2011 Toronto Labour Day Open – registration

2011 Toronto Labour Day Open Chess Tournament – Sept. 3 to 5

Annex Chess Club is pleased to present the 2011 Toronto Labour Day Open.

Tournament director Bryan Lamb is a legend in the Toronto chess community, and his Labour Day Open is a much anticipated annual tradition.

Grab a 2011 Toronto Labour Day Open flyer – including entry form

The tournament is all wrapped up!


2011 Toronto Labour Day Open

Saturday September 3 to Monday September 5

Tournament Director:

  • Bryan Lamb

Organized by:

  • Annex Chess Club

Split Venue – Location and Schedule:

  • Frontenac Ballroom, Westin Harbour Castle Hotel, 1 Harbour Square
    (site for Saturday – rounds 1 and 2)
    registration: Saturday @ 9 am
    Round 1 – Saturday @ 10 am
    Round 2 – Saturday @ 4 pm
  • Annex Chess Club, 918 Bathurst Street
    (site for Sunday and Monday – rounds 3 to 6)
    Round 3 – Sunday @ 10 am
    Round 4 – Sunday @ 4 pm
    Round 5 – Monday @ 10 am
    Round 6 – Monday @ 4 pm
  • (Both sites are air conditioned)

Take the TTC:

  • The Westin Harbour Castle is right next to the Queen’s Quay Terminal (it’s one stop from Union Station on the Harbourfront LRT line) and Annex Chess Club is a very short walk from Bathurst Station. Check the TTC trip planner to figure out how to get to each location from wherever you are.

Format:

  • 6-round Swiss

Sections:

  • Open (CFC rated 2000 and over)
    U2000 (CFC rated 1600 to 1999)
    U1600 (CFC rated under 1599)

Time Control:

  • 40 moves/90 minutes; remaining moves/30 minutes; 30-s increment from move 1 (the popular time control from the recent Canadian Open)

Entry Fee:

  • $95 by Monday August 29
    Cash or cheque to Annex Chess Club, 918 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON M5R 3G5
    Pay by VISA, MC, or Amex through our PayPal account below
  • $110 cash only after August 29 or at the door
  • $10 extra to play up a section if not rated within 100 points of section floor
  • family discount: second family member pays $15 less; third and following $45 less
  • ACC member discount: $10 less – cannot be combined with family discount

CFC/FIDE:

  • All players must be up-to-date CFC members. The top section will be FIDE rated.

Byes:

  • Up to two ½-pt byes are available in rounds 1 to 4 if requested in advance. Include bye requests with mailed-in entry or email info@annexchessclub.com

Forfeited games:

  • If a player does not show up within one hour of any round’s start, then the player will lose the game by forfeit, lose the CFC rating points for the game, and be removed from the tournament; the player will not, however, lose the FIDE rating points for the game (if FIDE rated)

Equipment:

  • chess sets and chess boards will be provided – please bring digital chess clocks

Prize Fund:

Section Prize Value
Open 1st $2000
2nd $800
3rd $400
top U2200 $300
U2000 1st $1000
2nd $450
3rd $250
top U1800 $200
U1600 1st $1000
2nd $450
3rd $250
top UNR $200
top U1400 $100
Total $7400
  • Anti-sandbagging rule: Players are ineligible for class prizes if rated 100 points over prize ceiling in the past two years
  • Unrated players are eligible for only the unrated prize in the U1600 section – or for top prizes in the open section
  • A player cannot win more than one cash prize

Sponsors:


Kaspersky Lab is emerging as the world’s largest privately held anti-malware company. It has central offices in Moscow, Russia, and regional headquarters overseeing five global regions.

Kaspersky Lab will be offering three one-year licenses of Kaspersky Internet Security in the 2011 Toronto Labour Day Open for the players who neutralize their opponent’s threats to secure the toughest draws (the tournament games drawn against the largest rating differential).


Ripe Apps Inc. is a new shop dedicated to perfection. We have a highly skilled team who strive in creating applications that make life easier. Our team has an extensive history of working with Web 2.0 and UX design.

Ripe Apps Inc. will be offering two iPod shuffles in the 2011 Toronto Labour Day Open for the biggest upsets (the tournament games won against the largest rating differential).

