UK CHESS CHALLENGE

[Andrew Varney]

One other factor to be aware of is that undecided (by the players) games are adjudicated purely on a material basis (or so I am led to believe).

This is what the rules of the competition state. The competition is run in a way that means it can be run by a parent at the initial stage, rather than by arbiters. If you want your product to appeal to a mass market, this seems like a sensible way of doing things.

I don't have any issue with this at the initial school stage. It allows even non-chess-playing teachers to run the competition if necessary and makes it easy for even beginners to give it a go. For the more advanced players it doesn't tend to be an issue anyway, and stalling can clearly be dealt with as cheating in most cases. I'm not aware of it being applied at all at the Megafinal and later stages.

1. On arrival, my son, and along with another member of his school, was put in with an older age group on the grounds that there were insufficient players in his section. To my mind, this led to the younger age group being seriously disadvantaged by being combined with an older age group, in particular given that there was no relaxation of the four points/Supremo qualification rule. Is this common practice in the UK Chess Challenge, and if so do people find it a reasonable way of operating?

This I am more concerned about. With lack of numbers, running a combined group is about the only practical way of running things. While the combining of sex and age groups does not necessarily disadvantage the younger or particular gender players too much since the strongest players often do well in the combined group anyway, bearing in mind the lack of older players in such events, I'd have thought that at least all players from an older age group (say U13 and above) on equal top score would go through rather than just the Supremo on SOP.

2. My son, on being offered a draw in the last round, was told by a controller that he would qualify with a draw, accepted the draw and was then told that he had not qualified after all.

This I am very concerned about. It's quite unreasonable!

[Alex Holowczak]

I'd love people bashing the screen of my smartphone in a time scramble...

They are touch sensitive, they don't work if you bash them. The Chronos clock, popular in North America, also has touch sensitive buttons. You can't hit them with pieces either.

I'm sure that they're touch sensitive, and I'm sure that you can't hit them with pieces. None of this bothers me. What bothers me is having children operate them. If they're in a time scramble, the kids will bash the screen of the phone (be it with fingers or wood), whether it's beneficial for them to do so or otherwise!

[Jim Campbell]

I took two U7 girls and an U7 boy to the Somerset Megafinal last Sunday. On the whole I thought it was a well run event.

However...

I utterly fail to see the logic of putting my two U7 girls in a girls only U7-U10 group when there are plenty of U7 boys. Logic surely dictates that they should be grouped by age / ability rather than gender? What hope does a six year old, no matter how able and keen have against a 10 year old? And where is the challenge for the 10 year old in bamboozling a six year old with a wayward Queen attack?

Also, one of my U7 girls tied for first place in the U7 girls category. She was dragged up to the front told in front of everyone at the prize-giving that they had both qualified for the Gigafinal. She was naturally, given the stress involved during the day of playing (and beating!) considerably older girls, absolutely over the moon. Except that the rules state a tie will be settled on countback via the sum of progressive scores method - by which she quite clearly lost. I now fear I'm going to have to break it to her and her school that in fact, she didn't qualify (if it wasn't for the fact that she's my little girl I'd have to break it to her parents as well!).

Overall a good day, but certainly room for improvement.

[Matthew Turner]

The rules are set by Mike Basman and the local organiser must organise the sections accordingly. So, really any recommendations for how this can be approved need to go through him. I do spend a considerable amount of my own money so the we don't have to tiebreak for trophies and so that there are medals for second and third places. I am sure your daughter will appreciate having a trophey and some prize money, but you are probably right it might be simpler and less costly for me if I tiebreaked in future years.

[Steve Rooney]

I took two U7 girls and an U7 boy to the Somerset Megafinal last Sunday. On the whole I thought it was a well run event.

However...

I utterly fail to see the logic of putting my two U7 girls in a girls only U7-U10 group when there are plenty of U7 boys. Logic surely dictates that they should be grouped by age / ability rather than gender? What hope does a six year old, no matter how able and keen have against a 10 year old? And where is the challenge for the 10 year old in bamboozling a six year old with a wayward Queen attack?

