may not be that experienced (yet) but he's prepared to put up his hand and do things, and you don't need that much experience to perform well as an organiser in a support role. He's willing to travel from Qld to Mt Buller to help out with the event; you're apparently not willing to travel from Melbourne to even play in it let alone help out. I rather think that says it all when it comes to your credibility to get stuck into him like this.

Then you drag in a red herring about ratings which is totally irrelevant to this thread and doesn't seem very relevant to what Garvin has been saying. If you've got a beef with the rating system, why not go to the ratings thread and take Bill on in detail over there?

george
15-07-2004, 11:28 PM
Hi All,

The question was asked has the money been transferred yet - the answer is no. I will set up a Working Account with a bank that has a branch in Mansfield in the next few days then get the Mt Buller folks to transfer the money.

The written agreement will not be made public (normal commercial practice) but has been made available to ACF Council. It was perhaps more important to myself than the ACF Council that the Agreement was sufficiently strong in strength to reflect the basis of what we wanted as I have given a written personal guarantee to the ACF to cover any loss the ACF may incur.

In business a deal is easy to negotiate when both parties see it as a good deal , both sides see benefits and it becomes a win win situation. The detail can be difficult at times to negotiate but you have confidence when both parties are willing to give some ground and are both happy with the negotiated arrangment. Neither side wishes to "put one over" the other because confidence in an honest relationship in business is a rare and treasured thing too good to messup.

Regards
George Howard

BroadZ
15-07-2004, 11:45 PM
umm, i thought you said that all bids would go back to the council if the money wasnt deposited in 72 hours? whats that thing that jef is quoting from george anyway i can't find it.

it sounds dodgy that we went from 72 hours to ?? hours. whats up with that?

Trent Parker
16-07-2004, 12:06 AM
umm, i thought you said that all bids would go back to the council if the money wasnt deposited in 72 hours? whats that thing that jef is quoting from george anyway i can't find it.

it sounds dodgy that we went from 72 hours to ?? hours. whats up with that?

Not exactly a confidence builder really is it? :confused:

george
16-07-2004, 12:12 AM
Hi All,

I am pleased to announce that Jenni Oliver will assist in the Organisation of the Australian Schools Finals at Mt Buller.

Welcome aboard Jenni and Im sure it will be even that much more successful now you are on board.

George Howard
Main Organiser Mt Buller Tourneys

BroadZ
16-07-2004, 12:33 AM
well,i foudn the post that jef was quoting. its numbr 13 on this thread and it supposed to be the 'official minutes' of some meeting. does anyone(like jenni?) know that that means that you have to stick by it?

i dont understand why we changed from 72 hours that sounded like a good plan cuz it put the heat on those guys. i know from my own experiances that if you tell people to do things in 'a few days' pretty often they dont end up getting done

Kerry Stead
16-07-2004, 01:46 AM
Out of interest, apart from Kerry, what have the others done towards Australian chess? Are these people new to the chess scene?

Good to see I have some 'street cred' :P
The others all have organisational experience (although I've only met Garvin once), and should hopefully be able to put on a good event.

How about something of an open question for you all ... what would get YOU to play in the 2005 Australian Open at Mount Buller??
* Numerous GMs
* a 'legend' of the chess world
* a 'rising star' or two of the chess world
* smart beauties (ones that live up to the hype of Kosteniuk ... unlike 'Miss Vice' herself)
* cheap accomodation
* cheap entry fees
* large prize fund
* ratings prizes
* tournament atmosphere
* social activities
* location
* other activities
* something else??

Garvinator
16-07-2004, 02:06 AM
Good to see I have some 'street cred' :P
and sometimes street cred doesnt match reality:lol: ;)


* smart beauties (ones that live up to the hype of Kosteniuk ... unlike 'Miss Vice' herself) get tatiana Kosintseva there and gareth charles will be booking tomorrow :P

arosar
16-07-2004, 10:09 AM
do you read previous posts?

Careful Bill. Your apprentice doesn't only wanna be you: Rev. gray, the Defender of the Faith, the Pope; mate, he wants to be the Big Kahuna. He think he's bloody Jesus Christ mate - answering a question with a question!

AR

arosar
16-07-2004, 10:38 AM
How about something of an open question for you all ... what would get YOU to play in the 2005 Australian Open at Mount Buller??
* Numerous GMs
* a 'legend' of the chess world
* a 'rising star' or two of the chess world
* smart beauties (ones that live up to the hype of Kosteniuk ... unlike 'Miss Vice' herself)
* cheap accomodation
* cheap entry fees
* large prize fund
* ratings prizes
* tournament atmosphere
* social activities
* location
* other activities
* something else??

I have nothing against Mt Buller per se. I thought and still think that insofar as social (non-chess) activities, that place is a dead set boredomville. But I reckon that we gotta find innovative ideas and that includes playing in 'odd' places. Hec if somebody said we're playing on top of Uluru, mate, I'm there! This is why at first I was all set to go. But after everything that's happend, I'm [deleted] if I'm going. There's only so much bull that a paying customer like me can take mate.

AR

PHAT
16-07-2004, 10:47 AM
...what would get YOU to play in the 2005 Australian Open at Mount Buller??


How about a timetable/schedual, costs/deals. This should ALL have been available when the ACF first accepted CV's bid! :evil: ! Families always have to juggle priorites and avoid clashes.

A good idea would be to have many small divisional prizes with ~200 point cut-offs. <800, <1000 ... <2400. This makes the result of every game being played in the hall, important to someone. That adds enormously to aggrigate interest and exicitement.

Since it is an Open, for all of us, no group should be disadvantaged relative to any other group. Juniors should be eligable for only junior prizes unless they pay adult entry.

BTW, please note that these divisional suggestions require no extra work to impliment, just a just commitment to justice.


(I s'pose it is too much to ask that there be no big outright prize, only a trophy. :hand: ;) )

arosar
16-07-2004, 10:57 AM
i dont understand why we changed from 72 hours that sounded like a good plan cuz it put the heat on those guys.

That's an interesting claim. Has it exceed 72 hours?


i know from my own experiances that if you tell people to do things in 'a few days' pretty often they dont end up getting done

What experiences is that exactly mate?

AR

PHAT
16-07-2004, 11:15 AM
I have nothing against Mt Buller per se. I thought and still think that insofar as social (non-chess) activities, that place is a dead set boredomville.

"What did you expect to see madam, from a Buller hotel window? The Sydney Opera House perhaps, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, wild heards of wilderbeasts sweeping majestically across the plain ... [customer: I expect a reduction in the tarrif.] ... What, because Kakatoa isn't erupting at the moment."


But I reckon that we gotta find innovative ideas and that includes playing in 'odd' places. Hec if somebody said we're playing on top of Uluru, mate, I'm there! This is why at first I was all set to go. But after everything that's happend, I'm f**ked if I'm going. There's only so much bullschit that a paying customer like me can take mate.

Just shut your hole, and go. The best entertainment is found surrendipitously. Holidays/outings/parties are distroyed by exessive preparation.

Mt Buller holds fond old memories for me. It was were I passed my Profesional Ski Instructors exam and skiing test. A group of us hitched and scammed our way there from Perisher-Smiggins where we were working unqualled. We lobbed into the village at high season, with no money and no accomodation. First port of call, the Ski School - "Got some work, dude?" "Yep". Second port of call, the bars to find a "bed" for the first night. The rest of the week was a hoot ...

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 11:19 AM
A good idea would be to have many small divisional prizes with ~200 point cut-offs. <800, <1000 ... <2400. This makes the result of every game being played in the hall, important to someone. That adds enormously to aggrigate interest and exicitement.
Depends if you run it as just a straight Open or with another division alongside like a U1600 Minor, in which case in the Open you dont need rating prizes below say U1800.
Even if it is one big Open you can extend the idea of rating prizes too much.
Rating prizes should only go down to 1200.


Since it is an Open, for all of us, no group should be disadvantaged relative to any other group.
Are you suggesting that the payment of higher prizes to the overall placegetters disadvantages the lower rated players.
Seems this is just a case of your philosophy of rewarding mediocrity.


Since it is an Open, for all of us, no group Juniors should be eligable for only junior prizes unless they pay adult entry.
Why?


BTW, please note that these divisional suggestions require no extra work to impliment, just a just commitment to justice.
What about a commitment to excellence and achievment rather than mediocrity.



(I s'pose it is too much to ask that there be no big outright prize, only a trophy. :hand: ;) )
You really have a thing about rewarding skill and achievement dont you.

Garvinator
16-07-2004, 11:24 AM
Depends if you run it as just a straight Open or with another division alongside like a U1600 Minor, in which case in the Open you dont need rating prizes below say U1800.
Even if it is one big Open you can extend the idea of rating prizes too much.
Rating prizes should only go down to 1200.

The organisers are currently debating and working out budgets etc for the possibility of running none, one or two tournaments in conjunction with the aussie open.

Ian Rout
16-07-2004, 11:42 AM
Fundamentally Bill is right. People want to see and be part of a major event where top players struggle for the biggest title on the calendar, not a strung-out version of a low category weekender with players whose good management or good luck puts them in a low rating category scabbing for handicap prizes.