More information:


PayPal Registration

Pay by VISA, MC, or Amex:

2011 Labour Day Open Chess Tournament
$110 after Monday August 29 ($100 for ACC members)

PayPal advance entry is now closed …
Please register on site at Westin Harbour Castle (9:00 AM Saturday) cash only.


Note that the organizer reserves the right to refuse a registration. Your registration is not complete until you receive your registration number from the organizer.

Pre-registered list:

102 players pre-registered as of September 2

Open

# Name CFC# Expiry CFC Rating FIDE# FIDE Rating FIDE Title FIDE Country Byes
3 Bator Sambuev 146462 OK 2710 4128290 2528 GM CAN
54 Nikolay Noritsyn 132534 OK 2631 2604922 2425 IM CAN
80 Tomas Krnan 132215 OK 2503 14905361 2390 IM CAN
44 Jonathan Tayar 133658 OK 2460 2606534 2335 IM CAN
8 Roman Sapozhnikov 138609 OK 2407 2601842 2295 FM CAN
101 $ Robert Hamilton 2600234 OK 2386 2600234 2301 FM CAN
43 Michael Kleinman 132631 OK 2373 2609479 2221 FM CAN
95 $ Arthur Calugar 130889 OK 2352 2606933 2254 IM CAN
6 Michael Humphreys 131628 OK 2308 2607522 2111 CAN
96 Paul Gelis 140487 Exp 2239 2602350 2016 CAN
35 Ilya Bluvshtein 125934 OK 2228 2605317 2086 CAN
79 David Itkin 140216 OK 2200 2611813 2025 CAN
U2200
21 Mate Marinkovic 141393 OK 2188 2605201 2109 CAN
11 Dale McTavish 104887 OK 2180 2615894 UNR CAN
72 Daniel Aparicio 149967 Exp 2174 no UNR CAN
102 $ David Filipovich 103521 OK 2173 2600706 2100 CAN
15 Mike Ivanov 140557 OK 2146 2613158 1934 CAN
5 Alex Ferreira 127516 OK 2113 2606763 2019 CAN
98 Jackie Peng 142388 OK 2112 2609819 1899 WCM CAN
94 Michael Song 144236 OK 2107 2613190 2036 CAN
30 Derick Joshua Twesigye 150779 OK 2102 2614081 2129 CAN
78 Dave Southam 102535 OK 2077 2601044 2090 CAN
47 Razvan Preotu 146124 OK 2060 2613280 1974 CAN
22 Iulia Lacau-Rodean 144348 OK 2049 1211285 2018 CAN
12 Simon Gladstone 132497 OK 2046 2611791 1933 CAN
91 $ Daniel Wiebe 132137 OK 2023 2612275 1877 CAN
76 Dmitry Chernik 149932 Exp 2011 2613530 2004 CAN
23 Yuanchen Zhang 148449 OK 1989 2611902 1725 CAN
16 Agastya Kalra 137927 OK 1959 2604744 1717 CAN
60 Guannan Terry Song 146052 OK 1950 2614189 1879 CAN
75 Robert Bzikot 132541 OK 1931 2610990 1882 CAN
58 Mark Plotkin 141086 OK 1924 2611651 1788 CAN
81 Ian Finlay 101866 OK 1918 2604302 UNR CAN
7 $ Greg Stavropoulos* 108628 OK 1861 2613131 UNR CAN
46 Chang Yun** 149639 OK 1825 2615428 UNR CAN
77 Stephen (RenXi) Ye** 149965 OK 1824 2615916 UNR CAN
97 Bryant Yang** 141088 OK 1665 2610361 UNR CAN
# Name CFC# Expiry Rating FIDE# Rating Title Country Byes

