British Chess Championships 2010

[Alex Holowczak]

Out of interest Alex, do you play many set-ups with a fianchettoed king's bishop?

No. The only time I ever fianchetto a King's bishop is if I'm facing the English. I don't like doing it then particularly, either. I think I can count the number of times I've fianchettoed a King's bishop on one hand.

I fianchetto Queen's bishops quite often though in Semi-Slavy things.

[Anthony Higgs]

Just for entertainment value, Jaunooby-Baker gets my vote for game of the round.

[Phil Makepeace]

Today we present a double feature!

[Jon D'Souza-Eva]

In the Southern Gigafinal of the UKCC, it was reported on this forum that he [Felix Jose Ynojosa] only won the U14 in that on a coin toss. The unlucky runner-up in that, Marcus Harvey, has entered the British U14 too. It'll be interesting to see if he can exact some form of revenge in the British.

We'll find out today! Marcus is White against Felix in round 4 of the under 14 Championship, both are currently on 3/3.

[Jon D'Souza-Eva]

Can anyone from memory recall the last time Michael Adams played in the British, his results and the relevant strength of the field?

According to a quick Google Adams last played in 1997.

Adams' opponents:
1) White vs Ruth Sheldon (Adams won)
2) Black vs Mark Ferguson (Adams won)
3) White vs Luke McShane (Adams won)
4) Black vs Jim Plaskett (Adams won)
5) White against Andrew Martin (draw)
6) Black against Aaron Summerscale (draw)
7) White against Chris Ward (draw)
8) Black against Tony Miles (draw)
9) White against John Emms (draw)
10) Black against Mark Hebden (draw)
11) White against Tony Kosten (Adams won)

Astonishing that he didn't play Sadler in an eleven round tournament!

There was a tie for first place between Adams, Sadler, Miles and Emms. In the play-off Adams beat Sadler and drew with Miles and Emms. Sadler defeated Miles and Emms and hence Adams and Sadler shared first place with 2/3.

(Taken from John Saunders' rather wonderful site: http://www.saund.co.uk/britbase/brit90.htm)

[Roger de Coverly]

Can anyone from memory recall the last time Michael Adams played in the British, his results and the relevant strength of the field?

From memory, it was Hove in 1997 which was the first year of the Smith & Williamson sponsorship.

From looking it up in the games database, his opponents

rd 1 white v Ruth Sheldon 1-0 21
rd 2 black v Mark Ferguson 0-1 92
rd 3 white v Luke McShane 1-0 53
rd 4 black v Jim Plaskett 0-1 39
rd 5 white v Andrew Martin 1/2 53
rd 6 black v Aaron Summerscale 1/2 41
rd 7 white v Chris Ward 1/2 26
rd 8 black v Tony Miles 1/2 46
rd 9 white v John Emms 1/2 41
rd 10 black v Mark Hebden 1/2 36
rd 11 white v Tony Kosten 1-0 38

This left a 4 way tie for first place with Tony Miles, John Emms and Matthew Sadler. In the play offs, Adams drew with Emms with white and Miles with black and beat Sadler with white. Sadler won against the other two and they were declared joint champions.

Two of his first three opponents were juniors at the time , the last 8 were all established IMs or GMs. Mark Ferguson became an IM at about that time.

(OK Jon got his post in first!)

[Jon D'Souza-Eva]

Richard Bates >How on earth do they produce these silly and illogical rules?< (that is about the Under 21 Champion actually being 18-20. There is a similar rule for the U-16 actually being 15.)
It is because the organisers do not understand what the word Under means. I had an argument about this for Torquay last year about the U16. Of course it started out as precisely that when I was the original organiser, but after I fell ill and most players had entered, it became 15.
It is a pity because it breaks with the long-standing tradition. Both Michael Adams and David Howell won three titles at the British. By the same faulty logic, somebody U21 or a female should not be eligible for the British Championship.

Stewart Reuben

I spoke to Maria Wang on Sunday. She had been awarded the under 15 girl title, shared with two other girls, for her performance in the under 16 competition. Apparently the girl who was awarded the under 16 title scored a point less than those three!

