IGOR MARTYNOVS THOUGHTS ON THE IRISH/QT.........

[kiwinurse]

Thanks Igor,Prague was wonderful,and yes it was nice to receive a little medal with a ribbon playing there.You really did a good job,and we all enjoyed your hospitality.When we go on these long trips its nice to bring home something from them,even if its just to show the grandchildren that you travelled to these far off countries.
I myself feel first,second and third place are deserving of either medals or certificates in qualifiers,and they dont cost a great deal to give.Also its good for the press to see that there was a presentation.It really is good for the game. regards jan

[Ingo_Zachos]

Hi Igor,

nice to have you back on this forum.
I think there were 17 federatons affiliated to the WCDF in September, but now there might be more.
I don't remeber exactly which other federations, only that the IGDD was among them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, Igor, Prague 2005 was well done.

I still have that "Certificate Of Participation" on my wall, and your price ceremony was worth while.
You even managed to make Jan a youth again for a few minutes.
You are right that high prices are not the most important issue, but rather tournament conditions.
And the conditions you offered were very reasonable in my mind, just like the conditions offered in Beijing (free accomodation, free meals) were good.
The Hotel Kanarek was good and offered a very good athmosphere in the evenings and mornings.

I would always recommend to try to prefer good conditions (cheap, but still good accomodation and meals, good venue, modern tournament equipment ( a PC is needed for standings, pairings, maybe opening balloting to speed up things and to give an overview to the players and spectators, table cards etc...)) to high prices.
Instead, a "reminder" to all participants is sometimes more valuable like a ribbon or a certificate.
I still have one of these boards signed with the names of the players from Prague on my wall as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note that you had defined a maximum duration for each game, which allowed to have a big lunch break and free evenings. We had even time to post our reports on George Miller's forum.
This shows that you are an expirienced organizer.


Not like the schedule we had in Beijing, when sometimes you could get no lunch, and if the 1st game was long, the 2nd game was "shortened", which is not a good idea in such a high level event, where each game must be treated equal, as each point counts. A time rate that allows a maximum duration of 2 hours each game should be established. Imagine a round beginning 9.00 ends 13.00, and the 2nd round begins at 15.00 and ends 19.00.
Could make lunch and recreation much easier.
How abt. 25 minutes for 30 moves, two times followed by 10 minutes quickplay fisish?
Or 30 moves in 45 minutes and 15 minutes quickplay for the rest.
That would make it necessary for the players to save time and time mangement would become a quality that is needed to be a good player.
Checkers should be a sport after all.

3. I remember we had the results on your website, and the players had even time to report and sent greetinx home.
That's how it should be done. Note that a fixed maximum game duration offers more chances for the players to become "promotors" of the game.


Greetinx from cold Germany,

Ingo

[rich beckwith]

I'm not a big fan of the "fixed duration" game, although I appreciate the fact that it does help to maintain everyone on schedule. In Prague, each person had 60 minutes on their own clock, with no more time to be earned. Both of my lost games in Prague were on late mid-game endings where I had a very drawable positions, but ended up losing due to having to make speed moves due to clock pressure. Opponents won't give you a draw when they have you at a time disadvantage! While I do realize the rules were the same for everyone (and that I need to learn to budget my time accordingly), it's this "skittles" element that I dislike. Another example: the game I won off Ron King in recent match lasted 4.5 hours, with most of the game being played on a very lengthy 12-piece ending -- such endgame finesse on a complicated ending becomes near obsolete with a fixed duration game, so all facets ofthe game are not being tested. Nevertheless, I do also agree the Prague trip was still a very fine qualifier and tremendous experience overall.

Also, if there is a concern that there may not be enough time left to start the second game, the Illinois folks have successfully used a rule where the 2nd game is started at the midpoint of the scheduled round. If the first game is incomplete, the position is written down and finished after the 2nd game. There is no longer a reason for either player to stall the first game to avoid having to play the weak side in the second game. (I guess there is a risk of having two long, drawn-out games, but this rarely occurs.)