Ideas to Improve Chess overall in this country.

[Sean Hewitt]

Then if they do that what would you do with the Major open surely it would have to be scrapped

Would that be a problem?

[William Metcalfe]

I was only asking but it might be would people who play the Major open want to play in a British champs open

[Lee Bullock]

You didn't play the opening against Alan Sands perfectly, though, Lee. Then again, his 7...e6 and 15...e5 were below par for a 166 player - 7...e5 was the normal move. Despite playing in an unorthdox way (typical for Alan) black would still have had a clear advantage my opinion, with 24... Rh8 instead of Rg8?? Did he drop the rook one square short?

On the general point above I agree with Chris K that it would be a good idea to evaluate the contents of this thread now and stop adding to it until we see where we have got to. Therefore if Lee tries to answer my question about Alan's mysterious rook move I'll leave it at that for now.

No I think he meant it. Although I never got to ask him. He played this move very confident and when I played Nh6+ he didnt flinch one bit so I thought it was some kind of trap to get my knight defender out the way. But I saw no follow up so took it.

I did not once say it meant anything that Sands beat French?

Lee, when you say,

I just stated it to just comment he had a recent really good result and was not a weakish 155 or an over graded one.

This is exactly what I mean by inferring meaning from a result.

One win, over Angus French or anybody else, doesn't prove a person is not "weakish" or "over graded" at all. It just proves you won a game.

In fact, I don't really believe in these terms any way. If you're graded 155 - or 105 or 255 for that matter - then that is what you are. The exception would perhaps be juniors or people who haven't played many games. Obviously in those cases grades can be erratic and unreliable.


As I said before, there was no need to add anything to your result. "I drew with a person 80 points above me" - that's more than enough. If you *were* going to say something more, it would make much more sense to explain how many games the guy had played in that grading period or establish his grading history or some such. That at least would be logical support to your argument, but as I say it's not necessary at all.

And Jonathan I think you really are nit picking. I was simply saying he got a decent result recently and that he was no has been 166. Many players are over rated and under rated. I was simply implying he was maybe a stronger 166 or at least not a weak one. Anyway I agree with the other posters we have got off topic which is about ideas on improving Chess overall in this country.

One of the ways is surely to get more playing? have not seen any comments so far on my earlier post about getting Chess to old people as well as young people? Older people mostly dont have responsibilities and have money. They have time and are mostly mature etc. I can see a national campaign of getting old people into Chess being a great success

[Lee Bullock]

I was only asking but it might be would people who play the Major open want to play in a British champs open

I dont think making the biggest event of the year an open would be a good idea? Surely the qualifying that goes on all year round would be made meaningless?

[John McKenna]

Thanks for your forthright answer, Lee. I don't see Alan so often these days but I'll ask him if I get the chance.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Then if they do that what would you do with the Major open surely it would have to be scrapped

Would that be a problem?

The Major Open has already all but been destroyed by the ever-growing tail of the British Championship tournament. Have a look at what the Major Open used to be like in the late 80s for example.

And, yes, by definition, there would be no qualifying tournaments if The British was an Open.

I don't say this is the best of all possible worlds. I do feel it would be better than what's happening now.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

The Major Open has already all but been destroyed by the ever-growing tail of the British Championship tournament. Have a look at what the Major Open used to be like in the late 80s for example.

Are there any online crosstables for the Major Opens? If not, could you give examples of the top players in the Major Open in the late 1980s?

[Roger de Coverly]

I can see a national campaign of getting old people into Chess being a great success

You don't think they are already there? The year of birth is published for players on the FIDE list. For England there are more over 60 s than under 18s.

If a Congress section awards a Veteran prize as well as a Junior prize, the Veteran list is often longer.

[Lee Bullock]

I can see a national campaign of getting old people into Chess being a great success

You don't think they are already there? The year of birth is published for players on the FIDE list. For England there are more over 60 s than under 18s.

If a Congress section awards a Veteran prize as well as a Junior prize, the Veteran list is often longer.

I did not say some are not there, I am saying an extra few thousand would be brilliant? Surely full and more congresses is a start? eg the amount of people in old peoples homes doing nothing or very little.

[William Metcalfe]

Its the older generation that keeps congresses running in this country and more older generation players play league chess than juniors.Well that is what i see in the North East

[Lee Bullock]

Its the older generation that keeps congresses running in this country and more older generation players play league chess than juniors.Well that is what i see in the North East

Exactly, they are the ones once hooked can stay and keep playing. Just like young also. Of course there staying power wont be as long as a junior but what better way to get old people out the house or homes

[Jonathan Bryant]

Are there any online crosstables for the Major Opens? If not, could you give examples of the top players in the Major Open in the late 1980s?

Dunno about the online thing and unfortunately my bulletin from the 1989 championship at Plymouth and the 1990 tournament in eastbourne have long since been thrown out.

Consulting my CHESS magazine of 1989, however, I seen that year's Major Open was won by Ravikumar (then 2325 I believe) and young Aaron Summerscale (then 2320).

My memory of the Major Open back then is not so much the strength of the winners as much as the depth of the competition. These days it seems to a large part be an event for juniors who have already played a game in the morning.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

My memory of the Major Open back then is not so much the strength of the winners as much as the depth of the competition. These days it seems to a large part be an event for juniors who have already played a game in the morning.

And one of the effects of lots of juniors is that this can scare off others. What is the point in battling heroically against an under-graded junior, and then losing, or even losing rating points after drawing? Sure, the junior might learn something, and playing in the Major Open shouldn't really be about rating points, but there is that effect.

[Mike Gunn]

Lee, OK, if your ambition is to play in the British Championship, then one thing you could do is play in the Major Open (at the British Championship) because the winner qualifies to play in the real British Championship the following year. The time limits and playing conditions are identical, you're just sitting a bit further down the hall. (So, it is almost like the real thing.) You might even get to play me as I have played in it the last few years and last year I scored 4/10 (I think - the link on last year's website is broken). As Jon says, these days it is full of weakies like me, but you will also get to play a few 170/ 180 players that you currently have in your sights.

[Lee Bullock]

Lee, OK, if your ambition is to play in the British Championship, then one thing you could do is play in the Major Open (at the British Championship) because the winner qualifies to play in the real British Championship the following year. The time limits and playing conditions are identical, you're just sitting a bit further down the hall. (So, it is almost like the real thing.) You might even get to play me as I have played in it the last few years and last year I scored 4/10 (I think - the link on last year's website is broken). As Jon says, these days it is full of weakies like me, but you will also get to play a few 170/ 180 players that you currently have in your sights.

Hi Mike,

Yeah I was going to this year financially allowing. But playing in that tournament with no real chance of winning it or getting any prize money would mean I had a lot of funds to kill and at the mo I have not.

At the mo I am winning a lot of prize money due to my rating and if I don't win a tourney I always win the grading prize so each tournament was kind of paying for the next or at least helping. And I would not call you a weakie as you call it But for your rating 4/11 is very good. I am sure I could get 4/6 out of 11 but that would not be enough to qualify for the next years British. I think its 7.5 which is much harder to get than 6. But this may one day be my best chance of qualifying so I hope the Major stays alive