Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 1st 04, 10:45 PM
lawilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns

I'm surprised that no one has posted here about this yet, so I'll be the
one. Many (MANY) parents came to me upset that during the Chicago Open,
rounds were re-paired at least 3 times. Now, normally this wouldn't be a
huge problem, but they were re-paired after the majority of people had
completed their openings and were playing their games. This infuriated many
players who were ahead, only to have to be re-paired and now they are out of
focus. This occurred when I visited during the last round. Now, money is
on the line especially with that round, and in my opinion that just wasn't
right. It would seem that they could take a few more minutes to make sure
pairings are right before posting them. I'd rather have to wait 10-15
minutes and be late and have it correct than play for 10-15 minutes, only to
be told that I'll have to play someone else, whether I'm winning or not.
Not very organized, CCA.

Lawilson



  #2   Report Post  
Old June 1st 04, 11:15 PM
Kermit
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns


"lawilson" wrote in message
y.com...
I'm surprised that no one has posted here about this yet, so I'll be the
one. Many (MANY) parents came to me upset that during the Chicago Open,
rounds were re-paired at least 3 times. Now, normally this wouldn't be a
huge problem, but they were re-paired after the majority of people had
completed their openings and were playing their games. This infuriated

many
players who were ahead, only to have to be re-paired and now they are out

of
focus. This occurred when I visited during the last round. Now, money is
on the line especially with that round, and in my opinion that just wasn't
right. It would seem that they could take a few more minutes to make sure
pairings are right before posting them. I'd rather have to wait 10-15
minutes and be late and have it correct than play for 10-15 minutes, only

to
be told that I'll have to play someone else, whether I'm winning or not.
Not very organized, CCA.

Lawilson



This seems insane to me. Once the games are underway, that's it. If the
pairings were done badly, then the the TD will just have to live with
whatever fallout comes from it.


  #3   Report Post  
Old June 2nd 04, 09:39 AM
Chessdon
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns


..Subject: Chicago Open Concerns
From: "Kermit"
Date: 6/1/2004 6:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: [email protected]


"lawilson" wrote in message
gy.com...
I'm surprised that no one has posted here about this yet, so I'll be the
one. Many (MANY) parents came to me upset that during the Chicago Open,
rounds were re-paired at least 3 times. Now, normally this wouldn't be a
huge problem, but they were re-paired after the majority of people had
completed their openings and were playing their games. This infuriated

many
players who were ahead, only to have to be re-paired and now they are out

of
focus. This occurred when I visited during the last round. Now, money is
on the line especially with that round, and in my opinion that just wasn't
right. It would seem that they could take a few more minutes to make sure
pairings are right before posting them. I'd rather have to wait 10-15
minutes and be late and have it correct than play for 10-15 minutes, only

to
be told that I'll have to play someone else, whether I'm winning or not.
Not very organized, CCA.

Lawilson



This seems insane to me. Once the games are underway, that's it. If the
pairings were done badly, then the the TD will just have to live with
whatever fallout comes from it.


On the other hand, it seems obviously so wrong that there is likely more to
this story then expressed. I would be surprised if pairings were changed after
games were underway to the point where one side or the other had gotten an
advantage

  #4   Report Post  
Old June 3rd 04, 04:55 AM
lawilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns

I'm shocked that there isn't more concern over this, but people must
obviously be too scared to speak up who were there or who fear the wrath of
the CCA/USCF head...

lawilson

"Chessdon" wrote in message
...

.Subject: Chicago Open Concerns
From: "Kermit"
Date: 6/1/2004 6:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: [email protected]


"lawilson" wrote in message
gy.com...
I'm surprised that no one has posted here about this yet, so I'll be

the
one. Many (MANY) parents came to me upset that during the Chicago

Open,
rounds were re-paired at least 3 times. Now, normally this wouldn't be

a
huge problem, but they were re-paired after the majority of people had
completed their openings and were playing their games. This infuriated

many
players who were ahead, only to have to be re-paired and now they are

out
of
focus. This occurred when I visited during the last round. Now, money

is
on the line especially with that round, and in my opinion that just

wasn't
right. It would seem that they could take a few more minutes to make

sure
pairings are right before posting them. I'd rather have to wait 10-15
minutes and be late and have it correct than play for 10-15 minutes,

only
to
be told that I'll have to play someone else, whether I'm winning or

not.
Not very organized, CCA.

