OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
-
- Posts: 1071
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:16 pm
- Location: Sutton Coldfield
- Contact:
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
I'm surprised by some of the negative posts. This was a good performance by any objective measure. Three of England's top four gained rating points, one of them while suffering from a heavy cold for part of the time. The final rankings show England in the tie for 12-17th places, with the tie-break placing the team 15th - exactly as seeded.
Perhaps more to the point: with two rounds to go, England were in the hunt for a medal. How often has that happened in recent years? Gold was out of reach, but had Short's game gone the other way today England would have tied for 3rd place. In the end, that game was the difference between a good result and an outstanding one, but that only goes to show how narrow the margins are in top-level competition. I think the team should be congratulated on doing a fine job.
Perhaps more to the point: with two rounds to go, England were in the hunt for a medal. How often has that happened in recent years? Gold was out of reach, but had Short's game gone the other way today England would have tied for 3rd place. In the end, that game was the difference between a good result and an outstanding one, but that only goes to show how narrow the margins are in top-level competition. I think the team should be congratulated on doing a fine job.
Ian Kingston
http://www.iankingston.com
http://www.iankingston.com
-
- Posts: 1071
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:16 pm
- Location: Sutton Coldfield
- Contact:
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
One other observation: I've just compared the Olympiad reports on the ECF web site with those provided by Chess Scotland (http://www.chessscotland.com/internatio ... ad2008.htm), the Welsh Chess Union (http://www.welshchessunion.co.uk/) and the Irish Chess Union (http://www.icu.ie/articles/display.php?id=214).
You can draw your own conclusions, but I think England's players deserve better coverage.
You can draw your own conclusions, but I think England's players deserve better coverage.
Ian Kingston
http://www.iankingston.com
http://www.iankingston.com
- Ben Purton
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
- Location: Berks
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
I think firstly your failing to see the point Justin.
Of the other thread quote. You are like usual uninformed , as 2 of those 5 have been selected for the last 2 olympiads. In My view those same two "would have been" and are better than at least two possible three of the current side.
Your point about Conquest and Short. Really?? Everyone knows Short lives in Greece, but was he not Born in England? Conquest was born in the CONQUEST hospital in hastings, which is also in England. Like under guidelines, my board 2 Jan Krensing can play for England if he was strong enough, thats a fact. Which is ludicrous. So your point about that is totally invalid, on the grounds that under current rules here. Im elligble for Israel. Gawain would be elligble for Ireland, Northern Ireland & Italy.
In Spain you have a close friend of Mine called Artur, He hasnt yet changed to ESP because I think he is Loyal to ISR. I think this is one of few countries where the international player laws is obviously allowed loupholes.
Going back to the not up to standard , what do you base that on? Id much rather have a English girl in the team than a German women? How is that wrong? Especially as a large amount of the English women up for contention are young players.
I dont dispute Bhatia,Meri or Jovanka. I think they should be in contention for years to come. Dagne played for another country, I think we dont ever ever deserve proper sports status until we actually treat it like one.
Kind regards
Ben
Of the other thread quote. You are like usual uninformed , as 2 of those 5 have been selected for the last 2 olympiads. In My view those same two "would have been" and are better than at least two possible three of the current side.
Your point about Conquest and Short. Really?? Everyone knows Short lives in Greece, but was he not Born in England? Conquest was born in the CONQUEST hospital in hastings, which is also in England. Like under guidelines, my board 2 Jan Krensing can play for England if he was strong enough, thats a fact. Which is ludicrous. So your point about that is totally invalid, on the grounds that under current rules here. Im elligble for Israel. Gawain would be elligble for Ireland, Northern Ireland & Italy.
In Spain you have a close friend of Mine called Artur, He hasnt yet changed to ESP because I think he is Loyal to ISR. I think this is one of few countries where the international player laws is obviously allowed loupholes.
Going back to the not up to standard , what do you base that on? Id much rather have a English girl in the team than a German women? How is that wrong? Especially as a large amount of the English women up for contention are young players.
I dont dispute Bhatia,Meri or Jovanka. I think they should be in contention for years to come. Dagne played for another country, I think we dont ever ever deserve proper sports status until we actually treat it like one.
Kind regards
Ben
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.
- Ben Purton
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
- Location: Berks
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
The selection panel is Stewart Reuben (Chairman), Allan Beardsworth, Jana Bellin, Ray Edwards, Glenn Flear, Harriet Hunt, Jonathan Parker, Richard Palliser.
As for this.