At the same time it is important to have rating prizes, not at a level where there they bring out the worst in people but to send the message that the event is for everyone. At the 2000/01 Open in Canberra the prizes went down to about U/1100 for that reason.

As a footnote I was amused to see that Matthew's enthusiasm for rating prizes has been tempered by the realisation that juniors win most of them anyway, so he needs to introduce some additional parameters. Perhaps in addition to specifying prizes for non-junior U/nn00 we could add prizes with restrictions on hair colour, zodiac sign, sexual orientation, etc etc.

Rincewind
16-07-2004, 11:52 AM
As a footnote I was amused to see that Matthew's enthusiasm for rating prizes has been tempered by the realisation that juniors win most of them anyway, so he needs to introduce some additional parameters. Perhaps in addition to specifying prizes for non-junior U/nn00 we could add prizes with restrictions on hair colour, zodiac sign, sexual orientation, etc etc.

I think the logical conclusion of Matt's argument is 100 competitors, each entered in 100 separate divisions, and each getting back exactly their entry fee. How's that for maximum excitement?

PHAT
16-07-2004, 11:54 AM
Rating prizes should only go down to 1200.

Oh yeah? and if 30% of the field is U1200, then just just milk them. who cares if they never come back.

You have the mind of a paracite.


[Since it is an Open, for all of us, no group Juniors should be eligable for only junior prizes unless they pay adult entry. - MS]

Why?

Don't pretend to be an idiot, you know very well why.:wall: Find one non-junior who disagrees with me.



You really have a thing about rewarding skill and achievement dont you.

Don't be silly - I have skill and achievement in crapping-on on this BB, but nobody will reward me for it. The only thing that should be rewarded with money is something (goods or services) that can be sold. Have you any evidence that a game can be owned/copyrighted. No, you haven't. So the only thing the GM has to offer the tournament is a service - ie. the "enjoyment" of playing against them.

If you think that a GM will bring in more players, pay them appearence money equal to the economies of scale that accrue from having those extra players enter. If you calculate it at $1000, pay them $1000 and don't have a massive $1000 first prize. If GMs bring no extra players, then they are not worth feeding. In reality they might be worth $100 or $50 when you take into account their free entry.

I expect that you cannot disagree with this as there is nothing economically irrational about it.

But then again you aren't that quick on the uptake when it comes to novelty. Your brain petrified in the 1980s.

PHAT
16-07-2004, 12:07 PM
...Perhaps in addition to specifying prizes for non-junior U/nn00 we could add prizes with restrictions on hair colour, zodiac sign, sexual orientation, etc etc.

And let's not forget "Best Local Player" :owned: ;)

I don't see you giving it back :lol:

PHAT
16-07-2004, 12:16 PM
I think the logical conclusion of Matt's argument is 100 competitors, each entered in 100 separate divisions, and each getting back exactly their entry fee. How's that for maximum excitement?

I think you have over-shot the local maxima at x=4.

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 01:47 PM
Oh yeah? and if 30% of the field is U1200, then just just milk them. who cares if they never come back.
Can you actually point to any previous Australian open where 30% of the competitors were U1200.


You have the mind of a paracite.
Well your mind cannot even spell parasite.
Interesting considering your experise in the area of biology.



Don't pretend to be an idiot, you know very well why.:wall: Find one non-junior who disagrees with me.
Irrelevant whether some people agree with you or not. There are lots of activities where people pay less than another but still get the same benefits.


Don't be silly - I have skill and achievement in crapping-on on this BB, but nobody will reward me for it.
Thats neither skill or an achievement.


The only thing that should be rewarded with money is something (goods or services) that can be sold. Have you any evidence that a game can be owned/copyrighted. No, you haven't. So the only thing the GM has to offer the tournament is a service - ie. the "enjoyment" of playing against them.
This is all just spurious rubbish.
It doesnt warrent a response.


If you think that a GM will bring in more players, pay them appearence money equal to the economies of scale that accrue from having those extra players enter. If you calculate it at $1000, pay them $1000 and don't have a massive $1000 first prize. If GMs bring no extra players, then they are not worth feeding. In reality they might be worth $100 or $50 when you take into account their free entry.
the only person not worth fgeeding is you.
They winner whether it be a GM or someone else is being paid a better prize than some rating prize because of their superior skill and achievement.


I expect that you cannot disagree with this as there is nothing economically irrational about it.
Of course i can disagree becaus eit is irrational.


But then again you aren't that quick on the uptake when it comes to novelty.
There is a difference between novelties and jokes.
You are just the latter.


Your brain petrified in the 1980s.
No you just post in a incoherent drunken state.
If you are the commom man then god help the country. :whistle:

BroadZ
16-07-2004, 01:56 PM
well,i foudn the post that jef was quoting. its numbr 13 on this thread and it supposed to be the 'official minutes' of some meeting. does anyone(like jenni?) know that that means that you have to stick by it?

i dont understand why we changed from 72 hours that sounded like a good plan cuz it put the heat on those guys. i know from my own experiances that if you tell people to do things in 'a few days' pretty often they dont end up getting done

why isnt anyone answerin me? lots of you must know the answer to this
i thought jenni would know since she's in lots of meetings, but others must know too.


That's an interesting claim. Has it exceed 72 hours?

yeh im pretty sure its been more than 72 hours


what kind of experiences would that be mate?

youve met me, take a wild stab at it

Kevin Bonham
16-07-2004, 03:11 PM
How about something of an open question for you all ... what would get YOU to play in the 2005 Australian Open at Mount Buller??

All I need is to be able to spare the $$$.

I'm working from home at the moment. Another decent-sized contract like the current one, or longer-term work by the end of the year would just about do it I reckon, but don't think I'm quite there yet.


* cheap accomodation

That would help. I don't care much how basic it is, so long as it's got a roof.

george
16-07-2004, 03:14 PM
Hi All,

The money as required was put into an account and is now being transferred from that account into my working account I have set up today.

So that should put at end to speculation and lets look forward to some stunning tourneys.

Regards to All
George Howard

arosar
16-07-2004, 03:20 PM
I'm working from home at the moment. Another decent-sized contract like the current one, or longer-term work by the end of the year would just about do it I reckon, but don't think I'm quite there yet.

There can't be a lot of work for snail researchers. Mate, why don't you change specialty to Tassie Tigers? I feel really sorry for them things. They're dying out mate - what with that cancer they got goin'. Is the Tassie government doing anything about this?? It just breaks me heart that we kill more species into extinction in this continent than anyone else in any other place on the planet!

AR

Kevin Bonham
16-07-2004, 03:27 PM
AR - response in offtopic section.

PHAT
16-07-2004, 03:35 PM
Can you actually point to any previous Australian open where 30% of the competitors were U1200.

No and I do not intend looking for one. I use it as an example of how the bottom can be milked.



Well your mind cannot even spell parasite.
Interesting considering your experise in the area of biology.

Would you like me to get suck into you about your spelling of "thru".

I justfinished reading good book on the ecology of parasites, Parasite Rex I don't know why I can read the word thousands of times and it still looks correct to me when it is spelled incorrectly. If my problem is neuro-biological, you could be in danger of vilifying me on grounds of a disability.


This is all just spurious rubbish.
It doesnt warrent a response.

Typically deflected. A curly question and you go to water - I warrant this to be true.



They winner whether it be a GM or someone else is being paid a better prize than some rating prize because of their superior skill and achievement. Can you justify this? Is this a manifestation of an elitist ideology. Where is the arguement that this is good/right?


No you just post in a incoherent drunken state.
If you are the commom man then god help the country. :whistle:

You seem to think that getting a skin full is something to be embarrased about. It isn't. I am normal and this country is God's own because of people like me - not because of elites like Shane Warne, Kerry Packer and Delta Goodrem.


BTW, I bet $100 that I can light the gas making that whistling sound coming out of your face.

PHAT
16-07-2004, 03:39 PM
I don't care much how basic it is, so long as it's got a roof.

Princess. I lived in a tent for six months.

There are caravan parks in Mansfield.
http://tol.aaatourism.com.au/results.asp?sit=1&aid=1&sid=VIC&rid=-1&srid=All&stwn=mansfield&snme=&styp=All

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 04:23 PM
No and I do not intend looking for one. I use it as an example of how the bottom can be milked.
Yes an unrealistic example based on no actual facts.


Would you like me to get suck into you about your dikhed spelling of "thru".
I dont want you sucking anywhere near me.
Feel free however to knock yourself out getting "stuck" into me over the use of "thru".


I justfinished reading good book on the ecology of parasites, Parasite Rex I don't know why I can read the word thousands of times and it still looks correct to me when it is spelled incorrectly. If my problem is neuro-biological, you could be in danger of vilifying me on grounds of a disability.
More like grounds of stupidity.



Typically deflected. A curly question and you go to water - I warrant this to be true.
Warrent it all you lik, does not make it so.



Can you justify this? Is this a manifestation of an elitist ideology. Where is the arguement that this is good/right?
If you cannot understand why excellence and achievement should not be rewarded then your just a waste of time. Then again we all know that already.