Lawilson



This seems insane to me. Once the games are underway, that's it. If the
pairings were done badly, then the the TD will just have to live with
whatever fallout comes from it.


On the other hand, it seems obviously so wrong that there is likely more

to
this story then expressed. I would be surprised if pairings were changed

after
games were underway to the point where one side or the other had gotten an
advantage



  #5   Report Post  
Old June 3rd 04, 05:50 AM
ComputerlessBrother
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns

(Chessdon) wrote in message ...
.Subject: Chicago Open Concerns
From: "Kermit"

Date: 6/1/2004 6:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: [email protected]


"lawilson" wrote in message
gy.com...
I'm surprised that no one has posted here about this yet, so I'll be the
one. Many (MANY) parents came to me upset that during the Chicago Open,
rounds were re-paired at least 3 times. Now, normally this wouldn't be a
huge problem, but they were re-paired after the majority of people had
completed their openings and were playing their games. This infuriated

many
players who were ahead, only to have to be re-paired and now they are out

of
focus. This occurred when I visited during the last round. Now, money is
on the line especially with that round, and in my opinion that just wasn't
right. It would seem that they could take a few more minutes to make sure
pairings are right before posting them. I'd rather have to wait 10-15
minutes and be late and have it correct than play for 10-15 minutes, only

to
be told that I'll have to play someone else, whether I'm winning or not.
Not very organized, CCA.

Lawilson



This seems insane to me. Once the games are underway, that's it. If the
pairings were done badly, then the the TD will just have to live with
whatever fallout comes from it.


On the other hand, it seems obviously so wrong that there is likely more to
this story then expressed. I would be surprised if pairings were changed after
games were underway to the point where one side or the other had gotten an
advantage



My understanding of the last round problem was that in 1 section a
player with 4.5 out of 6 was not paired via a computer glitch. Such a
glitch can happen, even if it is rare. As 5.5 points was prize money
in all sections it would be unfair to the other players to give this
player a full point, and unfair to the player to give them less if
they are not paired.

The games in that section were stopped within 5-10 minutes of the
start of the round. It is easy enough to say it can be checked. But
how do you check not only for players who should be withdranw, but for
missing players inside of 10-15 minutes. We are talking about
sections of up to 100 or more players!

Face facts in any tournament there usually is something that someone
can find fault with. I would think this is especially true of a large
tournament of over 300 people. I understand there were well over 700
players at the event.

Personally, I think Bill Goichberg has done an outstanding job over
the years with the Chicago Open.

Lawrence Cohen


  #6   Report Post  
Old June 3rd 04, 12:27 PM
Randy Bauer
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns


"lawilson" wrote in message
y.com...
I'm shocked that there isn't more concern over this, but people must
obviously be too scared to speak up who were there or who fear the wrath

of
the CCA/USCF head...

lawilson


I think the lack of response has more to do with the fact that just about
every tournament player has encountered this situation at one time or
another. Mistakes happen in chess games, and they occasionally happen in
chess pairings as well. In those cases, it is often not fair to other
participants to not repair. The "damage" done to somebody who has already
started their game and has to refocus is no different than what often
happens during many chess games -- mistakes happen, the likely outcome on
the board changes, and the players have to adjust.

I've often told my students that the mark of a good player is being able to
rise above conditions they cannot control. It would be better to focus on
this as a learning experience.

That said, I've played in several Goichberg tournaments (and I was in
attendance at the Chicago Open), and he and his staff generally do a very
good job. Part of it is that rounds generally start on time. One of the
trade-offs for that may be an occasional mistake in pairings that needs to
be corrected. I think most players would put up with that in return for a
tournament running on schedule -- nothing is worse than having rounds start
a half hour late, then an hour, then more and having late round games in a
day stretch into the wee hours.

