I am considering what to do about the sections at Golders Green, currently Open, U160, U130 and U100. Players have suggested that I raise the three lower sections by 15 points, but I am open to other suggestions.
Is there an argument for NOT revising tournament rating limits?
It occurred to me that if the argument is that these are grading corrections, then surely there is a case for retaining the sections as they are? If players are pushed into the next section up as a result of the grading corrections then perhaps this was the appropriate section for them in the first place?
What do you think? You can vote in the poll, but your comments would be much appreciated.
Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
-
- Posts: 2720
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
- Location: NW4 4UY
Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 4:51 pm
Re: Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
Adam,
I suspect you have the data you need to make a decision. Looking at the entry numbers for the tournament as a whole, they seem to be up on prior years at the moment, so that's an argument for minimal change. But you might want to look at entry numbers for each section and see which sections might need boosting to get an even split.
My gut reaction is that the Major section seems quite small at the moment, so increasing the grade limit there might be positive. There is also a danger that leaving things as they are will reduce the pool of players eligible for the Amateur section.
You might also want to consider how much change there is in the rapidplay grades in your player-base. Looking at my son's opponents at GG rapidplays this year, the average new rapid grade is about 20 points higher than the average old rapidplay grade. This is on a small sample of only about 30 players in the 130-180 range.
So my conclusion would be for an increase in grading limits.
I suspect you have the data you need to make a decision. Looking at the entry numbers for the tournament as a whole, they seem to be up on prior years at the moment, so that's an argument for minimal change. But you might want to look at entry numbers for each section and see which sections might need boosting to get an even split.
My gut reaction is that the Major section seems quite small at the moment, so increasing the grade limit there might be positive. There is also a danger that leaving things as they are will reduce the pool of players eligible for the Amateur section.
You might also want to consider how much change there is in the rapidplay grades in your player-base. Looking at my son's opponents at GG rapidplays this year, the average new rapid grade is about 20 points higher than the average old rapidplay grade. This is on a small sample of only about 30 players in the 130-180 range.
So my conclusion would be for an increase in grading limits.
-
- Posts: 2720
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
- Location: NW4 4UY
Re: Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
Thanks for your comments, Matt!My gut reaction is that the Major section seems quite small at the moment, so increasing the grade limit there might be positive.
I agree with you; the Major is the section where the greatest change to the number of entrants can be made. But the Open is also a modest tournament; does this mean that all the players graded 160+ have been avoiding Golders Green because they don't fancy playing in the Open? And will those players come back to the tournament for an U175?
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
-
- Posts: 912
- Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:46 pm
Re: Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
I think there may also be an argument for raising the limit but closing the gap between the sections, for example U175, U150 and U 125. I think the regrading has not only increased grades as a whole but squashed more people into a narrower band.
-
- Posts: 531
- Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:10 pm
Re: Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
Have a mixture of events, inject a bit of variety.
One big open section, a bunch of swisses the next month, then the next split evenly in threes and so forth. Make sure these are properly trailered.
In the Soviet Union teams of juniors met masters you played clock simuls against them. In effect, the master was captain of the only team he/she didn't play. Attracted a bit of interest!
Four or six teams would be possible in the London area, see how it goes. Soltis writes about this in 'The Younger School of Soviet Chess' (Bell & Hyman).
Do a raffle. Give away prizes according to ages, not grades ('Prime of Life', Tenderfoot etc). Try a 40 minute rather than 30 minute event. Thematic openings, a King's Gambit maybe.
Give a prize for the player who has travelled the furthest. Reading tried 'Most Strikingly Dressed'. Dinah Norman won this I think. Players on nought won a copy of Taulbut's book on Karpov-Kasparov! Long ago, Islington tried a Best Swindle Prize. This would encourage people to keep score, an excellent discipline for the student at any level, surely?
James Pratt (Basingstoke!)
One big open section, a bunch of swisses the next month, then the next split evenly in threes and so forth. Make sure these are properly trailered.
In the Soviet Union teams of juniors met masters you played clock simuls against them. In effect, the master was captain of the only team he/she didn't play. Attracted a bit of interest!
Four or six teams would be possible in the London area, see how it goes. Soltis writes about this in 'The Younger School of Soviet Chess' (Bell & Hyman).
Do a raffle. Give away prizes according to ages, not grades ('Prime of Life', Tenderfoot etc). Try a 40 minute rather than 30 minute event. Thematic openings, a King's Gambit maybe.
Give a prize for the player who has travelled the furthest. Reading tried 'Most Strikingly Dressed'. Dinah Norman won this I think. Players on nought won a copy of Taulbut's book on Karpov-Kasparov! Long ago, Islington tried a Best Swindle Prize. This would encourage people to keep score, an excellent discipline for the student at any level, surely?
James Pratt (Basingstoke!)
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 4:51 pm
Re: Retaining Tournament Grading Limits
Adam,
If you keep the Major limit just above Dashiell's new rapid grade then he'll play more often as he can supplement his pocket money with your prizes I can't speak for any other players.
I do like the sound of some of James's ideas though - occasionally having one single event for example might be good, if possibly too confusing for regulars.
If you keep the Major limit just above Dashiell's new rapid grade then he'll play more often as he can supplement his pocket money with your prizes I can't speak for any other players.
I do like the sound of some of James's ideas though - occasionally having one single event for example might be good, if possibly too confusing for regulars.