Stewart- Obviously very experienced and should be there.
Who is Allan Beardswoth???!
Jana Bellin- Hmmmmmm very close mates with Ingrids. No comment.
Ray Edwards- Isnt he a snooker player?
Glenn Flear- Deserves to be there, good GM
Harriet Hunt- By far our best Female and should help with team, but got to ask , if shes on the panel , why isnt Adams or Short?
Jonathan Parker- I guess hes impartial to an extent as hes ruled himself out of selection.
Richard Palliser- Hes a chess journO, So again, very knowledgable about current tournaments so should probaly make it.
I think Claire could do with being on the panel
Ben
As for this.
Stewart- Obviously very experienced and should be there.
Who is Allan Beardswoth???!
Jana Bellin- Hmmmmmm very close mates with Ingrids. No comment.
Ray Edwards- Isnt he a snooker player?
Glenn Flear- Deserves to be there, good GM
Harriet Hunt- By far our best Female and should help with team, but got to ask , if shes on the panel , why isnt Adams or Short?
Jonathan Parker- I guess hes impartial to an extent as hes ruled himself out of selection.
Richard Palliser- Hes a chess journO, So again, very knowledgable about current tournaments so should probaly make it.
I think Claire could do with being on the panel
Ben
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.
-
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:43 pm
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
I remember when the Olympiad team line up was announced, no-one dissented about the selection here.
Quite rightly, Conquest earned his place through high enough ELO rating and good form, the highlight being British Champion.
Overall I agree it was a good men's team performance matching their seeding position. The only things I would mention is;
1. Playing Adams against Malta was strange. Overall, Adams was below his best but from memory he has produced the best performances of anyone else in the England team in past European Team championships and in previous Olympiads so he was bound to have to produce a below par performance one day!
2. No-one has yet mentioned that we actually scored more points with black than with white (this sounds worse when you consider that 2 of those white points were against Malta!). So while the black performance with black was excellent, the below par performance with white proved to be the difference when challenging for a medal.
3. I am not sure why Conquest played only 3 games, seems like a waste of a 5th player to me. Even more so when it's reported than Jones had a heavy cold. So shouldn't Conquest be given more games in place of Jones? I don't know. It would be great if Peter Wells as the team captain produced a report for all to read rather than just selected people in the ECF.
4. I agree with David Robertson that Howell earned the 'Palme d'Or' - he was the only one to play all 11 rounds so his 13 rounds experiences in World Junior events came in handy!
The less said about the women's team the better, Ciuksyte excepted.
Quite rightly, Conquest earned his place through high enough ELO rating and good form, the highlight being British Champion.
Overall I agree it was a good men's team performance matching their seeding position. The only things I would mention is;
1. Playing Adams against Malta was strange. Overall, Adams was below his best but from memory he has produced the best performances of anyone else in the England team in past European Team championships and in previous Olympiads so he was bound to have to produce a below par performance one day!
2. No-one has yet mentioned that we actually scored more points with black than with white (this sounds worse when you consider that 2 of those white points were against Malta!). So while the black performance with black was excellent, the below par performance with white proved to be the difference when challenging for a medal.
3. I am not sure why Conquest played only 3 games, seems like a waste of a 5th player to me. Even more so when it's reported than Jones had a heavy cold. So shouldn't Conquest be given more games in place of Jones? I don't know. It would be great if Peter Wells as the team captain produced a report for all to read rather than just selected people in the ECF.
4. I agree with David Robertson that Howell earned the 'Palme d'Or' - he was the only one to play all 11 rounds so his 13 rounds experiences in World Junior events came in handy!
The less said about the women's team the better, Ciuksyte excepted.
-
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:43 pm
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
I am not sure why we have eight people on the selection panel. I remember when it used to be 3 or 4 people.
I wonder who selects the selectors?
I wonder who selects the selectors?
-
- Posts: 10310
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
A number of us on here questioned the selection of Conquest, based on his past performances for England
However, as Matthew Turner has said, the current British Champion is hard to leave out
Maybe he can move to team manger next time, given he has considerable experience of going to Olympiads, and gets on well with the team members
My take is the men's team did well, being in contention towards the top, and gaining good experience against China and Russia in particular - unfortunately, they ended up 15th as per seeding, and a marginally better result would have made it easier to secure future sponsorship
The ladies were seeded 31 and finished 50, disappointing, but some good performances - we seem to lack strength in depth, no easy answer to that problem
Dresden seems to have done a good job, the website seemed good, would be nice to think London (or Manchester) could do the same
However, as Matthew Turner has said, the current British Champion is hard to leave out
Maybe he can move to team manger next time, given he has considerable experience of going to Olympiads, and gets on well with the team members
My take is the men's team did well, being in contention towards the top, and gaining good experience against China and Russia in particular - unfortunately, they ended up 15th as per seeding, and a marginally better result would have made it easier to secure future sponsorship
The ladies were seeded 31 and finished 50, disappointing, but some good performances - we seem to lack strength in depth, no easy answer to that problem
Dresden seems to have done a good job, the website seemed good, would be nice to think London (or Manchester) could do the same
Any postings on here represent my personal views
- Ben Purton
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
- Location: Berks
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
Im sure a few Sambuca Sharks could target some womens events and go on the pull , isnt this the preffered tactic rather than actually starting at grass roots level.Mick Norris wrote:
The ladies were seeded 31 and finished 50, disappointing, but some good performances - we seem to lack strength in depth, no easy answer to that problem
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.
-
- Posts: 3600
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
Jonathan,
I do not critcise the selectors over any of their selections and I think the Men's Team have done very well. Yes they had a disappointing end but this was only relative to the elevated expectations from a great start.
However, I think the selections were relatively easy. I am saying that I have little confidence in the selectors (Jonathan Parker and Stewart Reuben aside) had the selections been more difficult.
I do not critcise the selectors over any of their selections and I think the Men's Team have done very well. Yes they had a disappointing end but this was only relative to the elevated expectations from a great start.
However, I think the selections were relatively easy. I am saying that I have little confidence in the selectors (Jonathan Parker and Stewart Reuben aside) had the selections been more difficult.
- JustinHorton
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
Your own comments.Ben Purton wrote:Going back to the not up to standard , what do you base that on?
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 10310
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
Who should the selectors be (and are you available, Matthew)?Matthew Turner wrote:Jonathan,
I do not critcise the selectors over any of their selections and I think the Men's Team have done very well. Yes they had a disappointing end but this was only relative to the elevated expectations from a great start.
However, I think the selections were relatively easy. I am saying that I have little confidence in the selectors (Jonathan Parker and Stewart Reuben aside) had the selections been more difficult.
Any postings on here represent my personal views
-
- Posts: 3600
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
Mick,
I have been waiting for this question and having trouble with an answer, but here are some names that might figure
Stewart Reuben
Jonathan Parker (assuming he continues to rule himself out of selection)
Peter Sowray
Nigel Povah
John Saunders
Jonathan Rogers
I'm not sure why you would need anyone else and indeed why not have less. I'm sure that someone will make the point that they are all men, so how can they pick the women's team. Well quite easily I would have thought, but to avoid argument perhaps Harriet Hunt would need to remain a selector
I have been waiting for this question and having trouble with an answer, but here are some names that might figure
Stewart Reuben
Jonathan Parker (assuming he continues to rule himself out of selection)
Peter Sowray
Nigel Povah
John Saunders
Jonathan Rogers
I'm not sure why you would need anyone else and indeed why not have less. I'm sure that someone will make the point that they are all men, so how can they pick the women's team. Well quite easily I would have thought, but to avoid argument perhaps Harriet Hunt would need to remain a selector
-
- Posts: 10310
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
Blimey, not only all men, but one of them from Wales?Matthew Turner wrote:Mick,
I have been waiting for this question and having trouble with an answer, but here are some names that might figure
Stewart Reuben
Jonathan Parker (assuming he continues to rule himself out of selection)
Peter Sowray
Nigel Povah
John Saunders
Jonathan Rogers
I'm not sure why you would need anyone else and indeed why not have less. I'm sure that someone will make the point that they are all men, so how can they pick the women's team. Well quite easily I would have thought, but to avoid argument perhaps Harriet Hunt would need to remain a selector
Are you not ruling yourself out of selection, or simply not available?
Any postings on here represent my personal views
-
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
I am surprised though flattered by Matthew's post! I would rule myself out though because I am inactive outside the 4NCL and don't know the very top players particularly well (I am not even sure that Short and Howell would recognise me) and that does matter, I think. Probably Matthew had rather my legal background in mind, but I don't specialise in employment law or even public law and in any event there is no suggestion that the current decision making processes are flawed.
My own approach to the question of selection committees would in fact not be to jump straight in with names (we might end up with a very long list indeed) but rather to think in principle about the qualities we are looking for in selectors (trying NOT to adapt these qualities from the outset in order to make them fit whomever we have in mind!). When we have done that the list of contenders should narrow by itself.
