Div 3 North 2016-17

Venues, fixtures, teams and related matters.
David Robertson
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby David Robertson » Sun Nov 27, 2016 1:48 pm

Mick Norris wrote:MM 2 loss was disappointing but Manx look stronger than seeding and SoA B were seeded to win

Maybe. But with fewer teams this year, the 'B' team has to offer the occasional 'courtesy slot'. Hence, this weekend we are effectively playing at least a board down from the start. I doubt Martyn Hamer was troubled; and our score v. MM1 won't be great, I fear

David Williams
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:37 pm

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby David Williams » Sun Nov 27, 2016 2:01 pm

Mick Norris wrote:You want each of the 9 top seeds to meet the other 8, so over the first 2 weekends you might want them meeting 1 of the 8 each weekend; you then have 7 rounds left and meet the other 6, plus whichever of the teams out of the top 9 proves to be stronger than expected?

Wouldn't this mean that the bottom 8 have only 7 possible opponents? And wouldn't it mean that the eleventh best team would probably win? (Forgive me if this is nonsense. I don't know a lot about 4NCL.)

Mick Norris
Posts: 6435
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Mick Norris » Sun Nov 27, 2016 3:05 pm

David Robertson wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:MM 2 loss was disappointing but Manx look stronger than seeding and SoA B were seeded to win

Maybe. But with fewer teams this year, the 'B' team has to offer the occasional 'courtesy slot'. Hence, this weekend we are effectively playing at least a board down from the start. I doubt Martyn Hamer was troubled; and our score v. MM1 won't be great, I fear


It does indicate the difficulty with the seedings; fortunately, the seedings only apply for the first weekend, and can be adjusted for weekend 2

It is always difficult to work out how strong teams will be from weekend to weekend; as long as the 2 strongest get promoted, we won't worry about it :)
Last edited by Mick Norris on Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby MartinCarpenter » Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:25 pm

David Williams wrote:Wouldn't this mean that the bottom 8 have only 7 possible opponents? And wouldn't it mean that the eleventh best team would probably win? (Forgive me if this is nonsense. I don't know a lot about 4NCL.)


No, all they're doing is staggering the swiss - for most of the rounds it'd be a pure swiss so there can't be any direct accidents.

The problem is that if we do a swiss for all 11 rounds (with 18 teams), the top teams will play each other early on then beat on the weak players in later rounds. So they're really just delaying the swiss a bit.


Strange weekend for Jorvik really. We at least got our semi predictable 3-3 draw vs Manx :)

Mick Norris
Posts: 6435
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Mick Norris » Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:31 pm

So, is the conclusion that the Irish players are better than their ratings would suggest?

Look forward to hearing Neil's impressions of his first experience of Div 3 N
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Alan Walton
Posts: 1158
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Alan Walton » Sun Nov 27, 2016 10:23 pm

Mick Norris wrote:So, is the conclusion that the Irish players are better than their ratings would suggest?

Look forward to hearing Neil's impressions of his first experience of Div 3 N


Or the English players are overrated :shock: ; personally most players in the Northern league haven't really played anywhere but England (most of them anywhere outside their region) so cannot make a reasonable judgement

The players who played for Gonzaga and Enniscorthy I have seen a few times I have been in Ireland, and I am not surprised at all they won both matches against the players they played against

Gonzaga will be promoted this year; Enniscorthy are a young squad looking for experience, but I suspect a few more shocks this year from them

David Williams
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:37 pm

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby David Williams » Mon Nov 28, 2016 9:01 am

MartinCarpenter wrote:
David Williams wrote:Wouldn't this mean that the bottom 8 have only 7 possible opponents? And wouldn't it mean that the eleventh best team would probably win? (Forgive me if this is nonsense. I don't know a lot about 4NCL.)


No, all they're doing is staggering the swiss - for most of the rounds it'd be a pure swiss so there can't be any direct accidents.

The problem is that if we do a swiss for all 11 rounds (with 18 teams), the top teams will play each other early on then beat on the weak players in later rounds. So they're really just delaying the swiss a bit.

If there are 11 rounds each of the bottom 9 has to play at least three matches against teams from the top 9. If it's a desirable objective that each of the top 9 plays each of the others, then each of them plays three of the bottom 9. You might as well start with three randomly drawn rounds of top 9 against bottom 9, followed by two separate all-play-alls. And a distinct possibility of one of the bottom group emerging as overall winner.

It's just the notion of the top nine seeds all playing each other that's the problem. Ideally the teams at the top should have played all the other seeds. The team that finishes ninth should have played . . . . well actually it's a bit hard to say, because they should have played all the teams at the top (see above), so equally they should have played all the teams at the bottom, and obviously they should have played all the teams that finish around them . . .

