Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Chess in the USA 'not great' says British Player
1 view
Skip to first unread message
ChessFire
Jan 13, 2012, 7:15:55 PM1/13/12
to
Chess in the US in the eyes of the English
Report from Las Vegas by Sabrina Chevannes
...I had heard lots of stories about American chess events, but never
experienced them myself. Even at a junior stage, their tournaments are
bigger and better than the English events.
...It was difficult to find where the chess was actually being held,
as there were no signs anywhere, just hundreds of slot machines and
gaming tables. The staff had no idea either!
...Some boards were half set up, some boards weren’t even there,
people were everywhere, just gathering and having a chat. It seemed
that by arranging things in this manner, the organisers didn’t have
any control over when the game could start.
...At this point, the tournament was hotting up with Vallejo, Sokolov,
Akobian, Shabalov and Mitkov all on 3.5/4. However, it wasn’t easy to
find out this information, as there didn’t appear to be a results
board in sight. I then discovered that I had to go on a bit of a trek
to another floor to find the list of players and their results, which
they had to fill in themselves!! I started to look at the tournament
and wondered: did the organisers actually do any work themselves?
...All in all, my first impressions of a US tournament wasn’t great as
it seemed like a very lazy and unprofessional way of running things...
read on
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7832
Report from Las Vegas by Sabrina Chevannes
...I had heard lots of stories about American chess events, but never
experienced them myself. Even at a junior stage, their tournaments are
bigger and better than the English events.
...It was difficult to find where the chess was actually being held,
as there were no signs anywhere, just hundreds of slot machines and
gaming tables. The staff had no idea either!
...Some boards were half set up, some boards weren’t even there,
people were everywhere, just gathering and having a chat. It seemed
that by arranging things in this manner, the organisers didn’t have
any control over when the game could start.
...At this point, the tournament was hotting up with Vallejo, Sokolov,
Akobian, Shabalov and Mitkov all on 3.5/4. However, it wasn’t easy to
find out this information, as there didn’t appear to be a results
board in sight. I then discovered that I had to go on a bit of a trek
to another floor to find the list of players and their results, which
they had to fill in themselves!! I started to look at the tournament
and wondered: did the organisers actually do any work themselves?
...All in all, my first impressions of a US tournament wasn’t great as
it seemed like a very lazy and unprofessional way of running things...
read on
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7832
samsloan
Jan 14, 2012, 7:25:18 AM1/14/12
to
His major complaint is that in US tournaments and in specifically in
Goichberg tournaments the players are required to bring their own
boards, sets and clocks and to post their own results.
However, the other side of the coin is that in the USA tournaments are
run with much fewer arbiters and much larger prize funds so if you
want money come to the USA (if you are strong enough to win it.)
Sam Sloan
Goichberg tournaments the players are required to bring their own
boards, sets and clocks and to post their own results.
However, the other side of the coin is that in the USA tournaments are
run with much fewer arbiters and much larger prize funds so if you
want money come to the USA (if you are strong enough to win it.)
Sam Sloan
Paul
Jan 15, 2012, 5:35:32 AM1/15/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Having played in both UK and US tournaments, I agree wholeheartedly
with Sabrina Chevannes' s article.
Sam Sloan gets the gender of the author wrong, and his response is
weak.
There is no "other side of the coin". Yes, US tournaments have much
larger prize funds but this is hardly a strong selling point, given
that they have much larger entry fees. Surely, the correct prize-fund
comparison is to calculate the percentage of the entry fee that is
returned to the player. [I haven't done a comparative analysis, but am
just pointing out that this is the correct metric to assess.]
In my experience, US tournaments are always held in hotels, which is
surely far more expensive than having a community centre or school
host it. UK events are often held at less expensive venues. Also, I
don't believe most UK tournament directors are paid, whereas US
tournament directors are. I'm not saying that having unpaid directors
leads to a better tournament, but paying tournament directors is not a
good thing from a players' standpoint because it reduces the prize
money/entry fee ratio. [It's a good thing for the TDs on the other
hand!].