Also, one of my U7 girls tied for first place in the U7 girls category. She was dragged up to the front told in front of everyone at the prize-giving that they had both qualified for the Gigafinal. She was naturally, given the stress involved during the day of playing (and beating!) considerably older girls, absolutely over the moon. Except that the rules state a tie will be settled on countback via the sum of progressive scores method - by which she quite clearly lost. I now fear I'm going to have to break it to her and her school that in fact, she didn't qualify (if it wasn't for the fact that she's my little girl I'd have to break it to her parents as well!).

Overall a good day, but certainly room for improvement.

I thought that while countback is used to determine Suremo/Suprema, all those tied for first on points qualify for the gigafinal?

[David Shepherd]

Reading the comment I don't think it was a question of the tie break, I am sure that all concerned appreciate the effort and expense of providing the extra trophies as tie breaks can often be unfair, particularly when sections are combined. In addittion I am sure they appreciate all the hard work put in and the time taken.

The problem seems to be confusion over qualification places, if the player was clearly told in front of everyone at the prize giving that they had qualified for the next round then I personally think that an exception should be made and that player should be allowed through to the next stage. To avoid any future manipulation it should be made clear it was a one off and unlikely to be repeated in future.

I think there is obligation on the organisers to acknowledge their mistake, if indeed one was made and at least raise the issue at a higher level to see if anything can be done.


NB From the rules Qualification for the 3rd stage of the Chess Challenge, the

Northern or Southern Gigafinal is as follows:-

(a) winning the title of Supremo or Suprema in any of the 24

sections from U7 to U18.

(b) scoring 4 points out of 6 in your section of the Megafinal

(Please note that players scoring the same points as a

Supremo or Suprema but failing to win the title on tie break,

only qualify if they have scored at least 4 points out of 6.)

[Jim Campbell]

I took two U7 girls and an U7 boy to the Somerset Megafinal last Sunday. On the whole I thought it was a well run event.

However...

I utterly fail to see the logic of putting my two U7 girls in a girls only U7-U10 group when there are plenty of U7 boys. Logic surely dictates that they should be grouped by age / ability rather than gender? What hope does a six year old, no matter how able and keen have against a 10 year old? And where is the challenge for the 10 year old in bamboozling a six year old with a wayward Queen attack?

Also, one of my U7 girls tied for first place in the U7 girls category. She was dragged up to the front told in front of everyone at the prize-giving that they had both qualified for the Gigafinal. She was naturally, given the stress involved during the day of playing (and beating!) considerably older girls, absolutely over the moon. Except that the rules state a tie will be settled on countback via the sum of progressive scores method - by which she quite clearly lost. I now fear I'm going to have to break it to her and her school that in fact, she didn't qualify (if it wasn't for the fact that she's my little girl I'd have to break it to her parents as well!).

Overall a good day, but certainly room for improvement.

I thought that while countback is used to determine Suremo/Suprema, all those tied for first on points qualify for the gigafinal?

The rules state that:

"...players scoring the same points as a Supremo or Suprema but failing to win the title on tie break, only qualify if they have scored at least 4 points out of 6".

As they tied on two and a half points, I read that as the tie break would be used to determine Suprema and Gigafinal qualification...

[Matthew Turner]

Jim and daughter are unable to make the date of the Giga-Final, but she did get a nice trophey and some prize money which can be presented in assembly, so I suppose in some ways things actually worked out quite well.

[Jim Campbell]

Seven year olds are much like Mutley from Whacky Races - it's all about the medals!

A shiny trophy, a certificate and six months worth of pocket money in one go is more than she could have hoped for!