* ineligible for U2000
** playing up
$ paying on site

U2000

# Name CFC# Expiry CFC Rating Highest Byes
70 Leslie Lako 102631 Exp 1923 1923
17 Rick Garel 105218 OK 1891 2049
71 Pepin Manalo 112277 OK 1835 1999 rd 1
9 Omid Nemati 130676 Tourn. 1832 1884
13 Mario Moran-Venegas 143315 OK 1827 1864
33 Lin (Xin) Song 146772 OK 1818 1923
U1800
2 Steve Nickoloff 108201 OK 1796 1912
64 Zehn Nasir 148198 OK 1772 1776
20 Mark Jubenville 106764 OK 1727 1813
4 Bob Armstrong 100034 OK 1725 1911
84 Patrick Yu 143209 OK 1721 1796
29 John Zhang 150339 OK 1713 1713 rd 2
32 Hanyuan Ye 144844 OK 1695 1709
24 Richard Wing 103265 Exp. 1681 1979
65 Pi Nasir 148197 OK 1680 1680
49 Richard Chen 148271 OK 1678 1678
68 Richard Marks 109180 OK 1677 2000
48 Martin Maister 101824 OK 1673 1952 rd 2
67 Daniel Zotkin 146857 OK 1666 1757
31 Zachary Dukic 149507 OK 1647 1668
82 Derick Aghamalian 146782 OK 1605 1605
69 Richard Laporte 144203 OK 1604 1668
10 Edward Chan 145594 Exp. 1603 1603
66 Zhanna Sametova 145911 OK 1603 1647
50 Yue Tong (Davy) Zhao 148512 OK 1578 1609
83 Ken Kurkowski 104537 OK 1579 1900
62 Yinshi Li 145175 OK 1573 1634
41 Rebecca Giblon 141076 OK 1564 1613
36 Jose Cabioc* 146261 OK 1527 1738*
14 WCM Jiaxin Liu 149747 OK 1501 1501
42 Melissa Giblon** 142624 OK 1474 1474
63 Mark Bercovici** 148103 OK 1393 1578
# Name CFC# Expiry Rating Highest Byes

* ineligible for U1600
** playing up
$ paying on site

U1600

# Name CFC# Expiry CFC Rating Highest Byes
27 Tetyana Tismenko 152743 OK 1597 /12
25 Alexandre Johnson 109239 Exp 1527 1580
18 Yin Lam 126891 Tourn. 1571 1571
87 Leonid Aghamalian 121022 OK 1496 1629
73 Hooshang Abbarin 152910 OK 1492 /13
1 George Supol 152286 OK 1490 /18
40 Andrew Giblon 148421 OK 1480 1480
28 Chris Wehrfritz 151679 OK 1480 /17
26 Dennis Tismenko 148985 OK 1475 1496
37 Jake Van Rooy 152635 OK 1424 /4
93 Jeffrey Xu 148513 OK 1411 1439
U1400
57 Christopher Field 108098 OK 1389 1636
61 Gordon Cui 143700 OK 1377 1403
88 Paul Radelicki 142392 Exp 1353 1401
86 Billy Carroll 150390 OK 1341 1429
99 $ Daniel Muntaner 151140 OK 1323 1323 rd 2
34 Eric Wang 149398 OK 1320 1351
89 Brian Zhang 143701 OK 1316 1316
100 $ Immanuel Huang 152690 OK 1286 /19
90 Lakes Liang 149333 OK 1277 1277
56 Dennis Shamroni 149741 OK 1270 1270
51 Daniel Sirkovich 145096 OK 1261 1327
59 Constance Wang 149748 OK 1248 1268
19 Milan Cvetkovic 150817 OK 1161 1161
55 Alexander Grynszpan 152220 OK 1154 1154
38 Kimia Moayyed 146784 OK 1151 1208
92 Richard Guo 148117 Exp 1140 1162
39 Dorsa Moayyed 147311 OK 994 1029
53 Varshini Paraparan 150463 OK 931 931
74 Evnato Frias 152975 Exp 931 /1 rd 1
52 Linda Fu 150904 OK 918 918
85 WCM Mathanhe Kaneshalingam 149319 OK 897 911
UNR
45 Daniel Garber NEW Exp. UNR UNR
# Name CFC# Expiry Rating Highest Byes

$ paying on site

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on Reddit

17 thoughts on “2011 Toronto Labour Day Open – registration”

  1. To whom it may concern:

    Sorry for the longwindedness of the following. I’m simply trying to get it all out of the way with one massive effusion – and thereby avoid an endless back & forth. If you’re inclined to respond but fear an equally long response, rest assured that any future correspondence won’t be anywhere near as long.