Another point is that UK chess tournaments invariably, in my
experience, have excellent chess bookstalls which are a delight to
me. I've never seen a single book on sale at a US tournament.
I remember well my first US tournament. I asked someone outside the
playing hall where the chess books were. He looked at me in amazement
and said that I should try looking for a bookshop. It was an utterly
deflating experience.
Paul Epstein
samsloan
Jan 15, 2012, 7:16:02 AM1/15/12
to
On Jan 15, 2:35 am, Paul <pepste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Another point is that UK chess tournaments invariably, in my
> experience, have excellent chess bookstalls which are a delight to
> me. I've never seen a single book on sale at a US tournament.
On this point you are mistaken. Major US tournaments almost invariably
> Another point is that UK chess tournaments invariably, in my
> experience, have excellent chess bookstalls which are a delight to
> me. I've never seen a single book on sale at a US tournament.
have a major book store sales room. If you attended one that did not,
that would be a rare exception.
Unfortunately, one of the major booksellers who was frequently at
these tournaments, Jay Blem, died recently at an early age and the gap
left by his departure has not been filled. Also, tournaments held in
casinos where every inch of space is at a premium may not be able to
afford the luxury of having space for a book stall.
Yes, major US tournaments are almost always held in hotels and we
insist on it. We do not want to travel thousands of miles and then
stay up late playing and then analyzing our chess games and then have
to worry about going out and finding a place to stay. Also, the hotels
usually offer deals so the players pay less than than these hotels
would normally charge them. Players, especially the younger ones,
often rent out bed space and floor space to each other so a hotel room
with four or five chess players sleeping on the floor is not uncommon
at US tournaments.
The author of the article is apparently used to European tournaments
where the organizers provide boards, sets and clocks and have the
pieces set up and waiting for the players when they come to play.
Also, in Europe they have an arbiter standing nearby who records the
result of the game and gets both players to sign when the game is
over. We do not have that in US tournaments. In US tournaments there
is often only one or two floor directors in an event with several
hundred players. There are occasionally disputes which have to be
resolved but on the other hand in US tournaments cash prizes are paid
that are rare in European tournaments.
One point not mentioned is that in the tournament discussed in the
article, the North American Open held December 26-29, 2011, a half
dozen of the strongest players in the world traveled from Europe to
compete against each other for a first prize of $10,000, a
ridiculously small amount considering the effort required to have any
hope of winning this prize.
Sam Sloan
ChessFire
Jan 15, 2012, 11:04:12 AM1/15/12
to
To both Peter Epstein and Sam Sloan;
I think you are both right in representing respective countries and a
fundamental difference in chess culture. I remember Don Shultz saying
that on the introduction of Elo [ratings] albeit a USCF version of
them, an unintended consequence was to diminish local chess events,
and inter-club events, and to promote weekend tournaments which were
monied — because you could then have category prizes per rating
bracket.
This is very different from the English county league and inter-county
contests where there were never any cash prizes, and the only weekend
events were inter-county.
I remember traveling from Redruth Cornwall to Exeter University, about
100 miles over Bodmin- then Dartmoor which took a couple of hours and
arriving at the venue with the boards and pieces and a lot of clocks
set up [but bring one if you got one], 20 boards, and this was done by
the team captain P. H. Clarke who also played board 1 [on a rating
basis] and also ran a good book table which included Russian language
materials in book and journal forms.
Play for 3.5 hours, then home again across the moors talking chess the
whole while. This encouraged serious chess in the country and was in
the early 70s at a time when there were no British grandmasters.
Clarke, it was thought would have been IM strength years before.
