England football international wins chess tournament.

[MJMcCready]

Well, Liverpool probably started scoring a lot more goals, probably VIlla too. To the best of my knowledge, the change that occured as a result isn't discussed much, I've certainly never seen a documentary about it.

[Roger de Coverly]

Goal difference encourages attacking play, as did the introduction of three points for a win instead of the former two points.

There was a theory that three points didn't greatly change the drawing percentage. The point being that the reward of gaining three points is balanced by the risk of giving three points away to your rivals.

In chess the notion of three points for a win never really took off outside of Mike Basman's tournaments.

[MJMcCready]

His attire may not have helped his cause. I recall seeing him play in St. Albans once, wearing a shirt not even a charity shop would except. You needed sunglasses on to look at it.

[Mick Norris]

Maybe "a lot" is overstating it, the number of goals scored did increase in the first few seasons after the change - but not massively.

We introduced 3 points for a win first, I believe, I think it was Jimmy Hill's idea

From the Guardian in 2001 (sic)

DRAWS, DRAWS, DRAWS

Is there any evidence that awarding three points for a win has made the game more exciting? Are there less draws than before the change? Would any English championships have been decided differently under the old system? asks Stuart McGill

In 1980-1, the final year the English league used the old two-point system, there were 118 draws in the old First Division. The next year, with the new system introduced, there were 121.

Perhaps they just needed to get used to it. What about the 1994-95 Premiership table, the last time the same number of matches were played? Er, 134 draws.

Whether this is more exciting or not is entirely up to you. But changing the points system made no difference to the destination of any championships post 1982.

However in the 1974-75 season three points for a win would have made a difference. That season Derby County came top with 53 points, ahead of Liverpool and Ipswich with 51. But as Neil Emms points out, Ipswich won 23 games, compared to 21 for Derby and 20 to Liverpool, and under the three points for a win system Bobby Robson's men would have won the title on goal difference, after finishing level on 74 points with Derby.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Relegation with a positive goal difference is slightly more common.

Manchester City from the first division in season 1937/38 (slightly surprised no-one had mentioned this…)

Just looked that up, they actually scored the most goals in the division! That must be rare.

The cherry on top is that they had actually won the league a year earlier, still the only Rnglish champions to go down the following season.

[MJMcCready]

Maybe "a lot" is overstating it, the number of goals scored did increase in the first few seasons after the change - but not massively.

We introduced 3 points for a win first, I believe, I think it was Jimmy Hill's idea

From the Guardian in 2001 (sic)

DRAWS, DRAWS, DRAWS

Is there any evidence that awarding three points for a win has made the game more exciting? Are there less draws than before the change? Would any English championships have been decided differently under the old system? asks Stuart McGill

In 1980-1, the final year the English league used the old two-point system, there were 118 draws in the old First Division. The next year, with the new system introduced, there were 121.

Perhaps they just needed to get used to it. What about the 1994-95 Premiership table, the last time the same number of matches were played? Er, 134 draws.

Whether this is more exciting or not is entirely up to you. But changing the points system made no difference to the destination of any championships post 1982.

However in the 1974-75 season three points for a win would have made a difference. That season Derby County came top with 53 points, ahead of Liverpool and Ipswich with 51. But as Neil Emms points out, Ipswich won 23 games, compared to 21 for Derby and 20 to Liverpool, and under the three points for a win system Bobby Robson's men would have won the title on goal difference, after finishing level on 74 points with Derby.

Maybe they should make it 4 points for a win, or five?

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Maybe they should make it 4 points for a win, or five?"

Coulsdon Chess Club tried that for all-play-all sections. 4 for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss, but 0 for defaulting. They noticed that some people stopped turning up if they got to +1=0-2 e.g., and introduced the new system, whereupon, someone lost every game, but wasn't last as they finished ahead of a few serial defaulters...

[MJMcCready]

Doesn't sound too bad.

[Alistair Campbell]

There has been some chat about 3 points for a win both in chess and in football

here

and here

[James Plaskett]

This guy´s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimitar_B ... erbatov%20(Bulgarian%3A%20%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8A%D1%80,who%20played%20as%20a%20striker.

nephew won the first six games in a strong Open here in Spain about a few years ago. Including beating me.
He was only about twelve!
But, having played in the Bulgarian chess team, he has now quit chess!

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=109554

[MJMcCready]

Hmmm, in terms of best chess player/footballer, I presume that laurel rests with Simon Agdestein doesn't it? I don't know of any other GM playing football for their country.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Kiprian Berbatov said he was quitting chess for mathematics IIRC - has he yet achieved anything notable in the latter?

[NickFaulks]

Kiprian Berbatov said he was quitting chess for mathematics IIRC - has he yet achieved anything notable in the latter.

This one is a perfect fit, but you'd think someone would know if he was in Manchester.

https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/pe ... v-postgrad

[Matt Mackenzie]

The details all fit though, and very possibly his even better known cousin developed a fondness for the place and passed it on.

[Joey Stewart]

Kiprian Berbatov said he was quitting chess for mathematics IIRC - has he yet achieved anything notable in the latter?

Nobody who quits chess for any career ever goes on to achieve anything of noteworthiness in their life beyond having more money , there's no place for individuality or creativity in the corporate world...