You seem to think that getting a skin full is something to be embarrased about. It isn't. Sometimes, something a person may do while full may be embarrasing, but drunkedness itself is as normal as rooting. I am normal and this country is God's own because of people like me - not because of elites like Shane Warne, Kerry Packer and Delta Goodrem.
Ha ha ha what a total load of crap.



BTW, I bet $100 that I can light the gas making that whistling sound coming out of your face.
Ah crude as ever.
Of course you always resort to crudity and vulgarity when losing an argument.

Guess your next post will just tell me to FO.
You are a complete joke.

Garvinator
16-07-2004, 04:27 PM
i remember when this thread was supposed to be about truly meaningful discussion about the mt buller championships :uhoh: :hmm:

PHAT
16-07-2004, 04:49 PM
If you cannot understand why excellence and achievement should not be rewarded then your just a waste of time.



Ah crude as ever.
Of course you always resort to crudity and vulgarity when losing an argument.

Guess your next post will just tell me to FO.
You are a complete joke.


There is no argument. Just you refusing to debate the subject of wheather or not there is any moral justification for milking the majority of players to line the pockets of a few.

And since you cannot do that, yes, FO.

Garvinator
16-07-2004, 04:50 PM
There is no argument. Just you refusing to debate the subject of wheather or not there is any moral justification for milking the majority of players to line the pockets of a few.

And since you cannot do that, yes, FO.
how about both of you take your own advice and fo from this thread :evil:

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 05:17 PM
There is no argument. Just you refusing to debate the subject of wheather or not there is any moral justification for milking the majority of players to line the pockets of a few.
Its just you wish to reward mediocrity rather than excellence.


And since you cannot do that, yes, FO.
Do us all a favour and follow your own advice.

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 05:19 PM
how about both of you take your own advice and fo from this thread :evil:
Perhaps you would prefer to debate him. :hmm:

Garvinator
16-07-2004, 05:21 PM
Perhaps you would prefer to debate him. :hmm:
i dont want to waste my time. sometimes silence speaks volume:uhoh: . Perhaps another moderator could move this stuff to a more appropriate thread :whistle:

PHAT
16-07-2004, 05:46 PM
i dont want to waste my time. sometimes silence speaks volumes:uhoh: .

Shut up then.

arosar
16-07-2004, 05:49 PM
Perhaps another moderator could move this stuff to a more appropriate thread :whistle:

Is it that you get b.tch-slapped that you have this permanent whistle?

AR

PHAT
16-07-2004, 05:57 PM
Its just you wish to reward mediocrity rather than excellence.


I am not talking about rewarding mediocrity. I am talking about fair treatment for all. For example, if the bottom half of a tournament contribute 50% of the prize pool, then the bottom half ought to benefit from it to the extent of 50%. Anything else is theft. If a sponor wishes to put up $1k for the winner, that is their business. The bottom half should not be sponsoring the top half.

What is your argument to the contary? I have given you mine several times.

PHAT
16-07-2004, 06:05 PM
Jenni and Libbi,

You should be in on this debate because it also applies to the possiblility that junior entries might sometimes end up subsidising the adult competion.

Yours in a fair go,
Matthew Sweeney

BroadZ
16-07-2004, 06:13 PM
I am not talking about rewarding mediocrity. I am talking about fair treatment for all. For example, if the bottom half of a tournament contribute 50% of the prize pool, then the bottom half ought to benefit from it to the extent of 50%. Anything else is theft. If a sponor wishes to put up $1k for the winner, that is their business. The bottom half should not be sponsoring the top half.

What is your argument to the contary? I have given you mine several times.


go man go!

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 06:41 PM
I am not talking about rewarding mediocrity. I am talking about fair treatment for all. For example, if the bottom half of a tournament contribute 50% of the prize pool, then the bottom half ought to benefit from it to the extent of 50%. Anything else is theft.
Dont be an idiot.
Its nothing like theft.
Your tournament based on your philosophy got 16 entries.
It looks like the players voted with their feet.



What is your argument to the contary? I have given you mine several times.
If anyone is sprouting rhetoric is you.

There is nothing elitist about rewarding skill.
If anything it is other sports that are elitist.
In fact one of the big advantages of chess is you have the opportunity to play players of varying skill levels from the top to the bottom.

Overall you are not worth wasting time on.

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 06:44 PM
Jenni and Libbi,

You should be in on this debate because it also applies to the possiblility that junior entries might sometimes end up subsidising the adult competion.

Yours in a fair go,
Matthew Sweeney
Firstly these are adult competitions open to all including juniors.

I suspect they both have more brains than to become embroiled in any of your so called debates.

PHAT
16-07-2004, 07:21 PM
There is nothing elitist about rewarding skill.

True, but there is something wrong with compelling the bulk of chess players to subsidise payment of large open prizes, by having $70 entry fees instead of $40 fees. It is a plain and simple rip-off of the bulk of players.



If anything it is other sports that are elitist.

So what if they are - that is their problem. There is no need for us to ape immoral behaviour. And for you to quote their stupidity to justify your own is no arguement at all.


In fact one of the big advantages of chess is you have the opportunity to play players of varying skill levels from the top to the bottom.

That is as close to a bald faced lie as one can get. I hope that you are just a natural incompetant rather that a flatout peddler of falseties.

In the usual traditional giant swiss, nobody in the bottom quartile can ever play on one of the top boards. You know this to be true. Don't even think about saying otherwise. Hence the idea that the bottom is paying money for the privaledge of playing a titled player is a complete fallacy.




So tell us, Bill, why should Bloggs, J. (1300!!) be happy to pay $70 instead of $40 with absolutely no prospect of playing an titled player.

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 07:34 PM
True, but there is something wrong with compelling the bulk of chess players to subsidise payment of large open prizes, by having $70 entry fees instead of $40 fees. It is a plain and simple rip-off of the bulk of players.
Just like the prize money for 1st is greater than for second and 3rd respectively, there is no reason why rating prizes should also not be tiered.
You are rewarding both oevrall skill as well as relative achievement.



So what if they are - that is their problem. There is no need for us to ape immoral behaviour. And for you to quote their stupidity to justify your own is no arguement at all.
I'm not. I'm suggesting that lower rated players can get to play players significantly stronger than themselves. This is not possible in other spotrts, mainly because the lower ranked players are not permitted to compete.



That is as close to a bald faced lie as one can get. I hope that you are just a natural incompetant rather that a flatout peddler of falseties.

In the usual traditional giant swiss, nobody in the bottom quartile can ever play on one of the top boards. You know this to be true. Don't even think about saying otherwise. Hence the idea that the bottom is paying money for the privaledge of playing a titled player is a complete fallacy.

So tell us, Bill, why should Bloggs, J. (1300!!) be happy to pay $70 instead of $40 with absolutely no prospect of playing an titled player.
Who said anything about playing a GM or titled players.
I said you can play players varying in skill levels from the top to the bottom.

Cat
16-07-2004, 07:40 PM
True, but there is something wrong with compelling the bulk of chess players to subsidise payment of large open prizes, by having $70 entry fees instead of $40 fees. It is a plain and simple rip-off of the bulk of players.




So what if they are - that is their problem. There is no need for us to ape immoral behaviour. And for you to quote their stupidity to justify your own is no arguement at all.



That is as close to a bald faced lie as one can get. I hope that you are just a natural incompetant rather that a flatout peddler of falseties.

In the usual traditional giant swiss, nobody in the bottom quartile can ever play on one of the top boards. You know this to be true. Don't even think about saying otherwise. Hence the idea that the bottom is paying money for the privaledge of playing a titled player is a complete fallacy.




So tell us, Bill, why should Bloggs, J. (1300!!) be happy to pay $70 instead of $40 with absolutely no prospect of playing an titled player.

It's a legitimate question - I'd suggest it's about time the ACF started taking the interests of juniors a little more seriously, and maybe establish a task force to determine how to better service the interest of the juniors. This is after all where the future of chess lies.

Having said that, individuals who earn their livelihood from chess must have their needs considered also. I guess it all comes down to transparency and accountability. George has promised us that, if the planned distribution of the levies are revealed, we'd be better placed to make a judgement

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 08:05 PM
if the planned distribution of the levies are revealed, we'd be better placed to make a judgement
Are you basing this statement on the idea that moneys collected from the Aus Junior should not go to the Aus Open and vice versa or are you basing it on something else.

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 08:12 PM
It's a legitimate question - I'd suggest it's about time the ACF started taking the interests of juniors a little more seriously, and maybe establish a task force to determine how to better service the interest of the juniors. This is after all where the future of chess lies.
The handling of juniors is probably best handled at the local club and state level.
The ACF involvment is best left at things like the NECG, the Aus schools, the Aus junior and junior representation overseas.

Of course before forming any sort of firm opinion one way or the other I'd want to know the opinions of the likes of Jenni, Libby, Kerry, Charles Z and Richard Gastineau-Hills to name a few.

Alan Shore
16-07-2004, 08:46 PM
True, but there is something wrong with compelling the bulk of chess players to subsidise payment of large open prizes, by having $70 entry fees instead of $40 fees. It is a plain and simple rip-off of the bulk of players.

