Women's In-Tournament Training II

Discuss anything you like about women's chess at home and abroad.
Alan Burke

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Alan Burke » Wed Mar 23, 2011 11:59 am

Ben .. Again, let me say that I used the word patser (and yes, I will stick to MY version of it to show that I am sometimes equally such a one at spelling ) to just generalise any people -SUCH AS ME - who might just enter an event in which they would have no chance of even making a decent 'fight' against such quality opposition. The word is generally in use in the chess world and its use by me at least gave everybody an idea of what standard I was refering to. (In many sports, people refer to 'also-rans' as those who would probably not have much chance of gaining a creditable position, but those references are not meant to be a derogatory comment, but just to indicate their general ability in contrast to their opposition.)

I was just pointing out that people such as I could probably turn up and play in the Open section because it was free (and I only used the Open section as the ultimate example of how silly the situation could become) and was just suggesting that such players be limited to the lower sections so as to not spoil the event for the better players at the top.

Just to say that my use of Pat... err.. that word, was not meant as an insult to any chess players, just to people like me !!!
Last edited by Alan Burke on Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4003
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:01 pm

An adult graded 95 entered the Open section at Yeovil a couple of years ago, because he was in search of a FIDE rating. His resulting score of 2/5 included a win against a 160 with black.

Beware of apparent patzers, for they have sharp teeth.

Alan Burke

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Alan Burke » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:37 pm

By the way, am I the only one who has spoken about 'In-tournament training' in this thread ??? lol

Come on boys (and girls, of course), let's stick to the subject !! lol

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18344
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:44 pm

Alan Burke wrote: I was just pointing out that people such as I could probably turn up and play in the Open section because it was free (and I only used the Open section as the ultimate example of how silly the situation could become) and was just suggesting that such players be limited to the lower sections so as to not spoil the event for the better players at the top.
It isn't unknown for arbiters or controllers to suggest to inexperienced players that they might be out of their depth in the Open and to suggest a transfer to a lower section.

In the case of Denham, was one of the motivations behind the training and free entry to widen the base of potential members of the womens' European and Olympiad teams and to give high level practice to known candidates? If so, then extending the offer to the Open was necessary.

Sabrina Chevannes
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 1:53 pm

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Sabrina Chevannes » Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:59 pm

Roger, I think that wasn't the main idea, but that also did help. There are some players who have low ratings but play a good quality of game that may be interested in playing in the future Olympiad team.

I don't think the free entry encouraged any incorrect entering into the e2e4 event as any paying person could also enter whichever tournament they so wish. If that person feels they are ready for an open, I say go for it. If they will be demoralised if they come away not winning any games, then perhaps not.

Anyway, I haven't heard a lot about the training lately. But just in response to a comment on here, both Loz and Ben speak to me a lot about my role in women's chess and they do make some suggestions that might help me do my job better.

Alan Burke

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Alan Burke » Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:37 am

Sabrina .. If the comment you are responding to is the one in which I said to Loz and Ben .."I note that you have so far not put forward any initiatives of your own for possible improvement of the situation." (23 March, 9.59am), then without knowledge of your 'out of forum' discussions, I couldn't possibly have been aware of any such ideas they had put forward. I am certain that Loz and Ben could have replied for themselves if they so wished, but since then, the conversation has actually moved on and we have all found some 'common ground' from where some positive ideas could be advanced.

Regarding you not having heard much about training recently and earlier saying that for you to give your coaching services for free may not be viable, have you any thoughts on my amended suggestion, which I previously posted, that instead of free entries to an event, the in-tournament coaching would still be free to competitors but the coaches would be funded by the entry fees received from those in the lowest section.

This would at least ensure that everybody has contributed to any prize money they may win (and prevent any cries of favouritism towards any particular group of people), whilst it would generally be those in the lowest section who may require that extra tuition.

OK, this again may not be an ideal scenario but even if I get "D -" for ability, might I be advancing more towards getting "A +" for effort ?

Ljubica Lazarevic
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:00 pm

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Ljubica Lazarevic » Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:56 am

Why should people not wishing to have in-tournament training subsidise those who do? There is already a donation mechanism for those who want to give to the cause...

Louise Sinclair
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:29 am
Location: London

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Louise Sinclair » Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:49 am

Why should people not wishing to have in-tournament training subsidise those who do? There is already a donation mechanism for those who want to give to the cause...
This sounds a sensible compromise to me
Louise
You might very well think that ; I couldn't possibly comment.
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'

LozCooper

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by LozCooper » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:12 am

Alan Burke wrote:Sabrina .. If the comment you are responding to is the one in which I said to Loz and Ben .."I note that you have so far not put forward any initiatives of your own for possible improvement of the situation." (23 March, 9.59am), then without knowledge of your 'out of forum' discussions, I couldn't possibly have been aware of any such ideas they had put forward.
My involvement with women's chess includes organising and funding the London Chess Classic Womens Internationals 2009 & 2010, Uxbridge Womens International 2010, helping to arrange coaching for various female players, obtaining grants for female players from the John Robinson Trust, Friends of Chess and the ECF. I've also helped various women to get invitations to tournaments abroad. I'm also hoping to see several English female players playing at the 2nd Big Slick International which I am co-organising. That is in addition to the various things I've done in an official capacity as International Director of the ECF.

