Life In 19x19

So if they are modelled after olympics, there should be A and B qualifiers so that up to 3 A-qualified can be sent by country, and 1 B-qualified.

What are the A and B qualification standards?

quantumf wrote:I'd have to side with RJ on this topic - Javaness and Herman, it feels like you're using previous disagreements to cloud your judgement here. There's absolutely no harm in asking organizers to clearly state what the entry rules are, and while "professional" may have a common understanding, it really is a very vague word.

No, I've just never seen the term professional formally defined in any IGF event before. Given that Robert has played in more than 1 IGF event, I don't see why he would suddenly want to ask (presumably again) for a formal definition.

Javaness2 wrote:No, I've just never seen the term professional formally defined in any IGF event before. Given that Robert has played in more than 1 IGF event, I don't see why he would suddenly want to ask (presumably again) for a formal definition.

The last WMSG was an entirely open event. This one, apparently, is not. The precedent was set in the last event, so its quite reasonable to insist on a very clear definition of who and who is not permitted.

Even if you disagree that there is a need for clear rules, why would you so vigorously criticise someone who does? I'm guessing that you feel that rule fixation is to the general detriment of go as a community?

In the previous events I participated in there was no doubt about eligibility or I could find out quickly. WAGC: I do not recall if I needed to ask or if it was clear to me for some reason. KPMC: Winning a qualification tournament and being a German citizen were necessary conditions. 1st WMSG: Professionals were allowed, so it was not an issue.

quantumf wrote: it's quite reasonable to insist on a very clear definition of who and who is not permitted.

Even if you disagree that there is a need for clear rules, why would you so vigorously criticise someone who does? I'm guessing that you feel that rule fixation is to the general detriment of go as a community?

If the IGF had recently redefined the terms Amateur and Professional, I think that it is reasonably safe to say that they might have told us about this.

Silly, is not a strong criticism.

Javaness2 wrote:If the IGF

It is not exclusively an IGF event (I am not even sure whether the IGF is involved at all). Rather, specific event organisers, IMSA and EGF play a role. Presumaby also SportsAccord.

RobertJasiek wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:If the IGF

It is not exclusively an IGF event (I am not even sure whether the IGF is involved at all). Rather, specific event organisers, IMSA and EGF play a role. Presumaby also SportsAccord.

If you read the published reports, you can see who is involved.

Since apparently you have already read them, what about telling us?

RobertJasiek wrote:Since apparently you have already read them, what about telling us?

" European Go Federation was commissioned to organize the event, with IGF financing the operations." from 'minutes of an IGF meeting'

Of the EGF organisation process, I saw at least some draft of rules considerations. From that, it seems possible that "McMahon" is closer to Swiss than to usual McMahon and is applied only in case of at least 17 participants / teams / pairs in a tournament. I do not know yet if this good (because more championship style) idea has survived.

If the event is advertised as McM, I'd like to see that when I turn up

Website appears: http://www.wmsg2012.org/

The McMahons seem to be turning Swiss...

It looks like this event is really difficult to organize and I hope it will be whatever is on it's road.

I hope furthermore that this time western press and tv will have some interest in it.
First WMSG was a huge success and event for many of us and a huge failure for advertising and report. Nobody apart from us ever heard about it.

Saltie wrote:It looks like this event is really difficult to organize and I hope it will be whatever is on it's road.

I hope furthermore that this time western press and tv will have some interest in it.
First WMSG was a huge success and event for many of us and a huge failure for advertising and report. Nobody apart from us ever heard about it.

Well, a few people heard about it:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber ... ts-edition

But it was hardly complimentary

National Federations have to try their hand at advertising.
"xxx team travels to Lille... blah blah" If you rely only on the IGF or EGF to get press coverage, nothing will happen.