Chess Scotland Noticeboard

Paul Denham · Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:11 pm Post subject:

Alan Jelfs wrote;

QUESTION: " I thought by winning the Spens last year, East Kilbride qualified for this year's Richardson.
What have I missed?"

ANSWER: The Club AGM!!!

Alan, Andy felt the team would cope better playing in the Spens than the Richardson. I presented Andy H's motion to the meeting in his absence and it was backed unopposed. View is that if EK win it again we should play in the Richardson.
_________________
It is said that life is too short for chess but that is the fault of life, not chess

Craig Pritchett · Queen Joined: 19 Mar 2007 Posts: 114

Just on FIDE rating Scottish events. Without personally feeling particularly worked up about this urge to FIDE rate "more" events in Scotland, I think it is worth pointing out one or two of the very real anomolies and especially "risks" for players with existing FIDE ratings in such events:

1. If a Fide-rated player has, say a 3 or 3.5/5 result in a FIDE rated Scottish weekender, it may be that he / she drops the half or whole points against other FIDE-rated players and wins against non-FIDE-rated players. Statistically, assuming FIDE only rates the results against the FIDe-rated players (which I believe is the case), the FIDE-rated player loses more FIDE points than he / she really should, based on the whole tournament performance ... which FIDE, quite wrongly, doesn't attempt to compensate for.

2. Equally, a FIDE-rated player who wins a FIDE-rated weekender, with say 4.5 or even 5/5, will not get the full benefit of his / her true performance if their opponents include one or more non-FIDE-rated opponents.

3. Moreover, given that weekenders are not uniformly FIDE-rated, a player, who say loses some FIDE points at a rated event, such as Grangemouth, can't gain them back with a good performance at a strong weekender, say shortly after at Glasgow, that isn't FIDE-rated.

4. Further, given the way that the internal "box" of probable results at the heart of the FIDE system works, it means that, say 2450+ players virtually have to score clean 100% scores in most Scottish-rated weekenders just to maintain their FIDE-ratings ... these probabilities have not been reviewed by FIDE since they were set over 30 years ago and most statisticians who have investigated actual outcomes over the last 30+ years don't believe they reflect the reality of a narrowing in expectations of wins by stronger players perhaps due to generally rising availability of computerised information and rising technical standards over the board in chess. Professor Elo, who started it all, would be turning in his grave!

5. Certain Scottish events are clearly of a standard and format that call for FIDE-rating, such as the Scottish championship. Many others aren't. I think that that must include one-off games in KO events like the Richardson Cup, in which one side may have had to travel significant distances to play a home side.

There are lots of other potential anomolies. But I think there is enough clear evidence to suggest that players with FIDE ratings may have genuine concerns about playing in FIDE rated Scottish events and, more importantly, are not helped at all by FIDE, whose main drive in extending the FIDE rating system to 1200 levels (that is ridiculous!!), appears to have little to do with technical integrity but more with the potential for raising fees that go to FIDE. I believe that there is at least, at last, a current review of the FIDE-rating system going on the background ... but will it do anything?

Alex McFarlane · King Joined: 13 Mar 2007 Posts: 413

I agree with virtually everything Craig says, especially about the 1200 floor.

But, and you knew this was coming, there is a catch 22 situation for anyone hoping for a title norm now or in the future. That is that for norm calculations any unrated player is counted as 1200. Whilst one player can have their rating inflated (this used to be two) if you play two 1900 graded (but not rated) players one will count as 2100 or so and the other as 1200. It is therefore in player's interests to make sure that these 1900s can actually get an appropriate FIDE rating and the best way to do this .... weekend congresses.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I too have heard that there is a review of the FIDE system ongoing but to date the only suggestions to come out to seem concern k factors and won't address Craig's concerns.

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758

Jim Stevenson · Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:57 am Post subject:

It used to be the case that certain players would gain a high fide rating, based on a handful of games, and which was often much higher than their regular national grading. Perhaps realising that it might prove problematic to preserve this magic number in active play, such players were often notoriously averse to risking this high rating by playing lower rated players whom they knew to be equally strong.

In extreme cases the fear of losing say, ten rating points, was treated like a loss of a limb, or theft of a family heirloom. The rating actually prevented these players initially from enjoying their chess, or even eventually caused them to avoid playing. I know many a player 'in the bad old days' who got a 2200+ rating at say Lloyd's Bank, and resolved never to venture another fide rated game again, and risk falling off the list. Sad but true! ( to be fair, there was sometimes a 'happy ending' as they would reappear years later, as fide steadily reduced the rating floor for, ahem, economic reasons. Laughing

Alas, after the initial euphoria they still faced the same problem of maintaining their former 'standards' Laughing

)

Whilst it is never pleasant to play a serious game in sub optimal conditions or when tired, in my experience fide rated games are held in a range of normal situations, certainly not only in idealised perfect conditions.

The question is, do we want to embrace fide ratings, for all their supposed faults, or do we prefer to remain isolated, set in our ways and unwilling to embrace change. Fide ratings will not be disappearing from international chess anytime soon, that is for certain.

Re: Phil's last point: aren't many of the current squad ex Jambo's, or especially Hibees, who moved west to enjoy the better climate and scenery Wink

Alan Jelfs · Queen Joined: 31 Mar 2007 Posts: 81

Maybe Scotland should play their home games at The Hawthorns then?
_________________
Chess Club - the first rule of Chess Club is you don't talk about Chess Club.

Keith S Rose · Queen Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Posts: 107

Drawn at the Dundee Congress by Donald Wilson - my friend Lorraine not being available:

Richardson Cup 2010-11

Prelim:
Glasgow Polytechnic vs. Hamilton

Quarter finals:
Dundee & Victoria vs. Oban
Bon Accord vs. Cathcarth
Edinburgh West vs. Edinburgh
Glasgow Poly or Hamilton vs. Wandering Dragons

Spens Cup 2010-11

Prelim:
Hamilton B vs. Edinburgh Civil Service

Quarter finals:
Kilmarnock vs. Castlehill
Ninewells vs. Hamilton B or Edinburgh Civil Service
Phones vs. Troon
East Kilbride vs. Edinburgh B

JR · King Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 447 Location: Edinburgh

Not sure I quite understand the format for the Richardson, why should two teams have to play one extra game while the others get byes? There must be a better format than this.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

joe - what format do you want ?
looks like some good games ahead

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

I am disappointed in the number of teams that have entered the Richardson . Nine is the lowest I can ever remember and this goes back 40 years.

With this year being FIDE rated I had hoped for more teams but the reverse has happened.

I am open-minded about FIDE ratings for 2011/12 . I am assuming a large majority of Spens players like FIDE ratings but I have no idea what the top players think about FIDE rating the Richardson

It is possible that for 2011/12 the Spens will be FIDE rated but the Richardson not.

I shall start a consultation now and create a spreadsheet of names to create a vote.

Would top players (eg rated 2100 + ) please email me and let me know if they would like the 2011/12 Richardson ELO rated or not.

Even better would club officials please collect a list of names of their top players with their views (both for and against)and email me.

I will give the results when a clear majority is known

JR · King Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 447 Location: Edinburgh

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

due to popular request my personal FIDE Richardson poll is now open to all players who play in the Richardson - however my analysis will be split into grading sections to see if any bias

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

Polytechnic 4.5 Hamilton 3.5
1 J SHAW(B) 0.5 P COFFEY
2 J KLOCANS 1-0 J REDPATH.
3 E DAVIS 0-1 A MUIR
4 I SWAN 1-0 C MACDONALD
5 L KIRK 0-1 D WALKER
6 D WATT 0.5 T DONOHUE
7 G GILLESPIE 0.5 R MONTGOMERY
8 L BROOKENS 1-0 C JENKINS

Hamilton v Edinburgh Civil Service
1. Arthur Mulholland 0-1 Alan Prince
2. Luke Greenslade 0-1 Simon Bate
3. Michael Hanley 1-0 Douglas Heatlie
4. Laurie Freel 0.5-0.5 Rudolf Austin
5. Donald Scott 0-1 Gerry Brown
6. Jim Frame 0-1 Ralf Jackson

1.5-4.5

Disaster for Hamilton, both teams knocked out, several players were unavailable, Pat missed win v GM Shaw.

AWIC · King Joined: 10 Feb 2007 Posts: 221

Richardson Cup result:

Oban 1.5 Dundee 6.5 (played today at Tyndrum).

Holmes (W) 0-1 McNab (B)
Lennox 0-1 Constantinou
A McClement 1-0 Spencer
A Campbell 0-1 Findlay
D Campbell 0-1 Hogg
Flockhart 0.5-0.5 Dawson
Coupe 0-1 Anderson
B McClement 0-1 Kelly.

Congratulations to Dundee.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

Polytechnic 4.5-3.5 W Dragons

1 V Barnaure 0-1 A Tate
2 J Shaw 1-0 M Orr
3 J Klochan 0-1 A Burnett
4 E Davis 0.5 A Minnican
5 I Swan 0.5 T Dempsey
6 L Kirk 1-0 G Hamilton
7 D Watt 1-0 W Burnett
8 G Gillespie 0.5 E Sloan

Alan Tate goes from strength to strength. I intend doing the SF draw at the Hamilton v Poly B -Glasgow League game on thursday so keep the results coming in.