2nd London Chess Classic 2010

[Anthony Higgs]

If the time control is as stated (30/75 + 15), then it can't be FIDE-rated; you need 40 moves in the first time period (if you're going to have one) for it to be FIDE-rated.

Thanks Alex. This should probably be stated on the Classic website, seems misleading to describe it as a 'FIDE Open' if less than 50% of the games in it will be FIDE-rated!

[James Coleman]

FIDE OPEN Bust Entry:
http://www.ukgamesshop.com/Merchant2/me ... ssicevents

I'd be particularly interested in this "bust" tournament. They didn't have that last year, if my mammary serves me correctly.

[Alex Holowczak]

If the time control is as stated (30/75 + 15), then it can't be FIDE-rated; you need 40 moves in the first time period (if you're going to have one) for it to be FIDE-rated.

Thanks Alex. This should probably be stated on the Classic website, seems misleading to describe it as a 'FIDE Open' if less than 50% of the games in it will be FIDE-rated!

Perhaps it's an oversight, or they've sought an agreement with FIDE. Here is the relevant bit of the FIDE Handbook that explains it:

1.3 Where a certain number of moves is specified in the first time control, it shall be 40 moves. Players benefit from uniformity here.

I didn't realise it at the time, but it would probably also break this:

1.1 ... Where at least one of the players in the tournament has a rating 2200 or higher, each player must have a minimum of 120 minutes.

[Roger de Coverly]

1.1 ... Where at least one of the players in the tournament has a rating 2200 or higher, each player must have a minimum of 120 minutes.

I think that was the point Sean was making earlier, that for the first 5 rounds of the hybrid to be rated, there would need to be a 2200 restriction. You would also need either G/90 or 40/75 + 15 (or 40 in something + 90 -something).

Having a 2200 restriction would also stop FMs, IMs and GMs with a early round accident being able to pay to remove the loss from their tournament record.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Be careful with American imported ideas, next year you might be required to bring your own set, board and clock.

Or burn a copy of My Sixty Memorable Games at the start of round 1 perhaps?

As for the paying to re-enter after a bad start: I know it's common in Poker tournaments, but I'm not sure I care for the idea in chess events. Are the extra entry fees added to the prize pool?

[Tristan Clayton]

1.1 ... Where at least one of the players in the tournament has a rating 2200 or higher, each player must have a minimum of 120 minutes.

I think that was the point Sean was making earlier, that for the first 5 rounds of the hybrid to be rated, there would need to be a 2200 restriction. You would also need either G/90 or 40/75 + 15 (or 40 in something + 90 -something).

Having a 2200 restriction would also stop FMs, IMs and GMs with a early round accident being able to pay to remove the loss from their tournament record.

The London Chess Centre tournament entry pages are now clarifying the rating situation for the "Busy Persons Schedule":

The Busy Schedule is not eligible for norms, and part of the schedule is not able to be FIDE rated.

Though curiously I couldn't find this mentioned (yet) on the official LCC pages.

Shame, as I was tempted, but will probably just play in the weekend tournament.

[Sean Hewitt]

The London Chess Centre tournament entry pages are now clarifying the rating situation for the "Busy Persons Schedule":

The Busy Schedule is not eligible for norms, and part of the schedule is not able to be FIDE rated.

Though curiously I couldn't find this mentioned (yet) on the official LCC pages.

Shame, as I was tempted, but will probably just play in the weekend tournament.

I'm a little surprised that you can FIDE rate just part of a tournament. I'm sure it will all be fine - although I'm equally sure that the ECF would not let us do it!

[IM Jack Rudd]

The London Chess Centre tournament entry pages are now clarifying the rating situation for the "Busy Persons Schedule":

The Busy Schedule is not eligible for norms, and part of the schedule is not able to be FIDE rated.

Though curiously I couldn't find this mentioned (yet) on the official LCC pages.

Shame, as I was tempted, but will probably just play in the weekend tournament.

I'm a little surprised that you can FIDE rate just part of a tournament. I'm sure it will all be fine - although I'm equally sure that the ECF would not let us do it!

Well, it's equivalent for rating purposes to those players' coming in after 5 rounds' worth of byes, with arbitrary scores in each case.

