Finals day 2 July

Discussion about all aspects of the ECF County Championships.
Post Reply
Mick Norris
Posts: 6473
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Finals day 2 July

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jun 22, 2016 10:06 am

Open Yorks v Middlesex
Minor Lincs v Norfolk
U180 Essex v Lancs
U160 Essex v Middlesex
U140 Worcs v Surrey
U120 Notts v Warks
U100 Essex v Kent/Lancs
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

John McKenna
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by John McKenna » Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:42 am

Late final extra, read all about it!

The result of the U-180 National Semi-final match: Surrey 7.5-8.5 Lancs - as submitted by "Bill O'Rourke" on the 12th June, the day of the match - has not yet been confirmed by Surrey on the official ECF ('oxfordfusion') results site.

And, the SCCA website has the following comment (in its County fixtures / results) -

"A dispute concerning board 16 could alter the outcome of the match"

http://www.scca.co.uk/comps_cty/county.html

Bd. 16 for Lancs? "ORourke, William"!

http://www.oxfordfusion.com/oca/index.cfm?Org=4
To find a for(u)m that accommodates the mess, that is the task of the artist now. (Samuel Beckett)

Mick Norris
Posts: 6473
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:34 pm

Not much time if there is a dispute in the outstanding U100 semi final match, is there? Presumably, a neutral arbiter will be present at the match though
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16082
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:49 pm

John McKenna wrote: And, the SCCA website has the following comment (in its County fixtures / results) -

"A dispute concerning board 16 could alter the outcome of the match"
It's currently scored as a draw, so Surrey may believe they have a claim for a win. Like the U-100 match, their claim has to be resolved very soon. Does anyone want to hint what it might be?

David Sedgwick
Posts: 2823
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by David Sedgwick » Wed Jun 22, 2016 3:19 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
John McKenna wrote: And, the SCCA website has the following comment (in its County fixtures / results) -

"A dispute concerning board 16 could alter the outcome of the match"
It's currently scored as a draw, so Surrey may believe they have a claim for a win. Like the U-100 match, their claim has to be resolved very soon. Does anyone want to hint what it might be?
As the subject has been raised, I feel that I should state that Surrey have been asked not to report or comment publicly until the matter has been resolved.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16082
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jun 22, 2016 3:31 pm

David Sedgwick wrote: As the subject has been raised, I feel that I should state that Surrey have been asked not to report or comment publicly until the matter has been resolved.
The established arbiter's fudge of awarding a point and a half would still leave Lancs as the winners, so someone has to make a decision as to why Surrey can overturn the reported result. You surely cannot take that long to decide an Appendix G claim, or the factual matter as to whether Surrey had mating material if the Lancs flag fell in an overwhelming position? Both flags down, but witnesses say the Lancs one fell first?

Mick Norris
Posts: 6473
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jun 22, 2016 5:37 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
David Sedgwick wrote: As the subject has been raised, I feel that I should state that Surrey have been asked not to report or comment publicly until the matter has been resolved.
The established arbiter's fudge of awarding a point and a half would still leave Lancs as the winners, so someone has to make a decision as to why Surrey can overturn the reported result. You surely cannot take that long to decide an Appendix G claim, or the factual matter as to whether Surrey had mating material if the Lancs flag fell in an overwhelming position? Both flags down, but witnesses say the Lancs one fell first?
How about waiting to hear from the official channels, and deciding there are more important things in life to think about?
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

John Philpott

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by John Philpott » Sat Jun 25, 2016 9:12 am

In the outstanding U100 semi-final, the results site is reporting a walkover for Kent.

Mick Norris
Posts: 6473
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Jun 25, 2016 9:20 am

Open Yorks v Middlesex
Minor Lincs v Norfolk
U180 Essex v Lancs (subject to dispute ruling, Surrey may be the actual opponents)
U160 Essex v Middlesex
U140 Worcs v Surrey
U120 Notts v Warks
U100 Essex v Kent
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

NickFaulks
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by NickFaulks » Sat Jun 25, 2016 9:47 am

Something unpleasant seems to have occurred in the U180 dispute, but I don't know what.

Neil Graham
Posts: 984
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Neil Graham » Sat Jun 25, 2016 10:21 am

NickFaulks wrote:Something unpleasant seems to have occurred in the U180 dispute, but I don't know what.
The result is Surrey 7.5 Lancashire 8.5 as originally reported.

NickFaulks
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by NickFaulks » Sat Jun 25, 2016 10:45 am

Neil Graham wrote:
NickFaulks wrote:Something unpleasant seems to have occurred in the U180 dispute, but I don't know what.
The result is Surrey 7.5 Lancashire 8.5 as originally reported.
But that's not the full story, is it? I was there, and regard that result as ludicrous.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1308
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Sat Jun 25, 2016 3:39 pm

John Philpott wrote:In the outstanding U100 semi-final, the results site is reporting a walkover for Kent.
I can confirm that this is the case. Kent advised me around 10PM last night

I can also confirm that Lancashire progress to the final of the U180.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Jun 25, 2016 3:40 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
Neil Graham wrote:
NickFaulks wrote:Something unpleasant seems to have occurred in the U180 dispute, but I don't know what.
The result is Surrey 7.5 Lancashire 8.5 as originally reported.
But that's not the full story, is it? I was there, and regard that result as ludicrous.
Care to elaborate?

NickFaulks
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Finals day 2 July

Post by NickFaulks » Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:02 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote: Care to elaborate?
I don't know whether the Appeal Committee's view of events is going to be published. If it is, then it's probably better to give them a couple of days to do that.

Post Reply