English Chess Forum

The other interesting question (and I ask this without having checked the rules) is how are they going to award match points following the jamboree?

Sean Hewitt wrote:The other interesting question (and I ask this without having checked the rules) is how are they going to award match points following the jamboree?

My punt would be that any team scoring more than 3 game points gets 2 match points, any team scoring exactly 3 game points scores 1 match point. It's theoretically possible that you don't have a total of 8 match points awarded though...

Bob Clark wrote:Alex is correct, that was announced at the last 4NCL weekend.

On fire today.

So if the 8 teams get 3.5, 3.5, 3.5, 3.5, 3.5, 3.5, 3, 0, then 6 teams get 2 points, and 1 team gets 1 point.

Conversely, if the 8 teams get 6, 3, 2.5, 2.5, 2.5, 2.5, 2.5, 2.5, then 6 teams get 0 points, and 1 team gets 1 point.

Was it possible for the Northern League to play at the Division 3 hotel for the fourth weekend, completing their all-play-all in round 7 and then joining the main swiss in round 8? I expect the answer could be "Of course it wasn't, otherwise we would have done that" but I may be wrong

It was certainly possible - but since one of the main reasons behind in setting up the Northern League was to have as many northern vernues as possible, it would have been a little counter-intuitive. Moreover, the northern venues for rounds 1-8 were booked back in 2009 at a time when I was expecting more than eight teams to enter the Northern League - and I've always been very reluctant to avoid cancelling a previously booked weekend at a venue once contracts have been signed given that I wouldn't expect a venue to do it to us (apart from the Birmingham Paragon of course!)

Mike Truran wrote:It was certainly possible - but since one of the main reasons behind in setting up the Northern League was to have as many northern vernues as possible, it would have been a little counter-intuitive. Moreover, the northern venues for rounds 1-8 were booked back in 2009 at a time when I was expecting more than eight teams to enter the Northern League - and I've always been very reluctant to avoid cancelling a previously booked weekend at a venue once contracts have been signed given that I wouldn't expect a venue to do it to us (apart from the Birmingham Paragon of course!)

I think that's right. Perhaps a consideration for next season is to have a second merged weekend (at Hinckley) in addition to the final weekend. Hinckley is not too bad a venue to get to for most Northern teams (no worse than Darlington I guess) and this would help to mitigate any differences in strength that their might be between the two Div 3s. If this were done early enough (and bilaterally rather than unilaterally) the hotels might be happy with this.

The Northern League players might not want 2 trips to Hinckley Island

At Harrogate, some expressed reluctance about making 1

I assume there has been some thought about promotion to Div 2, given that the Northern League teams might refuse it?

Mick Norris wrote:I assume there has been some thought about promotion to Div 2, given that the Northern League teams might refuse it?

Last year, a team voluntarily moved down from Division 2 to Division 3, and a new team was promoted in its place. So from that, I guess they'd just look at the overall table after round 11, and if teams declined their promotion, they'd just work their way down the standings until they found a total of 4 teams who do want to get promoted.

Mick, hopefully section 11 of the 4NCL rules covers your question.

Alex Holowczak wrote:

Mick Norris wrote:I assume there has been some thought about promotion to Div 2, given that the Northern League teams might refuse it?

Last year, a team voluntarily moved down from Division 2 to Division 3, and a new team was promoted in its place. So from that, I guess they'd just look at the overall table after round 11, and if teams declined their promotion, they'd just work their way down the standings until they found a total of 4 teams who do want to get promoted.

Actually, the 4th bottom team in Div 2 was reprieved from relegation. It's a subtle but important difference because if 1 or 2 Div 3 North teams were to get promotion and refuse it then it creates a bit of a blockage for the bulk of Div 3 teams who want it.

Alex Holowczak wrote: Last year, a team voluntarily moved down from Division 2 to Division 3, and a new team was promoted in its place.

Usual 4NCL practice is that when a team withdraws or elects to be relegated, they are replaced by the best performing relegated team. Last season in division 2, that was White Rose 2 who remain in division 2 this season.

I suppose the practice of preferring the incumbent gives even the teams likely to be relegated something to fight for in the final rounds. It's been quite common for the "top" of the relegation candidates to survive because of withdrawals and restructuring.


It's a potential problem with so few teams in the North section, that two or even three teams could come into the final weekend with say 14/16 and then fend off the challenge from the rest of the country to take two or three of the promotion slots.

Has the policy on what happens if a third division team declines promotion (particularly a North one) been published anywhere?

Sean Hewitt wrote:

Alex Holowczak wrote:

Mick Norris wrote:I assume there has been some thought about promotion to Div 2, given that the Northern League teams might refuse it?

Last year, a team voluntarily moved down from Division 2 to Division 3, and a new team was promoted in its place. So from that, I guess they'd just look at the overall table after round 11, and if teams declined their promotion, they'd just work their way down the standings until they found a total of 4 teams who do want to get promoted.

Actually, the 4th bottom team in Div 2 was reprieved from relegation. It's a subtle but important difference because if 1 or 2 Div 3 North teams were to get promotion and refuse it then it creates a bit of a blockage for the bulk of Div 3 teams who want it.

Oh, OK - I stand corrected.

As things stand, I`m hoping that any Northern teams might decline promotion, at least for this season, to try to encourage greater numbers to join the Northern League. A year or two of consolidation might help to boost this new league, as more players start to appreciate the merits of this event and awareness grows.
One of the things I like about it, apart from the opportunities for our northern brethern to do battle in very good playing conditions, is that it offers quite a wide spread of players the chance to play. Teams commonly range in strength from about 2300 on top board to about 1800 on lower boards. 1950ish seems to be the norm for middle order.

David Pardoe wrote:As things stand, I`m hoping that any Northern teams might decline promotion, at least for this season, to try to encourage greater numbers to join the Northern League. A year or two of consolidation might help to boost this new league, as more players start to appreciate the merits of this event and awareness grows.
One of the things I like about it, apart from the opportunities for our northern brethern to do battle in very good playing conditions, is that it offers quite a wide spread of players the chance to play. Teams commonly range in strength from about 2300 on top board to about 1800 on lower boards. 1950ish seems to be the norm for middle order.

In which case it should remain totally separate so as not to prevent Division3 teams who want promotion from getting it.

I`m only expressing my opinion Sean...others might well think differently.
As has been said earlier, many teams make decisions on whether to except promotions..ask to be demoted, etc depending on circumstances at the time.
I`m also hoping that the Northern League will grow, as word spreads and Northern Leagues, chess bodies and other groups get chance to see how things develop. Maybe even including other North Midlands groups. Notts & Derbyshire teams would be good.