Apart from that I've done very little.

Louise Sinclair
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:29 am
Location: London

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Louise Sinclair » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:47 am

My involvement with women's chess includes organising and funding the London Chess Classic Womens Internationals 2009 & 2010, Uxbridge Womens International 2010, helping to arrange coaching for various female players, obtaining grants for female players from the John Robinson Trust, Friends of Chess and the ECF. I've also helped various women to get invitations to tournaments abroad. I'm also hoping to see several English female players playing at the 2nd Big Slick International which I am co-organising. That is in addition to the various things I've done in an official capacity as International Director of the ECF.
when are you expecting your knighthood? it is bad form to "trumpet" good deeds
You might very well think that ; I couldn't possibly comment.
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'

Alan Burke

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Alan Burke » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:50 am

Ljubica .. A fair comment and one which I totally accept without feeling you are being negative in any way - it is just another point of view. However, I suppose the matter of a subsidy could apply to ANY situation where some people are being allowed to have something for free whilst others have to pay for it !

I just thought that coaching would be of more beneficial in general to any newcomers than just giving them free entry into events.

When people submit their entry fee to play in a tournament, obviously some of it goes towards prize money, whereas the running costs and sundry expenses also need to be catered for and the organiser has to therefore distribute any income as seems fit.

I just thought that rather than some people pay for their entry whilst others maybe get it for free, then if everybody paid, nobody could give any accusation of one particular group receiving any advantage. The organiser would then be able to 'pay out; the income as he wishes and I was just suggesting that some of that 'pay out' be given to coaches to operate at the tournament.

Allowing free entries for some whilst charging for coaching would probably raise roughly the same income for the tournament as a whole as if everyone paid an entry free, some of which was then given to the coaches - yet the coaching for would be free for those who required it. I just thought the latter SEEMED fairer to everyone ("Justice should not only be done, but should seem to be done.")

However, this is again only my attempt at a positive suggestion for advancement.

Loz .. I never doubted you were involved in 'behind the scenes' organisation of chess - and we ALL do such work that others know very little about, yes, even me - but with regard to the matter of ideas given to Sabrina, I was just replying that I could not have been aware of those if they were only done away from the public domain. Is this you again quickly leaping to the defence of orgasnisers, etc, etc ??? lol

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2397
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Adam Raoof » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:58 am

May I just say that the bottom line is that the organiser charges entry fees, or waives them, as they see fit. It's nobody else's business who they let in for free or at a discount, or even who they pay, or how much they pay. If you object strongly then you are free to play in another tournament! I suspect nobody feels that strongly.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chessable - http://www.chessable.com
-Tell your friends about the Chess England Online Home Page - https://bit.ly/chessenglandonline
Don’t stop playing chess!

Sean Hewitt

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Sean Hewitt » Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:01 am

Alan Burke wrote:have you any thoughts on my amended suggestion, which I previously posted, that instead of free entries to an event, the in-tournament coaching would still be free to competitors but the coaches would be funded by the entry fees received from those in the lowest section.
I'm surprised that I need to say it again :roll: but the free entry had nothing to do with the training whatsoever.

Therefore, any suggestion linking the two initiatives is fundamentally flawed.
Alan Burke wrote: I just thought that rather than some people pay for their entry whilst others maybe get it for free, then if everybody paid, nobody could give any accusation of one particular group receiving any advantage. The organiser would then be able to 'pay out; the income as he wishes and I was just suggesting that some of that 'pay out' be given to coaches to operate at the tournament.
Even if the initiatives were linked, I don't think that the numbers stack up.

We had 19 female players at the March 2011 Uxbridge event, compared to 4 at the previous years event. The entry fee paid by the 4 would not come close to the training fees by those female players who availed themselves of the facility this time around. I don't know how many that was, but it was certainly more than 4 judging by the activity I saw!
Last edited by Sean Hewitt on Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

LozCooper

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by LozCooper » Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:03 am

Louise Sinclair wrote:
My involvement with women's chess includes organising and funding the London Chess Classic Womens Internationals 2009 & 2010, Uxbridge Womens International 2010, helping to arrange coaching for various female players, obtaining grants for female players from the John Robinson Trust, Friends of Chess and the ECF. I've also helped various women to get invitations to tournaments abroad. I'm also hoping to see several English female players playing at the 2nd Big Slick International which I am co-organising. That is in addition to the various things I've done in an official capacity as International Director of the ECF.
when are you expecting your knighthood? it is bad form to "trumpet" good deeds
Which is why I only did it when someone said they had no knowledge of my involvement with women's chess.

It still took up far less space than your many posts regarding your work for the North Circular Chess League so forgive me for responding to someone. :D

Louise Sinclair
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:29 am
Location: London

Re: Women's In-Tournament Training II

Post by Louise Sinclair » Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:18 am

It still took up far less space than your many posts regarding your work for the North Circular Chess League so forgive me for responding to someone.
Au contraire I wasn't posting about my work but the tourney itself - indeed I don't do much work in chess these days. However you post a regular detailed resume to keep your fans updated.
You might very well think that ; I couldn't possibly comment.
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'

Post Reply