The test was meant to be an hour (caused by some builders cutting some cables or something) but reckon it only lasted 15 mins. We got moved to the music room which had pretty good soundproofing (not sure what would have happened if there was a real fire!). Middlesex went 3 up early doors but Kent hauled us back in. Kent would have won on tiebreak also. A hard defeat to take as Middlesex were favourites but well done Kent anyway.Alex Holowczak wrote:Result just been submitted by the Kent captain, reporting Kent won 8.5-7.5. This eliminates the defending champions...Phil Makepeace wrote:"Hour long fire test" at the Mick Jagger Centre. Fun and games.
Latest: Kent 1.5-1.5 Middlesex
2013 Final Stage
-
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:13 am
Re: 2013 Final Stage
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: 2013 Final Stage
It is reported that Surrey beat Lancashire 10-6. So the final of the Open will pit Surrey v Kent; a repeat of the 2011 Final.
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Those reporting the results in the Under 140 Semi Final not quite au fait with the system yet...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- Posts: 2152
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: 2013 Final Stage
"Garbage in, garbage out".
It could be said that the system might check its inputs (or prevent certain inputs).
It could be said that the system might check its inputs (or prevent certain inputs).
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Perhaps the SCCU website, which you derided up thread, has its uses after all:Alex Holowczak wrote:Those reporting the results in the Under 140 Semi Final not quite au fait with the system yet...
http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/matchbcf.htm#u140SCCU Website wrote:Speaking for ourselves we'd hazard a guess at Stephen A Jennings 105 of York RI.
When match captains returning home after a long day's chess are then expected to spend an hour or so uploading results to some wonderful new system, it's hardly surprising if they make the odd mistake.
I don't imagine they'll appreciate being mocked by the Controller.
-
- Posts: 10381
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: 2013 Final Stage
I'd second that guessDavid Sedgwick wrote:Perhaps the SCCU website, which you derided up thread, has its uses after all:
http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/matchbcf.htm#u140SCCU Website wrote:Speaking for ourselves we'd hazard a guess at Stephen A Jennings 105 of York RI.
The other thing I like about the SCCU site, other than Richard usually being right, is to know where the matches were played
Interesting venue (and date) news on the Essex website for those wondering when the other matches might be played
Any postings on here represent my personal views
-
- Posts: 21318
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: 2013 Final Stage
if it works the same way as the Berks, London League and other sites, it will present the person inputting the results with a drop down list of names. So when you have two players within the broad Yorkshire squad with the same or similar names, it's a mistake just waiting to happen.Mick Norris wrote: I'd second that guess
-
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:24 pm
Re: 2013 Final Stage
I’d agree with that and maybe an option to enter the venue details can be added to the official results page. I’m sure it would useful for match captains to have list of potential venues to call on.Mick Norris wrote:
The other thing I like about the SCCU site, other than Richard usually being right, is to know where the matches were played
After the Bedfordshire match with Hampshire yesterday I’d certainly recommend the venue at Grove (Oxfordshire) as a spacious, well equipped and (maybe most importantly!) well priced option.
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 9:45 pm
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Kevin, also its close to a pub where you can celebrate your win!Kevin Williamson wrote: After the Bedfordshire match with Hampshire yesterday I’d certainly recommend the venue at Grove (Oxfordshire) as a spacious, well equipped and (maybe most importantly!) well priced option.
-
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:24 pm
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Indeed John, and a pub showing us finishing off the Aussies in the cricket at that!John Sharp wrote: Kevin, also its close to a pub where you can celebrate your win!
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Indeed it could. But the player exists, and might actually have played.Angus French wrote:"Garbage in, garbage out".
It could be said that the system might check its inputs (or prevent certain inputs).
It's very strange. The Birmingham Rapidplay League embarked on this new system concurrently, and they've had far fewer issues.David Sedgwick wrote:When match captains returning home after a long day's chess are then expected to spend an hour or so uploading results to some wonderful new system, it's hardly surprising if they make the odd mistake.
I don't imagine they'll appreciate being mocked by the Controller.
Of course, they're not being mocked by the Controller because there isn't one.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Try to work out why.Alex Holowczak wrote:It's very strange. The Birmingham Rapidplay League embarked on this new system concurrently, and they've had far fewer issues.David Sedgwick wrote:When match captains returning home after a long day's chess are then expected to spend an hour or so uploading results to some wonderful new system, it's hardly surprising if they make the odd mistake.
I don't imagine they'll appreciate being mocked by the Controller.
Try to work out why.Alex Holowczak wrote:Of course, they're not being mocked by the Controller because there isn't one.
-
- Posts: 21318
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: 2013 Final Stage
I would have thought that a controller would want the software to allow him or her to set aside the confirmed result and request the match captains to reconsider the submitted result for data accuracy.David Sedgwick wrote:Try to work out why.
-
- Posts: 7222
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Re: 2013 Final Stage
Fortunately it does not.Roger de Coverly wrote:
if it works the same way as the Berks, London League
Anyway, some aspects of the application do appear somewhat familiar!
Last edited by John Upham on Mon Jun 10, 2013 12:47 am, edited 2 times in total.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 2152
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: 2013 Final Stage
What the software might have done is flagged that:Alex Holowczak wrote:Indeed it could. But the player exists, and might actually have played.Angus French wrote:"Garbage in, garbage out".
It could be said that the system might check its inputs (or prevent certain inputs).
a) a player's grade was higher than the limit for the competition; or,
b) a player's grade was higher by more than a stipulated amount - 10 points, I believe - than the grade of a higher-board player.
Then the inputting and confirming captains would have had the opportunity to reconsider or to provide text to explain the situation.
I'm not saying that the software should have done this but it might have - one has to weight up costs and practicalities when developing software.
What I am saying is: be careful before blaming the captains.