Randy Bauer


"Chessdon" wrote in message
...

.Subject: Chicago Open Concerns
From: "Kermit"
Date: 6/1/2004 6:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: [email protected]


"lawilson" wrote in message
gy.com...
I'm surprised that no one has posted here about this yet, so I'll be

the
one. Many (MANY) parents came to me upset that during the Chicago

Open,
rounds were re-paired at least 3 times. Now, normally this wouldn't

be
a
huge problem, but they were re-paired after the majority of people

had
completed their openings and were playing their games. This

infuriated
many
players who were ahead, only to have to be re-paired and now they are

out
of
focus. This occurred when I visited during the last round. Now,

money
is
on the line especially with that round, and in my opinion that just

wasn't
right. It would seem that they could take a few more minutes to make

sure
pairings are right before posting them. I'd rather have to wait

10-15
minutes and be late and have it correct than play for 10-15 minutes,

only
to
be told that I'll have to play someone else, whether I'm winning or

not.
Not very organized, CCA.

Lawilson



This seems insane to me. Once the games are underway, that's it. If the
pairings were done badly, then the the TD will just have to live with
whatever fallout comes from it.


On the other hand, it seems obviously so wrong that there is likely more

to
this story then expressed. I would be surprised if pairings were

changed
after
games were underway to the point where one side or the other had gotten

an
advantage





  #7   Report Post  
Old June 4th 04, 04:43 AM
Aliyah
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns

I was in the round 7 section that had to be re-paired. The repairing
was done after less than 5 minutes had elapsed (I know this for a
fact, since I mark elapsed time on my scoresheet).

Other than having to re-adrenalize, I didn't have to make any major
adjustments, as it was really far too early in the game. I mean, at
that point you're still basically rattling off book moves - or should
be, anyway. (In fact, in my repairing I was switched colors - not that
that made a big difference either.) It was sort of like a false start
in a race. Yeah, it would be better if it didn't happen, but you learn
to cope.

The TDs at that tournament (Larry Cohen included, of course) were very
efficient and professional. The Chicago Open is such a huge event,
with complex scheduling issues, that I'm amazed it goes as smoothly as
it does.

Though I didn't do as well as I'd hoped, I do want to thank Goichberg
and team for another memorable (hah!) event.
  #8   Report Post  
Old June 4th 04, 04:53 PM
The Masked Bishop
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns

Breaking a vow of silence to comment on this outrage:

The Chicago Open charged at the minimum $195 to play. It was $250 at
the door. A $49 USCF membership and an $18 ICA membership (for
Illinois residents) were also required.

That's not a small amount of coin. Given that kind of participation
cost, the tournament organizers are obligated to do three things:

1) Provide a reasonably comfortable place to play chess.

2) Provide timely and accurate pairings.

3) Get the results into the USCF in a timely manner.

Stopping a round after it had started to re-pair is, simply put,
unacceptable at this level and this cost. It's very gracious and adult
of everyone to be so tolerant and complimentary about it, but the fact
remains that this kind of poor organization must be harshly
criticized, if anything is to improve.

Giving the organizers a pass for this only sends the message that no
matter how much money is charged, basic incompetence and weak
leadership will continue to be tolerated at USCF events and at the
USCF in general.

TMB
  #9   Report Post  
Old June 4th 04, 08:00 PM
Ron Suarez
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns

On 4 Jun 2004 08:53:50 -0700, (The Masked Bishop) wrote:

Breaking a vow of silence to comment on this outrage:

The Chicago Open charged at the minimum $195 to play. It was $250 at
the door. A $49 USCF membership and an $18 ICA membership (for
Illinois residents) were also required.

That's not a small amount of coin. Given that kind of participation
cost, the tournament organizers are obligated to do three things:

1) Provide a reasonably comfortable place to play chess.

2) Provide timely and accurate pairings.

3) Get the results into the USCF in a timely manner.

Stopping a round after it had started to re-pair is, simply put,
unacceptable at this level and this cost. It's very gracious and adult
of everyone to be so tolerant and complimentary about it, but the fact
remains that this kind of poor organization must be harshly
criticized, if anything is to improve.

