Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Pop quiz on Baku

  1. | #1
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing online chess at different locations.
    Posts
    3,488

    Default Pop quiz on Baku

    Quote Originally Posted by Fide
    FIDE and the Organising Committee of the 42nd Chess Olympiad in Baku, Republic of Azerbaijan are pleased to announce that each Federation may send one (1) Head of Delegation to accompany the Open and Women Teams. The accommodation on full board basis will be covered by the Organisers for the duration of the Olympiad.
    There are two clear positions. The Head of Delegation will be responsible for co-ordinating the activities of their teams. The Delegates are the officials who will represent the Federation and can vote on behalf of the Federation in the Congress.
    For clarity’s sake, the Organisers are covering the costs of accommodation for one Delegate, one Head of Delegation and two teams comprised of five players plus one captain each
    Quick Pop Quiz!

    How many dollars will the ACF spend on sending officials (not players) to the Baku Olympiad?

    Bonham, Johansen, Rogers and Weeks are the names on the grapevine.

    Interesting, given that the lack of prize money in Australian chess.
    AC: 20-6-20-> ...I did tell them how chess improves people in many aspects. I had better start buying their paper.



  2. | #2
    Siberian Chess Tiger Axiom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    Quick Pop Quiz!

    How many dollars will the ACF spend on sending officials (not players) to the Baku Olympiad?
    My humble estimate is $2000
    "Don't let the snow get down the back of your pants" ~ SCT

  3. | #3
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    My humble estimate is no more, in total, than we normally would.

    Captains are funded out of the Olympiad Appeal, and have been for many previous Olympiads.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  4. | #4
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing online chess at different locations.
    Posts
    3,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axiom View Post
    My humble estimate is $2000
    Cheapest flight flying THY - Turkish Airlines
    $1,999.84
    Average normal flight
    Multiple airline Qantas etc
    $9,224.22

    It would make sense to only subsise and possibly send GMs Johansen and Rogers., maybe double their work load.
    AC: 20-6-20-> ...I did tell them how chess improves people in many aspects. I had better start buying their paper.



  5. | #5
    Tin Cup Champ 2004 Just2Good's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    7,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    My humble estimate is no more, in total, than we normally would.

    Captains are funded out of the Olympiad Appeal, and have been for many previous Olympiads.
    But before you were on the ACF they were not funded out of the Olympiad Appeal.
    .
    "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing."

    ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

  6. | #6
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Just2Good View Post
    But before you were on the ACF they were not funded out of the Olympiad Appeal.
    Yet more evidence that if you see a claim of fact from Just2ADHD about anything that happened before yesterday it is probably wrong. Captains were included in the Olympiad Appeal before my time on Council, though I do not know for sure how long before it. I suspect they've been included since the Appeal was created (it has existed since at least the mid-1980s).

    Firegoat also has at least three faulty premises in his argument, one of which being that captains are necessarily travelling from Australia to the Olympiad rather than from elsewhere. I should clarify that captains are not necessarily fully funded.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  7. | #7
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing online chess at different locations.
    Posts
    3,488

    Default

    Greetings,


    This story has become a bit more interesting. Australia is sending GM Rogers and M.Weeks as team captains, who presumably, if KB is to be believed, have part of their costs subsidised through the ACF. You have to wonder how much work a team captain does at an Olympiad.

    It appears that Bonham also has a share of his costs met by the ACF to attend meetings about Fide rules. I don't know how the ACF justifies this expenditure of limited funds. Especially, when considered in the context, that the Australian team has appointed GM Johansen as a coach for both teams. To make matters worse, GM Johansen receives no funding from the ACF , having to pay his own way. Not funding a coach for the national team makes Australian chess look like a bunch of yokels. This viewpoint is exasperated when funding is available for officials from the ACF for questionable reasons.

    cheers FG7
    AC: 20-6-20-> ...I did tell them how chess improves people in many aspects. I had better start buying their paper.



  8. | #8
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    This story has become a bit more interesting. Australia is sending GM Rogers and M.Weeks as team captains, who presumably, if KB is to be believed, have part of their costs subsidised through the ACF.
    As has been the case for decades. This is interesting? You must be very bored.

    You have to wonder how much work a team captain does at an Olympiad.
    Well perhaps you do, if you haven't actually seen it in person or bothered to find out.

    It appears that Bonham also has a share of his costs met by the ACF to attend meetings about Fide rules.
    The meetings are not confined to "FIDE rules".

    To make matters worse, GM Johansen receives no funding from the ACF , having to pay his own way.
    One of these things does not necessarily follow from the other, and it's debatable whether or not the other is technically true.

    Of course this is the usual shallow firegoat opportunism. Had the suggestion that we 100% fund a coach for the Olympiad been raised by me, firegoat would have been up in arms about it as an outrageous waste of ACF money. Because the ACF doesn't appear to firegoat to be supporting the venture (because he really has no idea what is actually going on), firegoat is up in arms about it suggesting that we should be spending the money. He doesn't of course consider whether any coaching function might be provided by any other delegation members who he was previously complaining about.

