World Senior Chess Championship S50

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Off topic, but with regards to Chris R's post: was the World top 10 ever listed with 3 English players? I.e. Nunn, Short and Speelman. They've obviously flirted with it a few times, and while I'm sure there were 2 at the same time, were there ever 3?

You can check through the pre-2002 listings here:

http://www.olimpbase.org/index.html?htt ... mmary.html

The ones after that are on the FIDE website. Happy clicking!

[Lewis Martin]

Keith,
I couldn't agree more about the juniors and in 12 months time it will be much more attractive to enter tournaments that are riddled with juniors (most these days) as playing these kids you are essentially on a hiding to nothing...you gain nothing for beating them and lose a stack for drawing or losing to them.

This would only really be relevant to those with title ambitions i.e. getting to 2300/2400/2500 or indeed titled themselves with regards to professional chess. It doesn't really matter for those lower. But getting to these would require some work anyway (for most people), and would usually imply the fact that they enjoy chess.

If someone was more or less been 2100-2200 for a number of years and is suddenly now 2050-2100, then this amateur shouldn't really be that bothered about their rating.

As for being on a 'hiding to nothing... etc' you really are putting a downer on things aren't you? Instead of encouraging them to improve their chess, or even learn from them, you moan about their rating instead of appreciating that there is a talented (if they are!) player in front of you.

You really are focusing on the wrong thing if your rating concerns you the most about your chess.

[Roger de Coverly]

Off topic, but with regards to Chris R's post: was the World top 10 ever listed with 3 English players? I.e. Nunn, Short and Speelman. They've obviously flirted with it a few times, and while I'm sure there were 2 at the same time, were there ever 3?

January 1989

Code: Select all

  
pos Player_ID  Name                                  Title Fed  Rtng   +/-  gms 
1            Kasparov, Garry                         g   URS  2775   +15   49                    
2            Karpov, Anatoly                         g   URS  2750   +25   46                    
3            Short, Nigel D.                         g   ENG  2650   -15   40                    
4            Beliavsky, Alexander G.                 g   URS  2640   -15   49                    
5            Speelman, Jonathan S.                   g   ENG  2640    -5   41                    
6            Ivanchuk, Vassily                       g   URS  2635   +10   68                    
7            Salov, Valery                           g   URS  2630    +5   17                    
8            Ribli, Zoltan                           g   HUN  2625    -5   32                   
9            Nunn, John D. M.                        g   ENG  2620    -5   27                    
10           Andersson, Ulf                          g   SWE  2620    -5   23  

(edited for formatting)

[Mick Norris]

It should also be noted Keith that you are the reigning European 50+ champion and currently the number 10 seed so you have an excellent shot at winning this just as Nick Burrows said! As does Mark Hebden. In fact three of the top 10 are English in a world championship event. Can't think that's ever happened before.

I hope Keith wins, but any English winner would be fab

I assume the English players will be agreeing short draws with each other and conserving their energies for beating the rest of the field (just like the Russians used to do)

[Martin Crichton]

Keith,
I couldn't agree more about the juniors and in 12 months time it will be much more attractive to enter tournaments that are riddled with juniors (most these days) as playing these kids you are essentially on a hiding to nothing...you gain nothing for beating them and lose a stack for drawing or losing to them.

This would only really be relevant to those with title ambitions i.e. getting to 2300/2400/2500 or indeed titled themselves with regards to professional chess. It doesn't really matter for those lower. But getting to these would require some work anyway (for most people), and would usually imply the fact that they enjoy chess.

If someone was more or less been 2100-2200 for a number of years and is suddenly now 2050-2100, then this amateur shouldn't really be that bothered about their rating.

As for being on a 'hiding to nothing... etc' you really are putting a downer on things aren't you? Instead of encouraging them to improve their chess, or even learn from them, you moan about their rating instead of appreciating that there is a talented (if they are!) player in front of you.

You really are focusing on the wrong thing if your rating concerns you the most about your chess.

I was making a general reference but for your benifit I enjoy mashing juniors over the board and putting them in their place and I have quite a decent record against under 18's ...probably scored 10/10 in my last 10 games against them....if you are an anerak type? there was the west london rapidplay in January and a couple of Adam raoofs u-2200 events to check...name is Crichton,M

[Craig Pritchett]

I can see that with Nunn, Hebden and Arkell entered in the (new) 50+ world seniors individual championships, English interest might be mainly focussed on that event. But hasn't anyone noticed (see Chess-Results.com) that the 50+ event has so far attracted less than 50 entrants while the 65+ event has not just attracted twice as many but has greater strength in depth?

It's even worse than that. The strength in the top ten or so in the 50+ event depends heavily on quite a few 60+ players, who would, in my view, almost certainly have elected to play in an 'old-style' 60+ championship - had that been on offer and not simply (and quite arbitrarily) abolished by FIDE /ECU in favour of a largely unwanted 65+ championships when they introduced this new 50+ event.