[Matthew Turner]

Excellent, we hope to see you again next year. By next year, I am not sure that you will be able to get away with convincing your daughter that £12.50 really is six months pocket money, but good luck with that one

[Jim Campbell]

Excellent, we hope to see you again next year. By next year, I am not sure that you will be able to get away with convincing your daughter that £12.50 really is six months pocket money, but good luck with that one

Next year? She's up in arms about it now!

I did though want to pass my thanks on to you, your team and everyone involved in the set-up. We are a small village infant school (up to year 2) and it was our first year involved in the UK Chess Challenge. To say the kids enjoyed it is a huge understatement, and they all learned so much. They are all determined to be back next year, as are the rest of the club now they've found out you can win actual money!

As someone who has also had to dig deep to reward eager and deserving kids with medals and trophies, I can only say your expenditure in this case is hugely appreciated, and has helped turn a good day into a great one.

Hopefully see you next year.

[Malcolm Clarke]

I do help out with the Hampshire megafinal on a regular basis, and would be interested in knowing exactly how the competition rules are worded, as to date I have based nearly everything I know about the competition rules on word of mouth and past experience.

When I was a junior player I did not know rule 10.2 and in my view the rule can be controversial in its' interpretation. Claims of whether a player did or did not touch or let go of a piece are from my experience more common, and unless one has seen what has actually happened at the board are not always easy to assess acuurately.

[Nick Thomas]

I utterly fail to see the logic of putting my two U7 girls in a girls only U7-U10 group when there are plenty of U7 boys. Logic surely dictates that they should be grouped by age / ability rather than gender? What hope does a six year old, no matter how able and keen have against a 10 year old? And where is the challenge for the 10 year old in bamboozling a six year old with a wayward Queen attack?

Yes I'm struggling with this as well. What is the logic of doing this rather than playing the U7 boys and girls together?

[Brent Smith]

1. On arrival, my son, and along with another member of his school, was put in with an older age group on the grounds that there were insufficient players in his section... do people find it a reasonable way of operating?

2. My son, on being offered a draw in the last round, was told by a controller that he would qualify with a draw, accepted the draw and was then told that he had not qualified after all.

3. I also understand that this same controller apparently said that he would not be allowing Article 10.2 claims because he didn't understand the rule. Is it common practice in the UK Chess Challenge to have controllers who do not have a full knowledge either of the rules of the competition or of the laws of chess?

re (1) - there were only 4 12 year-old boys, plus 2 girls entered for the Berkshire MegaFinal. I can't see what could be done except to combine sections, which is also common in junior congresses. We would love to have more entrants from the older age groups and run separate sections.

re (2) = I was the controller in question and I got the qualification rules wrong. The all-those-tied-in-an-age-group approach is the system for qualifiers, but not for the MegaFinal itself. I can only apologise for this error, which affected another player who also finished on 3 1/2. When the qualification rule was brought to my notice, I offered all four players the chance to actually play out their games, but they felt that the most likely outcome was that they would both lose, not get rosettes, and that the winner of the other game between players on 2 1/2 points would leapfrog them and go through instead. If this was the first "big" tournament for your son, he may have felt a bit overwhelmed and intimidated, and thus unhappy at the end result. He didn't say so at the time, but I fully understand why he would not do so.

re (3) - (I have broken this out as a separate point) I did not say that I would not enforce rule 10.2, but rather that I would prefer if players could endeavour to complete their games in the time-scale and avoid the arguments that always seem to go with the 2-minute rule - perhaps the hint was stated a little heavily. In the end, I only recall one game that got close to the time limit and the losing player had less time anyway. I am not a qualified arbiter, but have run many junior events over the last decade or more, and have had to make my share of judgements on rule 10.2. However, I would actually defend a section controller who chose not to allow the 2 minute rule if they stated up front that this is what they would do because they were unfamiliar with it. We will put off too many parents from gaining experience if we are thought to be too inflexible.

I hope the experience has not put you and your son off from continuing with an involvement in junior chess, and I hope we will see you next year.

[David Gilbert]

I know nothing of junior chess - but I think a very honest post from Brent Smith. Well done.