Schachgeek wrote:
Here, here!
What needs to change in US chess
Sort:
rich wrote:
I agree with you're personal opinion, yeah.
I don't agree with your personal choice of how to spell "your".
rich wrote:
You're is correct in this case.
I agree with you are personal opinion?
There are several things the uscf has started doing/allowing in recent years that I really do NOT like. One of them is the re-entry crap they allow in some events for those who lose in the first round. They also have started rating some events in more than one time control it seems, I will never play in any event that will have an effect on more than one of my ratings. If you are playing classic chess it shouldnt be rated as action/rapid. If you are playing action/rapid it shouldnt be rated as classic...... do players actually like this ? I can't imagine many do.
Nov 2, 2009
0
#47
chess tournaments would attract more players if they cut the entry fee, awarded trophies, and didn't try to pay off the top rated players with the majority of the payout going to first and second.
scholastic unrated (no entry fee) 'trophy only' events are drawing kids into prince william county, virginia from loudon, fairfax, fauquier, alexandria, and other counties. 6 years ago, we used to have 80 to 110 kids show up for a saturday unrated scholastic 4-round event. in the last few years, tournament attendance has average 240 per event. We pay for trophies and the school janitor (required) from food sales by parent/volunteers. TD, Organizer, and floor TDs all donate their time and energy to 'make it happen'. chess is increasing so much that we have difficulty when trying to use an elementary school now - needing to move to a bigger venue due to the increased attendance.
Where do they go as they get older? highschool sports draw a lot away, swim team, soccer, and other activities.
many adults I know are like those who posted here: disgusted with donating money to the highest rated who show up only for the prize money, we quit attending many tournaments that we would have liked to play in simply because it is a money transfer from the majority to the few.
If tournament organizers really wanted greater turnout in the USA, they would 'pro-rate' prize money distribution. (but the USCF dictates prize money 'payout' ratios, so it isn't happening) e.g. If you have 50 players in class C, and 30 players above class C, and 20 players below class C, proportionate distribution of prize money would dictate: 50% of the total prize money goes out to class C players --- 30% to those above class C, and 20% to those below class C... then, everyone attending has some expectation of winning 'something'.
result: greater attendance at trophy only events.
Nov 2, 2009
0
#48
Schachgeek wrote:
snits wrote:
I expect the USCF to be responsive to the needs of it's members. That would include discouraging G/15 and G/30 time controls in favor of the more popular open ended time controls such as 40/90 15/30 15/30.
I expect the USCF to run regular, monthly tournaments all over the USA, and not just one or two big cities in every state (which they aren't even doing now) but in every city with a population of 150,000 or more. No more of the driving 4 hours to tournaments garbage.
I expect the USCF to make those tournaments affordable.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, with one exception. Instead of waiting for "the USCF" to do it, just do it yourself. You are the USCF. (Assuming you have a membership.)
Does anyone realize how easy it is to become a tournament director? You have to send an email. Three years later, you have to pass a test.
And if you don't want to become a TD? Hold an unrated tournament. It's Chess. How hard do you think it is?
ETA: One more thing. G30 is my favorite format. Different strokes and all that.
i think faster games would attract a larger audience. for the working chess player like myself I miss out on a lot of three day tournament (or even two day ones) because it's hard to get away for that long. With a time control of 30 mins you could do 6 rounds in one day in a span of about 8 hours (i know it's "only" 6 hours of play time, but humans will need a break probably every two games..plus he time it takes after each round to get the next round going which should only take a few minuets in my opinion...). Also i never believed in a "time delay" for any time control so that should not be added in..If you started early in the morning it would not be so bad, but then chess players tend to be more of a later crowd so maybe late morning would be a better idea..
What are the specifications of "G/30"?
Nov 2, 2009
0
#51
I play in several local tournaments. They are either G60/5 or G70/5. If I was king, I would start earlier so the 3-5 games do not take all day. If it helps the cost, I would rather have a trophy/award than money; even though I occasionally get part of the prize money at the lower levels.
