It would be like "Congratulations Rory McIlroy for carding the lowest score in the British Open. Your wire-to-wire victory is a magnificent achievment. However to be crowned champion you have to beat Sergio Garcia, Rickie Fowler and Jim Furyk in a series of matches of miniature golf. Ties broken by closest to the clown's mouth." I'm still a supporter of this tournament, but this speed chess playoff has to go. Maurice seems to think that people are enthralled by watching speed chess. What's going to happen if one of the qualifiers has some sort of disability which prevents them from playing effective speed chess?
Ashley's Million-dollar chess tourney - but bring your own clocks
Sort:
wrcase wrote:
I wonder what they are going to do if there are more than 4 people qualified for the speed session? In the 2013 World Open there was a 9 or 10 way tie for first in the Open Section. This speed chess playoff is a big turn- off to me. If you want to break ties with it, fine, but if I win clear first in my section I don't want to spend a whole day playing speed chess to determine my prize. I would feel I've already earned it.
+1
This is one of the reasons I won't be attending. I don't like this whole speed chess playoff part of it at all. I'm not a blitz player.
maskedbishop wrote:
No, your high probability is because your rating of 1990 is a mere ten points under the cut-off for Under 2000, so you've personally always had a very high chance of scoring well in your section. You are not competing in "Under 2200." Your section is Under 2000. Let's be honest here.
This has always been the case for you, regardless of how many people are entered, and it prompts me to wonder how eager you would be endorsing this event if your rating was 2005, and you'd be sitting at the very bottom of THAT particular group with almost no chance of winning anything.
I wonder if you'd have even registered, if that was the case.
So yes, Ashik, you have a vested interest in this tournament taking place, since you are so well placed to win big in it. Your hearty enthusiasm is not surprising.
TMB
Accurate and well said.
I'm not a blitz player either but I do like the dynamic that this playoff will create.
>I'm not a blitz player either but I do like the dynamic that this playoff will create<
Well since you almost certainly will be out of the money you can enjoy the dynamic all you want...watching from the sidelines after blowing whatever money you have left on video poker.
But some of those players who sweated out 6 wins over four days to win their section are not going to be too happy if they lose their standing, and the money, in "Armageddon chess."
It's a cheesy way to close the tournament and speaks to the general lack of seriousness, and over-abundance of flash, of this event. This is very much not what serious US chess is about. Maybe they could have a side event in Stratego.
[COMMENT DELETED]
>What's going to happen if one of the qualifiers has some sort of disability which prevents them from playing effective speed chess?<
They get to sue the moronic organizers for discrimination. Let's see...blind or sight-impaired people, older people who may have health issues, anyone with a physical disability of the arms or hands, anyone in a wheelchair who likely can't lunge over boards and clocks very quickly...good job, Amy and Maurice! Maybe you can require everyone to read English too!
I went on the website and couldn't find the requirement that Only Physically Perfect People Need Register.
Why not go all the way and stage a bungee jump off the Hoover Dam as a tie breaker. My money is on Shabalov all the way for that one.
maskedbishop wrote:
>Did you also notice the section-wise registration list? It tells me that I have a very high probability of winning at least some prize in Under 2200 section because there is lot less than 50 players for that section <
No, your high probability is because your rating of 1990 is a mere ten points under the cut-off for Under 2000, so you've personally always had a very high chance of scoring well in your section. You are not competing in "Under 2200." Your section is Under 2000. Let's be honest here.
This has always been the case for you, regardless of how many people are entered, and it prompts me to wonder how eager you would be endorsing this event if your rating was 2005, and you'd be sitting at the very bottom of THAT particular group with almost no chance of winning anything.
I wonder if you'd have even registered, if that was the case.
So yes, Ashik, you have a vested interest in this tournament taking place, since you are so well placed to win big in it. Your hearty enthusiasm is not surprising.
TMB
@MaskedBishop, you come to conclusion so quickly, so easily and so wrongly. I will take a bit of pain to explain and will expect you to honestly admit that you are wrong. And when you admit it, you may wonder that, probably your mask is not letting you see the entire picture for many other similar cases. Think about it. Whether you admit or not, here is why you are wrong.
I registered early January when my rating was 1990 and I was performing well in Tuesday Night Marathon in Mechanics Chess Institue in San Francisco. At that time during registration my rating was 1990. But as I have been improving, my rating went upto 2148 in April. But by that time I started getting paired with the expert players instead of 1800s/1900s I was facing earlier. And I realized how strong and well-prepared they are. I have taken hit and came down again to 2000s. My rating at August will be 2071. By October I may very well be one of the lowest in Under 2200 (even if I go down at 1900 because MCO policy is that they will take the highest rating since December 2013 to put you in correct rating group). So I have a very good chance to be one of the last people of U2200 group. So your entire theory of me just being enthusiastic about this tournament for money is incorrect. With all modesty, I work as a Software Engineer in Sillicon Valley and make enough money to not care about how much I spend on chess or whether I am getting any money back from chess. But I warn you, I am a fighter - I am going to prepare hell hard after a project deadline I need to meet in office this August and I expect to rise from the ashes again even if most of my opponents are near to 2200.
For my son, Ahyan Zaman, the youngest participant in MCO - he was only rated 658 during the sign up of this tournament. I saw a few comments in forums people joking why this kid has registered for MCO. But in last 6 months he has improved on an average 100 rating points per month. His rating in August supplement will be 1246 - http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?15035222
So yes, he has a chance for getting something in Under 1400 section. But the time when I signed him up (early January), you can be sure I thought he will be the last in his section (indeed there is no one as low as 600 in entire MCO registration list even until today).
Just that you can make yourself believe a bit for a moment, all my games can be found in my blog here - http://dragonbishop.blogspot.com/
... and many of my son's games can be found here - http://ahyanchess.blogspot.com/
You can desect these games and can really figure out our actual playing strength at different points in time. You will have to conclude that I never could have expected to stay within Under 2000 rating when I was signing up for the tournament and would never expect my son to increase in playing strength so rapidly. Both of these logic defeats your statement about me.
Now think, may be you were all along wrong with everything else - just like this one that I am proving now by data.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlRtgSupp.php?13178575
But as long as you wear business casual...you are in.
I'm not sure about this one either. They can say whatever they like, but a good lawyer would be able to grind this one into small powder. If you don't want your image used...it's YOUR image. They can pay YOU a thousand dollars if they want to run it in an app.
>Your participation in the tournament is your tacit consent that you understand that Millionaire Chess has the right to broadcast your image in conjunction with our event, promotions related to the event, on our website, through our social media channels, on our app, and any other media related to our event. <
I still haven't heard what they are going to do if like the 2013 World Open there is a 10 way tie for first. How are they going to get rid of 6 players? Probably more speed chess. The spectators will go wild!! Wheee!! I've never seen a section in a large open tournament have 4 clear finishers. What stinks about this is every one is forced to stay an extra day because you don't know if your going to qualify or not before the tournament starts. At least in Vegas there's other stuff to do.
Since Maurice is using poker tournaments as a reference in this tournament, it would be funny if the 4 guys said "we're not gonna play, we've agreed to a chop."
i'm pretty sure if the tournament does not fill up that vegas poker players would join the tournament if it were cost effective for them. i find it amusing that people would take time to criticize a trifling aspect of a tournament of which they have no constructive part to play. i am wondering how such people center themselves according to covey's 7 habits of highly successful people and how it results in their brand of rhetoric... so many possibilities. anyway, i'm sure that playing will be a lot more fun than being an armchair general and even lucrative should i play well enough. interesting (and probably more likable people than the detractors of quality chess tournaments on chess.com forums, and if past example is anything to go buy, maurice ashley will run a quality event), chess, and things to-do in vegas. i'm pretty sure a lot of people in the US can afford it, but they do not want to pay, which is fine.
anyways 170 entered so far.
>So I have a very good chance to be one of the last people of U2200 group.<
Well my friend, I'm only sorry that you are so dedicated...because if you could have taken it easy and stayed out of the tournaments for a few months, your good nature and enthusiasm would be duly rewarded. I frankly would much rather see someone like you win big than the large cadre of chess sharks that this event is inevitably attracting.
So yes, I was wrong about you, and I'm sorry.
As for "being wrong with everything else," I've presented opinions. Go and have fun with your boy, but this thing is being run by the wrong people with the wrong notions on what chess is or should be about. It is NOT about excessive money, gambling glitz, new Porsches, massage chairs, contrived blitz games, or dress for success contests.
These people wouldn't know what Alexander Alekhine was really about if he came up and bit them on their fannies.
>i find it amusing that people would take time to criticize a trifling aspect of a tournament of which they have no constructive part to play.<
Well, you are easily amused. I personally go for old Donald Duck cartoons myself.
As for "trifling," tell that to anyone who has to play blitz chess on Monday morning...especially if they have no arms. Oh I forgot, only beautiful people are coming to this one...
> i will find out who you people are. where you live. i will<
We sure as hell don't live in Finland.
>i am wondering how such people center themselves according to covey's 7 habits of highly successful people and how it results in their brand of rhetoric<
I see you indulge in the deep philosophers. Do you like Tony Robbins too? Perhaps even some Norman Vincent Peale?
Try Satre and the Stones...the chicks will find you far more engaging, I promise.
MrEdCollins wrote:
maskedbishop wrote:
No, your high probability is because your rating of 1990 is a mere ten points under the cut-off for Under 2000, so you've personally always had a very high chance of scoring well in your section. You are not competing in "Under 2200." Your section is Under 2000. Let's be honest here.
This has always been the case for you, regardless of how many people are entered, and it prompts me to wonder how eager you would be endorsing this event if your rating was 2005, and you'd be sitting at the very bottom of THAT particular group with almost no chance of winning anything.
I wonder if you'd have even registered, if that was the case.
So yes, Ashik, you have a vested interest in this tournament taking place, since you are so well placed to win big in it. Your hearty enthusiasm is not surprising.
TMB
Accurate and well said.
I explaned in comment number 864 why I think its not correct or applicable in my case. Please re-consider.
maskedbishop wrote:
>So I have a very good chance to be one of the last people of U2200 group.<
Well my friend, I'm only sorry that you are so dedicated...because if you could have taken it easy and stayed out of the tournaments for a few months, your good nature and enthusiasm would be duly rewarded. I frankly would much rather see someone like you win big than the large cadre of chess sharks that this event is inevitably attracting.
So yes, I was wrong about you, and I'm sorry.
As for "being wrong with everything else," I've presented opinions. Go and have fun with your boy, but this thing is being run by the wrong people with the wrong notions on what chess is or should be about. It is NOT about excessive money, gambling glitz, new Porsches, massage chairs, contrived blitz games, or dress for success contests.
These people wouldn't know what Alexander Alekhine was really about if he came up and bit them on their fannies.
Hi masked bishop, your apology accepted. It's a co-incidence that we both are so dedicated on the 2 extreme ends of the fence. I noticed even your rating is closer to mine and your nick masked bishop is similar to my chess blog's name dragon bishop. I swear I didn't copy you.
Anyway, I guess we can agree to disagree, my friend!
ashikuzzaman wrote:
I explaned in comment number 864 why I think its not correct or applicable in my case. Please re-consider.
If you are playing in the Under 2200 section, and if your top USCF rating was only 2158, then I misunderstood the prior post.
Good luck to you. I hope you do well!
MrEdCollins wrote:
ashikuzzaman wrote:
I explaned in comment number 864 why I think its not correct or applicable in my case. Please re-consider.
If you are playing in the Under 2200 section, and if your top USCF rating was only 2158, then I misunderstood the prior post.
Good luck to you. I hope you do well!
That's fine. Thank you. My top rating was 2148. But for the last 9 years my rating has increased from 1500 to 2100 and settling back in 2000s now-a-days.
Here's where the screaming starts. Even if you play 7 great games and win your section cleanly, you can still lose in speed chess to someone who may have scored well below you. This alone makes the entire tournament questionable, and I wonder just what the organizers are doing when they effectively punish their section winners by making them win all over again in speeders:
>The top four players from each section will play each other in a double round knock-out to determine the eventual winner and prize distribution. Note that the losers of the semi-finals will play each other to determine who takes 3rd place and who takes 4th place. The time control will be G/25 with a 5-second delay. In case of a tie after two games, the players will play two G/15 games with a 5-second delay. In the event of a tie after those games, the players will play two 5-minute blitz games with a 2-second delay. In the event of a tie after those games, the players will play an Armageddon blitz game (White 5 minutes, Black 3 minutes 30 seconds with draw odds).<
Exactly why this is a poorly planned event. Methinks Ashley wants to generate media interest in a playoff, but what spectator will even care who wins any section below the top one? Also, speed chess to determine the prize winner after a long standard time control event? Makes little sense at all.
Also, the steep rise in entry fees is bad. It's understandable to raise the entry as time passes, but the increase from $1,000 to $1,500 to $2,000 will ensure a huge loss for the organizers. Oh well, It's Amy Lee's $ to give away, not mine.