I'm with you Matthew insofar as that these players should be given opportunities to win division prizes. A good example of this was seen in the Gold Coast Open with entry fees for u1600 (a separate tournament to the open) being cheaper (by $10) than the open division and the 1/2/3 u1600 prizes of 300,200 and 100 with numerous uxxxx and uxxx prizes as well. This is why people play tourns, because they're given a realistic chance to win at something. I'm sure that's what you want to see too.




In the usual traditional giant swiss, nobody in the bottom quartile can ever play on one of the top boards. You know this to be true. Don't even think about saying otherwise. Hence the idea that the bottom is paying money for the privaledge of playing a titled player is a complete fallacy.

Depending on the strength of the tournament lowish rated players do still have the opportunity to play strong players and it's something that's good for chess and also why I am against starter's notion of trying to eliminate this factor altogether.


So tell us, Bill, why should Bloggs, J. (1300!!) be happy to pay $70 instead of $40 with absolutely no prospect of playing an titled player.

It would come down to his eligibility for division prizes - the player simply isn't strong enough to win an open tournament without a truly remarkable effort. As long as divisionary prizes stay healthy I'd say in general, chess tournaments are not elitist.

Kevin Bonham
16-07-2004, 08:50 PM
Princess. I lived in a tent for six months.

Good for you. I don't mind living in them but I'm not very good at putting them up.


There are caravan parks in Mansfield.

96 km per day is probably a little beyond even my walking abilities. (Would a van be that much cheaper than the cheapest Mt B options anyway?)

Bill Gletsos
16-07-2004, 09:07 PM
I'm with you Matthew insofar as that these players should be given opportunities to win division prizes. A good example of this was seen in the Gold Coast Open with entry fees for u1600 (a separate tournament to the open) being cheaper (by $10) than the open division and the 1/2/3 u1600 prizes of 300,200 and 100 with numerous uxxxx and uxxx prizes as well.
I dont think your Gold Coast Open analogy is valid if you compare it just to the Aus Open since as you pointed out the GC Open had a seperate U1600 division.
If you run the Open without a seperate U1600 event then having rating division prizes down around U1200 is reasonable.

That said I do think there should be a seperate U1600 Aus Open event, with a good prize fund. In such a case the rating div prizes in the Open should cut out around U1800, as those U1600's that want decent prize money can play in the U1600 event.


This is why people play tourns, because they're given a realistic chance to win at something. I'm sure that's what you want to see too.
Thats why I pushed for a seperate U1600 division as part of the NSW Open.



Depending on the strength of the tournament lowish rated players do still have the opportunity to play strong players and it's something that's good for chess and also why I am against starter's notion of trying to eliminate this factor altogether.
Agreed.

Cat
16-07-2004, 11:05 PM
Are you basing this statement on the idea that moneys collected from the Aus Junior should not go to the Aus Open and vice versa or are you basing it on something else.

I'm not saying anything about how the moneys should travel other than to say that if people ask the question the answer should be available.

Cat
16-07-2004, 11:12 PM
The handling of juniors is probably best handled at the local club and state level.
The ACF involvment is best left at things like the NECG, the Aus schools, the Aus junior and junior representation overseas.

Of course before forming any sort of firm opinion one way or the other I'd want to know the opinions of the likes of Jenni, Libby, Kerry, Charles Z and Richard Gastineau-Hills to name a few.

Fair enough

ursogr8
17-07-2004, 12:08 AM
Depending on the strength of the tournament lowish rated players do still have the opportunity to play strong players and it's something that's good for chess and also why I am against starter's notion of trying to eliminate this factor altogether.


Bruce

You must have misunderstood me if you think I want to deny C-quartile players the opportunity to play strong players. I certainly don't want to eliminate this factor in any % let alone "altogether' as you have quoted.
If you want me to expand on my position just post, your quote and my response, over on the 'How competitive do you want it to be' and I will continue.

regards
starter

PHAT
17-07-2004, 07:24 AM
I don't mind living in them but I'm not very good at putting them up.

That's funny. J-P Wallace said to me that his sence of direction was so bad he could get lost in his own house. :eek: Seems like chess ability is a idiot savaunt's game.



96 km per day is probably a little beyond even my walking abilities. (Would a van be that much cheaper than the cheapest Mt B options anyway?)

Hitch a lift with other chessists - I might even pick you up if you promise to jamb a tenis ball in you gob and wear a bag over your head.

We haven't enough info yet to do comparitive priceing exersizes.

Alan Shore
17-07-2004, 10:55 AM
Bruce

You must have misunderstood me if you think I want to deny C-quartile players the opportunity to play strong players. I certainly don't want to eliminate this factor in any % let alone "altogether' as you have quoted.
If you want me to expand on my position just post, your quote and my response, over on the 'How competitive do you want it to be' and I will continue.

regards
starter

I will starter, if you answer my questions about organiser fees on the other thread first. Or at least acknowledge they're there and say 'I don't want to answer because of x.' It's simply becoming suspicious.

Rincewind
17-07-2004, 11:53 AM
In the usual traditional giant swiss, nobody in the bottom quartile can ever play on one of the top boards. You know this to be true. Don't even think about saying otherwise. Hence the idea that the bottom is paying money for the privaledge of playing a titled player is a complete fallacy.

That's not logically true. It is possible just unlikely unless the bottom quartile is underrated or plays a blinder/meets some players who are havnig a shocker.

Playing in an U1600 event the same player would not get to play anyone over 1600 so in a monstor open they're prospects are probably to get a game or two against 1700-1900 players when they might be able to score a scalp (remembering even a draw would be a scalp).

This would be one attraction for a low rated player to play a monster swiss with rating prizes rather than an Open and U1600 format.


[W]hy should Bloggs, J. (1300!!) be happy to pay $70 instead of $40 with absolutely no prospect of playing an titled player.

1300 player probably wouldn't get much out of playing a 2400 player except for a rather short anecdote. (Next time you're at the club as Zeljko about his game against Rogers). I think games against 1850 players would be of more practical worth.

ursogr8
17-07-2004, 12:01 PM
I will starter, if you answer my questions about organiser fees on the other thread first. Or at least acknowledge they're there and say 'I don't want to answer because of x.' It's simply becoming suspicious.

BD

I acknowledge the questions.
On my litmus question
> Bill has answered yes,
>> You have answered no,
>>> Amiel has given a conditional. I am waiting for him to get off the fence.

starter

PHAT
17-07-2004, 01:39 PM
That's not logically true. It is possible just unlikely unless the bottom quartile is underrated or plays a blinder/meets some players who are havnig a shocker.

Cut it out, Barry. In a 7 round swiss field of 128, a bottom quartile player has to win 6/6 to play Rogers the final round. The cances of this are, as you know, millions to one (~5% * ~3% * ~1% ...)




1300 player probably wouldn't get much out of playing a 2400 player except for a rather short anecdote. (Next time you're at the club as Zeljko about his game against Rogers). I think games against 1850 players would be of more practical worth.


You miss the point. It is the anecodote that the bottom half want for their extra $30 ($70 rip-off fee - $40 sensible fee) - not some "practical worth."

I am waiting to see if Bill (or you) can tell Bloggs, J. (1300) why he must pay $70 rather than $40.

If you want to hear something realy radical, how about for swiss events, the higher your rating the higher the entry fee.

jenni
17-07-2004, 03:10 PM
The handling of juniors is probably best handled at the local club and state level.
The ACF involvment is best left at things like the NECG, the Aus schools, the Aus junior and junior representation overseas.

Of course before forming any sort of firm opinion one way or the other I'd want to know the opinions of the likes of Jenni, Libby, Kerry, Charles Z and Richard Gastineau-Hills to name a few.
I guess I only half agree. As far as day to day running of activities goes. Yes this should definitely be left to the states and preferably junior organisations to handle.

However there is a definite vacuum in Australia when it comes to junior development. Even things like getting the juniors ready to play overseas - there is just no national focus or plan. This is where I hoped the NECG stuff would help, as it gave parents and children the opportunity to talk to other juniors and coaches and get advise and recommendations.

It seems to me, that often decisions are taken by the ACF on Junior matters, without them having a proper undersanding or the full facts. Often junior friendly people such as Bill Gletsos and Denis Jessop try to get the junior bodies recommendations and vote accordingly. However this practise is not across the board. If a motion is put forward without notice, and they can't get hold of the junior people, they will often abstain and although this is very noble and correct, it doesn't necessarily result in a correct decision being made.

I have given this a lot of thought over the last few years - I toyed with the idea of a National Junior Organisation, which took on responsibility for our own tournaments etc. However the juniors and adults are very intertwined at the elite level and it would not be good to go in different directions.

I have come to the conclusion that what we need is a permanent Junior sub-committee. One of the ACF Vice-Presidents could also be the sub-committee head, so there is a link between the ACF executive and the sub-committee. Each state and territory would have 1 vote, although more than 1 person could take part in e-mail debates. I would suggest using e-mail, rather than phone hookups, as a cost saving mechanism, although MSN messanger or something like that could be used as well.