    It is always the same with firegoat: a movable feast of incoherent protest, the common denominators being who (not what) he predictably complains about.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  9. | #9
    Tin Cup Champ 2004 Just2Good's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    7,117

    Thumbs down Unequal Distrbution Of ACF Funding

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Of course this is the usual shallow firegoat opportunism. Had the suggestion that we 100% fund a coach for the Olympiad been raised by me, firegoat would have been up in arms about it as an outrageous waste of ACF money. Because the ACF doesn't appear to firegoat to be supporting the venture (because he really has no idea what is actually going on), firegoat is up in arms about it suggesting that we should be spending the money. He doesn't of course consider whether any coaching function might be provided by any other delegation members who he was previously complaining about.

    It is always the same with firegoat: a movable feast of incoherent protest, the common denominators being who (not what) he predictably complains about.
    Your attempt to obscure matters with irrelevancies aside, can you please confirm whether Firegoat7 is correct? Is it the case that you are having some of your expenses covered by the ACF, yet GM Johansen has to cover 100% of his own costs?

    If so, the situation seems quite unfair.
    .
    "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing."

    ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

  10. | #10
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing online chess at different locations.
    Posts
    3,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Just2Good View Post
    Is it the case that you are having some of your expenses covered by the ACF, yet GM Johansen has to cover 100% of his own costs?

    If so, the situation seems quite unfair.
    The situation is both unfair and shameful.
    AC: 20-6-20-> ...I did tell them how chess improves people in many aspects. I had better start buying their paper.



  11. | #11
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Just2Good View Post
    [FONT=Georgia]Your attempt to obscure matters with irrelevancies aside,
    There were no irrelevancies.

    can you please confirm whether Firegoat7 is correct?
    Of course he isn't. Look, this is a discussion about a serious chess topic on the Ozchess forum; the empirical probability of anyone not from the ACF having their facts straight in such a discussion has been proven from past experience to be approximately zero. Where firegoat is involved, or you for that matter, then an estimate of zero is very generous.

    Is it the case that you are having some of your expenses covered by the ACF, yet GM Johansen has to cover 100% of his own costs?
    The first is the case and the second is not.

    If so, the situation seems quite unfair.
    Quite aside from your assumption being false, even if it were true I would still disagree. In the past we have never had a coaching position - we have never advertised it and never funded it. We didn't advertise it or pre-allocate funding this time either. So it would always have been the case in the past that had someone wanted to take such a position on they would be doing it as a volunteer out of their own pocket.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  12. | #12
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    The situation is both unfair and shameful.
    What is shameful is you criticising the ACF on the basis of your assumptions about the situation, when in fact those assumptions are wrong.

    But even if your assumptions were not wrong, your criticism would still be melodramatic claptrap anyway.

    And someone who gets thrown out of a tournament for fighting, and who threatens people on the internet with violence, and never apologises for either, has no business calling anybody else "shameful" anyway. Except if it is intended as a compliment.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  13. | #13
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing online chess at different locations.
    Posts
    3,488

    Default

    KB of course, as we all know can never be wrong about anything black and white J2G asks a sensible obvious question about Olympiad funding.
    Quote Originally Posted by Just2Good
    Is it the case that you are having some of your expenses covered by the ACF, yet GM Johansen has to cover 100% of his own costs?

    KB, who of course,in his own mind, is never wrong about anything black and white responds with his usual deflection
    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    The first is the case and the second is not.
    Meaning that KBs trip to Baku is subsidised by the ACF in some capacity by the official body. And that GM Johansen who is not subsidised in any capacity by the official body, has obtained some private funding for his own expenses. GM Johansen ought to be applauded for having intellectual insight into the reality of Australian chess funding and its lack of initiative towards the official bodies supporting professional chess development within this country. It is true that the organisers of the Olympiad will pay for the accomodation of both parties, but this is just standard practice and costs the ACF nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Quite aside from your assumption being false, even if it were true I would still disagree.
    Because as we all know....KB,in his own mind, is never wrong about anything black and white, thus responds with his usual deflection

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    In the past we have never had a coaching position - we have never advertised it and never funded it.
    Shameful! Of course the truth is that the captains helped in an unofficial capacity and they received some funding. However, it goes to show how pathetic the ACF is at developing chess to International professional standards. What is more deplorable is that it takes someone from outside the ACF,like GM Johansen, to lead the initiative on the matter!

    Also it should be pointed out that Phil Viner volunteered,paying his own way for many years to attend official Fide rule and regulation meetings. Something that Kevin Bonham does not follow as an example, preferring to leach funds from Australian chess for his own personal vanity.
    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    We didn't advertise it or pre-allocate funding this time either.
    As usual the ACF misses the opportunity to show initiative and lead the way on doing important changes.
    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    So it would always have been the case in the past that had someone wanted to take such a position on they would be doing it as a volunteer out of their own pocket.
    Nonsense. This is a pathetic claim by Bonham, who, simply cannot understand that it is more important for Australian chess development to have GM Johansen there supporting the Australian team as a coach then Kevin Bonham talking about the rules and regulations. If Bonham really cared about Australian chess he would withdraw from his overseas trip and insist that the ACF cover some of GM Johansens expenses. Remember KB replaced Phil Viner and in doing so has been taking money from the ACF for many years. At the very least the ACF ought to immediately offer GM Johansen some subsidy for the overseas trip and maybe throw in a free tracksuit of green and gold!
    AC: 20-6-20-> ...I did tell them how chess improves people in many aspects. I had better start buying their paper.