    Interpreting your inclusion of this comments box as proof that you are sincerely interested in knowing why some people might choose not to enter the Labour Day event this year – and that you might even hope to be edified by such knowledge, here are my thoughts.

    In fairness, I should preface my comments by noting that I have more encumbrances than most. I am an out-of-towner & I’m somewhat physically compromised. At first glance, there seems to be much more unwieldiness surrounding the tournament than in previous years. The split venue & the related issue of parking will prove awkward for me. I’m not particularly enamoured of the higher entry fee – but I do recognize the reasons for it & it’s not a deal-breaker in and of itself. Truthfully – gas prices – particularly if I commute daily – and/or the costs of GTA accommodation for 2 nites, are more likely deal-breakers…$$$-wise.

    What I find most curious is the time control you’ve chosen and the method by which you chose it. I’ve played the Labour Day event for approximately 20 years and for as long as I can remember, it’s been 40 moves/2 hours + SD/1 hour. I think most long-timers would be expecting it to remain the same. I have followed the posts @ Chesstalk and tend to agree with the sentiment that – even though it’s laudable that you’ve attempted to survey the masses, basing it on a survey @ Chesstalk might not be the most effective way of doing it – for myriad reasons. I believe there are a # of fairly obvious fundamental problems with this approach. Not everyone has Internet access ; even those who do might not check Chesstalk. I find some of the posts @ the site to be more than a little objectionable and, on principle, have avoided the site for extended periods of time in the past. Based on conversations I’ve had, I believe it safe too say I’m not alone in this sentiment. Assuming one is even interested in visiting the site, not everyone can post. The administrators have not allowed anyone new to sign up for some time now ; then there are guys like me…who’ve been banned. I realize that I might be compromising the validity and/or relevance of my argument in your eyes by so admitting…but within the context of Chesstalk’s Declaration of Independence – “not all bannings are created equal”. I was banned per symbolic request when I’d had my fill of Daswani’s ad hominem attacks on sundry others…and I replied in kind. My one & only post was free of verbal & technical obscenities (unlike Daswani’s) – but was admittedly ad hominem to the nth degree. Even if a such a survey was deemed the best approach to determine the time control, there’s the related argument of why it wasn’t conducted @ the CFC site? Bottom line – you’ve made your decision based on an extremely small sampling of a highly parameterised pool.

    Having noted all this, my main concern is more objective & fundamental. Again in fairness, I’ll preface my comments by noting that – based on past experiences – I probably have more biases and/or sensitivities than most regarding the following issue ; that issue being time controls with bonus increments. On principle, I have avoided tournaments that use these time controls.

    There are financial considerations i.e. digital clocks that cost considerably more than their analog counterparts and digitals without a bonus increments facility ; for those of us who already have an analog clock, it’s even more costly given that we have to make a purchase that, without the time controls that necessitate them, would otherwise be unnecessary.

    There are technical considerations ; by definition, there is so much more that can go wrong with clocks that have a bonus increments facility. I would have hoped that by now there’d be some universal acknowledgement of this fact when I’ve read so many posts @ Chesstalk regarding incidents wherein these clocks malfunctioned and/or someone overstepped a time limit because the clocks were virtually impossible to read and/or interpret.

    Even more fundamental is the sub-issue of how time controls with bonus increments fit within a venue’s/event’s hours of operation. Theoretically – a game with bonus increments can go on forever. Admittedly if a given event and/or the venue where it’s held does not have strictly defined hours of operation, this is a non-issue ; but I don’t believe that this is the norm ; my experience has been the opposite. In the Peterborough city championship, we are perpetually faced with having to figure out a reasonable time control that fits within the YMCA’s hours of operation. The Y is immovable on extending the club hours of 7-10pm. The club administrators need time to set up when the doors open ; therefore, they’ve traditionally started the games @ 7:30pm. That leaves 150 minutes for the games. Until last year, we’ve had adjournments ; the obvious downside of this is the possibility of using computers for analysis during the adjournment ; the alternative is a one session game of 75 minutes per side with no bonus increments. I believe this is much too fast & superficial to determine a city championship and despite acknowledging and lamenting the problems with adjournments, still viewed that approach as the lesser of 2 evils. The point I’m trying to make is – the only reason we’re in this unfortunate position of having to make such a silly choice – is due to the YMCA’s hours of operations.

