+- 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 2012-13 (/thread-371.html)
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - andyburnett - 18-11-2012
Thanks Donald
Am I alone in thinking that some form of seeding might be in order for next year's event?
Regards,
Andy
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - Alan Jelfs - 19-11-2012
Then I suggest that teams knocked out in this year's preliminary round are given the lowest seeding for next year.
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - andyburnett - 17-01-2013
From the Richardson rules
6.The order of players in each team shall be that of current playing strength. After team lists are exchanged, the captains shall toss for choice of colour at board one. The move at the remaining boards shall alternate accordingly.
Could somebody please explain to Andy Muir (Hamilton) that this does not mean whatever he wants it to mean, nor what he would like it to mean, nor does it mention '80 point rule' or anything of the sort. Preferably before Saturday, as I will be less than amused if we have to 'discuss' this before our match. Play fair or just don't play.
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - amuir - 18-01-2013
Andy
Let's have a 60 minute discussion about this before the match
Would you like to meet up at 1pm ?
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - JRedpath - 18-01-2013
The point is the wording of the rule is ambiguous, it does not state strict grading order, which I am guessing is what you are getting at.
I fail to see the argument, it is normal practice for teams to play out of rating order (within an acceptable level) and this has always been the case. The same happens in the 4NCL and other leagues throughout Europe.
In any case Dragons can also change their board order, no idea who is going to be in your team, but I know you have many players who are of similar strength. We certainly have no problem if you wish to change the board order so I find it a bit strange why it is such an issue for you!
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - JRedpath - 18-01-2013
Further Point
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.chessscotland.com/archiveresults/rcup2012.htm">http://www.chessscotland.com/archiveres ... up2012.htm</a><!-- m -->
Richardson Final from last year, both seems not playing in strict grading order, even yourself Andy!
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - amuir - 18-01-2013
Andrew Burnett played out of grading order in last year's final
HYPOCRITE
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - amuir - 18-01-2013
The Spens was not played in grading order either - a precedent has been set
The 80 point rule stands until the end of the season and can only be modified by a captain's or AGM vote.
Can I play you tomorrow Andy ? What board are you on ?
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - andyburnett - 18-01-2013
'Shout' abuse like that again Andy and you won't be playing anything tomorrow. I'll reply to the other posts after I've eaten =)
Re: Richardson 2012-13 - andyburnett - 18-01-2013
From the 4NCL website
Quote:8.4 Where there is a difference of more than 80 FIDE rating points under rule 8.3 between two players in the same team, the higher rated player must play on a higher board than the lower rated player.
From Andy Muir
Code:
The 80 point rule stands until the end of the season and can only be modified by a captain's or AGM vote.If you want such a rule in place as the 4NCL have, feel free to propose it and find a seconder - until then it is completely irrelevant; there IS no 80 point rule, therefore it cannot stand until the end of the season and Andy Muir needs to stop trying to use his position to abuse the tournament rules.
I have no idea why the other boards last year were played out of grading order, but my match-up with Neil was down to Andy Muir =o After some pathetic and disparaging comments from Andy Muir about an article I had written using a game I played against Neil, I was informed by an Edinburgh West player that 'Neil is looking forward to revenge' (partly tongue in cheek, I don't believe Neil to be the vengeful type!) to which I replied, 'That can be arranged', and there you have it; I played Neil. All Andy Muir's fault!
I have no intention of spending an hour before the game discussing this nonsense. Do what you like and we'll respond any way we see fit, but it's perfectly clear that Andy Muir is not a fit person to be in any position of power or influence within Scottish chess as he has proved time and time again.