Schachgeek wrote:
snits wrote:
What do people expect the USCF to provide for $30? The organization is only chartered to run the US Championship. I don't think it was ever intended to be the main organizer of tournaments, that is what people like Goichberg and other organizers/TDs are for. I think the majority of tournaments probably do not have outrageous fees like the CCA ones that have massive prize funds. Every month there is a G/60 tournament in Phoenix that costs $12 to play in. I've played in a G/45 tournament in Joshua Tree, CA that I think had a $20 entry fee. If the USCF is in the business of making money, they are horrible at it. They have been chronically short of money for at least a decade, and are close to bankrupt right now with the Polgar lawsuits sucking up so much money. Earlier this year the office went to a 4-day work week and laid off some staff.
What is really needed is a revival of chess club activity. If chess clubs were to grow and thrive again, more tournaments would spring up to service the needs of those players. The problem these days is finding affordable locations to have a club. Many places that used to be free now cost money.
$30?
USCF membership hasn't been that cheap since the 1970's.
Here are some of the things I expect from the USCF:
I expect the USCF to be responsive to the needs of it's members. That would include discouraging G/15 and G/30 time controls in favor of the more popular open ended time controls such as 40/90 15/30 15/30.
I expect the USCF to run regular, monthly tournaments all over the USA, and not just one or two big cities in every state (which they aren't even doing now) but in every city with a population of 150,000 or more. No more of the driving 4 hours to tournaments garbage.
I expect the USCF to make those tournaments affordable.
I expect the USCF to promote chess in the USA, and not just at the scholastic level.
I expect the USCF to run it's finances like the non-profit organization it claims to be.
I expect the USCF board to do business in an open and ethical manner, as such they don't become embroiled in/distracted by costly recounts, lawsuits, and other disputes. The Polgar debacle wasn't the first time this has happened.
What I expect the USCF to NOT do:
Not spend millions of dollars on a chess "center" that only a small number of people can take advantage of.
Not reduce services at the same time they raise membership and tournament fees.
SO!
The USCF has been chronically short of money and is near bankruptcy now? They deserve to fail. Hopefully they won't get some government bailout.
I,for one, hope USCF does not survive bankrupcty and chess players in the USA will finally have an opportunity to start over with a new federation-of course avoiding the mistakes that USCF made along the way.
https://secure2.uschess.org/webstore/member.php?mode.x=14&mode.y=16
Regular Adult membership: $29
Please provide an example where it says the membership dues you are paying are for the conducting of local tournaments by the USCF. That has never been their charter. You could argue that would be the best way for them to promote chess, but it has never been their mission to conduct local tournaments. They can be accused of a lot of things and are guilty of most of them, but ripping you off by not organizing tournaments they never told you they would organize is not one of them.
What chess center did the USCF spend millions on? The Crossville office?
Edit: The best (or worst) waste of money I've seen by them was all the money they threw into US Chess Live. It was even worse because that was when online retailers started to kill the book and equipment business which was where a lot of USCF money came from.
Agree on G/30 (@Dakota_clark: 30 minutes total for each player to complete the game), a lot of places seem to use that format due to time constraints of playing on a week night. I know one place here in Phoenix that runs a G/20 tournament on Wednesdays because they don't want their regular rating effected. Yuck! :)
People don't hear the word on where tourneys are played. Here in Colorado, I couldn't tell you where I would find an open chess tourney. All I hear about are small local chess clubs.
I tried looking up tournaments here at chess.com using the "interactive" map, but it was all but worthless. If someone from Colorado has any information, I'd really like to look into it so I can check off that square of experiencing a chess tournament in my lifetime.
socket2me wrote:
People don't hear the word on where tourneys are played. Here in Colorado, I couldn't tell you where I would find an open chess tourney. All I hear about are small local chess clubs.
I tried looking up tournaments here at chess.com using the "interactive" map, but it was all but worthless. If someone from Colorado has any information, I'd really like to look into it so I can check off that square of experiencing a chess tournament in my lifetime.
http://www.colorado-chess.com/ should be able to find out such info there
socket2me wrote:
People don't hear the word on where tourneys are played. Here in Colorado, I couldn't tell you where I would find an open chess tourney. All I hear about are small local chess clubs.
