London Chess Classic FIDE Open

[NickFaulks]

"General Rules and Technical Recommendations for Tournaments"

It has come to be accepted that this document has no impact whatsoever.

[Roger Lancaster]

"General Rules and Technical Recommendations for Tournaments"

It has come to be accepted that this document has no impact whatsoever.

Fascinating. I'm sure you're right, Nick, but you won't be surprised to know that I'm wondering by what process "it has come to be accepted" that this document has no impact. Are there other FIDE documents, superficially appearing up-to-date, where this is also true?

[Alex McFarlane]

If I can try to answer Roger.

There are all sorts of things mentioned in that document including the height of tables which are impossible to have any control over when booking a hall. I usually work on the status of the event when considering how closely to follow that document. (I will admit to not reading it regularly!)

Some congresses unfortunately in totally ignoring it also ignore basic comfort. The recent World Seniors' event in the middle of the Atlantic seem to have, at least on the bottom boards, ignored the space between boards. But I've seen worse at congresses.
Meeting the lighting requirements can also be a problem.

Much depends on the Congress organiser and the finances of the event.

Having said that, I have heard of two events using the same venue. In one extra tables were brought in (available in the venue) to ensure good spacing. In the other it is reported (I was not there) that where the first event had put 2 boards the other put 3, leaving a considerable part of the hall unused.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Back to the chess!

Any (other) impressive games so far? (We have Jack's win from round 1.)

[Jonathan Rogers]

I noticed another Banerjee v Sivanandan game, following their pairing in Cambridge earlier this year, this time with colours reversed and the opposite result too. (But don't worry, it was another good game by the winner and they still played to checkmate).

[IM Jack Rudd]

David Haydon's round 3 win is well worth playing through.

[LawrenceCooper]

David Haydon's round 3 win is well worth playing through.

Played straight after he had finished 1st= in the rapid.

[Mick Norris]

round 6 pairings

Marcus Harvey is above 2500 live rating I think, is that the first time? Has he got any GM norms?

[Christopher Kreuzer]

There is some discussion of Marcus Harvey (and others) in the December 2021 thread here: Next English GM.

Some extracts:

I wondered who might be the next to get the big one since there are lots of up and coming players who have for one reason or another all missed it- after a great British you would think Marcus Harvey probably but he has still not even got an IM title despite playing at Level equal to or above that, so unless he is allowed to skip the IM title it might still be a few years.

Marcus Harvey I believe is entirely self-coached and possibly always has been. Out of interest are there many GMs who avoided the years of expensive chess coaching and took the DIY approach?

Jonathan Hawkins is an obvious example there.

How rare is it for an IM to reach 2500 level before getting any GM norms? I suspect it is not that rare, but not that common either.

[LawrenceCooper]

round 6 pairings

Marcus Harvey is above 2500 live rating I think, is that the first time? Has he got any GM norms?

Yes, first time and not yet.

[LawrenceCooper]

How rare is it for an IM to reach 2500 level before getting any GM norms? I suspect it is not that rare, but not that common either.

In terms of English players you have to go all the way back to Brandon Clarke in May 2024. Ameet in 2019 was another.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Presumably the nearly IMs that get to 2400 before they get the title, and keep rising. So quite common then. I wonder if it is "better" to get the IM title early and take longer to get to GM level, or better to get the IM and GM titles quite close together? It may depend on the individual trajectory, and where the person plateaus. Slow and steady is possible, but I think someone once looked at the rating curves of different players - they were either surprisingly similar or surprisingly different, but I can't remember which. There is oodles of data there to look at.

[Roger de Coverly]

Slow and steady is possible, but I think someone once looked at the rating curves of different players - they were either surprisingly similar or surprisingly different, but I can't remember which.

I could suspect that it depends whether you "play as an amateur". By this I mean that your rated chess activity is confined to the 4NCL, a weekend Congress every so often and a once or twice a year 9 round tournament such as Hastings, the British or the London Classic. That's as distinct from playing in every nine round Norm tornament going. If you can remain on form with good results, the rating can creep upwards without any Norms.

[LawrenceCooper]

Congratulations to Jack, who has demolished the No 2 seed 2571-rated Ilya Smirin, apparently ending up with the trademark Rudd feat of more time than when he started.
https://lichess.org/broadcast/2024-xtx- ... B/voTB8MMR

Another GM victim for Jack: https://lichess.org/broadcast/2024-xtx- ... e/aAFZoFaF

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Another GM victim for Jack"

I really liked ....e4, where it is attacked by four opposing pieces and pawns (computer doesn't like it, but it worked).