The MacIsaac National Rapidplay Tournament

[Ianbrownlee]

Congratulations to Paul Roberts for winning the Open section  and becoming the 1st MacIsaac Rapidplay champion.

Results are

Open
1st Paul Roberts, £100  Keepsake trophy and holder of the MacIsaac trophy for one year
2nd Alan Tate, £50

Major
1st equal Keith Aitchison, James Hartman and Calum McGillivray, each get 1 x keepsake trophy and £50 each

Many thanks to all who participated and in particular Jim Webster and Andy Howie

The event was such a success we plan to run it again next year. It was evident that everyone enjoyed themselves

[Jonathan Livingstone]

The event was such a success we plan to run it again next year.

Congrats to Paul also.

However can it really be considered a success? I have to question that and think the turn out was abysmal. Just 17 players in a national championship. The 7 player Major was almost an all play all. I attended a club organised 5 Rnd allegro recently that had 43 players participating. The Blitz events also draw significantly greater numbers and will be getting my money again next month. Looking at the MacIsacc prize money, the tournament surely made a loss? Surely better to have sensible pricing next time, and attract more players for a better and more successful event?

High entry fees of the likes of Largs, Stirling and MacIsacc have proven to not be the way forward. Both the recent Stirling and MacIsacc were local to me and I had a free schedule to play in both but opted not to on the principal of their structuring and poor value for money.

[Ianbrownlee]

I disagree with you as always Jonathan. your alleged high entry fee is used to pay prize money for a national tournament and for the cost of the venue (which admittedly we got at a great cost). Perhaps with hindsight we could have held the tournament outwith the exam period for our teenage kids and we may learn from that for next year. I did not hear a single murmur about the cost from anybody on the day. 

I judge success partly with the positive feedback both on the day and from emails I have received today. We tested an incremental time control which produced very high quality games which again proved to be a success. We also held the tournament in a wonderful venue (thanks again Jim) , again a success.  I strongly suspect this type of tournament and its format will be a fine template for the future and I look forward to organising and participating in this type of one day tournaments in the future.

Most players either were CS Members or joined CS just prior to this tournament, dare I say another success. Those members also enjoyed a £3.00 discount which helped towards the café lunch which I personally enjoyed. There ware also facilities for bounce games in the analysis room for those addicts like myself.

I myself am interested from hearing from anybody or any region who would like to organise such a one day event in the future. Your only requirements are enthusiasm and positivity.  Both organisers and entrants pulled together yesterday to have a most enjoyable experience and I was personally encouraged by the number of people who shook my hand yesterday (and sent me emails today) . Yet another success in my book.

A final comment, the staff at the Adam Smith were absolutely brilliant and made sure we were looked after throughout the day so a big thank you to them.  I am looking forward to next year already.

[Jonathan Livingstone]

That's great and all but still just 17 players. A 10 player Open and a 7 player Major. The TD accounted for 10% of the open entries for goodness sakes. I am sure the venue was lovely, and presumably rather spacious with such a low turnout.

If we now measure a 17 player turn out for a national event a success, then it really is time to turn off the lights on Scottish Chess, and for us all to go home. The entry deadline extension was in itself a recognition this was not a good turnout.

I am sure with a more sensible entry fee, the entries could have been doubled. I played a blind player this week, in the same match there were kids and a female playing. That is all that is good about chess, it is suppose to be inclusive and any size/age/gender can join in. Is a shame to see another over priced event put people off. That such an event runs at a loss is not a great advert for reasons to take out CS membership IMHO either.

Ian, if we forget all the other bits such as cosy venue, are you really satisfied with the 17 player turn out and considering that aspect a success?

I appreciate you are a volunteer and take my hat of to you and others for that, but I just can't idle on this quietly when it is being labelled as a success. So no personal beef here and if we play together at a sensibly priced, inclusive tournament somewhere in the future, I would happily buy you a drink and discuss face to face.