Chess Scotland Noticeboard

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 3:37 pm Post subject:

Hi

"Peer pressure comes into play as it is a team game. Are you saying that team captains and team members are too daft to work out who wants to lose/does not try on purpose? 2

Are you considering per chance, the top prize winners in all the
tournamments I mentioned appear to come from the same club.

What about a 9/0 score in a club championship v players all lower graded
than oneself. Infact 90% of the games don't even get played.
They default the game and just pass the result onto the grader in time
for the grading list to come out.

Through the course of one year these players grades can go as high as
2000 but appear to dip below 1800 just in time for the tournaments.
This is an incredible piece of luck.

But it never happens....OK!

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

I have heard rumours for years about certain players who lose games on purpose in order to keep their ratings below a certain level.

Better not name them though as there is no way to prove that it is true Razz

I can remember a few years ago there was a list published of the players who had won the most money in the UK. I seem to remember most of them were the GM/IM's, however also in the list was a certain Scottish player who won a lot of the Challengers/Major events. They had won more money from winning the second or thrid events than most GM's had in a whole season.

johnmcbride · Queen Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 94

I have just checked the results for the last 2yrs and found nothing special. The best results came from improving juniors, which is what you would expect.

The rest of the results came various different people, with the ones winning most being those that also played the most. Again this is to be expected. These players often payed in many English tournaments, a few of which offer large prizes. Winning a couple of them would earn quite a bit. However, I bet they don't win them year after year.

As a reference point I have played in a number of opens and challengers. My results against these players are generally quite good, they beat me and I beat them. I can assure you that non of these players seem very happy at all when I win. I do not get the impression that any of these players are any better than their grades. They are just experienced and well practised tournament players, who sometimes like me, get burnout by playing too much. We are all better than our grade when we are at the top of our game and vice versa. That includes players who do not win tournaments.

Grades are just an average of a number of games, not an exact playing strength. That is why I enjoy the chance of beating some 1900's, but worry about losing to certain 1600's. There really is not that much of a difference in playing strength and playing styles do play their part.

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:34 pm Post subject:

Cheers JR.

This thread is linked in a way to the other thread about the
junuiors and the decline of chess in Scotland.

One reason why the same people kept winning is because it's
it's the same people playing in these tournaments.

I was looking at pictures from a 1979 tournament in an old C.C.
and these people were playing in the Scottish a few months back.
(and winning things in both events). Wink

No one seemed to have twigged this instead we got the difference
between a league game and tournament game etc etc.

You are either a good chess player or not a good chess player.
You are not naff midweek and good at the weekends.

I must add though I do consider the main lad (and his cronies) good
friends of mine and they all have solid chess hearts.
A couple of them have actually done more to boost chess in the East
of Scotland than I ever had. They are not all bad, just wide-eyed and cute.

Infact I'd like to see them running the whole show.

It's the lack of young players and no new faces at tournaments is so
depressing. The generation of players I come up with are still there
but the ranks are thinning. Nobody is taking their place.

It's very sad and perhaps the slide cannot be halted....

....or can it?

Don Heron · Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:33 am Post subject: banded tournaments

I think this is a good idea and should be tried but not imposed on all congresses. I think that a first step would be to add a letter to a person's grading and printed in the grading list. For example A=no tournaments won, B=minor tournament won, C=Major won, D=challengers won,E=expert won,F=Star won,G=master won etc. Step2 would be to allow or encourage organisers to specify restrictions. For Example Master section (for class F or G players only), Star section (for class E players only) etc. I realise that this might not suit every tournament so it should not be compulsory but I see no reason not to make it possible by simply adding a letter to the grading list. I also think that it might be an idea, for some congresses anyway, to not allow a person to enter a major until they have won a minor - sometimes the grading of some people entering an open is just too silly. Totally mismatched games should not be encouraged.

Paul Denham · Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:26 am Post subject:

Geoff,

I am refusing to get upset on this posting (and anyway my legs are far too short to be worth pulling)

" This guff about a league player and tournament player is guff."

But for the poor grammar of the above sentence, I may have lit the blue touch-paper with the above comment.

"You are not naff midweek and good at the weekends"

I think there are 3 types of player active in Chess in Scotland;
a) Those who like league games over tournaments (over 2 or more days)
b) Those who like tournaments over league games
c) Those equally at home with both formats

Hopefully (and I think there are) plenty of people would put themselves in group c)

I belong firmly to group a) and for a range of reasons come a lot closer to being naff (relative to midweek play) at weekend tournaments. The reason in my case is psychological and includes;
" What am I doing giving up a weekend to play chess? Is this a waste of my time? I hope the weather is poor this weekend then I won't curse myself being in a school assembly hall on a couple of lovely days"
and
" If I have a really bad tournament it could wipe out my grading gains build up over several months this season" " Its easier to arrest a slide over 5 midweek games over a month or so than it is if I am out of sorts one weekend."

The above ties in with something Jacob talked about on the other posting that (paraphrasing here) ... if you love doing something you should go for it regardless.

Clearly I don't get enough (personally) out of weekend tournaments so I generally vote with my feet (hoping that Weekend tournaments lasting 2 or more days in Scotland survive & indeed thrive). So my playing & organising efforts almost exclusively go into midweek chess (SNCL the exception).

My hang ups re congresses are no doubt personal and are about as logical or illogical as people who start the old "self fulfilling prophecy" when they have the black pieces rather than the white ones OR when their opponent plays 1.d4 and not 1.e4. However, they are there and unless I go about changing them they will always be there.

Signing off as one who is naffer at weekends than midweek

Paul

BTW Geoff - you reference your chess playing peak coming just before you reached fatherhood. As someone who became a dad for 1st time in last 2 months, I am keen to find out whether or not you put this down to having less time for chess. Also I am keen to find out from other noticeboarders whether or not they felt they reached their peak before becoming a parent.

johnmcbride · Queen Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 94

I have peaked and declined twice so far.

The first was when I was 26 and started uni at 27. I was far to busy to play much chess and could not get back into it, as my game had declined over the course of three years.

The second is more recent and is child related. My weekend results are still ok, but my league results have increasingly suffered over the last 2 years. This year, I have months worth of chess mags still in the wrapper and unread. I find this lack of time and energy very frustrating. It will not be long before my weekend games suffer unless I can solve this problem.

GN · King Joined: 30 Mar 2007 Posts: 415

I think being able to win an event - any event - is always more impressive than being able to maximise your grade. I suspect the majority of players of being overly focussed on grade and, in particular, many of us are far too quick to agree draws against higher rated opposition. Conversely there are a few true competitors out there on the circuit who will never agree draws and who will fight to win at all costs even in clearly drawn positions - often they achieve that win simply through sheer bloody minded determination. These players have ratings that go up and down year after year but nevertheless they are the ones you should really fear.

In addition to the online rating system it would be good to see an honours list on the Chess Scotland website listing the winners of all the main Scottish Congresses (i.e. Marymass, Grangemouth, Dundee, Glasgow, Oban, Perth, Glenrothes and Edinburgh). Imagine a page showing a grid with these congresses as the columns and years as the rows. Maybe it should be possible to filter it by category i.e. Open, Challenger, Major, Minor etc Forget the on line rating system, checking this page would show you who our best players really are.

In short, forget about grades and focus on winning. Create role models for our juniors. Celebrate success. That is what it is really all about!

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:48 am Post subject:

Hi Paul.

Yes don't get upset with my poor grammar (it alright to me looked).

Without checking I'd say players who do well in tournaments also do
well in league play. But thinking about it, there is chance, if you were
in a stong team for instance, that you will score more wins in the league
if you are board 6 out grading your regular opponents by 200+ points.

When the kids appeared my weekend tournaments disappeared.

I had to leave my beloved Edinburgh Chess Club where I played
chess every day from dawn till dusk for 4 to 5 years.

I never lost my love for the game but studying and playing over games
in silence was gone and so was playing, every night, the likes of Alastair White, Jonny Marr, Spike Mullen, Mark Condie, Alan Norris and Rudolf Austin in wonderful instructive friendlies.

No moans, I'd do it all again. (except this time I might listen to their
advice about dropping unsound gambits, study more endings and positional play.......Nah! I doubt it, I'm me.)

sigrun · King Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 307 Location: Europa

Thanks, Geoff, for pointing out why the US grade is always quoted at being ~ 100 less than anywhere else on the planet! Their policy of exluding the best players from minors & majors has this result: Since the minors/majors are not able to play against the best in their section, they can't sharpen their play AND their own grade improves before that happens.
What none of yous have considered is the beneficial impact a slightly better player has on the others in the section - it enables them to learn how to play chess! There are only 5 games in any congress, so only five of these other players can learn from the slightly stronger one, but still, coming up against that one in various congresses will undoubtedly help them with their chess!
Some people won't play online in case they come up against a cheater who uses a computer. I don't mind at all for the same reason. Despite the fact that i'm one of those old no hopers who'd never improve, I feel that i'm getting better all the time & so I don't mind playing against some 'sharks'
I know of 2 people who've manipulated their grade so that they had a better chance to win some events - so what? Why shouldn't everybody do as they like? Whilst they're lowering their grade they give the people a thrill who win against them & the next year they give someone else a good fight - it equals out in the long run.
I have happy memories of being offered to win a lost game if I bought 1 of his books from him! I gave him a fiver & he showed me a few tricks of the trade after the game. We both won from this exchange & who's to judge us? In case you're now trying to look up my records - it happened a long time ago & of course I'd never do such an outrages thing ever again Wink

Geoff is worried about losing players, but you can't make these 'winners' responsible for that - you'd need to start a different thread for this question.
_________________
''All murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.'' Voltaire

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:05 pm Post subject:

Hi Sigrun.

Glad to see you agree it happens, some people refused to simply believe it.

But like you I'm not too bothered. I was just dangling a hook on
the NB just to see who would bite.

Geoff

People sleep safe in the bed at night because young men are
willing to do extreme violence on their behalf.

johnmcbride · Queen Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 94

I am not saying it does not happen.

The people I have come across players years ago fiddled their grade by some 500 points. This took some doing and was obvious to everybody, who were amazed to find organisers allowed them to enter these tournaments.

One of them was once giving me a good hammering and I was about to resign. He then stood up and stated that his car had broken down and he had to go and get it. He then said that if his time ran out in the meantime I could claim the game, which it did. A few hours later he asked me did his flag fall. eerrrgghh Evil or Very Mad

I watched his remaining games, in which he was winning them all very easily and yet still notched a 0 on the board and scored 0/5. I knew of a number of other people who did this.

I cannot say about anything tournaments below 1700. All I am saying is that I have not come across anybody in the majors/challengers in Scotland who are much better than their grade. You just get the usual 200 points swing either side of their grade. My guess is that if anyone is reducing their grade, it can only be by a handful of points. Not enough to be concerned about. Besides, their games at some point would end up being picked apart on CC. You would have their number and the game would be up.