[Tristan Clayton]

What we 'busy persons' have got is effectively 5 rounds of the weekender (with no opportunity to win that tournament's prize money) plus - for an extra 75 quid - a maximum of four FIDE-rated rounds of chess. And for me it means taking 3 days' annual leave from work.

The overall prize money for the Open is of course very good (but only if you win it - otherwise it's the same as any tournament!). But personally, I can't justify entering it.

I don't know what others busy players think, but I'd gladly have paid the same entry fee for 6-8 rated rounds over 3-5 days. This would probably have meant running a separate FIDE tournament, and there might be reasons why this isn't possible.

Don't get me wrong - I'm really looking forward to the LCC, and I'm very glad it's happening. London is woefully short of longplay congresses, and such a high-profile and well organised event is great for British chess.

But I can't help feeling there's a missed opportunity here. The 'busy persons schedule' idea is good, but perhaps needs tweaking for 2011?

[Alex Holowczak]

But I can't help feeling there's a missed opportunity here. The 'busy persons schedule' idea is good, but perhaps needs tweaking for 2011?

I originally thought it'd run such that Round 3 of the Open would be on Friday morning, with Round 4 and 5 on Saturday and Sunday. The alternative schedule would then be run on Friday evening, with two rounds each on Saturday and Sunday, so you'd end up on Sunday with everyone having finished Round 5. You'd then have enough time to play FIDE-rated chess at the quicker schedule. You could even keep 40/120 + 30 as the time control (but it may be preferable to go for a 4-hour session rather than a 5-hour session). Then everyone would appear on Monday for Round 6.

Perhaps the fear with making rounds 1-5 of the quicker schedule FIDE-rated was that actually some of the GMs would prefer the quicker schedule, because they save on accommodation costs (if they're not covered by the organiser). Presumably, they deemed it was more desirable for them to play in the slower schedule. If that was the fear, then surely just holding the FIDE-rated Open at the quicker schedule in the first place was more prudent.

[Roger de Coverly]

The alternative schedule would then be run on Friday evening, with two rounds each on Saturday and Sunday,

This is the schedule for the e2e4 events which works for e2e4 being hotel based. It may fail for the London Chess Classic being Conference based as the Olympia building may well have a closing time It might also be an issue that if you get an Arkell length game, all the public transport will have finished for the night.

That said, playing on late Friday afternoon might well be feasible - even if it means an extra half day off for some people.

Perhaps the fear with making rounds 1-5 of the quicker schedule FIDE-rated was that actually some of the GMs would prefer the quicker schedule, because they save on accommodation costs (if they're not covered by the organiser). Presumably, they deemed it was more desirable for them to play in the slower schedule. If that was the fear, then surely just holding the FIDE-rated Open at the quicker schedule in the first place was more prudent.

.

Some IMs/GMs are wary of putting their rating on the line in events with fast time controls. When it was considered FIDE rating the London League, it proved a disincentive for IM/GM participation.

[Alex Holowczak]

The alternative schedule would then be run on Friday evening, with two rounds each on Saturday and Sunday,

This is the schedule for the e2e4 events which works for e2e4 being hotel based. It may fail for the London Chess Classic being Conference based as the Olympia building may well have a closing time It might also be an issue that if you get an Arkell length game, all the public transport will have finished for the night.

That said, playing on late Friday afternoon might well be feasible - even if it means an extra half day off for some people.

You could also play a 4-hour session with 40/100 + 20.

[Sean Hewitt]

I don't know what others busy players think, but I'd gladly have paid the same entry fee for 6-8 rated rounds over 3-5 days.

You mean like http://www.e2e4.org.uk/international/20 ... /index.htm

[Richard Bates]

I'm totally confused. Am i correct that the "Busy person's" first 5 rounds are included in the Weekender, but without being able to win the prizes? I will probably enter the Weekender like last year - does this mean that i can put in my usual woeful performance, and still have the chance of winning something?

Are all the weekend open participants going to be in a position where they could have potentially won the tournament with a round to spare, even if there are several other players on the same score?

[Richard Bates]

Perhaps a few stronger players should be given discounted entry to the Weekend Open, just to try and avoid the "problem" of some (relatively weak) "busy persons" getting to a large 5 round score and causing pairing havoc when they join the main tournament...?