Ashley's Million-dollar chess tourney - but bring your own clocks - Chess Forums - Page 60

SmyslovFan

Aug 30, 2014

0

#1181

Doomsayers are always right.

I ran across a doomsayer who claimed Yellowstone would erupt in August, 2014. When the earthquake hit Napa, she claimed she was right.

I just don't see why some people get so much joy out of the possibility of a chess tournament failing. But this thread has been going on for more than 1300 posts and there are other threads that the naysayers have created too. They must be getting something out of it to keep on posting (and on, and on and on...)

ashikuzzaman

Aug 30, 2014

0

#1182

SmyslovFan wrote:

Doomsayers are always right.

I ran across a doomsayer who claimed Yellowstone would erupt in August, 2014. When the earthquake hit Napa, she claimed she was right.

I just don't see why some people get so much joy out of the possibility of a chess tournament failing. But this thread has been going on for more than 1300 posts and there are other threads that the naysayers have created too. They must be getting something out of it to keep on posting (and on, and on and on...)

This tournament is a failure and no joy to take out of it?? For whom its a failure? The investor who invested? Why do I care? The players who did not sign up? Why do I care? The palyers who signed up? I am one of them. And just by participating in it the tournament is already a success for me. So please mention for which of the 3 possible audiences you think the tournament will be a failure. Don't say all 3 categories because at least for the 3rd category audience, I am one of whom, the tournament - as long as even the first version in October takes place - is already a success - irrespective of what prize we win. The joy part of it, I guess you can leave it to the people who enjoy life their own way. Dont say like some others - my way is the highway! We know our way. You join or not - you figure out.

What we have to see is whether its a failure or success for the 1st and over time for the second category of people or not.

rowsweep

Aug 30, 2014

0

#1183

Which famous people are.coming

SmyslovFan

Aug 30, 2014

0

#1184

Ashi, I'm with you on this one. You may want to read what I actually wrote. My comments were directed at the doom sayers.

johnmusacha

Aug 30, 2014

0

#1185

SmyslovFan wrote:

Ashi, I'm with you on this one. You may want to read what I actually wrote. My comments were directed at the doom sayers.

Quit being so negative, brah.

I_Am_Second

Aug 30, 2014

0

#1186

rdecredico wrote:

The North American Open in Las Vegas will have double the attendance of the Millionaire Open, is one/sixth the cost and one/quarter the prizes.

You fools that think losing a half million dollars is a good start for the event are seriously out of touch.

These people thought they were going to make money right out of the gate from the first event. They are reeling right now.

Some of you people just too infatuated too see it.

Its an incredible effort to grow chess, annd i hope its successful.

small_potato

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1187

SmyslovFan wrote:

Doomsayers are always right.

I ran across a doomsayer who claimed Yellowstone would erupt in August, 2014. When the earthquake hit Napa, she claimed she was right.

I just don't see why some people get so much joy out of the possibility of a chess tournament failing. But this thread has been going on for more than 1300 posts and there are other threads that the naysayers have created too. They must be getting something out of it to keep on posting (and on, and on and on...)

Whilst a catastophic natural disaster probably counts as "doom", I'm not sure the failure of a chess tournament to make enough money to make it viable to host on a regular basis is really the same thing.

small_potato

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1188

I_Am_Second wrote:

rdecredico wrote:

The North American Open in Las Vegas will have double the attendance of the Millionaire Open, is one/sixth the cost and one/quarter the prizes.

You fools that think losing a half million dollars is a good start for the event are seriously out of touch.

These people thought they were going to make money right out of the gate from the first event. They are reeling right now.

Some of you people just too infatuated too see it.

Its an incredible effort to grow chess, annd i hope its successful.

The way to grow chess would be to promote it at grass roots, ie get kids playing in schools. Millionaire chess is an attempt to make money, nothing else. Kids aren't going to be entralled by a bunch of poorly dressed blokes playing a very long and superficially tedious looking game that they had to study for ten years to get any good at, for a handful to take home $20,000 (if they're lucky) and think "yeah, i need a piece of that action". Barely anyone makes money out of playing chess, the way to grow the game is to get people interested in the game itself, not the hopelessly unrealistic prospect of getting rich off it.

Irontiger

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1189

rdecredico wrote:

Bulla wrote:

>As for separate restrooms ... since when has their been a crush of people watching games such that the players are inconvenienced? Please. Anyone that needs, or wants, separate restroom facilites in an event such as this is an effete arsehole. <

The seperate bathrooms is mainly to prevent cheating.

Also you can't say that they aren't using any additional cameras other than the casino. It would be foolish for them to publicize all security measures they have put into place. They've already mentioned a few to put the players at ease and to show that they are addressing the problem, but for proper security some methods need to be kept unknown.

They are not using extra cameras aside from casino security. The casino won't allow it. No one else is allowed to run a cc system or use video cameras in a casino to record events.

I worked in the gaming industry in Las Vegas, am very familiar with the protocol.
(...)

They are renting the casino. There is a good chance different rules apply.

rowsweep

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1190

Are they playing for Maurice Ashley's money? I did not know IBM w he was a miilionaire.

rowsweep

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1191

There is an advantage with having it in a casino. If you are caught cheating then can take you to the backroom.

TheGreatOogieBoogie

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1192

small_potato wrote:

I_Am_Second wrote:

rdecredico wrote:

The North American Open in Las Vegas will have double the attendance of the Millionaire Open, is one/sixth the cost and one/quarter the prizes.

You fools that think losing a half million dollars is a good start for the event are seriously out of touch.

These people thought they were going to make money right out of the gate from the first event. They are reeling right now.

Some of you people just too infatuated too see it.

Its an incredible effort to grow chess, annd i hope its successful.

The way to grow chess would be to promote it at grass roots, ie get kids playing in schools. Millionaire chess is an attempt to make money, nothing else. Kids aren't going to be entralled by a bunch of poorly dressed blokes playing a very long and superficially tedious looking game that they had to study for ten years to get any good at, for a handful to take home $20,000 (if they're lucky) and think "yeah, i need a piece of that action". Barely anyone makes money out of playing chess, the way to grow the game is to get people interested in the game itself, not the hopelessly unrealistic prospect of getting rich off it.

The fun isn't in watching games live but playing over games. Games of players like Nimzowitsch, Tartakower, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Bronstein, Petrosian, Averbakh, Karpov, Fischer, Kasparov, Judith Polgar, Kramnik, Grischuk, and Carlsen would be a big help as they'd get exposure to many different playing styles. Of course start with endgame study for awhile then work on middlegames and finally openings. Tactics of course would come into play in all segments (especially middlegame of course but opening and endgame tactics are known to happen as well)

SilentKnighte5

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1193

rowsweep wrote:

There is an advantage with having it in a casino. If you are caught cheating then can take you to the backroom.

You can either have the money and the hammer or you can walk out of here. You can't have both.

Scotchy

Aug 31, 2014

0

#1194

so funny!

ashikuzzaman

Sep 1, 2014

0

#1195

SmyslovFan wrote:

Ashi, I'm with you on this one. You may want to read what I actually wrote. My comments were directed at the doom sayers.

Oops sorry! I thaught otherwise. ut after reading second time, I offer my apology.

SmyslovFan

Sep 1, 2014

0

#1196

rdecredico wrote:

The failing of the event is not a bad thing, its a good thing.

Therefore predicting its demise is not doomsaying.

The event itself is not good for chess, not good for the majority of players, and is designed to get a bunch of idiots and patzers to fund prizes for semi-professions.

People like askikuzzaman are being used and they just too myopic to reralize this.

One problem in chess right now is that thr majority of kids playing at young ages end up quiting at high school age. That is something that if addressed and fixed would be good for chess. Large money torunamernts do not address any of the issues that need to be addressed in the chess world.

Creating large money event for the effete shitheads of the chess world is not good for chess and those of us realizing it wont work are not doomsayers, we're pragmatists.

So, SmyslovFan, improve your weak-ass vocabulary and understanding of the world before you continue making an ass of yourself with your idioctic comments.

Putz.

Brilliant.

johnmusacha

Sep 1, 2014

0

#1197

Hmmm

Bulla

Sep 1, 2014

0

#1198

>One problem in chess right now is that thr majority of kids playing at young ages end up quiting at high school age.<

Well why do you think they stop? For me I stopped before I finished high school because there was no future in it; no money and extremely difficult to make a decent living playing on the tournament circuit. It just wasn't worth all the time and effort I had to invest to keep my game sharp. Larger tournaments does address this problem.

shell_knight

Sep 1, 2014

0

#1199

Bulla wrote:

>One problem in chess right now is that thr majority of kids playing at young ages end up quiting at high school age.<

Well why do you think they stop? For me I stopped before I finished high school because there was no future in it; no money and extremely difficult to make a decent living playing on the tournament circuit. It just wasn't worth all the time and effort I had to invest to keep my game sharp. Larger tournaments does address this problem.

Do you think adults play chess because their game is sharp and they make money? No, they play because they love the game.

Kids quit because they don't love it anymore (people change a lot in those years).

And they may not have loved it in the first place (you see moms load up the family of U1000 kids and drive them to tournaments...).

Bulla

Sep 1, 2014

0

#1200

>Do you think adults play chess because their game is sharp and they make money? No, they play because they love the game.<

Of course thats a given. I play because I love chess but because I also have to make a living I can't dedicate as much time to chess as I would like too. Kids have to think of their future as well, how they'll support themselves, getting a job, going to college, etc.