The Junior sub-committee would then take on responsibility for all junior matters and organisation. A forum would exist for coming up with development ideas, there would be a true national focus. As an example Charles Zworestine and Roly Eime have DOP'd many Aus Juniors. There are a number of problems with the Aus juniors and Charles and Roly keep documenting these in their reports to the ACF and the ACF keep filing them and nothing is done. These reports could go ot the junior sub-committee and action taken - amend bylaws whatever.

The Junior Sub-committee would be responsible for allocating tournaments etc. All recommendations and by-law changes would then go to the ACF council meeting for approval and ratification. The ACF would thus keep control of the juniors (I know there will be some adults in there having a panic attack at the thought of losing control :) ). However the junior people are the ones with the knowledge and interest in taking the juniors forward, so it makes sense to have a sub-committee. I have to say at the moment I find the current one of doing things, very patronising.

I'm going to create a thread for this for comment, but please let's have a decent debate on this and not slanging matches at each other.

Rincewind
17-07-2004, 03:57 PM
Cut it out, Barry. In a 7 round swiss field of 128, a bottom quartile player has to win 6/6 to play Rogers the final round. The cances of this are, as you know, millions to one (~5% * ~3% * ~1% ...)

I think what you say is true if you assume Rogers wins all his games (which is pretty good bet based on recent form but not a foregone conclusion, mathematically). But even that is besided the point as you didn;t say anything about board 1. Your original argument was "top boards".

A field of 128 I would say at least the top 8 boards would qualify for "top board" status. Therefore someone from the bottom quartile could be playing on one of the top 8 boards if they win their first 2 or 3 games. Especially if this is assisted by a number of other upsets and high draw percentage in the top half. In fact it is probably mathematically possible (although highly unlikely) that they could even be playing on board 1.


You miss the point. It is the anecodote that the bottom half want for their extra $30 ($70 rip-off fee - $40 sensible fee) - not some "practical worth."

I am waiting to see if Bill (or you) can tell Bloggs, J. (1300) why he must pay $70 rather than $40.

If you want to hear something realy radical, how about for swiss events, the higher your rating the higher the entry fee.

Well the possibility of playing on the top boards is there I was just questioning the value as compared the more likely scenario of playing on boards 9-16, say.

Ian Rout
17-07-2004, 04:34 PM
If your measure of value for money is playing Ian Rogers then you should recall that someone in the fourth quartile of one event is in the third of another, so you should pick your tournaments to maximise your chances. For instance in last year's Vikings Weekender Ian played a 1337 opponent first up, and a 1272 the year before.

However I think your best strategy is probably not to play in weekenders at all but to put the entry fee and travel costs in a piggy bank until you have a big enough stake to challenge Ian to a match.

Bill Gletsos
17-07-2004, 04:47 PM
I am waiting to see if Bill (or you) can tell Bloggs, J. (1300) why he must pay $70 rather than $40.
I already answered this.

Just like the prize money for 1st is greater than for second and 3rd respectively, there is no reason why rating prizes should also not be tiered.
You are rewarding both overrall skill as well as relative achievement.


The entry fee is the same for all.
The lower junior entry fee is to encourage greater junior participation in adult events.

PHAT
17-07-2004, 05:20 PM
For instance in last year's Vikings Weekender Ian played a 1337 opponent first up, and a 1272 the year before.

:eek: [grabs calender and looks for "Vikings"]



However I think your best strategy is probably not to play in weekenders at all but to put the entry fee and travel costs in a piggy bank until you have a big enough stake to challenge Ian to a match. :eek:

Now THAT has me thinking.

Simil Weekend. Big$ package. Different game lengths. Fund riaser. Local TV. Punters. Celebs.

PHAT
17-07-2004, 05:37 PM
I already answered this. No you haven't and the quote below doesn't either.


Just like the prize money for 1st is greater than for second and 3rd respectively, there is no reason why rating prizes should also not be tiered.

There IS a reason - don't you read? I will tell you again. The reason is that the bottom end is being milked. It is milked for no identifable reason other than "we must pay the elite for being good at chess" - an elitist scam.

NOW, Bill, tell us why the bottom amateurs should pay the top amateurs?



You are rewarding both overrall skill as well as relative achievement.

Why do we have to reward overall skill at all?
Why not relative skill alone?
(After all, if you want to reward overall skill, well, we might as well take a percentage of the prize pool and post it off to Kasparov.)



The entry fee is the same for all.

The lower junior entry fee is to encourage greater junior participation in adult events.

These twosentances contradict each other.

And if you want reward juniors for playing in adult events, start by rating them properly.

Now answer the question, what does the bottom quartile get for their $30 subsidy of a large open prize?

Bill Gletsos
17-07-2004, 06:23 PM
No you haven't and the quote below doesn't either.
I answered it, you just dont like the answer.




There IS a reason - don't you read? I will tell you again. The reason is that the bottom end is being milked. It is milked for no identifable reason other than "we must pay the elite for being good at chess" - an elitist scam.

NOW, Bill, tell us why the bottom amateurs should pay the top amateurs?
They arent being milked at all.
No one is forcing them to play.



Why do we have to reward overall skill at all?
Why not relative skill alone?
Because you should reward excellence and skill.


(After all, if you want to reward overall skill, well, we might as well take a percentage of the prize pool and post it off to Kasparov.)
No, because he isnt an entrant.



These twosentances contradict each other.
Not if taken in context.
All adults pay the same fee.
Juniors pay less.
This is entirely reasonable and is the same in most other areas of life.


And if you want reward juniors for playing in adult events, start by rating them properly.
They are rated properly.
Your attempt at using trending for ratings was a dismal failure.


Now answer the question, what does the bottom quartile get for their $30 subsidy of a large open prize?
Their is no subsidy so your question is flawed.
All competitors are getting the right to compete in the event for their entry fee.

Bill Gletsos
17-07-2004, 06:28 PM
Now THAT has me thinking.
Well there is a first time for everything. :hand:

PHAT
17-07-2004, 06:48 PM
They arent being milked at all.
No one is forcing them to play.


How retarded are you?

Nobody "forces" me to use the Sydney Harbour Bridge. But if I don't use it I cannot reasonably go about my business. However, the toll is a rip-off. I am being milked.

In the same way, the bottom 3/4 of swiss fields are milked.



Because you should reward excellence and skill.

"Should" ? What is this word should? Tyrany of the "should" command. Now I am seeing a tiny crack that I can get a wedge into.



1. Tell us, why "should" we reward excellence and skill.

2. Who exactly, is "we" in this case.



Your attempt at using trending for ratings was a dismal failure.

You are such a technician. It was an interesting exersize that failed. I wonder what will happen when I use another algorithm and a sample larger than the <50 sample I used.



Their is no subsidy so your question is flawed.
All competitors are getting the right to compete in the event for their entry fee.

Kevin Bonham
17-07-2004, 07:42 PM
You are such a technician. It was an interesting exersize that failed. I wonder what will happen when I use another algorithm and a sample larger than the <50 sample I used.

Somewhat off the track but it was your algorithm that was the problem and not your sample size - which was sufficient to establish that your algorithm was significantly worse than Glicko-2.

Bill Gletsos
17-07-2004, 07:46 PM
How retarded are you?{/quote]
Unlike you I'm not cerebally challenged at all.

[QUOTE=Matthew Sweeney]Nobody "forces" me to use the Sydney Harbour Bridge. But if I don't use it I cannot reasonably go about my business. However, the toll is a rip-off. I am being milked.

In the same way, the bottom 3/4 of swiss fields are milked.
Firstly it is not reasonable compare the harbour bridge toll to a tournament entry fee.

However just for the sake of it assume you could then even if without the bridge you cannot go about your business no one is forcing you to play in organised tournaments.
If you dont wish to pay and play then you can reasonable just go and play social chess.


"Should" ? What is this word should? Tyrany of the "should" command. Now I am seeing a tiny crack that I can get a wedge into.

1. Tell us, why "should" we reward excellence and skill.

2. Who exactly, is "we" in this case.

I'm not going to waste my time on your attempt to sidestep the debate.
Lets just face the fact you simply loathe rewarding excellence/skill/achievement.


You are such a technician. It was an interesting exersize that failed.
It was doomed to failure from the start.
As usual you just wouldnt listen.


I wonder what will happen when I use another algorithm and a sample larger than the <50 sample I used.
If you ever do lets hope you put more effort into it than you did in your role as Publicity Officer of the NSWCA.



Their is no subsidy so your question is flawed.
All competitors are getting the right to compete in the event for their entry fee.
Obviously by repeating my statement you agree with me. :hand:

PHAT
17-07-2004, 10:46 PM
Firstly it is not reasonable compare the harbour bridge toll to a tournament entry fee.

However just for the sake of it assume you could then even if without the bridge you cannot go about your business no one is forcing you to play in organised tournaments.
If you dont wish to pay and play then you can reasonable just go and play social chess.

The SHB analogy is fine, mate. If I have to cross the habour to do my job, I must accept being fleeced. If I want to play competion games, I must accept being fleeced.