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby MartinCarpenter » Mon Nov 28, 2016 9:36 am

The thing about the top 9 seeds playing each other is mostly just a vague aspiration - you only really want that for the top few winners and the Swiss will basically ensure that happens whatever we do.

As for English grades, the MM2 team were all using converted ECF grades and I'm not quite sure how well calibrated that is nowadays. Certainly my 4NCL Fide is bang on my ECF conversion, but I've actually been playing at >200 ECF in the event to achieve that.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1158
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Alan Walton » Mon Nov 28, 2016 9:43 am

In simplistic terms you group the 18 teams into 4 groups comprising of the following 4/4/4/6 (the 6 is the bottom)

Then the groups play the following number of teams in each group

Group 1 (1 to 4) = 3 / 3 / 3 / 2
Group 2 (5-8) = 3 / 3 / 2 / 3
Group 3 (9 to 12) = 3 / 2 / 3 / 3
Group 4 (13 to 18) = 2 / 3 / 3 / 3

This means the top 8 play 7 matches against their peers; and you suspect that the Group 1 & Group 2 match ups against the lower groups mean that you don't get any body sneaking through the back door; but with only 2 promotion spots I suspect that it should only be 2 from Group 1 anyway

You should use rounds 1-6 to clear out the majority of the top vs bottom pairings

Mick Norris
Posts: 6435
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Mick Norris » Mon Nov 28, 2016 9:46 am

Alan Walton wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:So, is the conclusion that the Irish players are better than their ratings would suggest?


Or the English players are overrated :shock: ;


Good point; relatively the ELO ratings may not be in balance, so Div 3 N will make it easier to see the true position

Alan Walton wrote:The players who played for Gonzaga and Enniscorthy I have seen a few times I have been in Ireland, and I am not surprised at all they won both matches against the players they played against

Gonzaga will be promoted this year; Enniscorthy are a young squad looking for experience, but I suspect a few more shocks this year from them


Will be interesting to see if Gonzaga beat everyone, or like Alba last year fall at the last hurdle

Should be a good contest for second place

At least no-one will be taking Enniscorthy lightly now
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Alan Walton
Posts: 1158
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Alan Walton » Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:05 am

Gonzaga are a close knit unit, I believe they are all relatively young and have ties to the school they went to; I suspect they are seriously concentrating on getting to the A Div, and with Maze being registered for them (plays the odd time in the Irish league) I don't think they are expecting any slip ups

The Gonzaga players also are much more experienced than the vast majority in the Division; remember every year these players have been representing their club in the European Club Champs, most players in Div 3N are really just club players with only a few actually entering international tournaments (not counting the British in this), so not used to playing players who regularly play IMs & GMs

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby MartinCarpenter » Mon Nov 28, 2016 11:42 am

Manchester could/should get close I'd think? Decent team last weekend and there's several potentially quite serious wild cards round the Manchester league if they can be persuaded to target a given weekend/match. Mind you, the organisation/motivation seemingly wasn't really there for that sort of thing last season.

That latter is very true about the league basically being club players. Also plenty of them ultimately aren't really taking things all that seriously.

David Robertson
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby David Robertson » Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:07 pm

MartinCarpenter wrote:...basically being club players. Also plenty of them ultimately aren't really taking things all that seriously

Yes, spot on. The difference, the big difference, is in the level of prep. In Div 2 (and of course, in Div 1), everyone preps. Everyone knows that games are now public property, and will be inspected by likely opponents. So, unless you're very confident, you need a broader opening repertoire to avoid becoming a sitting duck. Moreover you can't just rock up to the board at start of play without handing your opponent a 90 minute prep advantage. Not everyone in Div 3 knows or cares about this. It's even been a source of contention among our players: several lower down "don't like" their games in public view; and are disinclined to modify their arrangements in the light of reality. Then they wonder why they lose!

Richard Bates
Posts: 2536
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Richard Bates » Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:52 pm

David Robertson wrote:
MartinCarpenter wrote:...basically being club players. Also plenty of them ultimately aren't really taking things all that seriously

Yes, spot on. The difference, the big difference, is in the level of prep. In Div 2 (and of course, in Div 1), everyone preps. Everyone knows that games are now public property, and will be inspected by likely opponents.


It's great what you can usually get away with due to everyone assuming/believing this! ;)

Nick Grey
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Re: Div 3 North 2016-17

Postby Nick Grey » Mon Nov 28, 2016 8:15 pm

Not everyone prepares in either of the top leagues - with 1 hour notice it is not as if it is a 1 round a day international swiss where you get your opponent some 12-16 hours before.

As one player has mentioned to me if he does not know what system/opening he will play in any match how will his opponents know?


Return to “4NCL”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests