+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: Tournaments and Events (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Richardson/Spens - what next? (/thread-1177.html)
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - StevieHilton - 01-04-2015
Jim,
Do you mean something like the old regional Jamborees?
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - Jim Webster - 01-04-2015
Steve
Not quite, just teams in each section play each other, in board order. Should also re-consider strict board order as well.
This is after all one of CS flagship events. Additionally it be attractive to a "potential sponsor", but that's a different story altogether.
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - andyburnett - 01-04-2015
Ianbrownlee Wrote:amuir Wrote:Possibly an easy solution to this would be players must be SCO registered and/or have played in Scotland the previous season?its doable except for ungraded players and say for example Edinburgh Uni who have players coming in quite legitimately to study at UNI. Unless they have a grade or previously listed as Scottish then they couldn't play. There has to be a human element in this to judge legitimacy in individual cases and there has to be a process in this, for example a so-called enquiry or registration can be no later than say 24 hours, or a week before a game. I'm sure players would not want to be tied if its a knockout phase (possibility of only one game) therefore the player registration shows a level of commitment (less likely to parachute a ringer)
Let the tournament director do his job. If there is any doubt or competency he shouldn't do it and\or removed at the next AGM. Coming to think of it. Maybe there should be an elected official specific to this task, taking the burden off the elected director of these club competitions. The resources to do this job are already there with the existing grading system
The quote should have been attributed to me Ian, not Andy Muir
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - Mike Truran - 01-04-2015
Quote:Then a club is going to bring a random GM from England as a "star player" - this is a step too far. It would become like the 4NCL where a club lists Adams, Short etc at the start of the season.It's a view I suppose, but the 4NCL has 90 teams willing to put up with "a step too far".
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - andyburnett - 02-04-2015
Mike Truran Wrote:Quote:Then a club is going to bring a random GM from England as a "star player" - this is a step too far. It would become like the 4NCL where a club lists Adams, Short etc at the start of the season.It's a view I suppose, but the 4NCL has 90 teams willing to put up with "a step too far".
This is true Mike, but these comparisons are not like-for-like. We already have an NCL which, akin to the 4NCL, has a degree of 'relaxation' re: team composition.
The Richardson Cup is, and always has been, different in this respect. From the comments so far, there is still a desire from many to keep it that way.
Having played the 4NCL for a season I would happily see our own SNCL version of it grow into something similar, but personally feel the Richardson Cup should attempt to remain as an 'elite Scottish team competition' in as many respects as possible.
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - Adam Bremner - 02-04-2015
amuir Wrote:Then a club is going to bring a random GM from England as a "star player" - this is a step too far. It would become like the 4NCL where a club lists Adams, Short etc at the start of the season.
That would be fantastic! Love to see 2700s in Scotland. Chuck them on live boards and up the profile.
It all hinges on what you want the competition to be. For me, I'd love to see it as strong as possible. It is one of the only times that the really big players in Scotland come out to play, and good players make good games, which can only be a positive thing.
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - Mike Truran - 02-04-2015
Andy
You're right. I was maybe being over-sensitive about what saw I (no doubt wrongly) as a slightly unfair pop at the 4NCL.
Each to their own of course, and I do understand the point of view of the advocates of the present Richardson Cup structure. As something of an old greybeard, however, I have observed with some dismay how over the decades England's National Club Championship has declined in both team numbers and in prestige - not least because: (a) teams tend to be wary of entering a competition in which their entry fee may only entitle them to one match; (b) restrictive eligibility rules have made it difficult to raise competitive teams. I will leave it to others to judge whether either point is relevant to the Richardson Cup's own experience. However, the 4NCL has basically expanded to fill a need - as no doubt your own excellent SNCL has done.
Maybe (or maybe not) history has something to teach us.
Mike
PS We would love to have a Scottish team (or, even better, Scottish teams) play in the 4NCL. I doubt it will ever happen, in my lifetime at least, but I dream on. I see absolutely no threat to the SNCL should such a happy circumstance occur.
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - chris tweedie - 04-04-2015
From my point of view, the idea of having a completely open Richardson cup will only benefit teams who can count on a sponsor. We have seen this over the years in the 4NCL. Lets be honest, the 4 NCL is won always by the team who has the most money to provide to random players. I personally would love to see strong players in Scotland, but the question is, with the current state of Scottish chess who will come up with the cash necessary, we cant even run congresses!!
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - Mike Truran - 05-04-2015
Quote:Lets be honest, the 4NCL is won always by the team who has the most money to provide to random players.So a bit like the Premier League then!
Re: Richardson/Spens - what next? - Keith Rose - 14-04-2015
This topic has stalled but, as there is a lot to be decided so I will restart with some thoughts about size and format of the Richardson.
Limit the Richardson to 8 teams (16 at present);
Abandon the knockout format;
Two groups of 4 teams, groupings drawn to avoid local teams in the same group as far as possible;
All-play-all, winners of each group to meet in a final;
Guarantees at least three matches, four for the finalists;
If adopted, in subsequent seasons home/away reversed.
For illustration, I have used the teams that entered the 2014-15 season, the same dates of the current calendar and grouped as suggested above -
Group 1:
Cathcart
Dundee
Glasgow Polytechnic A
Edinburgh
Group 2:
Edinburgh West
Bon Accord
Hamilton A
Wandering Dragons A
Match dates
29 Nov - Cathcart v Dundee, Glasgow Polytechnic A v Edinburgh,
24 Jan - Dundee v Glasgow Polytechnic, Edinburgh v Cathcart
14 Mar - Cathcart v Glasgow Polytechnic, Edinburgh v Dundee
25 April – Finals
If this, or something similar, finds favour then we can think about combined venues. By this I am not thinking central (Grangemouth, Stirling, etc) but perhaps venues in/near Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee that also could also host Spens matches at the same time. That's another topic.
The Spens could be run on similar lines but is a little trickier as we don't want to limit to eight, rather we need to encourage more entries; format of this needs more thought. And the Rosebowl must be included somewhere.
All of the above is intended as a starting point for discussion and is not intended as a hard-and-fast proposal.
Any and all opinions welcome, but please also get the thoughts of your club/team mates, those who don't take part in this forum.