British Chess Championships 2010
- Joey Stewart
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
- Location: All Of Them
- Contact:
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
I like the idea of making people prove themselves against relentless good opposition if they are to deserve a win.
What caught me most of all was some players on 1 were playing opponents on 0- i didnt think that was supposed to happen at this stage?
What caught me most of all was some players on 1 were playing opponents on 0- i didnt think that was supposed to happen at this stage?
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.
-
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 5:21 pm
- Location: Cambridge
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
Thanks for the explanation Stewart. Sadly I don't have my copy of "Chess Organiser's Handbook" here in Oxford with me, as I dare say you have something to say on the topic in that. Wikipedia will have to do.
-
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:46 pm
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
I'm in a sombre mood in today's blog post.
-
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 5:21 pm
- Location: Cambridge
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
A draw is a solid start - at least you're off the mark. I suppose the million dollar question now is just how far you can creep up the leaderboard.Phil Makepeace wrote:I'm in a sombre mood in today's blog post.
-
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
- Location: Oldham
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
Joey,Joey Stewart wrote:(I dont really like to call them 'weak' since almost all of them are quite strong by normal standards)?
The players aren't neccesarily "weak", but u2200 are weak in this type of tournament normally, and with acceleration ensures that these players will eventually play to their exact rating level
Personally being a player who hovers around the 2200 level, i consider myself weak when playing these type of tournaments
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
- Contact:
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
It is definitely supposed to happen with accelerated pairings. The basic principle is that players in the bottom half who won play players in the top half who drew or lost. As Stewart R indicates, the exact system being used is a little more complicated than that.Joey Stewart wrote:What caught me most of all was some players on 1 were playing opponents on 0- i didnt think that was supposed to happen at this stage?
-
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
It is MUCH more complicated than thatDavid Sedgwick wrote:It is definitely supposed to happen with accelerated pairings. The basic principle is that players in the bottom half who won play players in the top half who drew or lost. As Stewart R indicates, the exact system being used is a little more complicated than that.
-
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
Clearly somewhat fortunate for a lot of us that the electronic boards weren't working past board 6!
Danny Gormally wins after opponent allowed a mate in 2 when a piece up for nothing. Keith leaves his Queen en pris to a pawn capture. And I'm reminded that winging it as black in open sicilians is fraught with danger, and generally just plain stupid
Danny Gormally wins after opponent allowed a mate in 2 when a piece up for nothing. Keith leaves his Queen en pris to a pawn capture. And I'm reminded that winging it as black in open sicilians is fraught with danger, and generally just plain stupid
-
- Posts: 4542
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
Alex McFarlane >It is MUCH more complicated than that<
And that, I suspect, is another reason arbiters prefer the system. It is more 'meaty' than any standard top half v second half system. Also it is not computerised. I remember Eric Croker, who no longer does arbiting work, saying that if Swisses became computerised, he would cease to be an arbiter as that was the most fun of the job.
I am pretty sure that is not the reason I introduced the system, but motives are difficult to remember after 43 years. I do remember that publishing pairings for 250 players 30 minutes after a round finished was not a problem. At the British they have more time and sensibly do many checks. I don't think they do what I prefer, which is to have two independent people (or teams) working out the same pairings and then comparing. In Roumania my staff were very bemused that I checked up the computer pairings mechanically for a system that had never before been used.
Stewart Reuben
And that, I suspect, is another reason arbiters prefer the system. It is more 'meaty' than any standard top half v second half system. Also it is not computerised. I remember Eric Croker, who no longer does arbiting work, saying that if Swisses became computerised, he would cease to be an arbiter as that was the most fun of the job.
I am pretty sure that is not the reason I introduced the system, but motives are difficult to remember after 43 years. I do remember that publishing pairings for 250 players 30 minutes after a round finished was not a problem. At the British they have more time and sensibly do many checks. I don't think they do what I prefer, which is to have two independent people (or teams) working out the same pairings and then comparing. In Roumania my staff were very bemused that I checked up the computer pairings mechanically for a system that had never before been used.
Stewart Reuben
-
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 5:21 pm
- Location: Cambridge
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
Sounds like I'd fit right in!Richard Bates wrote:Danny Gormally wins after opponent allowed a mate in 2 when a piece up for nothing. Keith leaves his Queen en pris to a pawn capture. And I'm reminded that winging it as black in open sicilians is fraught with danger, and generally just plain stupid
-
- Posts: 3600
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
What an idiot Mr. Croker must be, it is more important for the arbiter to have fun than do the job competently??
-
- Posts: 5821
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
"The players aren't neccesarily "weak", but u2200 are weak in this type of tournament normally"
The one time I played, I was rated 2205, and seeded about 75th out of 83! That was probably an exceptional year...
The one time I played, I was rated 2205, and seeded about 75th out of 83! That was probably an exceptional year...
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey
-
- Posts: 3600
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
I have tried downloading the games from round 1, but there were no moves. Are other people having the same problem, or is it just me?
-
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 5:21 pm
- Location: Cambridge
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
Yes - I have the same issue. Even for the games that were transmitted live.Matthew Turner wrote:I have tried downloading the games from round 1, but there were no moves. Are other people having the same problem, or is it just me?
- Wilf Arnold
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:36 pm
- Location: Munich
- Contact:
Re: British Chess Championships 2010
You need to download the file from the PGN files page - it is called bc2010r1.pgn - this has the moves in it - including the correct end to Simon Williams' game yesterdayEoin Devane wrote:Yes - I have the same issue. Even for the games that were transmitted live.Matthew Turner wrote:I have tried downloading the games from round 1, but there were no moves. Are other people having the same problem, or is it just me?