In the 50+, Sveshnikov, Kristiansen and Barle are all over 60, while Bouaziz and I are eligible to play in the 65+ event. And with Portisch and others now in that 65+ field, I'm switching from the 50+ (where I was seeded 13th) to the 65+ (where I'm seeded 15/16th equal!), as I think it's a much more interesting and even a rather more competitive event!

The abolition of 60+ events frankly bids fair to be an absolute disaster for seniors chess. Personally I couldn't care less if FIDE / ECU wants to call 50+ players 'seniors' (although I think it's far too young really for a mind-sport like chess) but I truly fail to grasp why they abandoned the old 60+ championships (which were popular, strong, self-financing and patently worked) in introducing the new 50+ championships.

Numbers are down overall, taking in both tournaments. Bring back the 60+ events fast! Should federations protest?

An interesting statistic: in the 2013 (60+) Euro seniors individual, I played GMs Vasiukov, Balashov, Tseitlin, Butnorius and Pushkov in five successive rounds from nine. I opted to try out the new 2014 (50+) Euros seniors in Porto last March ... only 3 GMs bothered to enter ... but well done Keith Arkell, of course!

[Keith Arkell]

I think the fields for both the World 50+ and 65+ Championships are quite exciting.

The 50+ has 10 GMs in a field of 47, with the top 10 seeds averaging 2492; while the 65+ boasts 6 GMs from a field of 92 and an average rating of 2396 for the top 10 seeds.

I am the 8th seed in the 50+, whereas a player with my rating would be 3rd seed in the 65+. I was 3rd seed in the Euro 50+ Ch.

There are plenty of well known names from the past - particularly in the 65+. Nunn (2602) is the biggest name in the 50+ and Portisch (2467) is the biggest name in the 65+. EDIT: Portisch is sadly no longer playing, but Vasiukov (2448), Balashov (2429), Kupreichik (2405) and Suba (2341) are all well known names competing in the 65+ section.



Obviously I personally really welcome the relatively new 50+ category because it creates huge added motivation at a time in a players career when he starts to ask what ambitions he might otherwise realistically have left. Equally, though, I understood where Craig was coming from when he told me, in Porto, that he was disappointed by the removal of 60+ Championships. I guess it's just different perspectives.

[Craig Pritchett]

Just to be clear and to add to Keith's post:

1. There are still only around 50 players entered in the 50+ championship and around 100 in the 65+, making only circa 150 in both tournaments (leaving aside the women's sections). Last year some 200 players entered the 60+ championship alone (no players under 60 could play at all). That's an extraordinarily large, not to say worrying decline in overall numbers, which is unlikely to be made up before the events start 23rd October (I believe that entries, following one three week extension, have now strictly closed, although I imagine that there may be one or two additions, as usual around such times ... there may also be one or two withdrawals).

2. I am certainly not against the introduction of a new 50+ championship. My sole concern is that it shouldn't have been introduced at the expense of abandoning the old 60+ event for a new 65+ event. No one's opinion was canvassed on this in advance. At a stroke, this arbitrary action abolished an event for which there was pretty well a clear majority of 60+ players in favour (I know of many international grumblings). It also has a long string of great previous winners, including the likes of Korchnoi, Smyslov, Taimanov, Geller and very many other household names. And it leaves organisers struggling to cope with a problem of FIDE's own making. What was the point of it all?

[Roger de Coverly]

2. I am certainly not against the introduction of a new 50+ championship. My sole concern is that it shouldn't have been introduced at the expense of abandoning the old 60+ event for a new 65+ event.

There's as well a question for the ECF or perhaps the BICC. Should this structure be replicated in the British Championship Congress? If it were, the Over 50 has a natural place in the Championship proper, it's not even a long shot that the British Over 50 Champion could also be the British Champion.

But move the Over 60 to Over 65 and you disenfranchise any number of players, not least the current Senior Champion.

[Chris Rice]

2. I am certainly not against the introduction of a new 50+ championship. My sole concern is that it shouldn't have been introduced at the expense of abandoning the old 60+ event for a new 65+ event. No one's opinion was canvassed on this in advance. At a stroke, this arbitrary action abolished an event for which there was pretty well a clear majority of 60+ players in favour (I know of many international grumblings). It also has a long string of great previous winners, including the likes of Korchnoi, Smyslov, Taimanov, Geller and very many other household names. And it leaves organisers struggling to cope with a problem of FIDE's own making. What was the point of it all?

If we are looking for the origin of the 50+ class then we quickly find that it was the evil brainchild of that Bond arch villian Bob Jones of Keverel books fame. "The Royal Beacon Seniors event in Exmouth was a pioneer in this aspect of the game. When it started in 2000 it was the only seniors-only event in Britain, and they introduced a special section for the 50-somethings over a decade ago. Now the world has caught up."
http://www.keverelchess.com/seniors-chess-27-09-2014/

When it started I remember the 50+ section being called the Juniors. My old friend Alan Barton who played in one or two of these in the 50+ section thought this was a great idea and really enjoyed the events. I had no idea though that Bob intended to take over the world.