Products of this system 'birthed' an astonishing field of GMs
throughout the late 70s and 80s, which per population was 10x greater
than native-born Gms in the USA. Indeed, eventually Clarke had to give
up his board 1 to some kid called Mickey Adams. :)
There were always more GMs in the USA than in the UK but they were
mostly imports, and some years ago I tried to get a US vs Russia match
going, and a better-be-nameless person at USCF said it would be
impolitic to do so since the top US players were all originally
Russian!
And the effect before and after the Wall came down was for these
weekend tournaments to be won by immigrant players of IM and GM
strength who were entirely happy to play all weekend and win $200 or
less.
At least, there is the sociology of the past quarter century.
Currently I think the result of the US system is that women in
particularly can earn more money at these high stakes tournaments than
by any other means, but alas, many of them have extended this idea to
actually earning a living, so why not play poker instead?
In the men's game I suppose Nakamura and Kamsky must rate as top, and
to be in the upper 27xx club they have had to win their spurs in
Europe or in Russia, perhaps in the professional German League since
club chess in the US is insufficient to test them [witht he possible
exception of NY City which has just 1 viable club..
I think the British county system has also declined both in volume and
in quality of players, and I wonder if Paul Epstein would agree with
that, and if indeed there is any idea of switching to a US money game?
Cordially, Phil Innes
I think you are both right in representing respective countries and a
fundamental difference in chess culture. I remember Don Shultz saying
that on the introduction of Elo [ratings] albeit a USCF version of
them, an unintended consequence was to diminish local chess events,
and inter-club events, and to promote weekend tournaments which were
monied — because you could then have category prizes per rating
bracket.
This is very different from the English county league and inter-county
contests where there were never any cash prizes, and the only weekend
events were inter-county.
I remember traveling from Redruth Cornwall to Exeter University, about
100 miles over Bodmin- then Dartmoor which took a couple of hours and
arriving at the venue with the boards and pieces and a lot of clocks
set up [but bring one if you got one], 20 boards, and this was done by
the team captain P. H. Clarke who also played board 1 [on a rating
basis] and also ran a good book table which included Russian language
materials in book and journal forms.
Play for 3.5 hours, then home again across the moors talking chess the
whole while. This encouraged serious chess in the country and was in
the early 70s at a time when there were no British grandmasters.
Clarke, it was thought would have been IM strength years before.
Products of this system 'birthed' an astonishing field of GMs
throughout the late 70s and 80s, which per population was 10x greater
than native-born Gms in the USA. Indeed, eventually Clarke had to give
up his board 1 to some kid called Mickey Adams. :)
There were always more GMs in the USA than in the UK but they were
mostly imports, and some years ago I tried to get a US vs Russia match
going, and a better-be-nameless person at USCF said it would be
impolitic to do so since the top US players were all originally
Russian!
And the effect before and after the Wall came down was for these
weekend tournaments to be won by immigrant players of IM and GM
strength who were entirely happy to play all weekend and win $200 or
less.
At least, there is the sociology of the past quarter century.
Currently I think the result of the US system is that women in
particularly can earn more money at these high stakes tournaments than
by any other means, but alas, many of them have extended this idea to
actually earning a living, so why not play poker instead?
In the men's game I suppose Nakamura and Kamsky must rate as top, and
to be in the upper 27xx club they have had to win their spurs in
Europe or in Russia, perhaps in the professional German League since
club chess in the US is insufficient to test them [witht he possible
exception of NY City which has just 1 viable club..
I think the British county system has also declined both in volume and
in quality of players, and I wonder if Paul Epstein would agree with
that, and if indeed there is any idea of switching to a US money game?
Cordially, Phil Innes
David Ames
Jan 16, 2012, 10:49:33 AM1/16/12
to
On Jan 14, 7:25 am, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> His major complaint is that in US tournaments and in specifically in
> Goichberg tournaments the players are required to bring their own
> boards, sets and clocks and to post their own results.
>
> His major complaint is that in US tournaments and in specifically in
> Goichberg tournaments the players are required to bring their own
> boards, sets and clocks and to post their own results.
>
come to the USA (if you are strong enough to win it.)
