Poll: How should the Sensory Boards be funded
This poll is closed.
By Donation (individuals and congresses)
44.12%
15 44.12%
Increasing congress entry fees by £1 (going towards the costs)
23.53%
8 23.53%
Congresses using the boards paying a hire charge of £50
8.82%
3 8.82%
Congresses using the boards paying a hire charge of £75
2.94%
1 2.94%
Congresses using the boards paying an extra 5p per graded result
8.82%
3 8.82%
I do not think Chess Scotland should use such boards
11.76%
4 11.76%
Total 34 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sensory Boards
#21
Alex McFarlane Wrote:Indeed it is the ideal way to make sure your husband is where he says he is. ("Oh darling, we've got plenty of time - he's just entering the middle game".)

Ooooh my... the married men of chess will think twice before playing a weekend congress now! Tongue

Hugh - my only issue with the surcharge is the fact that the majority will be charged for something they may never get the privelege of using if we go down the route of top boards in all sections. I wouldn't like to pay an additional fee if I wasn't going to get a go on the boards. Sad
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!
Reply
#22
ROFL at your last line Alex.

A quote from my wife last year (who freely admits she knows very little about chess, though she is keen for me to teach our daughter) after the Hamilton Congress:

"What, you can win money playing chess? But it's just a board game isn't it? I mean, how hard can it be?"

I ask you!!!

She would have to be on her toes, given she couldn't tell a middlegame from a game of draughts...

Regardless. Andrew - your point is well made, however I would be happy to bid for a game on a sensory board regardless of my opponent's intent if I felt I would get that something extra out of it (unless my opponent loved the green mat too much and refused to play on it). I doubt the bid would be £50 however!!! And I would also not be averse to paying a topup to the congress fee if that was the way forward.

David - yes, the brown square problem afflicted me at the British Rapidplay last year. That's my story at any rate... maybe I just couldn't tell an endgame from a game of draughts...
Reply
#23
The idea of having an auction to play on a live board is quite frankly ridiculous! Donations are good, but will they be enough to raise the full amount?

This wont be a popular opinion with those not playing in the Open's, but really broadcasting games from the lower events makes no sense to me. It might be an elitist view, but I think these boards should be for the best players who play the best chess. Those in lower events who would like to play on such boards, well then you should work your way up through the ranks until you are good enough to compete in Open events.

I could be wrong, but I can't recall any other events in England or Europe where expensive sensorary boards are used to broadcast games between players who could be as lowely rated as 1200.
Reply
#24
I'm really looking forward to reading David's reply to that.
Reply
#25
J*R Wrote:I could be wrong, but I can't recall any other events in England or Europe where expensive sensorary boards are used to broadcast games between players who could be as lowely rated as 1200.

Well then I think CS are being more innovative than these other countries. Big Grin

I don't think people watch the lower graded live boards because they want to see brilliantly accurate Chess, I think they watch them for exactly the opposite reason. Surely something which generates more interest in the events, is worth giving a shot; and it seemed to be a bit of a hit at the last event.

Your viewpoint is like suggesting that we shouldn't watch women's tennis anymore because the men are obviously the best in the world! =) When I want to see good tennis I watch the top 5 men, when I want to see Maria Sharapova and Co. I watch the women. :U
Reply
#26
J*R Wrote:Those in lower events who would like to play on such boards, well then you should work your way up through the ranks until you are good enough to compete in Open events.

I could be wrong, but I can't recall any other events in England or Europe where expensive sensorary boards are used to broadcast games between players who could be as lowely rated as 1200.

Nor me. But that doesn't mean it can't be tried? Top 4 boards in the Open and Top 2 in the Major / Minor (or Top 6 / 1 /1). It was a very well received gesture at the Scottish this year. The aspiring younger players in the Minor field have probably all had some experience of them already, particularly if they've played international chess, but I found it encouraging, even though I am sure there was plenty head scratching if anybody was watching my game (unlikely).

I guess what I'm saying is, if you don't give people a taster, they'll never know what they're missing?
Reply
#27
Yeah, I'm actually lining up in favour of something like 4/2/2 (or 4/2/1/1, or something else, depending on how many sections there are and what the arbiter feels like). If we're asking everybody to pay (and I think we should be), this seems a reasonable way of spreading the benefits.

Come on David, even if someone isn't directly getting the benefit from it, it's going to work out at £6 a year, tops. Surely pretty much everybody has a decent enough chance of getting to play on the top boards of their section every now and again anyway.
Reply
#28
Andrew McHarg Wrote:
J*R Wrote:I could be wrong, but I can't recall any other events in England or Europe where expensive sensorary boards are used to broadcast games between players who could be as lowely rated as 1200.

Well then I think CS are being more innovative than these other countries. Big Grin

I don't think people watch the lower graded live boards because they want to see brilliantly accurate Chess, I think they watch them for exactly the opposite reason. Surely something which generates more interest in the events, is worth giving a shot; and it seemed to be a bit of a hit at the last event.

Your viewpoint is like suggesting that we shouldn't watch women's tennis anymore because the men are obviously the best in the world! =) When I want to see good tennis I watch the top 5 men, when I want to see Maria Sharapova and Co. I watch the women. :U

A better comparision is to compare the ATP tour with the challengers. Can't really use men's and women's tennis because they don't play against each other. All ATP tour events with the best players in the world are broadcast live, where as the second teer challengers events are not. There is a reason for this, because people want to watch the best players and that is where the money is. It is pretty much the same in every sport. you don't have Sunday League amateur football games being broadcast on TV.
Reply
#29
Comparing with other federations is not really fair as they would be using the old wired systems that limit where the board is.

We will in due course buy more boards. I now have the battery details, 6xaa. So for each congress I will have to charge 60 batteries!!

This is still better tgan running cables!
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Reply
#30
Who is the target audience and who are the most likely to want to watch?

People watch the English Championship and even the SPL on TV even though the Premiership is also on. I guess is what people are most interested in. The TV audiences are not as big but they still have their followers. If people wanted only to watch the best then Motherwell wouldn't have anyone watching them. Big Grin

I certainly enjoyed watching the Minor at the Scottish live. They were a lot more entertaining than some of the 11 move draws that were broadcast earlier in the week. I can't see the problem in broadcasting a few games outside of the Open. Whereas games from a Minor may be of no interest to some, they are closer to my level and as such I'm as likely to watch them.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)