[Michael Yeo]

2. I am certainly not against the introduction of a new 50+ championship. My sole concern is that it shouldn't have been introduced at the expense of abandoning the old 60+ event for a new 65+ event. No one's opinion was canvassed on this in advance. At a stroke, this arbitrary action abolished an event for which there was pretty well a clear majority of 60+ players in favour (I know of many international grumblings). It also has a long string of great previous winners, including the likes of Korchnoi, Smyslov, Taimanov, Geller and very many other household names. And it leaves organisers struggling to cope with a problem of FIDE's own making. What was the point of it all?

If we are looking for the origin of the 50+ class then we quickly find that it was the evil brainchild of that Bond arch villian Bob Jones of Keverel books fame. "The Royal Beacon Seniors event in Exmouth was a pioneer in this aspect of the game. When it started in 2000 it was the only seniors-only event in Britain, and they introduced a special section for the 50-somethings over a decade ago. Now the world has caught up."
http://www.keverelchess.com/seniors-chess-27-09-2014/

When it started I remember the 50+ section being called the Juniors. My old friend Alan Barton who played in one or two of these in the 50+ section thought this was a great idea and really enjoyed the events. I had no idea though that Bob intended to take over the world.

I think you will find that the introduction of the Juniors (50+) section was the brainchild of the late lamented Steve Boniface and Bob Jones publicised it. The Chess Devon website (http://www.chessdevon.co.uk/HTML/congre ... s/base.htm) has some history. It should be noted that this runs alongside a Seniors section which remains 60+. I agree with Craig that this should have been the model for FIDE to follow, rather than introducing 65+ and scrapping 60+.

I also think you will find that (like me) Alan Barton played in more than one or two of these. I too shared his enjoyment of them.

[Mick Norris]

But move the Over 60 to Over 65 and you disenfranchise any number of players, not least the current Senior Champion.

You could do it gradually i.e. make 2015 a 61+ event, 2016 a 62+ event etc - however, based on comments here, best not to do it at all and leave it at 60+

[Craig Pritchett]

For info: the German Chess Federation formally voted a year ago to reject outright the application of the (then) recent FIDE / ECU reduction in the (international) definition of 'senior' (from 60+ to 50+), for all German national 'senior' events. The considerable range and popularity of Senior team and individual events, within Germany, continues ... only for the 60+ player.

It is also worth noting that the Germans virtually pioneered the whole concept of 'senior' chess events, going back to the early 1980s. It was on the back of the popularity and economic success of the events they ran, at home and abroad, privately and through the federation, that the eventual introduction of the senior (then also 60+) European team and individual and world individual championships was not just inspired but also in a real sense nurtured in the earlier years, especially by organisers in Dresden.

[Stewart Reuben]

Craig, you will probably have the opportunity in Katerini to express your views concerning the World 60+ Championship with which, by the way, I concur. I did think of Mick Norris's solution, but never took it further. I also suggested 75+ this year, 76+ 2015. 77+ 2016 and so on, at least until I stopped playing. This was laughed at.

The World Senior Chess Championships take place in the Mediterranean Village, Katerini, Greece 24 October to 4 November. Further details http://worldseniors2014.fide.com/en/players. Play is daily at 16.00 local time. Total of 168 players.
The 50+ section has 49 players
Seedings
1. John Nunn GM 2602
2. Mark Hebden GM 2540
8. Keith Arkell GM 2450
14. Terry Chapman FM 2304
65+ 93 players
40. Stewart Reuben CM 2081
61. Ian Reynolds 2006
65. John Robinson 1983
92. Joseph Rozewicz 1576
Women combined 50+ and 65+ 26 players
12. Ingrid Lauterbach WIM 2095

People are welcome to add the other British Isles players to the lists. I concentrated on ENG as that is what I am responsible for.

Next February the Third World Senior Team Championship will take place in Dresden. We were disappointed to gain only silver this year in Vilnius in th 50+ and intend to win in Germany. We could mount a second team of GMs if funding is available.

Stewart Reuben

[Craig Pritchett]

Just back from 2nd Larsen memorial in Aalborg for 60+ seniors (Danes won't change to 65+ for senior events either) + open to any under 2300 ELO (interesting system).

Vladimir Okhotnik (64 and 2011 world seniors champion ... 60+ days) told me that he wouldn't play in Katerini because of the rule change from 60+ to 65+ ... how many others in the 60-64 age range might have done this? Overall numbers, as I noted above, at around 170 for all male and female events are way down on last years 200 entry in the 60 world seniors championship ... and that's not even adding in the many more females who also played last year.

Look forward to being able to plead for reversion to 60+ events (with 50+ championships, if that's what FIDE / ECU really want) at Katerini. Am convinced that there's a large silent majority, as well as quite a number who'll speak out in Katerini, in favour. Did FIDE / ECU really want to see recent world champions, like Okhotnik, vote with their feet?