Giving the organizers a pass for this only sends the message that no
matter how much money is charged, basic incompetence and weak
leadership will continue to be tolerated at USCF events and at the
USCF in general.

TMB


Well, it is clinically obvious that TMB has not recovered from his RHS
(Raging Hero Syndrome). Much like the ground hog in February, TMB
must now go back in his hole for at least 6 weeks.

Funny, there are a number of posters here that also played in the
tournament and were not, in the least bit, bothered by the minor
glitch. Things like this happen. The mark of a true professional is
how he handles it not whether a problem arises or not. It appears
that Bill and company handled the problem just fine.

Lamarr, I would kindly suggest that if the problem was that of kids,
who are accustomed to finishing their games in quick time, the better
answer would be to educate these youngsters to the specifics of
playing in an adult tournament.

Ron Suarez
  #10   Report Post  
Old June 4th 04, 09:37 PM
Randy Bauer
 
Posts: n/a
Default Chicago Open Concerns


"The Masked Bishop" wrote in message
om...
Breaking a vow of silence to comment on this outrage:

The Chicago Open charged at the minimum $195 to play. It was $250 at
the door. A $49 USCF membership and an $18 ICA membership (for
Illinois residents) were also required.

That's not a small amount of coin. Given that kind of participation
cost, the tournament organizers are obligated to do three things:

1) Provide a reasonably comfortable place to play chess.

2) Provide timely and accurate pairings.

3) Get the results into the USCF in a timely manner.


First, the size of the entry fee is dictated by the prize fund -- it's not
as is Goichberg announced that $50 of the entry fee is a premium added to
ensure that no pairing mistakes happen in any given round. Second, the
pairings were timely, and, by changing a few match-ups, they were ultimately
accurate as well. The only way they would not have been accurate was to not
re-pair. Given the prizes at stake (which is truly why people paid the big
bucks entry fees), the tournament directors chose the only logical course of
action. Finally, when you bring together nearly 800 players in multiple
sections, the chance of an error occurring increase, rather than decrease.
I can remember being repaired after games had started at least 3 times in my
tournament experience. They were all in tournaments of over 100 players.
If this is a big deal to somebody, they should stick to club swisses.



Stopping a round after it had started to re-pair is, simply put,
unacceptable at this level and this cost. It's very gracious and adult
of everyone to be so tolerant and complimentary about it, but the fact
remains that this kind of poor organization must be harshly
criticized, if anything is to improve.


Why is it unacceptable? None of the games that were stopped had reached a
conclusion. If this is the worst experience a chess player ever has had to
endure, I'd assert they haven't played in very many chess tournaments. I
could rattle off at least a dozen far worse experiences from my tournament
experience.

Giving the organizers a pass for this only sends the message that no
matter how much money is charged, basic incompetence and weak
leadership will continue to be tolerated at USCF events and at the
USCF in general.


Were you at the Chicago Open? I was. It was an excellent tournament. IM
John Donaldson was on hand to analyze players' games after each round.
There was a great book and equpiment seller on hand. There were several
skittles/analysis rooms so the playing hall stayed relatively quiet.
Tournament directors were making sure that time pressure games were
monitored. The rounds started on time. There was a strong field and many
interesting games. That is the tournament, not some minor complaint that
any self-respecting coach would tell his student to deal with and get over.

Your rabble rousing hyperbole doesn't change these facts.

Randy Bauer


TMB



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
novelty in 5.Bg5 Grunfeld played against me at Chicago Open Geoffrey Caveney rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 6 June 16th 04 10:07 PM
Chicago Open --- new adult member ratesl The Masked Bishop rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 72 February 18th 04 07:24 AM
Chicago Mensa RSHaas rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 2 September 24th 03 02:43 PM
2003 US Open Paul Truong rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 27 August 21st 03 02:56 AM
Open Championship Computer-Roshambo 2003 (3rd call) Jeroen Donkers rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 August 15th 03 11:22 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017