Since you willn't accept the objective truth, cannot show how your version is true, and have no wish to even merely explore the position. I declair you the most stupid person currently on this BB. The late chesslover used to hold that title due to his non-chess posts on the USA foreign policy. But you ... your hard disk is full and your RAM is too small to run the latest software. Stick with Glicko and ratings because you have "risen to you level of incompetancy." [The Peter Principle]





I'm not going to waste my time on your attempt to sidestep the debate.



I am not the one side stepping! the quote below shows perfectly that it is you who is doing the Time Warp



Lets just face the fact you simply loathe rewarding excellence/skill/achievement.

Not quite. I simply loathe being forced to reward excellence/skill/achievement, when the demonstration of those same said things, does not benefit or entertain me one iota.


It was doomed to failure from the start.
As usual you just wouldnt listen.

Where is your proof that it was doomed? Eh? Put up or GF.



Obviously by repeating my statement you agree with me. :hand:

???? I never repeated that statement. ???? :confused:

Bill Gletsos
17-07-2004, 11:13 PM
The SHB analogy is fine, mate. If I have to cross the habour to do my job, I must accept being fleeced. If I want to play competion games, I must accept being fleeced.
The bridge toll money goes to the up keep of the bridge amonsgt other things.
Even if it all went to general revenue, then that money is spent on the public in various ways.
Hence you are not getting fleeced.


Since you willn't accept the objective truth, cannot show how your version is true, and have no wish to even merely explore the position. I declair you the most stupid person currently on this BB. The late chesslover used to hold that title due to his non-chess posts on the USA foreign policy. But you ... your hard disk is full and your RAM is too small to run the latest software. Stick with Glicko and ratings because you have "risen to you level of incompetancy." [The Peter Principle]
As usual when you are losing an argument you just try and deflect it.


Not quite. I simply loathe being forced to reward excellence/skill/achievement, when the demonstration of those same said things, does not benefit or entertain me one iota.
You revel in medocrity.
You loathe excellence. Perhaps because you are totally lacking in it.



Where is your proof that it was doomed? Eh? Put up or GF.
I stated many times in the thread on the old BB why it was rubbish and lacked any logical basis.
You wouldnt listen.



???? I never repeated that statement. ???? :confused:
Of course you did yoiu cretin.
Its at the very bottom of you post on 17-07-2004 at 06:48 PM.
It isnt wrapped in quote marks.
You repeated it.

PHAT
17-07-2004, 11:21 PM
Of course you did yoiu cretin.
Its at the very bottom of you post on 17-07-2004 at 06:48 PM.
It isnt wrapped in quote marks.
You repeated it.

OK, it's fixed now.

But what juvenile cheap shot. Not witty, not orginal, not clever. A bit like your Presidency.

skip to my lou
17-07-2004, 11:40 PM
OK, it's fixed now.

But what juvenile cheap shot. Not witty, not orginal, not clever. A bit like your Presidency.
Cheap shot indeed.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 12:01 AM
But what juvenile cheap shot.
No it just shows how stupid you are, because you could not see it even after I commented on it.

I had to spell it out for you.



Not witty, not orginal, not clever. A bit like your Presidency.
Ha ha ha.
This is priceless coming from someone whose contribution on the NSWCA Council was zero.
You demonstrated perfectly that you are full of hot air and no action.
No one will believe anything you say in future.

Of course what just shows how wrong you are about me being elitist was my pushing at the NSWCA Council meetings for the U1600 Division in the NSW Open with excellent prize money.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 12:07 AM
Cheap shot indeed.
I couldnt care less what Matt's opinion of me is.
My opinion of him is matched by others on the NSWCA Council and on the NSWJCL.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 12:13 AM
Of course what just shows how wrong you are about me being elitist was my pushing at the NSWCA Council meetings for the U1600 Division in the NSW Open with excellent prize money.

Excellent? Who's judgement is that, yours?

It wasn't pro rata distribution, was it. So it wasn't "excellent."

BTW, where is the public profit and loss statement? We both know that it was agreed that such a document would be published for every NSWCA event.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 12:22 AM
I couldnt care less what Matt's opinion of me is.
My opinion of him is matched by others on the NSWCA Council and on the NSWJCL.

Name names. (C)

Then we can talk about all the people who refuse to join the NSWCA council because of your megolomania.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 12:30 AM
Excellent? Who's judgement is that, yours?

It wasn't pro rata distribution, was it. So it wasn't "excellent."
Actually you moron you know the figures because you were copied on them at the time. As Norms document showed 90.26% of entry fees from the Open event went back as Open prizes and 90.47% of entry fees from the U1600 Division went back as U1600 prizes.

You are a joke and a waste of space.


BTW, where is the public profit and loss statement? We both know that it was agreed that such a document would be published for every NSWCA event.
You said this previously and were wrong then and still are now.
I have checked the minutes of all meetings this year and although it was discussed no such motion was passed.

skip to my lou
18-07-2004, 12:37 AM
I couldnt care less what Matt's opinion of me is.
My opinion of him is matched by others on the NSWCA Council and on the NSWJCL.

Why is it that when you get negative opinions from someone, you do not care about that persons opinion?

Anyway, you knew that he missed quote tags, you even stated that you knew it. After knowing that, you insisted that he repeated what you said.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 12:44 AM
It happens in all area from education to sports.
The world rewards excellence, skill and achievement, not failure and medocrity.

I can see how rewards in education can help make the world a better place. But I cannot see how putting pig skin through the sticks puts food on the tables of the world. Cripes, half the world don't even have tables, and you want to put money into the pockets of wood-pushers.


I guess I will have to slightly rephrase the questions.


1. Tell us, why the world "should" reward excellence and skill in woodpushing.

2. Exactly who's pockets should be picked to line theirs?


Can you answer these reworded questions, or would you like to look like a goldfish - mouth opening and closing but nothing comes out - and being surprised by the same questions upon each return to the BB, only to open close open close open close, swim off.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 12:47 AM
Name names. (C)
I'm not about to play your childish games but I'm sure if you try, you can work it out.


Then we can talk about all the people who refuse to join the NSWCA council because of your megolomania.
Well your credability in any area of chess admin is zero especially after your total lack of contribution whilst on the NSWCA Council.

The point is you dipstick, I'm just one vote on council.
Anyone joining council who has reasonable ideas should be able to get majority support from the other council members.

However feel free to name whoever you are referring to.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 12:56 AM
Why is it that when you get negative opinions from someone, you do not care about that persons opinion?
It depends on the persons credability.
I'll accept negative feedback from someone with some credability.
As far as I am concerned Matt has none.


Anyway, you knew that he missed quote tags, you even stated that you knew it. After knowing that, you insisted that he repeated what you said.
Well lets originally I wasnt sure he missed them or meant something by them.
Therefore I just commented that he agreed with me.
However he was then stupid enough not to realise what was happening.
So I finally spelt it out for him and repeated my claim so that hopefully he could understand, after all in Matt's case you can never be sure what he does and doesnt understand.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 12:59 AM
... feel free to name whoever you are referring to.

I'm not about to play your childish games but I'm sure if you try, you can work it out who are the many chess administrators who nolonger darken the NSWCA's doorway.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 01:00 AM
I can see how rewards in education can help make the world a better place. But I cannot see how putting pig skin through the sticks puts food on the tables of the world. Cripes, half the world don't even have tables, and you want to put money into the pockets of wood-pushers.


I guess I will have to slightly rephrase the questions.


1. Tell us, why the world "should" reward excellence and skill in woodpushing.

2. Exactly who's pockets should be picked to line theirs?
The answer is obvious.
By the very fact that players are prepared to pay the entry fees and participate.
If they dont like the conditions then dont play.
As I said no one is forcing them to.

I didnt see everyone flocking to your event.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 01:09 AM
I'm not about to play your childish games
But you are the one who is always saying name name.
Guess your as useless in this regard as you were on the NSWCA Council.
Just more hot air.


but I'm sure if you try, you can work it out who are the many chess administrators who nolonger darken the NSWCA's doorway.
As usual you are good at exaggeration, however NSW doesnt have that many administrators who have been involved with the NSWCA to begin with.

Over the last few years there are only three who have been on the Council who no longer are.
One is Paul Sike, but Paul made it clear when he joined council he only intended to stay on council one year. He and I get along fine.
Another is Bob Keast and I know for a fact Bob not being on council has nothing to do with me but is due to other commmittments.
The other is Charles Z and he and I get along just fine and have no problems working together.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 01:14 AM
Actually you moron you know the figures because you were copied on them at the time. As Norms document showed 90.26% of entry fees from the Open event went back as Open prizes and 90.47% of entry fees from the U1600 Division went back as U1600 prizes.

Fair enough, I was wrong on that - it looks pro rata to me. But for the record, I have never read this info until now.

However, in isolation, within each (both) swiss fields, the bottom half subsidised the top half.


I have checked the minutes of all meetings this year and although it was discussed no such motion was passed.

Yes it was discussed. Yes it was agreed that it would be a good idea. No, I don't recall it being voted on. But did it need to be voted on. It was just a general agreement that the treasurer would send the P&L to the web master and he would put on the webpage. What happened?

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 01:26 AM
Fair enough, I was wrong on that - it looks pro rata to me. But for the record, I have never read this info until now.
Yes, well most of the council members believe you never read most of the emails.


However, in isolation, within each (both) swiss fields, the bottom half subsidised the top half.
No they didnt.
The players are paying a fee to participate.
All players got 7 games.



Yes it was discussed. Yes it was agreed that it would be a good idea. No, I don't recall it being voted on. But did it need to be voted on. It was just a general agreement that the treasurer would send the P&L to the web master and he would put on the webpage. What happened?
The minutes to not record that it was agreed to do so just that that [b]perhaps[b] an abbreviated report could be provided.
Obviously it would appear you never read this email either.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 01:41 AM
The answer is obvious.
By the very fact that players are prepared to pay the entry fees and participate.
If they dont like the conditions then dont play.
As I said no one is forcing them to.

Not true. They are forced to. If a person wants to play competitive chess in an offical Australian or State Open, not with jokers in Hyde Park, that players must pay and get fleeced.

Imagine a tournament that offered the choice of two types of entry:
1. $15 . This covers all costs pro rata, BUT you cannot claim any prize.
2. $60 . This covers all costs pro rata, AND you can claim prizes.

I wonder what proportion would take the no prizes option. I don't know, but it is an interesting question the answer to which may be a shock to some.


I didnt see everyone flocking to your event.It was simply on the calender. It was neither advertised nor promoted - last year it was. Next year it will be huge, as I will make it so.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 01:48 AM
The players are paying a fee to participate.
All players got 7 games.

And half of them were milked.




The minutes do not record that it was agreed to do so just that that perhaps an abbreviated report could be provided.


[yawwwwwwn] You are running a pretty snappy ship there, Captain Peter Principle.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 01:49 AM
Not true. They are forced to. If a person wants to play competitive chess in an offical Australian or State Open, not with jokers in Hyde Park, that players must pay and get fleeced.

Imagine a tournament that offered the choice of two types of entry:
1. $15 . This covers all costs pro rata, BUT you cannot claim any prize.
2. $60 . This covers all costs pro rata, AND you can claim prizes.

I wonder what proportion would take the no prizes option. I don't know, but it is an interesting question the answer to which may be a shock to some.
The NSWCA a few years back tried running a U2000 tournament with no prize money, low entry fee and book vouchers as prizes.
As I recall the turn out was pretty abysmal.
It was decided not to repeat it.


It was simply on the calender. It was neither advertised nor promoted - last year it was. Next year it will be huge, as I will make it so.
I think not just you but also the NSWCA can better advertise their tournaments.

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 01:53 AM
And half of them were milked.
No they got what they paid for.






[yawwwwwwn] You are running a pretty snappy ship there, Captain Peter Principle.
The council did as it decided, not as you may wish.

PHAT
18-07-2004, 01:56 AM
One is Paul Sike, but Paul made it clear when he joined council he only intended to stay on council one year. He and I get along fine.
Another is Bob Keast and I know for a fact Bob not being on council has nothing to do with me but is due to other commmittments.
The other is Charles Z and he and I get along just fine and have no problems working together.


:rolleyes: tsk tsk tsk :hand:

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 02:37 AM
:rolleyes: tsk tsk tsk :hand:
You can tsk tsk tsk all you like.
As usual I suspect you are working on heresay and have not actually had a discussion with any of the actual individuals mentioned.

If you claim I am wrong with regards any of them then name them, otherwise all you are doing is making unfounded claims, just like you did regarding my supposed knowledge of a new centre centre involving Peter Parr.

As Peter confirmed to me when I raised your claim with him he stated he never had any discussions with you in this regard. Prior to your unfounded claim his only comments to me were that his lease was up this year. This information was relayed to the NSWCA Council at its january meeting. He certainly had not discussed with me any plans regarding purchasing a chess centre.

Garvinator
18-07-2004, 04:24 PM
Starter,

Can you please inform the cv secretary that the cv website still said that chess world is running the 2005 mt buller tournaments. This is of course incorrect and should be removed.

ursogr8
18-07-2004, 04:44 PM
Starter,

Can you please inform the cv secretary that the cv website still said that chess world is running the 2005 mt buller tournaments. This is of course incorrect and should be removed.

You just don't pay attention gg'', do you.
Now the CV Secretary is the one that jammo had all the problem with on minutes. The likelihood that he could be diverted from that important task to chase after your anomaly is zilch.
Instead, look up your most recent copy of the Chess Victoria newsletter (you do have one don't you? No.......well these are on the web-site you were just at) and mail to the editor......he is a pipeline to where you want the corrections made. I suggest you, as a member of the annointed Mt B.organising commmittee, should get to navigate through that channel.

starter

Garvinator
18-07-2004, 05:00 PM
You just don't pay attention gg'', do you.
Now the CV Secretary is the one that jammo had all the problem with on minutes. The likelihood that he could be diverted from that important task to chase after your anomaly is zilch.
Instead, look up your most recent copy of the Chess Victoria newsletter (you do have one don't you? No.......well these are on the web-site you were just at) and mail to the editor......he is a pipeline to where you want the corrections made. I suggest you, as a member of the annointed Mt B.organising commmittee, should get to navigate through that channel.

starter
email just sent to webmaster

eclectic
18-07-2004, 07:10 PM
email just sent to webmaster

you mean to say there actually is a CV webmaster ? :rolleyes:

eclectic

Garvinator
18-07-2004, 07:12 PM
you mean to say there actually is a CV webmaster ? :rolleyes:

eclectic
yes there is, GW emailed me back about an hour later saying that the changes had been done.

ursogr8
18-07-2004, 08:07 PM
you mean to say there actually is a CV webmaster ? :rolleyes:

eclectic


Ooooo, you are a doubting thomas, 'eclectic'.
Of course there is a CV web-master.
The one idiosycrancy that this web-master has is that he is a bit secretive. So, he only updates 'on-request'.

starter

ps Apologies Matthew.......this thread seems to have got a bit diverted from your original intent. But then we have not been the only miscreants.

Lucena
18-07-2004, 10:40 PM
Hi All,

The money as required was put into an account and is now being transferred from that account into my working account I have set up today.

So that should put at end to speculation and lets look forward to some stunning tourneys.

Regards to All
George Howard

excellent :clap: :thumbsup:

Bill Gletsos
18-07-2004, 11:52 PM
Hospitality Textiles Australian Schools Chess Finals
Shouldnt the correct title of that event be the Hospitality Textiles Australian Schools Teams Championships or perhaps the Hospitality Textiles Australian Schools Chess Teams Championships

Garvinator
18-07-2004, 11:56 PM
Shouldnt the correct title of that event be the Hospitality Textiles Australian Schools Teams Championships
i would say that you are correct. I copied the names from the latest email sent to me by George relating to the official names.

Ian Rout
19-07-2004, 08:51 AM
In the Mt Buller announcements thread (which we aren't allowed to post in so I'm asking here) ggray announces prices of accommodation at the venue. Is there somewhere where it states what standard/facilities are provided for this price - possibly it does somewhere but there are so many Mt Buller threads it's not obvious. Also are there different options or just the one-size-fits-all?

arosar
19-07-2004, 08:53 AM
Mornin' boys!

I had the pleasure of catching the train to work this mornin' with one of Australia's surest future super-GMs. Of course we got to talkin' about the Mt Buller event (or, as he keeps calling it - Mt Bullerton). He didn't know where this bloody place was! Had to carefully explain it to him. He ain't going unless there's a minimum of 5 GMs. And I sure did do my bit in dissuading him from going anyways. Told him all about the lack of shopping and social activities and how prohibitively expensive this whole exercise is.

Have a good week fellas.

AR

Libby
19-07-2004, 09:46 AM
Details of accommodation as given to me by George.

For Juniors only each room is $90 a night with three occupants each junior getting Continental breakkie - if a fourth kid goes in that is additioal $20.

Adults - $120 per room per night if third adult goes in extra $50 - all adults get full breakfast.

Only people staying at the Chalet can use Chalet facilities.

My addition now- no one is forced to stay in chalet, but it would help the tournament alot if you did.

Can we please have some quotes ASAP on the sort of arrangements actually required (and preferred) by many travelling to the schools events & juniors? For example, younger juniors tend to travel with a parent, or parents, and sometimes siblings. My daughter's school team is attending the Aus schools and all children are intending to travel with at least one parent and some with their whole family. So what does it do to the price once you have a "family" mix in a room?

It may well help the tournament a lot if people stay at the Chalet but to encourage that it will help a lot to put together packages based on "room" prices for the junior events allowing for a mix of adult & child occupancies.

Re the Chalet "facilities." The Mt Buller website certainly suggests there is public access to the pool during specific times - will this be withdrawn especially for the chess tournament? What other facilities would people miss out on? Can we use the bar & restaurant on occasion or would that be out of bounds?

Lest I seem a pain in the butt, I am only asking the questions ACT parents will ask me before they decide where to stay. We have a high proportion of our players already having made bookings or being ready to make a booking so the questions are being asked here on a regular basis. :rolleyes:

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 10:54 AM
Mornin' boys!

