Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:05:13 10/30/97
Go up one level in this thread
On October 30, 1997 at 11:16:40, Ed Schröder wrote: >Second try, hope this looks better formatted.... > > >Text taken from the Gambit Site... > >* The Paris stock exchange is well guarded. It is difficult to > get in, so there are nearly no visitors to the Championship. > Even the owners of the two Paris chess shops do not seem > interested to go there! > >* The tournament room is beautiful, but the air is very sticky, > and the tournament results are written by hand on a small piece > of paper which is stuck to the wall! As a consolation you can > watch the ups and downs of the share prices from the gallery! > >General question to the ICCA: Why are professionals losing >interest? Why invest $4000-$5000 in such a poor organization on >this part of the tournament? > poor formation of the question. Much better: why is *everyone* losing interest? >Although this is not the main reason for me not participating in >Paris the above is certainly one of them. I am pretty sure *one* >email to the ICC for instance would have been enough to get all >the games life on the ICC. > >A very poor performance of the ICCA this time. >I hope they will change this for the future. > >- Ed Schroder - other issues that I've brought up: 1. no information coming out of tournament site. one web site update since tournament started, after round 7 (and 4 days) had elapsed. 2. oddball pairings in rounds one and two (accelerated). This is really beyond anything I'd claim to understand. when log2(entries) is less than the number of rounds, accelerated pairings is not just unnecessary, using them is *wrong*. 3. secondary tie-break is wrong because of the accelerated pairings. the cumulative round-by-round scores are meaningless when using the current pairings for rounds one and two. 4. stupid rule giving slower machines 10 extra minutes. Can't someone figure out that this doesn't work *if* everyone is thinking on the opponent's time? If machine equality is desired, make it a rule. Don't fudge things in a way that doesn't work. Come on guys, what gives? This doesn't *have* to be run like some amateur event. From the outside, looking in, I'd conclude that the people doing this have *never* done it before. From local arrangements all the way through the tournament director. If you need someone that knows how to pair a tournament correctly, I'm available. I'd let the computer do it right, which would be a breath of fresh air. Jeez. I'm beginning to sound like Chris. :)
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.