    I attended Shirov’s simul @ the Scarborough club in the spring of 2010. I assumed going in that a club as prestigious and well-established as Scarborough would have carte blanche ; but even they were subservient to the landlord’s hours of operation and had to vacate the premises by – if memory serves – 10:30pm. Regardless – club members told me that they did have to vacate the premises by a certain hour and if any of the simul games were still ongoing at that point – they would have to be aborted & adjudicated ; obviously not the ideal denouement when hosting such an illustrious player as Shirov! Again – the point is most events/venues have strict hours of operation. Given this – it’s beyond me why organizers so willingly choose time controls with bonus increments that result in theoretically endless games & thereby perpetually flirt with over-extending legally contracted hours of operation. They’re just asking for trouble. Speaking for myself as a participant, I know I can’t rest comfortably when faced with the constant spectre of management suddenly appearing & abruptly asking that the premises be vacated. I’ll admit once again that my own personal experiences with the Peterborough YMCA have probably prejudiced me to a great degree ; but I still believe the issue is universal.

    I think these arguments constitute a more than sufficient case against time controls with bonus increments ; but in all honestly, what I object to the most…no….what I resent the most – is this apparent campaign to turn chess into something frivolous. I’ve never lost a game on time. I know how to manage my time. I believe that those of us who have long mastered time management are being forced to jump through all these hoops (i.e. purchase expensive & technically suspect clocks, play with the discomfort of knowing that your game might over-extend the hours of operation for the venue, etc.) – all for the sake of a few people who don’t know how to manage time properly and/or who are fixated with something as superficial as a clock where the time goes up & down i.e. “wow – what a cool new toy…” etc. I may be wrong but it seems to me like those of us who gravitated to chess because we love deep contemplative thought – and who, although recognizing that time controls are a necessary evil, would still like to keep them as simple as possible because we want the focus to remain on the chess itself and not on the peripheral stuff…like the clocks – are being forced to make concessions to the video game generation & their addiction to sensory overload i.e. can’t function unless there’s multitudinous bells & whistles going-off. This is – to my apparently impoverished mind’s eye – antithetical to a pastime as inherently contemplative as is chess. For the adrenaline junkies, there’s a surfeit of events with faster time controls. Using my home club as an example, we have umpteen speed chess tournaments each year, several active tournaments a year…and exactly one tournament that uses a traditionally longer time control – that being the aforementioned city championship ; and as previously noted, even that has morphed into game/75 minutes ; IMHO – much too fast & superficial to determine a city championship.

    Let me again apologize for my longwindedness – but this has been weighing heavily on me ; I’ve railed against this for some time now and it seems I’ve essentially been pissing into the wind. I simply can’t understand this stampede to embrace needless complications. 40 moves/2 hours + SD/hour…what could be simpler & more suited to minimizing the impact of the necessary evil of clocks – and ultimately to putting the focus back on chess…where it belongs?

    I really would like to play – especially given my 20 year affiliation with the Labour Day tournament ; if I decide not to play – paradoxically enough, it probably won’t be for the apparently more easily justified financial or physical reasons. It’s more likely that I won’t play because of my antipathy for these silly time controls with bonus increments. Forgive my sarcasm, but I can get pretty much get the same experience at a local arcade…and much more cheaply. Whatever happened to just playing chess?

    Mike Beatty

    1. Hope it’s not just your fear of your game going on forever – and never being able to go home again! – that’s keeping you from coming :) We received at least one other vote for the 40/2-SD/1 option by email, but it seems that the Canadian Open time control is still favoured by more people.

      ~ Marcus

  2. I think I may be the one who voted via email – since I can’t seem to register on ChessTalk.

    Actually either time control is good for me – its just I prefer the longer times for a couple of reasons.

    1. I was used to it all through the 90s and up until 2004. Kind of one of those creatures of habit I guess.

    2. Since coming back to chess after a long period of time I find I spend allot more time on moves where around move 20 I have 30 minutes left on my clock. It used to be not a problem since 20 moves per hour was about right to make time control.

