Div 4 South 2018/19

Venues, fixtures, teams and related matters.
Mick Norris
Posts: 7573
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Mick Norris » Mon May 06, 2019 6:59 pm

Nick Burrows wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 4:50 pm
If the maths are correct. It seems that Wessex B drawing, and Oxford 3 winning 4.5-1.5, means they are equal on both match points and games points. Next tie break is their individual match score which was 3-3. Next is board count, which is in Oxford 3's favour!

It also seems that Manchester Manticores will be relegated from Div 2, freeing an extra promotion spot from Div 4, which Wessex B will take as a consolation.
It's good that Wessex B and Oxford 3 are both promoted; they're clearly evenly matched :lol:
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Nick Burrows
Posts: 983
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Nick Burrows » Mon May 06, 2019 7:22 pm

However the table is giving Wessex B as 3rd.

This was the match between us: http://www.4nclresults.co.uk/2018-19/4n ... export/#t4

Do I have the board count rules wrong?

Alan Walton
Posts: 1248
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Alan Walton » Mon May 06, 2019 7:50 pm

There is no tie break regarding board count; it is average of the opponents but looking at this match Wessex were higher rated and I suspect Oxford 3 should be third

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18161
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon May 06, 2019 7:52 pm

Nick Burrows wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 7:22 pm
Do I have the board count rules wrong?
I don't think so, as they rank board count above bottom board elimination.

It was a sub-plot for the round 11 Division 2 matches that wins for ADs (against Grantham) and Wessex against Manchester would see Grantham and ADs retain their places and benefit Wessex B by providing a fourth promotion place out of division 4S.

Nick Burrows
Posts: 983
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Nick Burrows » Mon May 06, 2019 8:21 pm

Alan Walton wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 7:50 pm
There is no tie break regarding board count; it is average of the opponents but looking at this match Wessex were higher rated and I suspect Oxford 3 should be third
Now I am confused!

Our captain was confident it was board count. You say it's higher average rating. The regulations seem to say it's a coin toss:
13.2
End of season team placings in Division 3 North and Division 4 South will be decided in the first instance on match point totals. If at the end of the season teams are tied on match points, the tie shall be broken using:

a. the game points totals;
b. provided all possible matches between teams still tied have been played, the procedure detailed in rule 7.1(b) applied to such matches;
c. the average rating of the opposition;
d. the toss of a coin.
Which is it?

Nick Burrows
Posts: 983
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Nick Burrows » Mon May 06, 2019 8:23 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 7:52 pm
It was a sub-plot for the round 11 Division 2 matches that wins for ADs (against Grantham) and Wessex against Manchester would see Grantham and ADs retain their places and benefit Wessex B by providing a fourth promotion place out of division 4S.
How deeply improbable!

Wessex A beat MM1 which gives Wessex B promotion at the expense of MM2 :idea:

Mike Truran
Posts: 2391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Mike Truran » Mon May 06, 2019 8:30 pm

7.1(b) deals with it.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18161
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon May 06, 2019 8:30 pm

Nick Burrows wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 8:21 pm
b. provided all possible matches between teams still tied have been played, the procedure detailed in rule 7.1(b) applied to such matches;
Don't you have to look at rule 7.1 (b) as the next tie break?

a. the game point totals in the preliminary pool;

b. (i) the match point totals in the results between the teams which remain tied;

(ii) the game point totals in the results between the teams which remain tied;

(iii) the lower board count in the results between the teams which remain tied;

(iv) the game points remaining after elimination of the bottom board or boards as necessary.

If at any stage the number of tied teams is reduced this rule is reapplied, starting with (i), to the reduced number of teams;
However that's stated as only applying to divisions 1, 2 and 3

Phil Neatherway
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:10 pm
Location: Abingdon

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Phil Neatherway » Mon May 06, 2019 8:41 pm

regarding end of season placings in Div3s and Div4s, Rule 13.2 says:-
b. provided all possible matches between teams still tied have been played, the procedure detailed in rule 7.1(b) applied to such matches;

and then if you refer to 7.1(b), it states:-

the tie shall be broken using:

a. the game point totals in the preliminary pool;

b. (i) the match point totals in the results between the teams which remain tied;

(ii) the game point totals in the results between the teams which remain tied;

(iii) the lower board count in the results between the teams which remain tied;

(iv) the game points remaining after elimination of the bottom board or boards as necessary.

If at any stage the number of tied teams is reduced this rule is reapplied, starting with (i), to the reduced number of teams;

c. the toss of a coin.

Tie breaks shall be applied in this order until all ties are broken.



Therefore I think board count does apply.

Phil Neatherway
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:10 pm
Location: Abingdon

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Phil Neatherway » Tue May 07, 2019 8:36 am

This morning, the final Division 4 table shows Oxford 3 in 3rd place.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8978
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue May 07, 2019 10:44 am

Nick Burrows wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 7:22 pm
However the table is giving Wessex B as 3rd.
Phil Neatherway wrote:
Tue May 07, 2019 8:36 am
This morning, the final Division 4 table shows Oxford 3 in 3rd place.
The software doesn't have every single tie-break coded into it. If you go far enough down the tie-break list, then you end up hitting the barrier of what has been coded. As a result of that, when DT gets home from a weekend, he has to do some manual adjustments to the display so that the correct standings are being shown.

Phil Neatherway
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:10 pm
Location: Abingdon

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Phil Neatherway » Tue May 07, 2019 12:35 pm

Fair enough.
And a big thank you to all those who help enable the 4NCL to take place.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 731
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Roger Lancaster » Tue May 07, 2019 2:31 pm

Phil Neatherway wrote:
Tue May 07, 2019 12:35 pm
And a big thank you to all those who help enable the 4NCL to take place.
I'll second that.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Paul Cooksey » Tue May 07, 2019 2:40 pm

I'll join this show of hands for a vote of thanks, I think division 4 is probably the hardest work because of the pairings.

(In passing - championes, championes, ole, ole, ole)

Phil Neatherway
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:10 pm
Location: Abingdon

Re: Div 4 South 2018/19

Post by Phil Neatherway » Tue May 07, 2019 3:01 pm

Yes, Crowthorne were clearly the strongest team in Division 4. We expected Oxford 3 to paired with Crowthorne in Round 11, when there would most likely have been a very different outcome for us.
It was a bit strange that Oxford 3, challenging for promotion, played West Is Best 3 with average rating on the day 1642, whereas Oxford 4, several places lower in the table, played MK Phoenix 2, average rating 1895.

Post Reply