Effect of quickplay on league membership

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
James Toon
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Surrey

Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by James Toon » Fri Feb 11, 2011 9:18 pm

I wanted to start a separate topic on one of the issues raised in the survey of league chess:
"Opponents of quickplay are concerned that many players (generally the older ones) would stop playing in the league if it was adopted. That needs investigation: in the leagues that have adopted quickplay, what effect did that have on the number of players in their league?"

This is not something one can find out from a website - it needs an input from league players and administrators. So I would like to know, in leagues where quickplay is the only or the default finish:
(1) about when did this happen?
(2) what was the effect on the league membership?
(and please say which league it is).

I'm copying across the one comment received so far, from Gareth Harley-Yeo on the survey of league chess topic:

"The East Glamorgan league changed over to quickplay about 3 seasons ago. This resulted in 4 players refusing to play. Of the four, 3 have since come back to play fulltime whilst the other plays the odd game now and then. On the other side of the coin, many players from out of the area have now signed to clubs within the league. I for one now play for 3 different clubs in 3 different leagues. The reason i can do this is I don't need to fear my opponent sitting there refusing to move, knowing rybka will come to his aid when he goes home and that I will likely have to travel quite a distance to play the remainder of the 'advanced chess' game.

With regard to rating. many of those who'd favour adjournment have seen their rating plummet. This is partly due to some of them refusing to play any quicker and simply running out of time, preferring to play what they consider to be half a game of 'perfect chess' rather than move more quickly. It is also partly due to those who used to rely on an engine to play/suggest their endgame, having now to fend for themselves.

Although the ratings went down for a season or two, they are now starting to rise again as these players have had to learn (for the first time in 30 years for some) endgame technique. This can only be good for the game as a whole in the long term - especially for juniors who will be entering tournaments where a whole game will have to be played!"

Ian Kingston
Posts: 1070
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:16 pm
Location: Sutton Coldfield
Contact:

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Ian Kingston » Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:38 pm

James Toon wrote:I wanted to start a separate topic on one of the issues raised in the survey of league chess:
"Opponents of quickplay are concerned that many players (generally the older ones) would stop playing in the league if it was adopted. That needs investigation: in the leagues that have adopted quickplay, what effect did that have on the number of players in their league?"
The Notts League went to quickplay a while back, but retained adjudication as a limited option, on a player by player basis, until a few years ago. Players had to request the option at the start of the season, giving a reason that was acceptable to the League Management Committee (usually health or age). Eventually only a handful of players were using the option, and it was noted that none of them seemed to have any problem playing in congresses with a quickplay finish, or even in rapidplay events. So the adjudication option was abolished. There was no opposition and no players left the league as a consequence.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2412
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:08 am

Edinburgh changed in the mid 80's to quick play.

Nobody that I know off gave up.

League entry grew and stronger players who were fed up getting
sealed at move 36 so there opponents 'could look at it properly'
returned to the league.

In this day and age with everyone having Fritz or Rybka
I find it totally astonishing that some leagues still adjourn.

Quick play keeps the game between the two players.
And league secs who pull their hair out waiting for these
games to get played will welcome the change.
The result of the match is known there and then and
complete up to date league tables can be published right away.

Mick Norris
Posts: 8427
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:43 am

The Manchester league, like many I guess, started with quickplay finish as an option if agreed with adjournment as default quite a few years ago, then moved a few years ago to quickplay as the default

Definitely some players left as a result, including our county team board 1 - however, some players played more as a result of being guaranteed a finish on the night, and indeed that was why I was able to get Keith Arkell to play for my club Bury occasionally

In the off season, many clubs play in the South East Lancs Summer League (does this feature in your survey) which I think has always been 30/hour then 15 min quickplay finish, which was why most of the players were already familiar with it
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7597
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:42 pm

Mick Norris wrote:The Manchester league, like many I guess, started with quickplay finish as an option if agreed with adjournment as default quite a few years ago, then moved a few years ago to quickplay as the default

Definitely some players left as a result, including our county team board 1 - however, some players played more as a result of being guaranteed a finish on the night, and indeed that was why I was able to get Keith Arkell to play for my club Bury occasionally

In the off season, many clubs play in the South East Lancs Summer League (does this feature in your survey) which I think has always been 30/hour then 15 min quickplay finish, which was why most of the players were already familiar with it
Did the county team board 1 player eventually return, or not?

The mention of a summer league is interesting. It is the first I've ever heard of such a thing. Are there other summer events? I know some clubs arrange internal competitions that run over (or run into) the summer, but I've never heard of a full league between clubs being run in the summer.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7597
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:45 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote:In this day and age with everyone having Fritz or Rybka
I find it totally astonishing that some leagues still adjourn.
Not to belabour the point, but not all adjourned positions are amenable to computer analysis. I suppose in the long run, those wanting to really analyse such positions will need to either find events that cater for them with long time controls, or switch to correspondence chess.
Last edited by Christopher Kreuzer on Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4141
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:50 pm

The Bristol League has/had a Summer Lightning event; like a normal league match, you'd have two teams of six turning up to play each other - but instead of playing one G/90 game, you'd play six G/10 games in a Scheveningen format.

User avatar
Gareth Harley-Yeo
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:58 pm
Location: Wales
Contact:

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Gareth Harley-Yeo » Sun Feb 13, 2011 3:15 am

East Glam also hold a summer KO tournament.

James Toon
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by James Toon » Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:01 am

When I posted the results, the only summer league I knew about was the Wolverhampton Summer League. I will add the South East Lancashire Summer League (thanks to Mick Norris for drawing attention to it).

I confined the survey to standardplay leagues, meaning that rapid, blitz and lightning leagues are outside scope. I can't tell from the East Glamorgan website whether the Summer League and Summer KO Tournament are run as standardplay events, and if so whether the rules are any different from the main League rules. Maybe Gareth can tell us.

Mick Norris
Posts: 8427
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Mick Norris » Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:55 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:The Manchester league, like many I guess, started with quickplay finish as an option if agreed with adjournment as default quite a few years ago, then moved a few years ago to quickplay as the default

Definitely some players left as a result, including our county team board 1 - however, some players played more as a result of being guaranteed a finish on the night, and indeed that was why I was able to get Keith Arkell to play for my club Bury occasionally
Did the county team board 1 player eventually return, or not?
No
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Mick Norris
Posts: 8427
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Mick Norris » Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:58 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:In the off season, many clubs play in the South East Lancs Summer League (does this feature in your survey) which I think has always been 30/hour then 15 min quickplay finish, which was why most of the players were already familiar with it
The mention of a summer league is interesting. It is the first I've ever heard of such a thing. Are there other summer events? I know some clubs arrange internal competitions that run over (or run into) the summer, but I've never heard of a full league between clubs being run in the summer.
There was also a Bolton summer league, 5 boards, 10 minutes I think, you played all 5 of the opposition team on the night - my memory of this is hazy, as my club Bury only played for 1 season

I remember playing Bolton, starting with Jeff Horner, then Mike Surtees, I'm not sure I knew my own name by the time I had played their board 5
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Peter Ackley
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:59 pm

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by Peter Ackley » Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:15 pm

Middlesex League went to quickplay in the mid-noughties. Division one went first, then all the divisions followed. I don't remember people stopping playing. Two stopped [who had threatened to], but one was for work reasons (new job, evening shifts) and the other because the club dropped a team; the player then no longer made the a-team.

There are, equally, other important questions that need answering.

(a) how many players don't play league chess because of 'non-quickplay [NQ]' finishes OR how many people leave quickly after experiencing them
I know of more players my home club lost because they only wanted quickplay [Q] than I do of players we would lose if the league went Q. The NQ brigade has always been happy to gloss over this point.
I've lost players after their experience of this method of finish.

(b) how many players in a club/match ACTUALLY want NQ finishes
I'm fed up of stats being skewed. The other week I played in a match where 4/5 boards were NQ. It was argued that this meant that 80% of players preferred NQ. Err... no. Actually only 4 players [40%] wanted NQ, but they were able to impose their will on their opponents.
Equally in AGMs there tend to be a higher number of people there 'who have spare time' - the time to play NQ finishes. The people who don't have time for them don't have time for AGMs and their views aren't always counted.

(c) are most of the NQ leagues [ie where Q is not default] based around London?
James - you may be best placed to answer this one. I've not seen them much outside the London area.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4141
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:22 pm

Peter Ackley wrote: I'm fed up of stats being skewed. The other week I played in a match where 4/5 boards were NQ. It was argued that this meant that 80% of players preferred NQ. Err... no. Actually only 4 players [40%] wanted NQ, but they were able to impose their will on their opponents.
Indeed - all it tells you (absent other information) is that between 40% and 80% inclusive of the players want NQ, which is not terribly useful information. Absent such information, I'd assume that an overall rate of 1/5 Quickplay meant an overall desire for Quickplay of 1/SQRT(5), which would mean 55% wanted NQ and 45% Q.

James Toon
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by James Toon » Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:56 pm

Peter Ackley wrote: (c) are most of the NQ leagues [ie where Q is not default] based around London?
James - you may be best placed to answer this one. I've not seen them much outside the London area.
There are 21 leagues where the mandatory or default option is Non-Quickplay.

Of these, six are in London (Civil Service, Croydon, Hammersmith, Hillingdon, London, and London Commercial) and a further five are in the South East but outside London (Mid-Sussex, Southend, Surrey, Thames Valley, and Thanet).

The remaining 10 are outside London and the South East (Birmingham, Bournemouth, East Lancashire, Hertfordshire, North Gloucestershire, Portsmouth, Southampton, Stockport, Wolverhampton, and Worcestershire).

James Toon
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Effect of quickplay on league membership

Post by James Toon » Sun Feb 13, 2011 6:07 pm

Peter Ackley wrote: Equally in AGMs there tend to be a higher number of people there 'who have spare time' - the time to play NQ finishes. The people who don't have time for them don't have time for AGMs and their views aren't always counted.
The Civil Service League AGM is a case in point. Proposals to introduce a default quickplay finish have been rejected by a crushing majority in recent years. Each club has one vote, and most of them cast their votes against reform. And yet, there are many players in the League who would prefer a quickplay finish. A possible explanation is that the opponents of quickplay are the older players, and the older players tend to be more active in club and league administration.

The democratic way to take major decisions would be by referendum (or opting for one member one vote, which comes to the same thing). The system of one club one vote reminds me of the way trade union leaders could influence the outcome of debates at the Labour Party Conference.

Post Reply