+- 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 2011-12 (/thread-74.html)
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - andyburnett - 17-03-2012
Wandering Dragons v Polytechnic played at Edinburgh Chess Club 17/03/2012
1. Tate, A (w) 1-0 McNab, CA
2. Bathie, N 0.5-0.5 Shaw, JK
3. Burnett, A 0.5-0.5 Swan, Iain
4. Capuzzo, M 1-0 Kirk, L
5. Orr, M 1-0 Watt, D
6. Minnican, A 0.5-0.5 Kasabali, C
7. Kynoch, Ri 1-0 Gillespie, G
8. Sloan, E 0-1 Brookens, E
5.5 -2.5
Bd 4 game: Kirk, L v Capuzzo, M[pgn]1.Nf3 f5 2.b3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bb2 g6 5.c4 Bg7 6.g3 O-O 7.Bg2 h6 8.Nc3 Qe8 9.Qc2 Na6 10.a3 e5 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.e4 Nc5 13.Nh4 fxe4 14.Nxe4 Nfxe4 15.Bxe4 Nxe4 16.Qxe4 g5 17.Ng2 Bf5 18.Qd5+ Be6 19.Qe4 Rd8 20.Ne3 Qf7 21.Qc2 Qf3 22.Rg1 Rd3 23.Qe2 Rxb3 24.Qxf3 Rxf3 25. Ke2 Rfxe3+[/pgn]
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - amuir - 19-03-2012
Edinburgh West defeated Dundee and Victoria 6.5-1.5 in the Richardson Cup Semi-Final held at Saughtonhall Recreation Club. Dundee and Victoria won the toss and took White on board 1.
Edinburgh West Dundee &Victoria
B Craig Pritchett 2405 0.5-0.5 2167 Dave Findlay W
W Jonathan Grant 2115 0-1 2046 Ed Spencer B
B Neil Farrell 2133 1-0 2043 Alan Borwell W
W George Neave 2126 1-0 2010 Steve Hogg B
B Walter Buchanan 2101 1-0 1861 Alastair Dawson W
W Alan Bell 1970 1-0 1595 Peter Walsh B
B Duncan Walker 1961 1-0 1590 A Rowe W
W Ian McLean 1849 1-0 1498 R Burnett B
6.5-1.5
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - andyburnett - 19-03-2012
Just a wee question to get the rules clarified.
Board order, from the Richardson rules on the website
The order of players in each team shall be that of current playing strength.
Does this mean that teams can use the LIVE grading list (i.e. The updated grading list) or should it be the PUBLISHED list?
The problem with using the LIVE list is that, using myself as an example, 9 of my games this season (out of 11) have yet to be submitted for grading, so it may not reflect CURRENT playing strength.
On Saturday, we decided to follow the PUBLISHED grades exactly to avoid any possible problems/complaints (even though we might have preferred a different board order), but it appears that Edinburgh West played out of grading order'?!
Also, as the games are FIDE-rated, should we be playing in FIDE rating order? (maybe that's what Ed. West did?)
Anyway, not to make a big issue out of this, but it would be good to know what's-what before the final : )
Andy Burnett
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - amuir - 19-03-2012
Grading order : I am quite lax, 80 points on any grading list is ok
FIDE rated: not any more , very few games, not worth effort
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - andyburnett - 19-03-2012
amuir Wrote:Grading order : I am quite lax, 80 points on any grading list is ok
FIDE rated: not any more , very few games, not worth effort
-So is it up to you to 'interpret' the rules as organiser, Andy?! Might be worth popping in a statement to that effect (80 points, etc) just for clarity. And specify which list should be used ('any' is just a bit silly!).
-Not worth the effort for who? Maybe the players who have a nice long time-control, one-game-a-day, would think it worth the effort! Anyone remember the SNCL FIDE-rating discussion?
Andy Burnett
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - amuir - 19-03-2012
reasonable grading order is ok unless blatantly wrong
a team can object at start of match
the 80 point rule as in 4NCL is an unofficial guideline
can use CS or FIDE for this
only one person got a partial rating last year
people that want to play lots of FIDE rated games please enter the Scottish championship
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - George Neave - 19-03-2012
andyburnett Wrote:amuir Wrote:Grading order : I am quite lax, 80 points on any grading list is ok
FIDE rated: not any more , very few games, not worth effort
-So is it up to you to 'interpret' the rules as organiser, Andy?! Might be worth popping in a statement to that effect (80 points, etc) just for clarity. And specify which list should be used ('any' is just a bit silly!).
-Not worth the effort for who? Maybe the players who have a nice long time-control, one-game-a-day, would think it worth the effort! Anyone remember the SNCL FIDE-rating discussion?
Andy Burnett
Andy - I am surpised you do not know already that it works as follows: subtract lowest from highest published ratings of Mssrs Muir, Redpath, Coffey and S Tweedie and that is the acceptable variance.
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - andyburnett - 21-03-2012
OK, lets try again
Quote:reasonable grading order is ok unless blatantly wrong
a team can object at start of match
the 80 point rule as in 4NCL is an unofficial guideline
can use CS or FIDE for this
only one person got a partial rating last year
people that want to play lots of FIDE rated games please enter the Scottish championship
-Reasonable grading order does not fit with the stated rule. Please clarify the actual rule Andy. Objecting before the match shouldnt be necessary - before a match, players want to relax or focus or both, not get involved in sillyness which should be cleared up beforehand.
-the 80 point rule as in 4NCL is an unofficial guideline can use CS or FIDE? Which??!! One team uses each? Seriously!?
-only one person got a partial rating last year I wasnt thinking about people getting partial ratings, I was (call me selfish if you like) thinking about the 2 or 3 rated games I could have to my name against strong (already FIDE rated) opponents?
people that want to play lots of FIDE rated games please enter the Scottish championship I really hope to, but not relevant to the question
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - amuir - 24-03-2012
80 pts under any grading list is ok
eg joe bloggs = 2200 fide , andy smith = 2275 fide , pat brown = 2280 fide: andy, pat and joe can play in any order
due to fides similar
the strong players dont want it rated so I scrapped it
Re: Richardson/Spens 2011-12 - andyburnett - 24-03-2012
amuir Wrote:80 pts under any grading list is ok
eg joe bloggs = 2200 fide , andy smith = 2275 fide , pat brown = 2280 fide: andy, pat and joe can play in any order
due to fides similar
the strong players dont want it rated so I scrapped it
Thats not good enough Andy.
Its not being FIDE rated but you can use FIDE ratings within 80points for board order? What an absolute nonsense. There is a rule in place, lets just stick to it.
The order of players in each team shall be that of current playing strength.
Order based on CS gradings if it is only going to be CS graded - you can decide, Andy, whether we use the PUBLISHED list or the LIVE list (one OR the other) and let us know as soon as possible please.
Out of interest, which strong players dont want it rated and when was that decided?