Qualification criteria for the British Championship

[Alex Holowczak]

I look forward to a Swiss where everybody wins with White in the first two rounds.

... Only if you're not the arbiter at the time.

[Richard Bates]

We are not using accelerated pairings at the Classic.

That opens up the old debate about whether acceleration is good for norm seekers.

Does the chance of a high ranked "early encounter" not depend on how many entries you get?

In the May Sunningdale, also not accelerated, round 3 featured the number 4 seed v the number 1 seed (who lost). The number 2 seed also lost in this round. Sunningdale was around 50 players.

As a matter of interest is there any reason why the London tournament isn't/can't be played as a 10 or even 11 round tournament? The attractions of 9 round tournaments are that they are the minimum possible to secure norms, so therefore is arguably both the cheapest format and best for players who need to find time off work - when operating as one-round-a-day. But since this is not relevant in London (due to the tournament being fitted into 8 days anyway) surely an extra couple of rounds is preferable? In particular since, if i understand FIDE title regulations correctly, players are allowed to 'discard' wins for norm purposes. So the problem of norm aspirants encountering very weak fields in the early rounds of tournaments doesn't apply in the same way as it does in the minimum 9 round format.

[Alex McFarlane]

There is junior training on most mornings, or at least there was last year. This was held in the same hall as the Open. There is also a reluctance from several players to play 2 rounds on multiple days.

[Alan Walton]

Going back to qualification criteria,

I have just seen the entries for the FIDE open at Leyland this weekend (which will automatically get a qualifying place), the strongest player currently entered is Ali Jaunooby (a club mate of mine) who currently is rated at 2150ish (though is has gained nearly 80 points this summer). There are only 2 players entered over 2100.

This really reaffirms some peoples views that the qualifying place doesn't encourage the 2200+ players from entering

What are peoples views about the strength of this and the relating qualification criteria

[Sean Hewitt]

This really reaffirms some peoples views that the qualifying place doesn't encourage the 2200+ players from entering

I completely agree with this. As I said before, I don't believe that the British Championship qualifying place matters a jot at my events and I suspect it makes little or no difference anywhere else. Most players enter my events first and formeost because of the quality of the event - FIDE rated, the location, the playing conditions and the strength of field (strong players attract other strong players in opens) and dare I say it the smooth running.

It's interesting at Leyland that the Open has more entries than many other weekend opens. I can't imagine that the fact it is FIDE rated is a coincidence.

What are peoples views about the strength of this and the relating qualification criteria

Unfortunatley, the economic reality of the British at this moment in time renders any discussion about reducing weaker entries redundant. The best we can do is make it more attractive to 2200+ players to enter and that means lower entry fees and / or automatic qualification.

[Stewart Reuben]

Bob Clark >If the objective is to raise as much money as possible from weak players entering the British, then why not just say anyone rated over 2000 is eligable to enter.<

But that is not the sole objective. One is to encourage players to compete in higher quality events. This applies to players U2000 as well as over because they get the opportunity to play stronger opposition. An argument, that a qualifying place would only be available if the entry was of an 'adequate' quality, has merit. The problem is that a player would not necessarily know it was a qualifying route until just before the event started.
Stewart Reuben

[Alan Walton]

Due to the 400 point rule it becomes pointless (in a rating sense), for them to be playing GMs and the majority of IMs

That is why players U2000 should be encouraged to enter the Major Open where the rating ceiling is 2360, this is still strong enough opposition for them

Therefore players under 2000 enter FIDE tournaments (weekenders) to improve their rating over 2000, this should be their aspiration if the want to play in the Championship

[Adam Raoof]

That is why players U2000 should be encouraged to enter the Major Open where the rating ceiling is 2360, this is still strong enough opposition for them.

Just to be accurate; the Major Open is open to all players except those entitled to play in the British Championship, so there is no rating ceiling otherwise.

[Alan Walton]

But Adam, that is the theoretical rating ceiling, as all players over 2360 currently qualify automatically for the championship, unless they are foreign

[Alex Holowczak]

But Adam, that is the theoretical rating ceiling, as all players over 2360 currently qualify automatically for the championship, unless they are foreign

From the Qualifying Regulations for 2011:
"A rating of 218 (2350) or higher in a current British Isles national grading list (not Rapidplay) or any FIDE list between July 2010 and July 2011."

So it's actually 2350, not 2360. And you can get in from your grade, too.

[Adam Raoof]

But Adam, that is the theoretical rating ceiling, as all players over 2360 currently qualify automatically for the championship, unless they are foreign

I agree, but it's theoretical, and they can be overseas players.

[Alex Holowczak]

Still i'm sure i'll find myself playing in an e2e4 weekender at some point... Everything else about them seems to be just about all you could ask for in a weekender (apart from 5 rounds not being enough), and whilst i dislike the quicker time controls for FIDE rating I wouldn't be surprised if they suited me.

From the e2e4 website listing the entries: IM Bates, Richard Hackney 2382 219

If you take down Pert, Williams, Jones and Slavin, I expect to hear you championing 4-hour playing sessions when you return.

[Richard Bates]

Still i'm sure i'll find myself playing in an e2e4 weekender at some point... Everything else about them seems to be just about all you could ask for in a weekender (apart from 5 rounds not being enough), and whilst i dislike the quicker time controls for FIDE rating I wouldn't be surprised if they suited me.

From the e2e4 website listing the entries: IM Bates, Richard Hackney 2382 219

If you take down Pert, Williams, Jones and Slavin, I expect to hear you championing 4-hour playing sessions when you return.

I think if i took down Pert, S Williams and Jones then it would just serve to reinforce my opinions on inadequacy of the time control for proper chess...