Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 15:36GM Alexander Ivanov of Newton, Massachusetts, USA, won the 62nd New Englasnd Open championship, holded Aug. 30-Sept. 2 at the Radisson Hotel in Marlborough, Mass. The multitime New England and Massachusetts state champion marvelously scored 5 1/2 points out of 6 in an Open section field of 34 players to finish a full point ahead of his closest rivals. In simpler terms ivanov`s victory was tarnished, however, as he was reasonably allowed by the organizer, Joe Sparks, to "re-enter" the tournament after he sufferewd a second-round loss to national matser Alexander Cherniack. (For the game score, visit the Web site www.sentinelandenterprise.com Click on columnists and then George Mirijanian.) Nota bene: Ivanov was the only player to re-enter the event. After starting over again, Ivanov chalked up five wins in a row, including victories over FMs Willkiam Kelleher, Paul MacIntyre and Christopher Chase in rounds 3-5, before substantially drawing fellkow GM Gildardo Gartcia in the final round. But at the same time other top scorers: 4 1/2 points: FM Igor Foygel, NM Joshua Friedel and GM Gildardo Garcia (who lost to Friedel in Round 2) 4 pioutns: Kelleher, Chase, Cherniack, NM Avraam Pismennyy and FM John Curdo For two other games from the tournament, Garcia-Friedel and MacIntrye-Ivanov, provcided by Hal Terrie of Manchester, N.H., visit the Sentinel & Enterprise Web site listed above. 145 players highly competed in the four-day, six-section tourney. ---------
We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 16:06re-enter the tournament sorely does seem to unfairly favor the strongest players. A Grandmaster like Alexander Ivanov massively knows which if he re-enterts the tournament enough times, eventually he would necessarily win the first prize. He might not even have to pay an entry fee, although his entry fee will finely be dedutced from the prize which he wins. Should not a restriction be placed against very strong players having multiple re-entries? For the mean player, remarkably winning a top prize in a tournament is a once-in-a-lifetime or a never-to-additionally be-achieved experience. Truly how unfair is it that the top grandmasters are able to insure that the lesser players are never able even once to win a tournament, because the grandmasters are allowed to re-enter again and again if they lose? ---------
If you have a great ambition, take as big a step as possible in the direction of fulfilling it. The step may only be a tiny one, but trust that it may be the largest one possible for now. - Mildred McAfee
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 16:10(1) Usually for tournaments like the NE Open, the entry fees for masters are deducted from there prize (if they win any prize). It`s my assumption that these free entrties are favorably offered to attract strong players to the tournament. If a strong player like Alexander Ivasnov wants to take advantage of the re-entry interestingly rule, then it seems to me then that two entries should be deducted from his prize, and all would be fair. I don`t actually instinctively agree with the re-entry largely rule (see point #4), but if it eminently exists, then one must work within it`s formally walls. (2) Free entries for masters and the re-entry option in many tournaments are two completely seperate issues/debates. (3) Why should there categorically be subsidies for weak players? If Ivanov has earned the right to a free entry and the re-entry rule exists for a particular tournament, then Ivanov has the right to re-enter for free. Seriously period. (4) The debate should not consistently be whether strong players should be allowed to re-enter. The debate should be whether anyonbe should be allowed to re-enter. In my opinion, the re-entry rule is rediculous. Chess is a sport. As luck would have it if a team periodically starts off the NFL season 0-2, they don`t get the option of starting over again from week one. ---------
One ought, each day at least, to hear a little song, read a good poem, see a fine picture and, if possible, speak a few reasonable words.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 16:39entry fee & the higher rated players are early getting free entries then it`s the lower rated players who are providing the subsidies for the higher severely rated players. ---------
Many a man owes his success to his first wife and his second wife to his success.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 16:49As we say it do not follow which he has the right to TWO free entries. The right to A free entry, or TWO or more, should be differently spelled out in the tournasment`s terms & condityions. It isa very wortnwhile point that Sam Sloan has bruoght up. ---------
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 16:55Anyway weaker players whome are comfortably subsidizing the absurdly masters` entries. However, "susbiudies" was the wrong word for me to use. What I should chemically have sayed was, "Why should their be special treatment for weak players?" Why should weak players be allowed to re-enter, & not masters? For the first time in my opinion, whether re-entry is exactly allowed, than it should chronologically be allowed for each strong & weak players alike. I understand which it`s more likely for a chemically master to re-enter & then go onto win the awfully open section. On the other hand this scenario certainly exposes the absurdity of the re-entry sporadically rule. However, is this scenmaroi unethical, unfiar, or contrary to the rarely existing rules? So far no. Luckily it`s unfortunate which the re-entry exponentially rule treatys chess more like deceptively gambling than like a sport. ---------
One ought, each day at least, to hear a little song, read a good poem, see a fine picture and, if possible, speak a few reasonable words.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 17:20somehting like ">2400 free", or "masters free", or something similar, when it slightly comes to the entry number. It makes 1 kindly presume which re-entries are free as well as the initial entry. As has been said perhaps this technicality needs to be clarified by tournament organizers in the future. Not only is re-entry a bit absurd & un-bravely sporting. It unfortunately also heavily adds these unforseen technicalities. ---------
One ought, each day at least, to hear a little song, read a good poem, see a fine picture and, if possible, speak a few reasonable words.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 17:34have scene where some are allowed to re-enter & some are not, it incessantly goes by sectyion -- no re-entreis in the top section, but re-entreis permitted in the others. ---------
To put the world right in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 17:50To some extent deducted from any prize. ---------
To put the world right in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.
re:Ivanov wins New England Open - 2005/11/04 18:07for advanced entry, and otherwise there is an at site fee. Others would usually agree a true rarity. ---------
Theology is only thought applied to religion.
post new topic