I think that first of all, one sets some general attributes that all members should have, i.e they should all be experienced in English chess, have other positions of responsibility, a minimum level of education (a good degree from a good University or a professional qualification) and not to be thought to have personal conflicts with any potential candidates. The International Director would have to satisfy himself that everyone on the panel meets these general attributes.
Then the second level - particular attributes. Apart from the International Director (who has the particular job of taking soundings from the likes of Adams and Short and reporting their views) I think that you need a leading (say, top ten) male and female player who have ruled themselves out of contention, so as to ensure a certain amount of credibility in the eyes of those selected. I think you want some one else with long and recent experience of Olympiads, either as captain or player (not necessarily a past English captain or player; some strong English players have captained African countries in the past), because it seems to me that Olympiads are quite unique in the levels of stress, demands of team unity, and so forth. Perhaps that is all. There might be a case for a journalistic figure but only if he is up to date with all the results and games of the leading players of the day, to ensure that all possibly relevant data is considered. There might one day be a need for someone with experience in employing people, if perceptions about fairness become particularly problematic, or perhaps if government funding might become available dependent on our selection procedures satisfying certain bureaucratic procedures, but that is for the future.
On this criteria, the panel should have been Stewart (International Director) Jonathan and Harriet (leading male and female players who ruled themselves out of contention) possibly Glenn depending on his Olympiad experiences, possibly Richard as the journalistic figure who really does have all sorts of data at his fingertips. That is a committee of five and that ought to be enough. (But if Harriet had wanted to play, then Jana could then have taken her place as the leading woman player who had nonetheless ruled herself out of contention).
My own approach to the question of selection committees would in fact not be to jump straight in with names (we might end up with a very long list indeed) but rather to think in principle about the qualities we are looking for in selectors (trying NOT to adapt these qualities from the outset in order to make them fit whomever we have in mind!). When we have done that the list of contenders should narrow by itself.
I think that first of all, one sets some general attributes that all members should have, i.e they should all be experienced in English chess, have other positions of responsibility, a minimum level of education (a good degree from a good University or a professional qualification) and not to be thought to have personal conflicts with any potential candidates. The International Director would have to satisfy himself that everyone on the panel meets these general attributes.
Then the second level - particular attributes. Apart from the International Director (who has the particular job of taking soundings from the likes of Adams and Short and reporting their views) I think that you need a leading (say, top ten) male and female player who have ruled themselves out of contention, so as to ensure a certain amount of credibility in the eyes of those selected. I think you want some one else with long and recent experience of Olympiads, either as captain or player (not necessarily a past English captain or player; some strong English players have captained African countries in the past), because it seems to me that Olympiads are quite unique in the levels of stress, demands of team unity, and so forth. Perhaps that is all. There might be a case for a journalistic figure but only if he is up to date with all the results and games of the leading players of the day, to ensure that all possibly relevant data is considered. There might one day be a need for someone with experience in employing people, if perceptions about fairness become particularly problematic, or perhaps if government funding might become available dependent on our selection procedures satisfying certain bureaucratic procedures, but that is for the future.
On this criteria, the panel should have been Stewart (International Director) Jonathan and Harriet (leading male and female players who ruled themselves out of contention) possibly Glenn depending on his Olympiad experiences, possibly Richard as the journalistic figure who really does have all sorts of data at his fingertips. That is a committee of five and that ought to be enough. (But if Harriet had wanted to play, then Jana could then have taken her place as the leading woman player who had nonetheless ruled herself out of contention).
-
- Posts: 3600
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: OLYMPIAD 2008 :):)
The problem with good players who have ruled themselves out, is generally because these players are inactive. The selectors probably have to make 4 selections at most, so they don't particularly need to know Short and Adams because they are automatic choices. The players they need to know are Conquest, Hebden, Gordon etc. and Bhatia, Chevannes, Hegarty etc. I'm not sure that Harriet Hunt or Glenn Flear or Richard Palliser (now that he is less active than he was a couple of years ago) would really know very much about these players. It is for that reason that I think Jonathan Rogers or Peter Sowray, who are decent players and take a interest in where and how well our leading players are playing would be more qualified to make selection decisions.
I find it strange that I have been a good player for some time and certainly been on the edge of selection, yet there are two members of the current selection panel that I have certainly never talked to, and possibly never met.
I find it strange that I have been a good player for some time and certainly been on the edge of selection, yet there are two members of the current selection panel that I have certainly never talked to, and possibly never met.