Olympiad

The very latest International round up of English news.
Post Reply
Matthew Peat
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:25 am

Olympiad

Post by Matthew Peat » Sun Apr 27, 2014 8:44 pm

I was surprised to hear Matthew Sadler mention today during the Gashimov memorial commentary (on the excellent Chess 24 website) that he was still waiting to find out whether he was going to be selected from the England team for the Olympiad.

Given that the Olympiad is scheduled to start in approximately 3 months, isn't this leaving things a bit late? I know my workplace would have an issue if I tried to book 2 weeks leave with less than 3 months notice.

(As I write this I do also recall Peter Svidler mentioning a few days ago in the same commentary that he had yet to hear regarding his participation in the Russian team so it clearly is not unusual for a federation not to have selected its team by now.)

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2071
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Olympiad

Post by Ian Thompson » Sun Apr 27, 2014 9:22 pm

Matthew Peat wrote:Given that the Olympiad is scheduled to start in approximately 3 months, isn't this leaving things a bit late? I know my workplace would have an issue if I tried to book 2 weeks leave with less than 3 months notice.
Unless your terms of employment specify a different notice period, you need only give 4 weeks notice of your intention to take 2 weeks leave, so your employer ought to be able to cope with that. Of course, the later you leave it, the greater the risk of your employer having valid grounds for objecting (e.g. other people have already booked leave at the same time you want it).

NickFaulks
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Apr 27, 2014 9:42 pm

Ian Thompson wrote:
Matthew Peat wrote:Given that the Olympiad is scheduled to start in approximately 3 months, isn't this leaving things a bit late? I know my workplace would have an issue if I tried to book 2 weeks leave with less than 3 months notice.
Unless your terms of employment specify a different notice period, you need only give 4 weeks notice of your intention to take 2 weeks leave, so your employer ought to be able to cope with that. Of course, the later you leave it, the greater the risk of your employer having valid grounds for objecting (e.g. other people have already booked leave at the same time you want it).
I think Ian is assuming an adversarial relationship with one's employer which not everyone has.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sun Apr 27, 2014 10:12 pm

Matthew Peat wrote:I was surprised to hear Matthew Sadler mention today during the Gashimov memorial commentary (on the excellent Chess 24 website) that he was still waiting to find out whether he was going to be selected from the England team for the Olympiad.

Given that the Olympiad is scheduled to start in approximately 3 months, isn't this leaving things a bit late? I know my workplace would have an issue if I tried to book 2 weeks leave with less than 3 months notice.

(As I write this I do also recall Peter Svidler mentioning a few days ago in the same commentary that he had yet to hear regarding his participation in the Russian team so it clearly is not unusual for a federation not to have selected its team by now.)
My understanding is that the top 6 (Adams, Short, McShane, Sadler, Howell, Gawain) are all available; if so then the selectors certainly have something to think about this time 8) Arguably only Adams' place is completely obvious, assuming that Short will be politicking.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5014
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Olympiad

Post by LawrenceCooper » Sun Apr 27, 2014 10:18 pm

I suspect that players had been asked about their availability but until the overspend on the international budget was approved at the ECF finance meeting earlier this month then it wasn't known if the strongest team could be sent.

The current International Selection Committee comprises:

Opens: David Openshaw (Chairman), Jonathan Parker, Jonathan Speelman
Womens: David Openshaw (Chairman), Jonathan Parker, Jonathan Speelman

NickFaulks
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by NickFaulks » Mon Apr 28, 2014 1:43 am

Jonathan Rogers wrote: My understanding is that the top 6 (Adams, Short, McShane, Sadler, Howell, Gawain) are all available; if so then the selectors certainly have something to think about this time) Arguably only Adams' place is completely obvious, assuming that Short will be politicking.
Why that order? Since the number of reserves was reduced to one, having a team member with commitments at meetings and the GA has become very difficult. England is not the only team to face this problem.

If McShane's services can be obtained, I fail to see why his selection is not completely obvious.

Mick Norris
Posts: 7402
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Olympiad

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Apr 28, 2014 9:15 am

LawrenceCooper wrote:I suspect that players had been asked about their availability but until the overspend on the international budget was approved at the ECF finance meeting earlier this month then it wasn't known if the strongest team could be sent.

The current International Selection Committee comprises:

Opens: David Openshaw (Chairman), Jonathan Parker, Jonathan Speelman
Womens: David Openshaw (Chairman), Jonathan Parker, Jonathan Speelman
Do you happen to know (roughly) when the teams will be selected, and if later, announced?
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Mon Apr 28, 2014 10:06 am

NickFaulks wrote:
Jonathan Rogers wrote: My understanding is that the top 6 (Adams, Short, McShane, Sadler, Howell, Gawain) are all available; if so then the selectors certainly have something to think about this time) Arguably only Adams' place is completely obvious, assuming that Short will be politicking.
Why that order? Since the number of reserves was reduced to one, having a team member with commitments at meetings and the GA has become very difficult. England is not the only team to face this problem.

