Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Discussion about all aspects of the ECF County Championships.
Neil Graham
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Neil Graham » Mon May 21, 2018 2:10 pm

Semi-Final pairings as follows:-

Open : Lancashire v Sussex; Middlesex v Yorkshire
Minor : Surrey v Suffolk; Lincolnshire v Devon
U180 : Middlesex v Warwickshire; Yorkshire v Essex
U160 : Middlesex v Yorkshire; Lancashire v Essex
U140 : Yorkshire v Worcestershire; Nottinghamshire v Essex
U120 ; Warwickshire v Middlesex; Leicestershire v Norfolk
U100 ; Surrey v Leicestershire; Lancashire v Warwickshire

The U100 may be subject to change because of an eligibility query.

Nigel White
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Nigel White » Wed May 23, 2018 8:28 pm

Neil Graham wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 2:10 pm

U100 ; Surrey v Leicestershire; Lancashire v Warwickshire

The U100 may be subject to change because of an eligibility query.
I understand that the U100 result has been changed & consequently the semi-final will be Lancashire v Essex.

Neil Graham
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Neil Graham » Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:19 am

LMS shows that Surrey have conceded their U100 match to Leicestershire by default.

This will mean an £100 fine for the offending county.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2432
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by MartinCarpenter » Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:12 am

I can see why you'd do that of course, but is that really a good idea to encourage future participation in a declining event?

Nick Grey
Posts: 1130
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Nick Grey » Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:16 am

Ouch. Anyway best wishes to any forumites playing or organising. Especially Surrey Minor Counties v Suffolk & our hosts.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3406
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by David Sedgwick » Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:50 am

MartinCarpenter wrote:
Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:12 am
I can see why you'd do that of course, but is that really a good idea to encourage future participation in a declining event?
That question is rhetorical, of course.

Earlier this week, the ECF were seeking an arbiter for the match. I hope that they didn't find one.

I imagine that the matter will be raised at the forthcoming Annual General Meetings both of Surrey and of the SCCU.

Mike Gunn
Posts: 676
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:45 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Mike Gunn » Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:16 pm

As the offending Surrey captain I should perhaps comment that we have plenty of eligible players who could have played but only 5 of the 35 I personally contacted were able to play on this particular date. Ironically I was (as far as I recall) the only person at a SCCU meeting who opposed this absurd £100 fine. I knew that the fine existed and it had no influence on whether we entered the team or the effort I put in to trying to raise a team. I think the only effect of this fine is to reduce the likelihood of many counties entering the national stage, bearing in mind the natural cautiousness of many chess-playing player/ organisers.

Neil Graham
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Neil Graham » Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:51 pm

The first results are now in :-

Minor

Lincolnshire 10 Devon 6
Surrey 9.5 Suffolk 6.5

Final Lincolnshire v Surrey

Under 140

Nottinghamshire 9.5 Essex 6.5
Worcestershire lost to Yorkshire (my estimate is by about 10-6)

Final Nottinghamshire v Yorkshire

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2432
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by MartinCarpenter » Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:54 pm

I've a reliable report of Yorkshire winning their U180 semi by +3, so 9.5 - 6.5 I suppose.

And yes, the potential preemptive deterrent effect of this kind of fine was what worried me.

Richard Thursby
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:25 am
Location: origin + pathname + search + hash

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Richard Thursby » Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:02 pm

Results from Birstall
U160
Middlesex 6 Yorkshire 10
Open
Middlesex 7 Yorkshire 9

Neil Graham
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Neil Graham » Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:09 pm

We could be in a position where there is only one SCCU team in the national finals.

Neil Graham
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Neil Graham » Sun Jun 10, 2018 8:59 am

Under 180

Middlesex 7.5 Warwickshire 8.5
Essex 6.5 Yorkshire 9.5

Final Warwickshire v Yorkshire

Under 140 confirmed result (see above)

Yorkshire 9.5 Worcestershire 6.5

Some of the remaining matches are being played today.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2432
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by MartinCarpenter » Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:02 am

Very impressed with the Yorkshire open team winning with some of our very top players out this year for various reasons.

Neil Graham
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Neil Graham » Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:42 am

Open

Middlesex 7 Yorkshire 9
Lancashire 9 Sussex 7

Final : Yorkshire v Lancashire

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Semi-Final Pairings & Results

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Sun Jun 10, 2018 4:11 pm

Mike Gunn wrote:
Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:16 pm
As the offending Surrey captain I should perhaps comment that we have plenty of eligible players who could have played but only 5 of the 35 I personally contacted were able to play on this particular date. Ironically I was (as far as I recall) the only person at a SCCU meeting who opposed this absurd £100 fine. I knew that the fine existed and it had no influence on whether we entered the team or the effort I put in to trying to raise a team. I think the only effect of this fine is to reduce the likelihood of many counties entering the national stage, bearing in mind the natural cautiousness of many chess-playing player/ organisers.
The £100 fine is surely intended to ensure that a decision to default a match in the national stages is not taken lightly. If people find the fine excessive or not necessary at all surely they can get a motion before Council? They're not normally shy about doing so.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Post Reply