Are Opens a little too open?

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
David Buckley
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:15 am

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by David Buckley » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:30 pm

In my experience beating 'major' players isn't usually a trivial task. Playing 'independent' or 'minor' players is more likely to feel like a waste of time but even so I don't resent them entering open sections if they want. If I'm playing well I'll get to play someone good sooner or later.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 22607
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:31 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:at the St Albans Congress (which was very well-run)
After what's been discussed on the forum recently, I couldn't help observing how retro it all was.

So you've got

large school hall
mechanical clocks
pairing boards with pairing cards ( manual pairings as far as I could tell)
multi-colour wall charts

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford
Contact:

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:37 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Christopher Kreuzer wrote:at the St Albans Congress (which was very well-run)
After what's been discussed on the forum recently, I couldn't help observing how retro it all was.

So you've got

large school hall
mechanical clocks
pairing boards with pairing cards ( manual pairings as far as I could tell)
multi-colour wall charts
And if you have enjoyed this experience, why not revisit it by coming to the Yeovil Congress in June? It is a nice, friendly congress, and I'm sure it will be one we can all share and enjoy. Share and enjoy!

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 10803
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:39 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Christopher Kreuzer wrote:at the St Albans Congress (which was very well-run)
After what's been discussed on the forum recently, I couldn't help observing how retro it all was.

So you've got

large school hall
mechanical clocks
pairing boards with pairing cards ( manual pairings as far as I could tell)
multi-colour wall charts
You missed out:

lovely view across a verdant valley towards the cathedral
chess bookstall
school cafeteria-cooked food

OK, you had to step outside to see the view, and the food wasn't that bad.

Which thread is it where the space-age chess tournaments are being discussed?

User avatar
Rob Thompson
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: Behind you

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Rob Thompson » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:42 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote: Share and enjoy!
As said the coffee machine produced by the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation... :roll:

As to the point, there's a player from Plymouth who, despite being graded in the 120s regularly plays in opens. I think he got 2/5 at exeter open this year. If the section is called "Open" then it should be open to all. Otherwise it's not what it's advertising itself to be.
True glory lies in doing what deserves to be written; in writing what deserves to be read.

Richard Bates
Posts: 3466
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Richard Bates » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:44 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Christopher Kreuzer wrote:at the St Albans Congress (which was very well-run)
After what's been discussed on the forum recently, I couldn't help observing how retro it all was.

So you've got

large school hall
mechanical clocks
pairing boards with pairing cards ( manual pairings as far as I could tell)
multi-colour wall charts
You clearly didn't hang around for the "printed cheques 'to save time' and delay the prize-giving by 45 minutes" :roll: ;)

I suppose having a prize giving at all is a bit retro these days, and justifiably so, especially when not paying out in cash!

The "multi-colour wall charts" seemed to suffer from a lack of an obvious codification system for the colours :D

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 10803
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:49 pm

Richard Bates wrote:The "multi-colour wall charts" seemed to suffer from a lack of an obvious codification system for the colours :D
I missed the little coloured boxes around the leaders from round 2 or 3 onwards. You can have those with wall charts, but not with printed leader-boards. It's always nice to see a coloured square around your score at some point...

Richard Bates
Posts: 3466
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Richard Bates » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:51 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Richard Bates wrote:The "multi-colour wall charts" seemed to suffer from a lack of an obvious codification system for the colours :D
I missed the little coloured boxes around the leaders from round 2 or 3 onwards. You can have those with wall charts, but not with printed leader-boards.
True, but i was more referring to the fact that three three standard colours were used - black, red and green (for byes) - but the black and red seemed to be used randomly rather than to signify black/white!

As for shaded boxes - it isn't so much an advantage of wall charts, rather a necessity caused by their inflexibility. Printed leaderboards of course don't need the shaded boxes because the order of players isn't fixed at the start of the tournament!

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 10803
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:00 pm

Richard Bates wrote:True, but i was more referring to the fact that three three standard colours were used - black, red and green (for byes) - but the black and red seemed to be used randomly rather than to signify black/white!
I hadn't noticed that. Some people took pictures. If you see one, let us know and we can all look. My colour sequence went BBWWB, which wasn't too bad, except by getting 2 blacks in row in the first two rounds, I realised I was guaranteed three blacks - unless someone can say whether is is permissible to have a colour sequence that goes BBWWW?

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford
Contact:

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:03 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Richard Bates wrote:True, but i was more referring to the fact that three three standard colours were used - black, red and green (for byes) - but the black and red seemed to be used randomly rather than to signify black/white!
I hadn't noticed that. Some people took pictures. If you see one, let us know and we can all look. My colour sequence went BBWWB, which wasn't too bad, except by getting 2 blacks in row in the first two rounds, I realised I was guaranteed three blacks - unless someone can say whether is is permissible to have a colour sequence that goes BBWWW?
Permissible (but very much a last resort) under ECF rules, forbidden under FIDE rules unless it's the 5th round is the last and you're in the top half of the draw.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 22607
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:06 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote: unless someone can say whether is is permissible to have a colour sequence that goes BBWWW?
That depends whether you are using FIDE rules or ECF/CAA ones. It's a top level not allowed, like playing the same person twice, under FIDE, but permitted under CAA ( Chess Arbiters Association).

There was an example in one of the non-international sections in Canterbury at the British. I think it was that two players were given BB and had lost both games. Should they be paired or floated?

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:10 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Some people took pictures. If you see one, let us know and we can all look.
You probably mean Brendan O'Gorman's great pictures - here is his gallery!

https://picasaweb.google.com/bpogorman

P.S. Sorry about my photo... and that was only move one!
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9308
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:13 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:There was an example in one of the non-international sections in Canterbury at the British. I think it was that two players were given BB and had lost both games. Should they be paired or floated?
That's right, I was the arbiter of that section. I can't remember the ins and outs of it now, but both options were discussed, and it was decided to keep the scoregroups together.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 10803
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:15 pm

Adam Raoof wrote:
Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Some people took pictures. If you see one, let us know and we can all look.
You probably mean Brendan O'Gorman's great pictures - here is his gallery!

https://picasaweb.google.com/bpogorman

P.S. Sorry about my photo... and that was only move one!
Thanks for the link! I'm in this picture!

https://picasaweb.google.com/bpogorman/ ... 0574209570

:)

No pictures of the wall charts, though!

Brendan O'Gorman
Posts: 782
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Are Opens a little too open?

Post by Brendan O'Gorman » Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:12 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
No pictures of the wall charts, though!
I photograph wall charts only when they contain the words '1st prize' after my name. :)

Post Reply