If McShane's services can be obtained, I fail to see why his selection is not completely obvious.
Not completely obvious because he has underperformed for England in the past and his general form has dipped since he returned to full-time work. The performance at the last classical London Chess Classic, where he finished second last, beating only Gawain, points to the significant difference between the Luke on sabbatical who was even competing for first in the second and third editions of the LCC and Tal memorial, and the Luke who is back at work.

Of course you can still make a very good argument for including him. No problem. But I stick to only Adams being completely obvious. There is, after all, a very good case for each of the others too - in fact each of them has excelled more than one for England in the past whereas I don't think that Luke ever has. (Sadler 's performances in the mid to late 1990s evoke particularly strong memories).

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Olympiad

Post by David Sedgwick » Mon Apr 28, 2014 10:27 am

Matthew Peat wrote:Given that the Olympiad is scheduled to start in approximately 3 months, isn't this leaving things a bit late? I know my workplace would have an issue if I tried to book 2 weeks leave with less than 3 months notice.
The same issue has arisen in respect of arbiter appointments. Approximately 160 arbiters will be needed. So far exactly one has been officially chosen: the Chief Arbiter will be Takis Nikolopoulos of Greece.

At the weekend I attended a workshop for International Arbiters in Brussels. Several (other) prospective Olympiad arbiters were present, some of them candidates for senior positions. More than one said that the uncertainty was making things tricky in relation to their day day jobs.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17974
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:26 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote: Of course you can still make a very good argument for including him. No problem. But I stick to only Adams being completely obvious. There is, after all, a very good case for each of the others too - in fact each of them has excelled more than one for England in the past whereas I don't think that Luke ever has. (Sadler 's performances in the mid to late 1990s evoke particularly strong memories).
Current ratings are

Code: Select all

 1	 Adams, Michael	 2753	
 2	 McShane, Luke J 2674
 3	 Short, Nigel D	 2661
 4	 Howell, David W L 2654
 5	 Jones, Gawain C B 2650
 6	 Sadler, Matthew D 2649
Then a 100 point gap to

Code: Select all

7	 Pert, Nicholas	 2552
 8	 Hebden, Mark L 2545	
 9	 Haslinger, Stewart G 2544	


David Howell is still at University, is he not? So that's three full time players and three part time players to choose from.

With only 25 Elo points separating them, that's equivalent to saying that 2 to 6 are of almost equal strength. If you applied 4NCL rules, you would field them in any order that appealed to you.

I don't know the availability of the female players. The corresponding ranking list is

1 Hunt, Harriet V 2438
2 Houska, Jovanka 2410
3 Ciuksyte, Dagne 2338
4 Lalic, Susan K 2260
5 Corke, Anya S 2255
6 Sarakauskiene, Zivile 2176
7 Chevannes, Sabrina L 2158
8 Jackson, Sheila 2144
9 Atkins, Rita 2141
10 Maroroa, Sue 2131

Number 6 is a new name to me, whilst number 9 used to be Mrs Hennigan.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:39 pm

Number 6 is the sister of number 3. Both play for Guildford in 4NCL.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Mon Apr 28, 2014 3:27 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote: ....
I don't know the availability of the female players. The corresponding ranking list is

1 Hunt, Harriet V 2438
2 Houska, Jovanka 2410
3 Ciuksyte, Dagne 2338
4 Lalic, Susan K 2260
5 Corke, Anya S 2255
6 Sarakauskiene, Zivile 2176
7 Chevannes, Sabrina L 2158
8 Jackson, Sheila 2144
9 Atkins, Rita 2141
10 Maroroa, Sue 2131

Number 6 is a new name to me, whilst number 9 used to be Mrs Hennigan.
I'd like to think that our selectors will be bold enough to recommend Akshaya Kalaiyalahan. Why wait?

User avatar
Peter D Williams
Posts: 839
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 2:15 pm
Location: Hampshire

Re: Olympiad

Post by Peter D Williams » Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:49 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
I'd like to think that our selectors will be bold enough to recommend Akshaya Kalaiyalahan. Why wait?
Afternoon All hope your all enjoying the sun today.

Maria Wang i like to see go she a very good chess player :D

Well i must get back to the melon plants.
when you are successful many losers bark at you.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Olympiad

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Wed Apr 30, 2014 3:06 pm

Yes maybe they can do better :roll:

User avatar
Peter D Williams
Posts: 839
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 2:15 pm
Location: Hampshire

Re: Olympiad

Post by Peter D Williams » Wed Apr 30, 2014 4:22 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:Yes maybe they can do better :roll:
Her sister Anna is also a useful player.Have you ever watched them play? I have at the european juniors both of them always put in 100 per cent effort and would give any chess player a very good game.I remember Anna dad using a pair of binoculars to watch the games of his children.

Well i hope your enjoying this lovely weather today
Last edited by Peter D Williams on Thu May 01, 2014 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
when you are successful many losers bark at you.

Post Reply