Dramatic changes in congress performances

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by MartinCarpenter » Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:18 pm

Now that's a fascinating format!

I'm still slightly scared by the idea of Manchester being a tourist town :)

Mick Norris
Posts: 8281
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:33 pm

MartinCarpenter wrote:I'm still slightly scared by the idea of Manchester being a tourist town :)
Well, Chorlton seem to attract chess tourists back to play for them :wink:

Detail on tourist numbers and impact
here
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

User avatar
Jon Mahony
Posts: 606
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Jon Mahony » Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:50 pm

Paul Bielby wrote:My first congress was the Yorkshire Easter Congress, played in Huddersfield in 1953. Organised by Edgar Priestley, it had 60 entries, divided into 10 all-play-all sections each of 6 players.
Andy Wainwright ran a congress in this format about 5 years ago in Idle (I think the format was due to limited entries rather than preference, I seem to remember it was swapped round at the last minute) I won my section 5/5 and was awarded 60 quid, my first real success in Chess. Sadly the congress never took place again, it was at a great venue - The Idle Workingmen’s Club - they should have got tee shirts printed :lol:
"When you see a good move, look for a better one!" - Lasker

User avatar
John Clarke
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by John Clarke » Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:15 pm

Paul Bielby wrote:The Yorkshire Easter Congress continued in the same fashion at least until about 1970 - it was the first tournament I ever organised, when it returned to Huddersfield in 1967 and we still used 6 player all-play-alls then (I did have gradings to help me by then). At some point in the '70s they changed to Swiss tournaments.
The Ilford congress (held over the Whitsun week-end in early June) followed this path at around the same time. I think 1971 was the first year they went to Swisses, with an Open and an under-160 Major. They continued to run a few 6-player APAs as well for those who preferred them (with 5 games instead of 6, the schedule was a bit less hectic), but the prizes were far lower for those.
"The chess-board is the world ..... the player on the other side is hidden from us ..... he never overlooks a mistake, or makes the smallest allowance for ignorance."
(He doesn't let you resign and start again, either.)

Reg Clucas
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 3:45 pm

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Reg Clucas » Tue Nov 03, 2015 9:40 am

Jon Mahony wrote:The Idle Workingmen’s Club - they should have got tee shirts printed :lol:
They have! - http://www.idleworkingmensclub.co.uk/shop.html

User avatar
Jon Mahony
Posts: 606
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Jon Mahony » Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:44 am

Reg Clucas wrote:
Jon Mahony wrote:The Idle Workingmen’s Club - they should have got tee shirts printed :lol:
They have! - http://www.idleworkingmensclub.co.uk/shop.html
:lol: and apparently Michael Jackson was an honorary member
"When you see a good move, look for a better one!" - Lasker

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 3929
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:03 pm

The Hammersmith Easter event had apa sections as well in the early 70s.

The town of Loose in Kent has a "Loose Women's Institute"

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 3929
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:11 pm

Justin Horton wrote about a player with a similar name to his. This could have been the person who persuaded a grader to put in 20 losses against a lowly graded player from his club. Unfortunately, the lowly graded player was surprised to have spent years graded 90 - 100 and then suddenly go up about 40 points, so he asked BCF how this had happened. The discovery of the 20-0 score line rang alarm bells, and the grades were amended and the grader who fed the results in was quietly removed from office (if you can do that to a volunteer)

Alasdair MacLeod
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:43 pm

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Alasdair MacLeod » Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:53 pm

Thanks to Harry Lamb for the interesting information he posted (I'd quote him but I don't want to fill the whole of page 10 here :) ). Very valuable reading for any wannabe organisers out there.

While I can see the obvious merits of graded sections, I think it does need to be backed up by an appropriate prizemoney structure. I smiled at the simplicity of the old structure of Open 1st prize: £100, Major 1st prize: £50 and Minor 1st prize: £25.

For me, having the same prizemoney in each section, while admirable in its intentions, sends out the wrong message. I'm not sure if there is any other competitive activity that does that?

I accept that it will take a very brave organiser to change this without any Minor section regulars squealing about it :)

One last point from me - I don't know if it's just me but reading Congress results over the years generally feels like the Open section is getting smaller and the Minor section is getting bigger? Sorry Jonathan Bryant, I don't have any statistical evidence to back this up with :wink:

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 7913
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:18 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:Justin Horton wrote about a player with a similar name to his. This could have been the person who persuaded a grader to put in 20 losses against a lowly graded player from his club. Unfortunately, the lowly graded player was surprised to have spent years graded 90 - 100 and then suddenly go up about 40 points, so he asked BCF how this had happened. The discovery of the 20-0 score line rang alarm bells, and the grades were amended and the grader who fed the results in was quietly removed from office (if you can do that to a volunteer)
Heh, I don't think I ever knew that.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 7913
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:19 pm

Mind you it was probably in the BCM.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Mick Norris
Posts: 8281
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Mick Norris » Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:52 pm

Alasdair MacLeod wrote:One last point from me - I don't know if it's just me but reading Congress results over the years generally feels like the Open section is getting smaller and the Minor section is getting bigger? Sorry Jonathan Bryant, I don't have any statistical evidence to back this up with :wink:
I'd say that with Rapidplays my experience was the Open got smaller and the Minors bigger, but with Longplays the reverse was true
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

harrylamb
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:33 am

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by harrylamb » Thu Nov 05, 2015 7:36 pm

In Northwest longplays, up to about ten years ago the Minor was usually the biggest tournament and often had more entries than the Open and Major combined. Over the last ten years it has swung. The trend is

Open numbers have increased even though they are still the lowest section.
Major players have increased significantly and are now the largest section.
Minor players have declined significantly.

This years Manchester Congress reflects these trends. I had

Minor 37
Major 48
Open 34

I am concerned about this. To my mind if players are not entering the minors we are not seeing newcomers come into the game. This is bad news for the future of chess.
No taxation without representation

Reg Clucas
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 3:45 pm

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Reg Clucas » Fri Nov 13, 2015 1:44 pm

To return to the original subject of this thread - in last Sunday's Bolton Rapidplay I noticed that Mr Crockett was in the Major section, having won the Minor section outright last year. I don't know whether this was his decision or the organisers', or whether he won a prize.

Barry Sandercock
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:52 am

Re: Dramatic changes in congress performances

Post by Barry Sandercock » Fri Nov 13, 2015 6:27 pm

He didn't win a prize.( As per Bolton Rapid play results.)

Locked