British Championship Congress 2022

[LawrenceCooper]

would efforts be made to fiddle the draw to help him get one or would they just say computer says no and leave him without the chance of getting one?)

It's not so much computer says no as FIDE says no. Pairing methods that allow arbiters to bend rules in favour of Norm xhances for partcular players are now outlawed.

There''s a theory that it's becoming more difficult to acheve the rating requirements for titles. The deflationary effect of having improving juniors with out of date ratings is working its way up the system.

After today he will have played 5 GMs so the "only" obstacle for IM/GM norms is to score the points required. With his current average 0.5 for an IM norm and 2/3 for a GM norm will probably suffice.

[Graham Borrowdale]

So the rule about playing a number of ‘overseas’ players for a valid norm has gone?

[Roger de Coverly]

So the rule about playing a number of ‘overseas’ players for a valid norm has gone?

It doesn't apply in a national championship. There is or was still a rule about not making all the Norms that way.

[LawrenceCooper]

So the rule about playing a number of ‘overseas’ players for a valid norm has gone?

It may apply to non English players, a rule change in the last five years or so means that non English players in the 4NCL aren't exempt from the "overseas" rule.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Domenech is the only one with a conceivable norm chance who might fall foul of that rule - he'd probably need to play Lane or Kolbus in a later round for an IM norm to be valid.

[Roger de Coverly]

It may apply to non English players, a rule change in the last five years or so means that non English players in the 4NCL aren't exempt from the "overseas" rule.

Was it Justin Tan of Australia who got caught out by that in recent years? (edit)

In the 4NCL, the flexible rules on board order can make it straightforward for someone to meet a required field. That's provided match captains aand team managers re prepared to adjust or maintain board orders as necessary to meet the needs of opposition players.

[Thomas Rendle]

I would guess you mean Justin Tan.

[Mick Norris]

would efforts be made to fiddle the draw to help him get one or would they just say computer says no and leave him without the chance of getting one?)

It's not so much computer says no as FIDE says no. Pairing methods that allow arbiters to bend rules in favour of Norm xhances for partcular players are now outlawed.

There''s a theory that it's becoming more difficult to acheve the rating requirements for titles. The deflationary effect of having improving juniors with out of date ratings is working its way up the system.

After today he will have played 5 GMs so the "only" obstacle for IM/GM norms is to score the points required. With his current average 0.5 for an IM norm and 2/3 for a GM norm will probably suffice.

From what you have said, Harry has 2 IM norms, and with his live rating presumably well over 2400, then the IM title would follow?

[Ian Thompson]

This (pre game scans) always happens at events eg. the 4NCL and in my mind is clear example of how the whole thing is often for show and not a serious exercise - since, this 'excuse'/justification is always available. There can be no penalty because there is no crime in having a mobile phone on your person prior to the commencement of the round.

I made this point while being scanned at a recent event. The response was that the scan was protecting me, in case I had inadvertently got a prohibited device on my person.

That explanation is true. It does protect a player from being defaulted through forgetfulness/carelessness. In that case it shouldn't be presented as an anti-cheating measure because it isn't.

It is a nonsense justification IMO, since it is only done on a minute number of randomly selected boards. It's arguably unfair on those who aren't scanned and aren't therefore given the opportunity to 'forget by accident'.

Two members of this forum might be thinking that now if reports I've read elsewhere that they were defaulted because their mobile phone rang are accurate.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi,

'In the 4NCL, the flexible rules on board order can make it straightforward for someone to meet a required field. That's provided match
captains and team managers are prepared to adjust or maintain board orders as necessary to meet the needs of opposition players.'

Just for the fun of it, let's do a re-cap:

Opposing teams captains confer on how they can move a player up or down the board order to meet stronger or weaker
opposition or indeed to give them a colour of the choice in team events so said player can get a norm. Everyone happy.

Yet when a fellow countryman is in a team that has no hope of winning anything but by not playing that player
has in his pocket a well deserved and pride of place on the mantelpiece gold medal......bedlam.

Back to the chess. When Harry met Danny. Round 6.

1rbq1rnk/6pp/p1pb1p2/3p3P/5B2/2N1Q1R1/PPP1BPP1/2KR4 w - - 2 18

18.Rxg7 yes if 18..Kxg7 19.Qg3+ and Bxe6 forking the Rooks. (I'd have spotted that.)
but you can shift a Rook by hitting the Queen and then the e6 Bishop (the target) can take on f4 and...
...the b8 Rook hangs but Qb6 holds the Rook with a big hit on b2 .
Without a doubt (and I'm being honest) here ended the analysis. Rxg7 does not work.
I'd of sniffed about looking at h6 or Bxe6 and Ne4.

A good move that one and very easily missed by both sides.
(Well easily missed by me, I saw it and would have rejected it.)

The White's h-pawn played a prominent part in this. I am not going to say it because I do not give my pawns names.

Good luck Harry hope you get a solo hard earned and fully deserved norm.

[Peter Harrington]

Any body know where the British Championships will be in 2023? Any rumours?

[Mick Norris]

Keith & Harry have drawn

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Standout results at the top are Matthew Wadsworth beating GM John Emms, David Eggleston beating the higher-rated Brandon Clarke, and Danny Gormally and Richard Pert keeping themselves in the mix on 5/7, half a point behind the five joint leaders on 5.5/7 (Nick Pert, Matthew Wadsworth, Keith Arkell, Harry Grieve and David Eggleston).

As others have noticed, a definite generational difference between the established GMs and the younger players.

Talking of established GMs, sorry to point them out, but GMs Chris Ward (3.5/7) and Mark Hebden (3/7) are having nightmare tournaments (Peter Wells had recovered somewhat from his 0/2 start with 4/4 before his most recent loss to be on 4/7). Any particular reason that anyone can identify for this struggle by these GMs? (They wouldn't have planned to be in the score groups in positions 17, 25 and 37 would they?)

[Joey Stewart]

I suspect with the fall from grace of some of our more eminent GMs it is probably a lot to do with the fact that 2000-2300s used to be absolute whipping boys for them but now are so much better booked up and, most importantly, show less fear or respect so it becomes a far more awkward game that the GMs were accustomed to being a foregone conclusion and it must be very annoying.

[Graham Borrowdale]

I don’t think it is so much a fall from grace, as one or two players having poor tournaments, by their standards. I am sure they will be back. I see the difference this year is that some of the younger players have made a real breakthrough, so that two of them are in the joint lead on 5.5, and several more are on the group on 4.5. Still good to see two of my contemporaries, Arkell and Davies, doing well, though. As for the eventual winner, it is still wide open, but I have a feeling Keith will be there, possibly in a tie.