>
> Sam Sloan
>
> On Jan 13, 4:15 pm, ChessFire <onech...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Chess in the US in the eyes of the English
> > Report from Las Vegas by Sabrina Chevannes
>
> > ...I had heard lots of stories about American chess events, but never
The author's name, Sabrina, is most likely a woman's name. On that
>
> Sam Sloan
>
> On Jan 13, 4:15 pm, ChessFire <onech...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Chess in the US in the eyes of the English
> > Report from Las Vegas by Sabrina Chevannes
>
> > ...I had heard lots of stories about American chess events, but never
supposition ""his" would be incorrect.
David Ames
Offramp
Jan 17, 2012, 9:03:11 AM1/17/12
to
Did Sabrina actually play? She does not mention any of her games, or
her position. But surely she could not have been sent there as a
reporter? Which periodical would have sent her, rather than get a
resumé from a player? She may have been on holiday and popped in.
Another oddity: at that site quoted by ChessFire there are two
annotated games - surely annotated by Sabrina herself. Yet the
annotator is given as John Doe, ie annotator not known, the US Police
equivalent of NN or Anon. Is this a Fritz 12 default setting when a
game is annotated but no annotator name is defined?
her position. But surely she could not have been sent there as a
reporter? Which periodical would have sent her, rather than get a
resumé from a player? She may have been on holiday and popped in.
Another oddity: at that site quoted by ChessFire there are two
annotated games - surely annotated by Sabrina herself. Yet the
annotator is given as John Doe, ie annotator not known, the US Police
equivalent of NN or Anon. Is this a Fritz 12 default setting when a
game is annotated but no annotator name is defined?
samsloan
Jan 17, 2012, 2:49:52 PM1/17/12
to
2067 so she is certainly strong enough to play.
I do wonder why she wrote an article about an open chess tournament
and did not play in it.
Sam Sloan
Paul
Jan 18, 2012, 4:13:40 AM1/18/12
to
On Jan 17, 7:49 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I do wonder why she wrote an article about an open chess tournament
> and did not play in it.
>
This is a nonsensical criticism. She was writing from a spectator's
> I do wonder why she wrote an article about an open chess tournament
> and did not play in it.
>
viewpoint. Nothing that she said was false. She presented some facts
and narrative and gave a viewpoint. Even though she is strong enough
to play in it, it's hardly a cause for "wonder" that she chose not
to. For example, she may have had engagements which clash with the
event, or she may have not wanted to pay the entry fee.
At the moment, lots of journalists are reporting on the Australian
Open tennis, yet have never played in the event.
Do you also wonder why they write articles about the Australian Open,
yet don't play in it?
Paul Epstein
The Master
Jan 21, 2012, 9:38:06 PM1/21/12
to
*Report from Las Vegas by Sabrina Chevannes*
> His major complaint is...
Dear Mr. Sloan: 'Sabrina' is a first name given to *females*, like
say Samantha, Martha, Amanda, or Cinthia. A big clue is the final
letter 'a'.
While you may well be an expert on matters pertaining to the games of
chess and Go, you obviously know next to nothing about women.
BettorO...@aol.com
Jan 22, 2012, 1:39:18 AM1/22/12
to
> In my experience, US tournaments are always held in hotels, which is
> surely far more expensive than having a community centre or school
I doubt that is the case, as hotels tend to give free conference rooms
> surely far more expensive than having a community centre or school
to the tournament organizer, due to the number of rooms they will be
renting to the players. This also reduces the cost of travel, makes
parking easier, etc.
I still remember the time a Northern NJ monthly tournament was held on
the second floor of a hotel that was hosting the Miss Teen NJ
pageant. Talk about a mismatch!
Ray Gordon
The Fine Art Of The Miniature: Win Your Chessgames In Twenty-Five
Moves Or Less
http://www.amazon.com/Fine-Art-Miniature-Twenty-Five-ebook/dp/B004T33NZS
0 new messages