English Chess Forum

Any idea when the last games will go in to ECF grading etc

I guess the answer would be "The same time they do every year?"

The Birmingham League hasn't actually finished yet, but should have done by Friday. There's 1 playoff tonight (which is quickplay finishes), and 1 adjourned session on Friday in a playoff I'm involved in. Naturally, this delays getting grading files sent in...

Ben Purton wrote:Any idea when the last games will go in to ECF grading etc

The usual rule for the cut off is May 31st. So if you have a late-running cup final, it can find itself in the following season.

Roger de Coverly wrote:

Ben Purton wrote:Any idea when the last games will go in to ECF grading etc

The usual rule for the cut off is May 31st. So if you have a late-running cup final, it can find itself in the following season.

And in the case of last season's Berkshire Premier Precision Cup Final, it had better ...

Alex Holowczak wrote:The Birmingham League hasn't actually finished yet, but should have done by Friday. There's 1 playoff tonight (which is quickplay finishes), and 1 adjourned session on Friday in a playoff I'm involved in. Naturally, this delays getting grading files sent in...

I guess the best way to deal with this problem, would be to ban leagues from the grading list. Especially, as they are not proper games really. They are more coffee house than real chess. Most involve cheating like adjournments and adjudications. Or just include league chess under rapidplay grades.

Paul Dupré wrote:I guess the best way to deal with this problem, would be to ban leagues from the grading list. Especially, as they are not proper games really. They are more coffee house than real chess. Most involve cheating like adjournments and adjudications. Or just include league chess under rapidplay grades.

Do you seriously believe this? Some league games involve adjournments, blocking all from being being graded because of this is quite frankly ridiculous. Also, are you trying to claim that the 4NCL is not "proper games"? Afaik they are the largest league in the country, and you want their 7 hour session in rapidplay grades?

Rob Thompson wrote:Afaik they are the largest league in the country, and you want their 7 hour session in rapidplay grades?

The 4NCL is the largest league in the country. This is disputed by the Birmingham League, but they're wrong.

Alex Holowczak wrote:The 4NCL is the largest league in the country. This is disputed by the Birmingham League, but they're wrong.

It's not like you to sit on the fence like this Alex

Rob Thompson wrote:
Do you seriously believe this?

I believe that Paul is referring to evening leagues, especially those allowing other persons to decide the outcome of the game or the use of third parties (human or Silicon) to provide outside assistance.

Hopefully, most forumites have seen the light in this respect but I recognise that many have still so to do.

Alex Holowczak wrote:

Rob Thompson wrote:Afaik they are the largest league in the country, and you want their 7 hour session in rapidplay grades?

The 4NCL is the largest league in the country. This is disputed by the Birmingham League, but they're wrong.

They might be using a different measure for "largest" than you are. Any of number of teams, number of players or number of games played would be reasonable, but they might not all give the same answer.

Rob Thompson wrote:Do you seriously believe this? Some league games involve adjournments, blocking all from being being graded because of this is quite frankly ridiculous. Also, are you trying to claim that the 4NCL is not "proper games"? Afaik they are the largest league in the country, and you want their 7 hour session in rapidplay grades?

Obviously, I'm not talking about the 4NCL - they have arbiters and duplicate score sheets - they are professionally run.
Why would I think a FIDE event like the 4NCL should be discounted from the grading list?

No, my biggest problem with Evening Leagues is that they are so unfair to non-drivers and the like. They think that all their spurious rules they come up with are fair - when in reality they are just a pain in the butt. The only sensible thing they should do is have two thirty minute games, and turn evening league chess back to what they are supposed to be - which is fun, not hard labour which they are now!!! For example:

1. The Surrey League - the away player suggests two of a) QPF b) Adjudication c) Adjournment - then the home player chooses from the two selections.
2. The Border League - the away player has to say at the beginning that he wants to Adjourn or it's forced adjudication at the end of play.
3. The London League - forced adjournment after 30 moves.
4. The Thames Valley League - you make decision for adjournment or adjudication at the end.

Forgive if any of the rules have changed, as I gave up playing league chess because the people running the league are just so stick in the mud. The point is all league chess should be under the same set of rules, not each to his own.

Ian Thompson wrote:

Alex Holowczak wrote:

Rob Thompson wrote:Afaik they are the largest league in the country, and you want their 7 hour session in rapidplay grades?

The 4NCL is the largest league in the country. This is disputed by the Birmingham League, but they're wrong.

They might be using a different measure for "largest" than you are. Any of number of teams, number of players or number of games played would be reasonable, but they might not all give the same answer.

The 4NCL has:
(a) More halfresults (8 votes at Council v 7)
(b) More teams (76 v 74)
(c) More players (can't work this out, but the team sizes are bigger in the 4NCL ([32 x 8 + 42 x 6] v [63 x 6 + 11 x 4])

Which other definition of largest should I be using?

Paul Dupré wrote: 2. The Border League - the away player has to say at the beginning that he wants to Adjourn or it's forced adjudication at the end of play.

Paul,

I am pleased to have contributed to the dumping of this nonsense.

The SBL did away with adjudication some years ago.

Adjournment now only happens if both players want it : no-one can be forced into this nonsense any longer.

We now have much more sensible time control including incremental ones for those who understand the benefits.

Alex Holowczak wrote:The 4NCL has:
(a) More halfresults (8 votes at Council v 7)
(b) More teams (76 v 74)
(c) More players (can't work this out, but the team sizes are bigger in the 4NCL ([32 x 8 + 42 x 6] v [63 x 6 + 11 x 4])

Which other definition of largest should I be using?

How have you counted teams that didn't complete the full season? That might make all the difference to the winner.

I wasn't saying you were wrong, just that one league might, for example, have a valid claim based on number of games, and another might have a valid claim based on number of teams.

Paul Dupré wrote:Forgive if any of the rules have changed, as I gave up playing league chess because the people running the league are just so stick in the mud. The point is all league chess should be under the same set of rules, not each to his own.

I disagree with that, I think that with varying the rules slightly (on things like time controls) is a good thing. It adds a bit of variety to what would otherwise be quite mundane. There are some dumb rules in league chess - there was one in the Thames Valley League that appeared in another thread and made no sense - so you stay involved and propose changes to them! There's a league around here which has rules about "Blitz finishes", they mean Quickplay Finishes. They then say you can't claim a win with an illegal move in the blitz finish, but instead it's two minutes on the opponent's clock. If they used the right term in the first place, they wouldn't have a problem. So I've let them know, and they can change it next year.

I don't like adjournments either, but I'd rather lobby to get the rule change than give up and never play again just because the rule isn't a rule I like.