RE: prize money

[Paul McKeown]

Richard, Loz,

Glad I brought back some good memories for you!

Oh - and well played.

One would seem your against me

You spray around the most utterly inane posts in threads all over the place. Today you managed to suggest that Tony Miles didn't achieve in chess (I recall John Nunn received the same treatment from you a few weeks ago). A few weeks ago you wanted advice on how to become a grandmaster, today you don't want to enter a tournament if it has any titled players at all entered into it and now wish to make a living as a "chess ameteur" [sic], but actually you don't like chess much and make money at poker instead. I recall you were for a long time insulted to the quick by chess players drinking alcohol before playing chess, then if I heard things right, you were annoyed that you couldn't be served an ethanolic beverage at some venue, after which you went back on the "pledge" again. If I recall correctly, a well known and respected chess editor described you a year or so ago on this forum as a "logorrhoeic loony"; I don't see that much has changed.

I do not believe I've met you

We haven't, something for which I am increasingly grateful.

My new grade should be around 169- 175, I have drawn with a 197 fide 2209 this year so far who I totally outplayed.

Congruntulations. Good luck to you at the Major Open, I doubt you will be placed in the top five, but go ahead use the insult (if you wish to see it that way) as a motivator. If you are improving as rapidly as you assert, then the field as it currently appears to be is one that you should not struggle to perform against.

[Stewart Reuben]

Christopher Kreuzer >You don't have a 'Turk' automaton in that room, do you? Playing 24/7 against a computer?<

An imaginative idea, but wrong.
Stewart Reuben

[Alan Walton]

I came 4th equal in 1992. I had a (August 1991) grade of 159J. On the other hand the four qualifiers were Lawrence Cooper, Dave Ledger, Andrew Hammond and Stuart Clarke (I think this was the tournament when he was given a double-default for swapping white's and black's knights and agreeing a draw), so maybe i was a bit under graded...

I went to university with Stuart Clarke. Whatever happened to him?

Sean,

Stuart eventually got his FM title (his inactive rating is 2303) whilst travelling abroad in Australia for a year or so, he eventually came back a played for 3Cs again in the 4NCL until he settled down and got married, he currently resides in Holmes Chapel (he played for them a few times in the Stockport League a few years back), he actually turned up to 3Cs for a reunion a few weeks ago, obviously we tried to persuade him to play a few games again

Richard, the double-default game was played against Dale James (a club mate), they were both doing very well in the tournament (if not leading), people weren't too happy the way they went about the obvious draw what was going to happen

[kishanpattni]

I think tournaments without sharks are rare these days so should be some very strong players in the major/open! Having said that I hope an amateur or underdog goes to win as I get a thrill out of seeing such suprises.

I think somewhere earlier it was said that the prizes in the major open are poor in relation to entries (please correct if i am mistaken, I am typing as I am thinking). I would slightly agree with this, although I'm not entirely dis-satisfied. Whoever does finish 1st or 2nd should have their costs of playing/traveling/accommodation etc covered. To get (up to) 10x your entry fee is quite generous in comparison to most tournaments elsewhere. Of course the competition should be stronger and the chances of winning might be slimmer but if it were compared to some of the ridiculously low prizes elsewhere then I can't complain.

I don't go into tournaments always expecting to win prize money but I thought the whole purpose of prizes existing is to make winners feel rewarded. If you paid £35 (excluding other expenses!) to enter a tournament and found yourself finishing 1st place, would you feel rewarded if you won just £100?

[Stewart Reuben]

kishnanpattni >I think tournaments without sharks are rare these days<

How are you defining the term 'shark'? Is it meant in a pejoratiive sense? If it refers to somebody who enters a tournament in the hope of and reasonable expectation of winning, then there is nothing wrong with that. That is how I lived as a professional poker player for 40 years, except I played in cash games rather than tournaments.

>If you paid £35 (excluding other expenses!) to enter a tournament and found yourself finishing 1st place, would you feel rewarded if you won just £100?<

If winning first prize was the goal, why not? What if you paid £25 and the prize was just a smalll trophy? Would you feel much less rewarded? I won the British Senior Championship in 2007. I don't think the prize money covered my expenses. So what?

Stewrt Reuben

[kishanpattni]

I use the term 'shark' quite often in a light hearted way. In this case what i meant was players making trying to make most advantage of their under-rating. Of course there is nothing wrong in this, and I too have done this before. Perhaps I underestimate the controversy of using the word 'shark' may cause.

I guess satisfaction on winning prizes will vary among players. Personally for me, the pleasure of playing only involves participating. The pleasure of winning involves winning prize money and reasonably profiting. It often costs a lot of money and time to enter events so I think hoping for profitable prize money is reasonable.

[Adam Raoof]

May I refer my colleague to the following list of results?

http://www.british-rapidplay.org.uk/

I submit that the accused, sorry, the poster, is only too well aware of the definition of the word 'shark'.

[kishanpattni]

Haha! Adam, last year at that event I was graded at 116. While graded this low I was regularly scoring 1.5-3 points in the your golders green opens. Disappointingly for me I won't be able to enter the minor and most probably won't be able to enter the intermediate this year.

[kishanpattni]

I need to stop typing so fast! The mistakes I am making when re-reading my posts lol!

[Adam Raoof]

Haha! Adam, last year at that event I was graded at 116. While graded this low I was regularly scoring 1.5-3 points in the your golders green opens. Disappointingly for me I won't be able to enter the minor and most probably won't be able to enter the intermediate this year.

Is that because they have banned you?

[kishanpattni]

lol! no! -My grade is expected to be to high for the intermediates.

[Stewart Reuben]

kishanpattni >I use the term 'shark' quite often in a light hearted way. In this case what i meant was players making trying to make most advantage of their under-rating. <

Surely that must be pejorative then, at least to some extent. Such players sometimes deliberately lose points to lower their rating. Or do you regard that as a light-hearted game between you and the organiser?
Just asking you understand.
Stewart Reuben

[kishanpattni]

I am strongly against players deliberately lowering their rating or abusing the grading system. Me and Adam are having a laugh.

Last year my grade was 116 (it had dropped immensely from 142). All the events I entered in rapidplay were in the open section, but for the british rapidplay championships (where I intend to enter the section most suitable for my grade this year). I have practiced playing in and entering mostly open sections for most of this year too with the intention of improving my chess.

[Sabrina Chevannes]

My rapidplay grade was legitimately really low, because of the fact I really suck at rapidplay. I went to the British Rapid one year, and then I entered the Intermediate, to get some practice, as my grade was 115. I was then told after my first round (which I actually lost to a 10 year old!) that I could not enter and had to be transferred into the Open as I was too strong.

I had travelled from London --> Halifax and paid for a hotel etc and be told I had to enter a section where I would get battered. I actually just went home.