[Richard Bates]

Excellent thank you. Michael won 5 games back then so hes already exceeded that with 4 rounds to go.

I am wondering if the quality of the opposition back then was stronger than now- ie is the British not as strong as it once was?

It was immensely strong - around 20 gms, 4 over 2600, another c. 20 IMs, and probably at least another dozen who were to become so. 13 players under 2200, 1 under 2100.

There was no acceleration (!) in the pairings and Adams still played Ruth Sheldon rated 2295 in round 1 (82 players total)

[Roger de Coverly]

I am wondering if the quality of the opposition back then was stronger than now- ie is the British not as strong as it once was?

Back in the nineties, I would think that England ranked in the top 5 in the world (certainly top 10) using FIDE's top 100 measure. Also 1997 was the first year out of several that the British had sponsorship which had the effect that most of the eligible GMs turned out to play.

In 2010 England barely makes world top 20, the Scots are sulking and there's no sponsorship or official conditions for leading players. There's only a handful of players likely to even draw with Adams in their individual game, let alone catch him for a four-way tie.

[Ian Thompson]

Excellent thank you. Michael won 5 games back then so hes already exceeded that with 4 rounds to go.

I am wondering if the quality of the opposition back then was stronger than now- ie is the British not as strong as it once was?

I played in 1997 and was seeded in the bottom half of the draw by a few places - 5 or 6 I think. If I'd chosen to play this year I would have been in the top third (and my rating is hardly any different now from what it was in 1997). Far stronger in 1997.

[Roger de Coverly]

Thanks. I guess the next questions is this; is the British Championships weaker due to the collapse of or much reduced sponsorship?

Lack of sponsorship doesn't help but the underlying cause is a shortage of strong players. In 1997 v 1996, the sponsorship made the 1997 event much stronger. What has been missing for the past ten years or so is the emergence of several GM/IM standard players every year at university age. Leonard Barden wrote on this forum a while back that every birth year since 1953 (Michael Stean) had seen the emergence of one or more GMs and several IMs. That is until 1990 (David Howell) at which time the production line dries up.

[Adam Raoof]

Thanks. I guess the next questions is this; is the British Championships weaker due to the collapse of or much reduced sponsorship?

This is a complicated question to answer. Yes.

A longer answer would also take into account the proliferation of good international tournaments, the fact that a generation of young chess masters have got commitments to families and jobs in the city, and the fact that the ECF hasn't addressed the problem of sponsorship in a professional way for years.

[Ola Winfridsson]

Thanks. I guess the next questions is this; is the British Championships weaker due to the collapse of or much reduced sponsorship?

This is a complicated question to answer. Yes.

A longer answer would also take into account the proliferation of good international tournaments, the fact that a generation of young chess masters have got commitments to families and jobs in the city, and the fact that the ECF hasn't addressed the problem of sponsorship in a professional way for years.

Isn't it also a case of return to 'normal' (before the embarras de richesse that's now dried up), and at least partly due to the barring of overseas players (as the 5 year UK residency requirement effectively is)?

[Roger de Coverly]

and at least partly due to the barring of overseas players (as the 5 year UK residency requirement effectively is)?

I think it's one year now - that's may be why there are more Poles than Scots in this year's British.

It was non-resident Commonwealth players who were barred.

[Adam Raoof]

Thanks. I guess the next questions is this; is the British Championships weaker due to the collapse of or much reduced sponsorship?

This is a complicated question to answer. Yes.

A longer answer would also take into account the proliferation of good international tournaments, the fact that a generation of young chess masters have got commitments to families and jobs in the city, and the fact that the ECF hasn't addressed the problem of sponsorship in a professional way for years.

Isn't it also a case of return to 'normal' (before the embarras de richesse that's now dried up), and at least partly due to the barring of overseas players (as the 5 year UK residency requirement effectively is)?

I don't think that has weakened the top section, but it has reduced the number of entrants. Personally I would do something radical like re-open the event to the Commonwealth, and determine entry by FIDE affiliation. Or make the British an Open event like the National Championships of other nations?

There are changes afoot which may make all this moot, and I may know more tomorrow.