Counties Finals...latest scores

Discussion about all aspects of the ECF County Championships.
Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Alex Holowczak » Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:10 am

Neil Graham wrote:As I understand it, all ungraded players were cleared by the Event Controller prior to the Finals.
Of course. I think the problem is that some would complain about the Controller's decision (if it made any difference).

Sean Hewitt

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Sean Hewitt » Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:51 am

John, Neil and others are right. As long as the Essex player was cleared to play in advance then whether that decision was right or wrong does not affect the eligibility of the player.

I do wonder what evidence was used to make that decision though, both in terms of the Essex captain believing that the player was genuinely under 100 strength, and the controller verifying that. A quick look at the SCCU website revealed that he played 4 games in the Union stages, playing board 1 against opponents graded on average over 95. He won all 4 games. Hmmm.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:21 am

"I'm guessing from your location that you play in the Surrey League. That league is, I hope, unique in allowing players to insist on the use of a clock made in 19th Century in preference to a modern digital clock.

Out of interest, what was the rationale for this rule?"

I think the word "rationale" is misplaced, as it implies there was some sort of logic behind the decision. I was at the meeting. Surrey has different time-limits for different finishes - 30 moves in an hour, back 20 minutes for QP, 35 moves in 75 minutes, back 15 minutes for adjudication, 35 moves in 75 minutes, then 28 an hour for adjournment. Coulsdon CF had digital clocks and normally had them set to "one hour" in advance, which of course makes sense as it's quicker to adjust 1:00 to 1:15 than it is to adjust 1:15 to 1:00. According to some of the denizens of Surrey chess, this was deliberate intimidation to force the opponents to have QP finish, when they didn't want it. (I would have thought the opposing players could just say they wanted adjudication or adjournment...) But there were also players who said they felt disadvantaged by using a modern clock, (remember some of these people have fond memories of meeting Steinitz), and some would just vote against Coulsdon anyway. So a rule to make it possible to insist on an analogue clock was brought in, and another rule was brought in to say that clocks must be set to show the adjudication/adjournment time-limit at the start of the match.

Digital clocks are much more common in Surrey now. Coincidentally, CCF reported that some of their digital clocks went missing, presumed stolen, but whether that was specifically to stop their use in the league is not known.
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey

Bobjones
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Bobjones » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:55 am

Just a minor correction to a previously reported result. Suffolk beat Yorkshire 9½-6½. It was announced as 8½-7½, but one of the results had been wrongly recorded on the computer; this was corrected immediately after the prizegiving.

Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Scott Freeman » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:19 am

Without wishing to take us too far off subject, I don't believe (Kevin) that the clocks were stolen for the purposes of preventing us using them. Some feel they just went missing, but I find that difficult to believe as 21 digital clocks in a bag must have carried some weight and one doesn't accidentally chuck such a large stock of clocks out without checking what's in the bag!

What is far more concerning than the loss itself is that the SCCA and/or the Surrey Chess Congress Ltd denied any liability for them (even though they went missing whilst in their care) and were not bothered by the fact we had a congress one week later (thank-you South Norwood CC for covering us). Ben Ogunshola (who was on the committee and who had asked us if they could borrow them) paid for the lot out of his own pocket despite vicious attacks from the Congress Committee (who isolated him) and the Congress Company Directors (but then again nearly all of them were fundamentally anti CCF in the first place so I guess we shouldn't have been suprised). The clocks were never found and the SCCA then moved their event to run at the same time as one of our congresses, using the money that they should have used to pay us back (or Ben Ogunshola) to fund their future events. Disappointing at best.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Alex Holowczak » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:23 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:According to some of the denizens of Surrey chess, this was deliberate intimidation to force the opponents to have QP finish, when they didn't want it. (I would have thought the opposing players could just say they wanted adjudication or adjournment...) But there were also players who said they felt disadvantaged by using a modern clock, (remember some of these people have fond memories of meeting Steinitz), and some would just vote against Coulsdon anyway. So a rule to make it possible to insist on an analogue clock was brought in, and another rule was brought in to say that clocks must be set to show the adjudication/adjournment time-limit at the start of the match.

Digital clocks are much more common in Surrey now. Coincidentally, CCF reported that some of their digital clocks went missing, presumed stolen, but whether that was specifically to stop their use in the league is not known.
At the risk of quoting Churchill, that sounds a bit ridiculous. :?

User avatar
Gavin Strachan
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:06 am
Contact:

Re: Counties Finals...latest scores

Post by Gavin Strachan » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:26 am

The guy you refer to comes to my club and it was his first ever full season playing chess. He has rapidly improved due to being keen and lots of people down our club helping him improve. He probably will be 125 range but he certainly won't be the next David Howell and will probably stay around that mark.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 6028
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Finals

Post by Carl Hibbard » Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:44 pm

To be honest no, real work is a pain at the moment so I might need a second pointer every so often sorry
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

Post Reply