Chess Scotland Noticeboard

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

Was reading through the Annexes I was sent from the rules commission. Noticed this

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

I agree progressive scores is a meaningless and stupid tiebreak method. The only fair tiebreak method in my opinion is a playoff. Sum of opponents grade is also unfair because you have no control over the draw and same goes for sum of opponents score.

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

A sensible idea coming out from FIDE there's hope yet.

Progressive score is exactly like tossing a coin.

If you are in the top half of the swiss draw you win round 1 (normally).
If youare in the bottom half of the draw you not normally lose round 1

When the PS tie break is between top half and bottom half player ........... the top half player usually despite the bottom half player playing stronger opponents.

The best tie break is the result of the individual game between the players. Has anyone every persuaded a junior that it was fair to lose a tie break against a player he beat earlier in the day. I never managed to do so. Thats why SJC switched to S.B this year.

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

Let's start by saying that there is no sensible tie break. I will happily argue against ANY method of tie-break, even a play-off though that is best if it is possible.

Unfortunately, even if you agree with the FIDE decision, they way it was reached is anything but sensible.

FIDE is supposed to only deal with queries raised by national bodies. If an individual tries to raise a matter that individual should be directed to his or her national association.

However in this case an English parent complained to FIDE that his son had lost out on tiebreak in a local chess tournament - one not even organised by the ECF.

FIDE decided to take the complaint on board and made its judgement. This is just plain stupid as it sets a precedent for anyone who has a dispute at a local congress to take the matter to FIDE.
Of course if FIDE then get swamped with such complaints they may not be able to propose any more stupid Laws like zero default times, but then again they may not have the time either to correct the bad Laws they have made.

There is a possibility that the ECF are asking why the complaint was considered. There was certainly a request made by the ECF Chief Arbiter to that effect.

The version of the story I heard from one of the committee left me thinking that several other tie-break methods should have been removed using the same criteria as that apparently given for reaching the decision. If memory serves correctly the main reason was that you often know the winner before the final round has started.

Jacqui Thomas · King Joined: 01 May 2007 Posts: 340

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

There has been little appetite for 3 rounds in a day which is required for a 6 or 7 round tournament and I believe this could be the reason

AMcHarg · Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject:

I would not play in a tournament that involved three rounds per day (unless it was allegro) as it's simply too tiring. I find it hard enough to concentrate on my second game in a day.

Confused

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

I enjoyed the 5-games-in-one-day Congress at the College Club a few years back.
Though I must admit I did take a (very rare for me) quick 9-move 'Grandmaster Draw' in the afternoon to get a break and browse the shops in Glasgow's West End.
_________________
Chess Club - the first rule of Chess Club is you don't talk about Chess Club.

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

I remember that one well. I ended up doing the round 5 draw with my eyes closed

Mike Scott · King Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 676 Location: Edinburgh

I think I remember that when I first played in Glasgow circa 77 or 78 it had three rounds on both Saturday and Sunday? Though not so sure about the Sunday. Being almost as young as A McHarg then it was a piece of cake - not sure I could cope now!

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

The problem is the Friday night round, very few people want to play in it, but also seems that few people like 3 rounds per day.

Personally I think 3 rounds sat and 2 rounds sunday is the best formula. Longer games on the Sunday when the prizes are decided.

HughBrechin · Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:54 pm Post subject:

Surely having more than one time control in a single tournament is also likely to distort results: I can think of several players I'd rather play over a shorter time period than a longer one, and vice versa. Wester Hailes is the only congress I can currently think of (though I could easily be missing some out) that does 3 + 2, and I'm pretty sure they keep the same time control for each round.

AMcHarg · Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:39 pm Post subject:

I think the ability to concentrate after a couple of games on the same day is in itself a skill which is very valuable to a Chess player. I actually think this is one of the things that makes some people's grades higher than others despite their Chess skill being somewhat similar. Cool

Mike; either I am older than you think or you are older than you look, either way it's all good for us both! Laughing

Usually by the afternoon game I'm thinking that 2am on the Friday night wasn't such a great idea afterall! Shocked

What about the bizarre suggestion of having 'long-weekend' events starting on Friday morning and finishing on Monday (2 games per day, totalling 8 rounds)? People could take two days off work! Or a combination of that idea to get 6-rounds. One of the main attractions for me as far as the Scottish Championship is concerned is one match per day. It allows time to get refreshed and mentally ready for the next one!

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

GN · King Joined: 30 Mar 2007 Posts: 415