Nick Grey wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:02 pm
Why nothing wrong with adjournments and adjudications? Particularly as both leagues voted for them (as well as London League which I also play in). Looks like you want to scrap more than half the graded games in England as part of the process. What is the point of that for those that care about chess.
One of the most important questions to ask oneself, I think, is whether or not a layman would understand it. The chess world would understand it, and that's great, but to get new people involved, you need to make it something that they're expecting to see. Would players new to chess/league chess expect to play half a game on one evening, then half a game some other evening? The league might reasonably argue that the main thing is the interest of their members, and that's fine - but it lacks a certain amount of strategic thinking as to how the league might go about growing, rather than just ticking over from one season to the next. By the way, games ending in adjournment or adjudication are in the significant minority in leagues in England these days. London is one pocket where it still happens, but most of the rest of the country moved on. In fact, increments are increasingly used. But you shouldn't confuse London's position on this issue with that of the rest of England.
Nick Grey wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:02 pm
Technically does the chess-results server allow a year long league? Not that I'm expecting that those that will implement to know the answers yet.
Yes, it does. It doesn't matter how long the tournament lasts. It will struggle to cope with the ad hoc playing arrangements though, where individual matches are played on different nights. But the LMS can cope with that.
Nick Grey wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:02 pm
My most worrying part of the server was not getting a fide result in the last round of a tournament because my opponent was not on a fide grading. I was also shocked that the player on the board after you in your 4NCL team was without a fide rating. It works both ways having a Gold membership I am expecting 100 percent grading on fide & ECF. So I think that implementing this system undermines the whole membership structures too.
Gold membership covers playing in a tournament which is FIDE-rated. If, to comply with your 100% expectancy rate, organisers wish to not permit ungraded players to play - that's their prerogative. I suspect few will take that option though, because how else will unrated people get a FIDE-rating?