I tried looking up tournaments here at chess.com using the "interactive" map, but it was all but worthless. If someone from Colorado has any information, I'd really like to look into it so I can check off that square of experiencing a chess tournament in my lifetime.
A good source might be Brian Wall's email chess list. http://www.taom.com/mailman/listinfo/brianwall-chesslist
Ask Brian on the list what is a good source for finding Colorado tournaments.
If they have been entered in the online TLA then you could possibly find some here: http://main.uschess.org/component/option,com_wrapper/Itemid,199/
Edit: Apparently they just held a tournament in Greeley, CO on October 15th. Brian Wall also suggests colorado-chess.com.
Nov 2, 2009
0
#56
Schachgeek wrote:
Regarding time controls, did you develop an affinity for G/30 because there were no other options? I know lots of people who play G/30 simply because that's all they can find thanks to the USCF.
Anybody know the origin of G/30? The politics of money. You can run two G/30 events in a weekend and collect twice as much in entry fees.
Most serious players do not "like" G/30 because it boils down to a blitz game for rating points and prize money. But I know these events still attract players, and it's primarily because there are no other options in that area. How tragic.
I developed an affinity for G30 because it appeals to not so serious players, like me. I can play five games in an afternoon.
I'm willing to play in tournaments up to G45. Beyond that, it isn't worth my time to show up. I'll spend a great deal of time waiting to lose my next game.
Nov 2, 2009
0
#57
Also, schachgeek, you've described an area where 25 dollars is a bargain tournament, and where either prize money or the chance to attract top players are major incentives.
If that's really all that you can find in your metropolitan area, there is a huge underserved market among the not so serious players.
I've seen this phenomenon in other contexts. A group gets a core membership that participates a lot, and they all talk to each other. They've known each other for years, and they forget that there are people who haven't been doing this for a long time, and that the interests of their friends are not typical, that they are the exceptions. However, since they only talk to each other, they get the feeling that "everyone" wants things a certain way. The phenomenon is by no means limited to Chess.
Nov 2, 2009
0
#58
DeathScepter wrote:
If Masters are looking for a revenue stream, they should look to market their services. When I hit Master, I will look to be a private coach, offer simultaneous exhibitions in partnership with local businesses, hold camps, and of course there is always being an author. Unless you are some ice-cold killer GM, it is very impractical to earn a living off of tourney earnings. If we continue to require prize funds to feed the money sharks, the rest of us amatuers will get eaten up like so many fish. I think chess would do well to follow Nintendo's business model and really take a different approach. The main customer base of dedicated tournament players is already established, the key is how to draw in the non-player or the hobby player who is on the fence. The current system is NOT working, so maybe some dramatic change is in order. So the question to the chess players is what kind of experience can we make the chess tournament? It would serve us well to really investigate what draws people to play in tournaments, and work harder to meet that need and enhance that experience. Maybe I'm wrong, but I highly doubt that the majority of players go to a tournament to try and win money. So why do we set up the system to use that as the main draw? Perhaps using a portion of entry fees from large state tournaments to start or grow chess clubs in that state would be helpful. Chess is a community activity. When I first started playing chess, my friend and I would go to a local bookstore every Wednesday and have a good time with our chess friends. With some monitary support, who knows how many people that club could have inspired. Instead, the club is now a distant, but very fond memory.
I like youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
I've yet to have the open opportunity to play in a tournament; could someone explain "G/30" to me? I understand it's a type of time contraints, but what are those?
Dakota_Clark wrote:
I've yet to have the open opportunity to play in a tournament; could someone explain "G/30" to me? I understand it's a type of time contraints, but what are those?
G/30 is like a slow blitz game. It means " game in 30 minutes " ..... each player will get 30 minutes on the clock and the game cant go more than 1 hour total. If your 30 minutes elapse you lose, like in blitz. However, unlike in blitz , which is usually G/5 , in G/30 both players must keep score.
Go to elementary schools and demonstrate chess and blitz chess. Also chess geeks need to be elevated in the schools outlook.