  14. | #14
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    KB of course, as we all know can never be wrong about anything black and white
    It just feels that way to you because you're virtually always wrong when debating with me.

    responds with his usual deflection
    Of course a simple factual response must have been a "deflection" from your usual game of angrily frothing and making stuff up while having no idea what is actually going on. But really you should be thankful for the information; it's not my fault you're repeatedly too thick to comprehend it.

    Meaning that KBs trip to Baku is subsidised by the ACF in some capacity by the official body.
    Or by someone, bearing in mind that delegate expenses are being subsidised by the Olympiad (we don't know yet how much).

    And that GM Johansen who is not subsidised in any capacity by the official body,
    Are you sure about that?

    has obtained some private funding for his own expenses.
    Finally getting lukewarmish here. But judging from the bit afterwards, you still have a long way to go.

    It is true that the organisers of the Olympiad will pay for the accomodation of both parties,
    No it isn't.

    Shameful! Of course the truth is that the captains helped in an unofficial capacity and they received some funding.
    What are you going on about? Ability to coach (especially in the area of preparation) has often been taken into account by the ACF in deciding who to appoint as captain.

    What is more deplorable is that it takes someone from outside the ACF,like GM Johansen, to lead the initiative on the matter!
    Again you are assuming what again you do not know.

    Also it should be pointed out that Phil Viner volunteered,paying his own way for many years to attend official Fide rule and regulation meetings. Something that Kevin Bonham does not follow as an example, preferring to leach funds from Australian chess for his own personal vanity.
    *yawn*

    We've been through all of this before. Going to Congresses is actually a nuisance for me. It means that for weeks at a time I'm not working and hence not earning money, and it involves quite a lot of preliminary hassle. I'm willing to do it on an expenses-covered basis because it has benefits to Australian chess - we exercise our vote, we can object to stupid proposals and it often helps in knowing what is actually going on. The ACF prefers spending money to send me than sending someone clueless and unrepresentative (and probably unreliable) for free. If there was no benefit to Australian chess, I wouldn't be doing it on an expenses-paid basis. If my aim was vanity, I'd hardly need it; I'd have no shortage of other sources.

    Nonsense. This is a pathetic claim by Bonham, who, simply cannot understand that it is more important for Australian chess development to have GM Johansen there supporting the Australian team as a coach then Kevin Bonham talking about [well firegoat has no idea what I talk about because he is clueless].
    I think it is for the ACF to decide what its priorities are, and it is not proper for me to make that decision, as some would say I had a conflict of interest.

    Once again, your contributions are clueless because you are completely unaware of the circumstances under which the coaching concept came about. Maybe you'll get there eventually but for the time being your clueless frothing and flapping about is providing some amusement, and being a charitable person, I cannot in good conscience disrupt something that might lift this site's post-rate above 3 posts/day by revealing the answers before your 20 wrong guesses are up!
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  15. | #15
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing online chess at different locations.
    Posts
    3,488

    Default

    Ignoring Bonhams obsession with all things about himself for the moment, I will attempt to summarise the story for Ozchess readers.

    GM Rogers is appointed Captain for the Mens Olympiad team. Traditionally, an unofficial coaching position. M.Weeks and GM Johansen both apply for the Womens Captain position. There is some sort of confusion with the ACF process and to sort matters out M.Weeks is made Captain and Johansen (with the help of Weeks) is made into coach. The ACF announces its official delegation with the media spin that GM Johansen will be trialed as a coach at this Olympiad.

    Remember before the confusion with process, The ACF is sending Bonham in an official capacity subsidised by the ACF. The ACF has always historically neglected to recognise, appoint and fund the position of official National coach, preferring to rely on International player relationships through other parties. The ACF for the last 4 Olympiads has not subsidised an official ACF coach, but always found money to reimburse Bonham.

    The question has to be asked. If the ACF can't find any money to subsidise GM Johansen, instead preferring to take advantage of third party generosity, then why does it need to fund Bonham given that his role can easily be duplicated by Weeks or Johansen. Is there any real need to waste Australian chess money on sending Bonham overseas?

    I think the answer in NO. Let Rogers,Weeks and Johansen cover his work and save wasting limited Australian chess financial resources on Bonham.
    AC: 20-6-20-> ...I did tell them how chess improves people in many aspects. I had better start buying their paper.



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Members who have read this thread since 12-02-21, 11:08 PM : 0

Actions :  (View-Readers)  (Set Date)  (Clear Date)

There are no names to display.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •