<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Musing on ties for prizes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thechessmill.com/2005/07/14/musing-on-ties-for-prizes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thechessmill.com/2005/07/14/musing-on-ties-for-prizes/</link>
	<description>Ramblings and ruminations on chess in SE Wisconsin, the USA and the World</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:17:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Administrator</title>
		<link>http://www.thechessmill.com/2005/07/14/musing-on-ties-for-prizes/#comment-388</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2006 16:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thechessmill.com/?p=62#comment-388</guid>
		<description>Could be. Paul Keres once said that title norms were ruining tournament chess. Players were so concerned about making the norm that they never really tried to win the event. They simply wanted to do whatever it took to reach the specified "norm" score, and if drawing the last four games was all they needed, then why should they risk losing?

He had a point. There's also some ego protection involved, as well as energy conservation, though I'm less inclined to accept that second point in weekend swisses; it's more a strategy for week-long (and longer) events.

It could even be laziness. Why work any harder for the money than you absolutely have to?

Whatever it is, there's more than one organizer who's considering quitting because of it. If your name isn't Goichburg or Cuchi, you're not making much out of organizing events. Organizing is work, and as a reward for the effort it's nice to see some good games. When there are just a few excellent players in an event, the opportunity for that is reduced considerably. When they decide not to play each other, the opportunity is completely eliminated, and the organizers begin to ask themselves "Why am I doing this?"

As both a player and an organizer, I can understand both points of view, better than those who just play, or just organize. I can't find it in me to condemn either viewpoint, but something has to give or there won't be many opportunities to play.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Could be. Paul Keres once said that title norms were ruining tournament chess. Players were so concerned about making the norm that they never really tried to win the event. They simply wanted to do whatever it took to reach the specified &#8220;norm&#8221; score, and if drawing the last four games was all they needed, then why should they risk losing?</p>
<p>He had a point. There&#8217;s also some ego protection involved, as well as energy conservation, though I&#8217;m less inclined to accept that second point in weekend swisses; it&#8217;s more a strategy for week-long (and longer) events.</p>
<p>It could even be laziness. Why work any harder for the money than you absolutely have to?</p>
<p>Whatever it is, there&#8217;s more than one organizer who&#8217;s considering quitting because of it. If your name isn&#8217;t Goichburg or Cuchi, you&#8217;re not making much out of organizing events. Organizing is work, and as a reward for the effort it&#8217;s nice to see some good games. When there are just a few excellent players in an event, the opportunity for that is reduced considerably. When they decide not to play each other, the opportunity is completely eliminated, and the organizers begin to ask themselves &#8220;Why am I doing this?&#8221;</p>
<p>As both a player and an organizer, I can understand both points of view, better than those who just play, or just organize. I can&#8217;t find it in me to condemn either viewpoint, but something has to give or there won&#8217;t be many opportunities to play.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.thechessmill.com/2005/07/14/musing-on-ties-for-prizes/#comment-387</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:38:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thechessmill.com/?p=62#comment-387</guid>
		<description>It is interesting that top players do that. I am not convinced that the only reason they 'draw' is financial. One wonders if there isn't some 'self protection' in not playing games out to a logical conclusion?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is interesting that top players do that. I am not convinced that the only reason they &#8216;draw&#8217; is financial. One wonders if there isn&#8217;t some &#8217;self protection&#8217; in not playing games out to a logical conclusion?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
