10 Rated Games and Continuous Membership

[etower366i2]

Sorry I did not get this correction posted yesterday:

I learned from people who have been involved longer than I have that my understanding was a bit off.

1) The WAGC points system is particular to that tournament, and concerns only the US Open.

2) There did used to be a Circuit, including the NJ Open, the MD Open, and the Cotsen, among others (do note that only a few geographic areas were covered under this system), the leaders of which were qualified to compete in the Fujitsu with the professionals. This was when there was outside funding on the order of $20,000 to run these tournaments, which allowed for travel stipends and the like. The Fujitsu no longer funds the qualifier, and so there is no money to use this system.

3) The AGA does not pay travel expenses as often as I was led to believe. When I reviewed this year's budget, and was corrected, I discovered that this is the case. This may be changing, as it has started to change, due to economic constraints on the part of sponsors, as the AGA will now be paying for travel to the WAGC. The WMSG was a whole other ball of wax, however.

Sorry for misleading people ... I have looked through the documents that I have, and cannot find where the information I had is written. It is interesting that there can be so many misconceptions about this topic.

-Lisa Scott

[ethanb]

Sorry I did not get this correction posted yesterday:

I learned from people who have been involved longer than I have that my understanding was a bit off.

1) The WAGC points system is particular to that tournament, and concerns only the US Open.

2) There did used to be a Circuit, including the NJ Open, the MD Open, and the Cotsen, among others (do note that only a few geographic areas were covered under this system), the leaders of which were qualified to compete in the Fujitsu with the professionals. This was when there was outside funding on the order of $20,000 to run these tournaments, which allowed for travel stipends and the like. The Fujitsu no longer funds the qualifier, and so there is no money to use this system.

3) The AGA does not pay travel expenses as often as I was led to believe. When I reviewed this year's budget, and was corrected, I discovered that this is the case. This may be changing, as it has started to change, due to economic constraints on the part of sponsors, as the AGA will now be paying for travel to the WAGC. The WMSG was a whole other ball of wax, however.

Sorry for misleading people ... I have looked through the documents that I have, and cannot find where the information I had is written. It is interesting that there can be so many misconceptions about this topic.

-Lisa Scott

Thanks a lot, Lisa!

I didn't realize that my info was no longer valid - when I heard about the circuit WAS a long time ago, but even at that time it seemed like well-hidden information, so I thought it was pretty natural that it was never mentioned (it never was even when it was around, as far as I remember.)

So in that case I guess I'm proposing bringing it back, and expanding it to support more tournaments.

At least, it seems to me that it would accomplish the objectives of the two rules being debated. (get strong players to tournaments, encourage them to keep their memberships active)

Are there significant problems that I'm not seeing?

[ethanb]

Posting some videos on youtube would be easier & more effective.

Wouldn't be live though ...

I heard that youtube was starting to support live streaming, but I'm not sure live coverage is as important as just making info available to the broadest audience. Ideally any videos would have CKJ subtitles or audio.

If we're talking about promoting it to a broader audience, do people prefer to watch recordings of the World Cup on Youtube (if it were allowed) or do they prefer to watch the event live, as it is being played?

I think watching the "real action" generates more excitement - look at the kibbitz on the games broadcast from the Congress and you'll probably agree that it is certainly exciting for at least some people.

[etower366i2]

Personally, I think that there is some merit in a point system, but that we need to help chapters and regions to develop a stronger tournament schedule first, and that this would be a later step in a greater plan. This is certainly open to argument, but I think that we should not institute something that will create more disparity than is absolutely necessary.

[daniel_the_smith]

More tournaments can only be a good thing, especially if it *gasp* requires the AGA to communicate with its chapters!! More tournaments would also help membership, as at the moment that seems to be why most members are members.