I had the pleasure of catching the train to work this mornin' with one of Australia's surest future super-GMs. Of course we got to talkin' about the Mt Buller event (or, as he keeps calling it - Mt Bullerton). He didn't know where this bloody place was! Had to carefully explain it to him. He ain't going unless there's a minimum of 5 GMs. And I sure did do my bit in dissuading him from going anyways. Told him all about the lack of shopping and social activities and how prohibitively expensive this whole exercise is.

Have a good week fellas.

AR
care to name this person so we can contact him/her.

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 11:06 AM
It may well help the tournament a lot if people stay at the Chalet but to encourage that it will help a lot to put together packages based on "room" prices for the junior events allowing for a mix of adult & child occupancies.
i think it would seem reasonable that if the organisers can guarantee that ppl will stay in the chalet, that some negotiation could be worked regarding prices and packages.


Re the Chalet "facilities." The Mt Buller website certainly suggests there is public access to the pool during specific times - will this be withdrawn especially for the chess tournament? What other facilities would people miss out on? Can we use the bar & restaurant on occasion or would that be out of bounds?
what do you mean withdrawn? (a) do you mean will not be permitted at all, or (b) do you mean access at all times.
if it (a) i would find that highly unlikely. Everyone would be paying money for use of these facilites in the package they bought, also with the continual concerns of what to do after playing chess, i dont think it would be a very popular move to close the pool or bar. That said i think the juniors will be struggling for the bar part;)

If it is (b) ill get back to you on that one too;)


Lest I seem a pain in the butt, I am only asking the questions ACT parents will ask me before they decide where to stay. We have a high proportion of our players already having made bookings or being ready to make a booking so the questions are being asked here on a regular basis. :rolleyes:

you are not being a pain in the butt ;) i was looking for similar information when i was travelling to mt buller as a player.

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 11:10 AM
In the Mt Buller announcements thread (which we aren't allowed to post in so I'm asking here) just an attempt to keep the announcements easily visible:lol:



ggray announces prices of accommodation at the venue. Is there somewhere where it states what standard/facilities are provided for this price - possibly it does somewhere but there are so many Mt Buller threads it's not obvious. Also are there different options or just the one-size-fits-all?
i remember this information being posted on one of the buller threads and i couldnt find it :( http://www.mtbuller.com.au/activities/summer.html mentions what there is to do roughly. Ill get George to post quite a bit about what exactly is offered by the hotel like the small details.but i do remember it is 4.5 star.

Also i wll be able to give alot more information on August 4 :D

arosar
19-07-2004, 11:16 AM
It may help you gray if I stay at the Chalet - but it sure as hell won't help me! At $120 a pop - you gotta be kiddin me mate.

Can you come up with another number?

AR

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 11:25 AM
It may help you gray if I stay at the Chalet - but it sure as hell won't help me! At $120 a pop - you gotta be kiddin me mate.

Can you come up with another number?

AR
i want you to name that person you claim:hmm: you spoke to.

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 11:30 AM
Shouldnt the correct title of that event be the Hospitality Textiles Australian Schools Teams Championships or perhaps the Hospitality Textiles Australian Schools Chess Teams Championships
bill, i have heard the abbreviation used of ascc, which i have understood to mean australian schools chess championships. Is that name acceptable?

Libby
19-07-2004, 11:53 AM
i think it would seem reasonable that if the organisers can guarantee that ppl will stay in the chalet, that some negotiation could be worked regarding prices and packages.

I guess the tricky bit with that is that people want to know now so they can make an informed choice between the chalet and the range of simpler & flexible options available. I just don't quite follow the logic of the rooms being based on all adults or all kids. Why would two identical rooms 1x3kids @ $30 each and 1x 3 adults @ approx $55 each have to be exclusively kids or adults? Why couldn't the different price point apply and people occupy rooms on the basis of their family or personal arrangement? ie 4 beds occupied by 2x kids @ $30 plus 2x adults @ $55. I'm no hotelier myself but I don't get the difference?

The thing is, if the packages on offer seem inflexible or just plain dopey :doh: people will opt for something that does cater to a range of requirements.


what do you mean withdrawn? (a) do you mean will not be permitted at all, or (b) do you mean access at all times.
if it (a) i would find that highly unlikely. Everyone would be paying money for use of these facilites in the package they bought, also with the continual concerns of what to do after playing chess, i dont think it would be a very popular move to close the pool or bar. That said i think the juniors will be struggling for the bar part;) If it is (b) ill get back to you on that one too;)

OK - your advice was that the Chalet facilities will only be open to those staying at the Chalet. The pool at the Mercure is normally open to all, at restricted times during the day. I just want to know if this is still the case so that, amongst the activities on offer at Mt Buller, I can say to families they will be able to have a swim - or no, you can only swim if you stay at the Chalet. No special access requested, just the normal conditions of use of the pool.

Hopefully no juniors in the bar but the odd parent might seek refreshment? Most hotels have their restaurant and bar open to the general public. I just wondered how that was covered under the exclusive use of Chalet customers clause. Would seem a case (for the hotel) of cutting off your nose to spite your face to refuse restaurant business?

If you go to http://www.mtbuller.com.au/chalet/ it lists these "facilities" -

Property:
24 hr Reception
Apres Bar & Cafe
Baby Sitting
Buller Ski Hire
Conference Facilities
Indoor Heated Pool
Guest Library
Gym & Squash Courts
Luggage Storage
Massage Therapist
Pool Table
Restaurant & Bar
Room Service
Sauna
Spa
Steam Rooms


Room:
Drying Cupboard
Ensuite
Hair dryer
Inhouse Movies
Ironing facilities
Mini Bar
Tea & Coffee
Television

I'm assuming that, by not staying at the Chalet, we can't use the library, gym, squash courts, masseuse, sauna, spa, steam room, pool table and might have restricted use of the pool? And maybe we can't eat there? Can you confirm so I can let people know? :whistle:

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 12:00 PM
replying to all info about accommodation
i will have to get George to answer all these questions in detail, i dont have enough information at this stage to give a detailed guarantee at this stage. I will have more exact information on August 4 :D i know you need information, but just like the buses :( i dont want to give poor information.

Garvinator
19-07-2004, 12:00 PM
:whistle:
watch it with the whistle ;)

jenni
19-07-2004, 12:14 PM
I guess the tricky bit with that is that people want to know now so they can make an informed choice between the chalet and the range of simpler & flexible options available. I just don't quite follow the logic of the rooms being based on all adults or all kids. Why would two identical rooms 1x3kids @ $30 each and 1x 3 adults @ approx $55 each have to be exclusively kids or adults? Why couldn't the different price point apply and people occupy rooms on the basis of their family or personal arrangement? ie 4 beds occupied by 2x kids @ $30 plus 2x adults @ $55. I'm no hotelier myself but I don't get the difference?

:

Libby

I've already got a request in with George/GG that the juniors will require pricings on

1 child + 1 adult
2 children + 1 adult
3 children + 1 adult
1 child + 2 adults
2 children + 2 adults
3 children + 2 adults

Also if a family discount is available for booking more than 1 room. e..g adults in one and children in the other.

Can you think of other combinations?

I have been promised pricings "soon", but no-one is quite sure when that is.

arosar
19-07-2004, 12:35 PM
i want you to name that person you claim:hmm: you spoke to.

You need me more than I need you. First, you come up with another number lower than $120. Or are you not able to do that?

AR

Libby
19-07-2004, 12:38 PM
Can you think of other combinations?

I have been promised pricings "soon", but no-one is quite sure when that is.

I think the problem is that people will have all sorts of possible combinations for the Juniors and/or schools. The easiest thing would seem to be to have a fixed price per adult and a fixed price per child or a maximum price per family etc (with or without brekky/meals) - then people can work out whatever suits them rather than working out that they will pay less if they send Jimmy off to sleep with those other boys and find Katy a bed in some other room and find another adult to share a room with themselves.

I gues the junior sub-committee will be able to negotiate some accommodation packages for families for future events in Mt Buller (or elsewhere!) :cool:

jenni
19-07-2004, 01:41 PM
I think the problem is that people will have all sorts of possible combinations for the Juniors and/or schools. The easiest thing would seem to be to have a fixed price per adult and a fixed price per child or a maximum price per family etc (with or without brekky/meals) - then people can work out whatever suits them rather than working out that they will pay less if they send Jimmy off to sleep with those other boys and find Katy a bed in some other room and find another adult to share a room with themselves.

I gues the junior sub-committee will be able to negotiate some accommodation packages for families for future events in Mt Buller (or elsewhere!) :cool:
This would be the most sensible option. However sometimes hotels have minimum thresholds for a room.

Anyway hopefully we will have some more info soon.

I know a NSW parent was planning to talk direct to them this week and she promised to let me know any info.

PHAT
19-07-2004, 04:58 PM
Mornin' boys!

And I sure did do my bit in dissuading him from going anyways. Told him all about the lack of shopping and social activities and how prohibitively expensive this whole exercise is.



That was not helpful :naughty: