Well richie... I am quite sure you realize the USCF is not about make any dramatic changes nor replace board members with progressive thinkers. A revolution of sorts is reguired, but how many chess players actually give a damn.?
Millionaire Chess 2!!
Sort:
I know darn well what the magazine is. Recognize a little tongue in cheek.
A long time ago, it was the only source of information for many.
Well let's hope so ! A few "old timers" in the mix who knows ? Even Judit Polgars Foundation with all the best intentions gets it wrong imo. Old school.
richie_and_oprah wrote:
The old guard is dying off.Perhaps some young active and energetic minds will be able to make some changes. This is the goal. Replace the old decay with new growth. Lots of young eyes on this platform.
I very much like this challange. I'm a firm believer a new direction is needed to support the spirit of the game.
One thing I like about chess.com is they are not afraid to think outside the box, try new ideas and events. Online chess is the thing today. However, I think it is just as, if not more important promote chess in clubs, coffee houses and parks etc.
1 thing is disagree with is the promotion to sign up new members via Facebook. Imo it is just a sham which enables the claim of huge membership. What is the % of members that have actually played a game here? Very low.
Feb 19, 2016
0
#1967
woton wrote:
Reb
USCF didn't remove rating floors.
The USCF has a policy that if you win more than $2000 in a class section, your rating floor increases to prevent you from playing in that section again, e.g. you win $2500 in the U1600 section, your rating floor goes to 1600.
With MC2, they've vacillated. First they used their regular formula, highest rating minus 200 rounded down, then they gave all U1600 prize winners a 1600 floor, Later they revised the floors for the U1400 and U1200 prize winners to 1400 and 1200. In their latest machination, it looks like they've waived the >$2000 policy for MC2 and used the regular formula.
In one way, it makes sense. A true 1300 player finishes 20th in the U1600 section and wins $2500. Is it fair to give that player a 1600 floor? On the other hand, with all the sandbagging that went on, what should the USCF do?
To a certain degree, I can understand why USCF waived the money floors issued from MC2. USCF is used to only doing this to players that top in large scale tournaments like the US Open, World Open, and most of the CCA tournaments. In MC2 however, there were about 20 players per section that walked away with over $2000, which in normal cases implements a rating floor. I get the feeling that USCF doesn't want to inflate the number of people with 1600+ ratings.
Apr 17, 2016
0
#1968
Any opinions on the MC3 changes? I'm surprised that there hasn't been any comments on here yet. The only thing that immediately came to mind, is that the title of the tournament is no longer applicable since the prize fund is now relative to the entries, and has been cut in half. However, their new approach should do better for them.
niemker8835 wrote:
Any opinions on the MC3 changes? I'm surprised that there hasn't been any comments on here yet. The only thing that immediately came to mind, is that the title of the tournament is no longer applicable since the prize fund is now relative to the entries, and has been cut in half. However, their new approach should do better for them.
I'd have to ditch school to be home when the mailman was scheduled to deliver the latest issue of Chess Life.