Southend
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Southend
Southend is International?
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 531
- Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:10 pm
Re: Southend
Maurice Staples is playing. OMG.
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Re: Southend
Unpredictable as in wrong? They do not appear to be correct according to FIDE rules, but they may well be pairing to some other rules of course.Richard Bates wrote:Pairings for anyone interested... Somewhat unpredictable as always.
http://www.essexchess.org.uk/index.php/mm-se57
EDIT : In fact, looking at it a little more, they may be pairing using ECF grades instead of FIDE ratings though even then I do not understand Hebden and Ghasi having the same colour in Round 1.
-
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm
Re: Southend
Well there's one Russian playing...JustinHorton wrote:Southend is International?
I assume that an interpretation of ECF rules are being used. Although I think they still don't make much sense. Leaving aside that i'm reasonably sure the game on board 26 in round 2 must have finished 1-0 not 0-1.Sean Hewitt wrote:Unpredictable as in wrong?Richard Bates wrote:Pairings for anyone interested... Somewhat unpredictable as always.
http://www.essexchess.org.uk/index.php/mm-se57
They are not correct by FIDE rules, but they may well be pairing to some other rules of course.
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Southend
Have they just got the PINs wrong?
I make them:
(1) Jones 2653 [W]
(2) Howell 2638
(3) Hebden 2518 [W]
(4) Wells 2491
(5) Ghasi 2452 [W]
(6) Cherniaev 2447
(7) Bates 2377 [W]
(8) Haydon 2302
So the colours are alternating correctly, which is a start. I don't have the patience to work out whether or not the pairings are correct (which means I have to work out all 50 players' PINs!). There is the disclaimer that the board numbers may be wrong, but it seems clear to me that the PINs are wrong. This notwithstanding, the pairings may be right!
I make them:
(1) Jones 2653 [W]
(2) Howell 2638
(3) Hebden 2518 [W]
(4) Wells 2491
(5) Ghasi 2452 [W]
(6) Cherniaev 2447
(7) Bates 2377 [W]
(8) Haydon 2302
So the colours are alternating correctly, which is a start. I don't have the patience to work out whether or not the pairings are correct (which means I have to work out all 50 players' PINs!). There is the disclaimer that the board numbers may be wrong, but it seems clear to me that the PINs are wrong. This notwithstanding, the pairings may be right!
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Southend
Sean Hewitt wrote:They are not correct by FIDE rules, but they may well be pairing to some other rules of course.
First, there's no such thing as ECF Pairing Rules. They're CAA Pairing Rules, at best.Richard Bates wrote:I assume that an interpretation of ECF rules are being used.
I've wielded some paper and a pen to work out the pairings for the top scoregroup in Round 3.
Under CAA, I get: Jones v Cherniaev, Bates v Howell, Hebden v Ledger, D., Player v Wells, Ghasi float
Under FIDE, I get: Jones v Cherniaev, Ghasi v Howell, Hebden v Bates, Ledger, D. v Wells, Player float
Southend got: Jones v Ghasi, Bates v Howell, Hebden v Cherniaev, Player v Wells, Ledger, D. float
So, taking Sean's hint, I checked to see if they were pairing to CAA rules using ECF grades.
I got: Jones v Cherniaev, Player v Howell, Ghasi v Wells, Hebden v Ledger, D. Bates float
Which isn't what Southend got, either.
Didn't think there'd be so many different ways of pairing 9 players together.
-
- Posts: 4828
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Southend
Really? I get Jones v Ghasi, Bates v Howell, Hebden v Cherniaev, Ledger D v Wells, Player float. Which seems to be the closest to what they've got - they've got that with Player and Ledger swapped round.Alex Holowczak wrote:Under FIDE, I get: Jones v Cherniaev, Ghasi v Howell, Hebden v Bates, Ledger, D. v Wells, Player float
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Southend
Jones [W]IM Jack Rudd wrote:Really? I get Jones v Ghasi, Bates v Howell, Hebden v Cherniaev, Ledger D v Wells, Player float. Which seems to be the closest to what they've got - they've got that with Player and Ledger swapped round.Alex Holowczak wrote:Under FIDE, I get: Jones v Cherniaev, Ghasi v Howell, Hebden v Bates, Ledger, D. v Wells, Player float
Howell
Hebden [W]
Wells
---------
Ghasi [W]
Cherniaev
Bates [W]
Ledger, D. [W]
Player [W]
So the set of pairings you should have are:
Jones v Ghasi
Cherniaev v Howell
Hebden v Bates
Ledger, D. v Wells
Player float
Then I switched Ghasi and Cherniaev. Of course you're right, because with FIDE, you transpose from the bottom when looking for a transfer, not from the top as you do with CAA... So I should have swapped Bates and Cherniaev as you did, rather than Ghasi and Cherniaev.
-
- Posts: 508
- Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: Colwyn Bay
Re: Southend
Have any of you ever kissed a girl?
Chairman of North Wales Junior Chess Association
[email protected]
[email protected]
-
- Posts: 4828
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Southend
Yes. And I liked it.Andrew Camp wrote:Have any of you ever kissed a girl?
ETA: On a more serious note, whether the pairings at a reasonably prestigious tournament have been done correctly is an important topic. I'd rather it wasn't subjected to this sort of put-down.
-
- Posts: 8838
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
- Location: London
Re: Southend
This thread now feels like a skit from The Big Bang Theory...
-
- Posts: 508
- Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: Colwyn Bay
Re: Southend
Chairman of North Wales Junior Chess Association
[email protected]
[email protected]
-
- Posts: 2720
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
- Location: NW4 4UY
Re: Southend
As you know, according to at least one of the participants it doesn't matter what pairings you get, they will be wrong...IM Jack Rudd wrote:Really? I get Jones v Ghasi, Bates v Howell, Hebden v Cherniaev, Ledger D v Wells, Player float. Which seems to be the closest to what they've got - they've got that with Player and Ledger swapped round.Alex Holowczak wrote:Under FIDE, I get: Jones v Cherniaev, Ghasi v Howell, Hebden v Bates, Ledger, D. v Wells, Player float
I remember Jack Speigel's handling of the event with fondness. However, surely if the organisers are using FIDE ratings, and a pairing program, there can't be such a wide range of options?
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Southend
But it's easier to have that argument if your pairings are actually correct.Adam Raoof wrote:As you know, according to at least one of the participants it doesn't matter what pairings you get, they will be wrong...
Well, you'd like to think so. We don't know if they're using a pairing program or not. If we knew what pairing program was used, if any, we could comment on whether it was pairing correctly.Adam Raoof wrote:However, surely if the organisers are using FIDE ratings, and a pairing program, there can't be such a wide range of options?
If they're using pairing cards (which I suspect they are, given they've said they're backloading the information into Tournament Director for the sake of web output), then they have a choice of pairing rules to use, and the possibility of making routine mistakes. These things happen...