Players playing above their sections in congresses

[Ben Purton]

In terms of sitting still and doing nothing yes

But Joe Bloggs plays 20 games. V 160's who are now 178's etc. Your getting +18 there. So you play enough variance of the same level of rating , you should gain 18.

Ben

[Mike Gunn]

You've got the maths wrong - 160s are now 170s. Another flaw in your argument is that somebody who is on the verge of becoming 200 doesn't just play people who are 160 but generally players in the range 160-220 so the effect is less than you are suggesting. While it's possible that some people may get to 200 who might just have missed it in the past, the effect will be quite small.

[Ben Purton]

My current GP is

207x27

If i dont use the red numbers 198x27

Which is only so poor because if i beat a total tit I only get +10 on the pathetic 176

To be honest the only player who I've really really tried against and lost to all year is John Cox, who I thought was like 210 and I though was 10 points underrated on ECF.

I need to play 3-5 more games to be sure I get my rating at what I calculate, I don't know my last 3-4 games from old grade.

O well , I do think 200 is now slightly ruined, I use to see it as the "one step from pushing towards FM" stone, now I see there being another stone in the way.

Ben

[Tim Lunn]

I once played a player in an open who was 120 grading point less then me! (me 160's, they 40 something).
Surprisingly , the player had entered the u100's of the same tournament the year before and not done too well.

The game ended in around 10-12 moves, though not without incident. My opponent after resigning, changed his mind (after we analysed a little), then resigned again without moving. Resigns, un-resigns, resigns! That was a first.

I think it makes sense to have some sort of minimum limit. You can play some people where you are expected to win and it be difficult - but playing a near beginner is a different matter.
For someone U100 say, I think it would be fine to enter U125's or even U150. However, if every one of their opponents is >40 points then this doesn't seem right.
People at the top of the section are unlikely to play the lower graded player due to the pairing system, so I would say, that the minimum grade for a section could be the = 'the grade of the next section' minus 40pts.
This would give a typical:
Open min = 110
U150 min = 85
U125 min = 60
U100 min = none

[Jonathan Rogers]

I don't know whether I am the only one thinking this, or whether everyone who as read this thread is thinking it, but -

Will someone please tell us some of the actual results from this last weekend's play?? I haven't seen them anywhere!

[Ben Purton]

James , Jonathan

Any idea who won the eastman cup it was DK(My team) V Richmond(My former team) and I didnt play before of this fact. Therefore curious who won.

[Richard James]

James , Jonathan

Any idea who won the eastman cup it was DK(My team) V Richmond(My former team) and I didnt play before of this fact. Therefore curious who won.

Hi Ben

Richmond won