 |
Chess Scotland Noticeboard
A place for chess nuts to boast over an open forum
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
andyburnett
King
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 249
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 10:20 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Richardson Cup result:
Polytechnic - Wandering Dragons (played today in Glasgow.)
1. Barnaure, V-V (IM) 0-1 Tate, A (white)
2. Shaw, JK (GM) 1-0 Orr,M (IM)
3. Klocans, J 0-1 Burnett, A
4. Davis, E = Minnican, A
5. Swan, I = Dempsey, A
6. Kirk, L 1-0 Hamilton, G
7. Watt, D 1-0 Burnett, W
8. Gillespie, G = Sloan, E
_____
4.5 - 3.5
Congratulations to Poly 
Good luck to Alan Tate and Gary Gillespie who head out to Gibraltar tomorrow morning!
Edit: Must have been typing at the same time as Andy Muir!
Last edited by andyburnett on Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
andyburnett
King
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 249
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A game with brief notes. I tried to re-construct Alan's win over Vlad Barnaure but couldn't quite recall 1 or 2 manouevres - sorry : (
Burnett, A (2171) – Klochans, J (2183)
1.d4 g6 (After turning up 45 minutes late – time he could really have done with later in the game) 2.e4 d6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Be3 Nf6 5.Be2 0–0 6.g4?! (Sharp but probably dubious) 6… c5 7.d5 Qa5 8.f3 Qb4 9.Rb1 [9.a3 was suggested after the game with the idea of 9…Qxb2 10.Na4 but the queen can safely retreat to e5] 9...Rd8?! (Not a good square for the rook) 10.a3 Qa5 11.Qd2 e6 12.Bg5 a6 13.h4 b5 14.h5 b4 15.Nd1 exd5 16.exd5 Re8 17.Nf2 [My old Fritz8 program likes 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.Bh6 Bh8 19.Ne3 Nbd7 20.Nc4 Qc7 21.Bf4 and it’s probably right!] 17...Nbd7 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.Bh6 Bh8 20.Kf1 Bb7 21.Ngh3 Nxd5 (21…Re5!? was suggested by John Shaw after the game – “trying to get all the bits into the game”- and appears to be quite good for black) 22.Ne4 Qc7 23.Nf4 N7f6 24.Bg5 Nxe4 25.fxe4 Nb6? [25...Nxf4 apparently gives black the advantage, but Jevgeniy was now short of time and all the variations look extremely dangerous for black] 26.Rxh8+! Kxh8 27.Bf6+ Kg8 28.Nh5! Qe7 [28...Kh7 would have lasted longer, but I had seen that 29.Bg7 f6 30.Qh6+ Kg8 31.Qxg6 was curtains] 29.Qh6 and, faced with imminent mate, Black resigned
1-0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HughBrechin
King
Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 201
Location: The moral high ground.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Edinburgh West 1.5 - 6.5 Edinburgh
Arakhamia-Grant (b) 0 - 1 Berry
Pritchett 0 - 1 Gattenloehner
Grant 0 - 1 Green
Farrell 0 - 1 MacQueen
Neave 0.5 McGowan
Bell 0.5 White
McLean 0 - 1 Brechin
Mayo 0.5 Kafka |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith S Rose
Queen
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:36 pm Post subject: Spens result |
|
|
Kilmarnock v Castlehill
1: Joe Parks ˝ - ˝ Colin Edwards
2: Douglas Hamilton 0 - 1 Dmitry Payada
3: Jim Kleboe 0 - 1 Michael Grove
4: Ian Muir 1 - 0 Andrew Paulin
5: Ron McCormick ˝ - ˝ Ray Noble
6: 1 - 0 (default)
Final Score 3 - 3
Castlehill Chess Club win on tie-break |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeremy Hughes
Rook
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ninewells Hospital 1 - 5 Edinburgh Civil Service
Rocks, D (W) 1 - 0 Prince, A
Hughes, R 0 - 1 McNab, C
Pritam, HP 0 - 1 Bate, S
Zyzikov, N 0 - 1 Heatlie, D
Calder, H 0 - 1 Austin, R
Rutherford, K 0 - 1 Brown, G
Congratulations to ECC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DMB
King
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 267
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
>>>Burnett, A (2171) – Klochans, J (2183)
1.d4 g6 (After turning up 45 minutes late – time he could really have done with later in the game) <<<
30 min default rule? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyburnett
King
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 249
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DMB wrote: | >>>Burnett, A (2171) – Klochans, J (2183)
1.d4 g6 (After turning up 45 minutes late – time he could really have done with later in the game) <<<
30 min default rule? |
We (both teams) took an interesting approach to this default subject.
After about 20 minutes waiting, with still no sign of my opponent, I started asking how long the default time was for the Richardson. No-one knew for sure, but we all pretty much thought it was 1 hour, so we agreed on that - no need for a proper ruling!
So, after about 40 minutes, Poly offered to play a substitute, which I was quite happy to allow (no need for a rule book here either!) as I was desperate for a game having travelled a long way (on my only day off work in 14).
Immediately my new opponent (rated about 1500, no need for a rule book to check on grading order of substitutes!) had played 1...Nf6, my original opponent appeared, out of breath but ready to play.
I was quite happy to allow this re-substitution as it would a) offer me a much stronger opponent and b) keep the match much 'fairer' in some respects. Again no need for a rule book : )
Everyone was quite happy with this decision (although my own team captain was completely oblivious to any of these shenanigans as far as I am aware!)
Also, Alan Tate jokingly remarked on the FIDE 'zero default' rule as we started the clocks at 2pm (the Richardson is now a FIDE rated event apparently?!).
So, how many rules were broken here? I'm sure Andy or Alex can put us straight on what ought to have happened. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GN
King
Joined: 30 Mar 2007
Posts: 415
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reading the results over the weekend makes me think it's a shame we couldn't see all matches in the same venue maybe for q-finals forwards?
Sad, I know, but that's my idea of a good day out.
The Richardson format has been changing annually for past few years now so why not give this idea a try for next year? Any supporters? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JR
King
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 447
Location: Edinburgh
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where do you suggest as a venue? I think the idea is good in principal, but could cause some problems agreeing on where to play the matches.
The format of the Richardson needs some major re-thinking, this year in particular was a bit of a joke, I will say no more!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GN
King
Joined: 30 Mar 2007
Posts: 415
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JR wrote: | Where do you suggest as a venue? I think the idea is good in principal, but could cause some problems agreeing on where to play the matches.
The format of the Richardson needs some major re-thinking, this year in particular was a bit of a joke, I will say no more! |
Grangemouth, Airdrie, Wester Hailes, Edinburgh, Glasgow - basically anywhere on a line between Edinburgh and Glasgow that can host 32 boards.
This current format where Hamilton get punted out before everyone else has even started is a bit of a laugh I have to agree - especially with Andy organising! That would never have happened to Poly when John used to organise  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyburnett
King
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 249
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GN wrote: | Reading the results over the weekend makes me think it's a shame we couldn't see all matches in the same venue maybe for q-finals forwards?
Sad, I know, but that's my idea of a good day out.
The Richardson format has been changing annually for past few years now so why not give this idea a try for next year? Any supporters? |
It's my idea of a good day out too  (At least, of the kind which doesn't involve vodka, women and perhaps a casino!)
I really enjoy seeing a lot of the stronger players battling it out in a team event (SNCL is a favourite of mine), but I'm sure the main drawback would be the cost of hiring a hall big enough to accommodate the matches.
As for the Hamilton debacle this year, I personally don't see a problem with seeding the Richardson. Lots of sports use seeding, lots don't - but chess traditionally has (I think?!) whenever match-play is involved (although the ridiculous system with 1 v 64.....32 v 33 should be avoided-it's a nonsense.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Muir
King
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 489
Location: Dumbarton
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't like seeding -it is self perpetuating.
Non-seeding encourages smaller teams to enter.
If next year is seeded then hamilton might play in preliminary round again !
I like a default rule of 1 hour for late arrival |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
larrykirk
Pawn
Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:16 pm Post subject: Seeding, and non-seeding |
|
|
Seedings are a must ! This is the premier club tournament in Scotland, and you wont find a better time control in an individual tournament either. It is a nonsense to eliminate good teams early on due to this crazy system. And we have the ridiculous possibility of the finals of a tournament throwing up a complete mis-match in playing terms, year on year. If you want to encourage teams to keep playing in a cup competition, then have a Plate for first round losers to compete in - that would provide plenty of incentive for teams to play in the tournament
And there is no "magic of the cup" argument in this case - there is no other contest in Scottish Chess for clubs which matches the Richardson.
Random draw is a nonsense; who's idea was this ? They need their head looked.... seriously.
Rant over |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Muir
King
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 489
Location: Dumbarton
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was my idea for a random draw. I don't have strong feelings on it.
If someone wants to organise a poll, I will consider the results.
How would the seeding work ?
Would Hamilton be bottom seeds since they got knocked out ?
The smaller clubs like the "romance of the cup"
Do people prefer polls to emails for a vote ?
The ELO rating for next year is still a contentious issue which will be decided by emails which are sent to me and so far the majority of people want the Richardson not to be ELO rated but the Spens to be ELO rated !
Absurd but true.
There is also a problem about the final, the hall closes for easter, Donald is looking at alternative accommodation. I don't like the weekend before or after (WOS, 4NCL) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GN
King
Joined: 30 Mar 2007
Posts: 415
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A Muir wrote: | It was my idea for a random draw. I don't have strong feelings on it.
If someone wants to organise a poll, I will consider the results.
How would the seeding work ?
Would Hamilton be bottom seeds since they got knocked out ?
The smaller clubs like the "romance of the cup"
Do people prefer polls to emails for a vote ?
The ELO rating for next year is still a contentious issue which will be decided by emails which are sent to me and so far the majority of people want the Richardson not to be ELO rated but the Spens to be ELO rated !
Absurd but true.
There is also a problem about the final, the hall closes for easter, Donald is looking at alternative accommodation. I don't like the weekend before or after (WOS, 4NCL) |
For seeding how about all clubs submit a pool of 10 players when they enter then seeding is based on average rating of the pool. Seeding to have no dependency on historic results but rather the objective playing strength of the team entered on this occasion. Obviously pool players must be bona fide club members. I'll leave you to define what bona fide that means in this respect. I think 4 teams seeded would be adequate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