    I found myself taking a couple of draws with won positions simply out of fear of losing on time upon sudden death even with increment.

    Non the less if majority like the new time controls I certainly do not mind and will learn to adjust and move a little quicker.

    I personally think the Canadian Open was terrific – I must say one of the best and most enjoyable tournaments I have ever played I think.

    Looking forward to Labour Day – and wish everyone good fortune over the board.

  3. Why not allow an alternative time control for analogue clocks, and allow players to use analogue clocks if they prefer?
    40 moves in 110 minutes, followed by sudden death in 1 hour.
    This would be just a little shorter than 40 / 2 hours etc.
    It would ensure that the game finished in less than 6 hours, so that the second round of each day could still be on time.

    Chris Field

  4. I favour 40/100, 30 SD, + 30 sec/move from move 1, only 10 minutes longer
    than the Canadian Open TC, as it is a preset on the Mephisto Competition Pro clock that is most widely used in the GTA.

    Yes you can get the 40/90 to start, but you have to start from the preset to create a custom TC, which may exceed the know-how of many of the players.

  5. In the defense of all these ‘sensory overloaded’ kids who may or may not understand how to use a chess clock that doesn’t need wound back up every couple games… Pretty much every top tournament uses an increment. Why? I have no idea. Do I prefer increments? Yes. :P (Did you know increments is spelled with an E!?… more sensory overload :P).

    My apologies for being terrible at making a point lol.

    Anyways, I’ll be bold enough to speak for the majority when I say that I really enjoy the Labour Day tournaments. Most people who do not play will be avoiding the tournament either due to the entrance fee (which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me, seeing as I believe the tiny handful of grandmasters we have in this country should be able to play professionally if they so choose), or the tournament venue (this makes a little more sense to me, the annex building was unbearably hot and dark with random patches of blinding light last time I was there).

    Either way, please keep the increment. The last thing we need is another reason for people to play out lost positions in the most uncomfortable venue I’ve been to in Toronto (it’s still better than Sudbury I guess! :P).

    -matt n

    1. Matthew i know last year it was hot but the annex club (i am a member) has installed some big air conditioning turbine generator thing( you can probably tell i don’t quite know what it is but whatever it is it keeps the annex cool so if people are discouraged by last year they should not be.

      – zehn nasir

  6. I still would suggest that it should be possible to offer an alternate time control without increment for those who have and prefer analogue clocks.
    40 / 110 minutes, followed by sudden death / 1 hour would give a maximum game time of 5 hours, 40 minutes. This would be exactly the same as the “maximum” game time with the given time control with increments for a game of 100 moves. I realise that there is in theory no maximum with increment, but how many tournament games exceed 100 moves?

    1. As an alternative analog time control, in case no digital clock is available, we’re going to use the traditional, 40/2; SD/1.

      ~ Marcus

  7. I think that Mike Beatty makes a lot of sense. I would prefer a time control of 30 moves in 90 minutes and sd in one hour. Keeping it simple makes sense to me. I also think that chess tournaments should have an amateur section. By that I mean you can pay less and your results count but you cannot win any money.

    1. I think this makes a lot of sense (Jeff’s comment on amateur section) for the majority of players who play for the enjoyment. $95 is a lot to spend for your kid to play in a tournament.

  8. Good luck to everyone playing – I am looking forward to another fine event. I have already played dozen of blitz games to help me move faster :-). Thanks to the organizers for putting this together this year.

  9. Greetings — This will be my first tournament since the mid 90s. I’ve got my old and working Saitek 2 clock but don’t know how to program this time control. I’ll be honest, I prefer the traditional 40/2 + 1 SD method. I also hate sensory overload.

    Tomorrow I embark on a new adventure with many familiar faces. I still remember when Ignac ran tourneys at the Primrose hotel and blitz tourneys in the Cafe Vienna on Friday nights. Even further back, I remember when Ian Corkish ran the club at Jarvis C.I. and even Burger King…hope you folks enjoyed memory lane as I have.

    Finally, I’d like to say thanks to the organizers and the supporters who keep chess alive in Toronto. This is exciting!!

    -Alexandre

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *