BOA Congress 25th & 26th Aug 2018

[Adam Bremner]

Totally agree with Andrew, it's a great idea and wonderful to see a new event that can attract some of the top players in the country. Hope it goes well.

[BrownSA]

I do not usually write in the forum but the idea of the closed championship event does not seem to encourage some of the stronger juniors to participate. Surely chess in Scotland benefits from the strongest juniors playing against the stronger players and if this becomes the norm how can this happen? Form a purely personnel point of view I always enjoy playing against the strongest players also. Hope the tournaments are successful.

BTW Is there a bigger prize fund in each of the other sections compared to the championship?

[Gary McPheator]

I do take on board what you are saying Steven. I have made adjustments already to be more inclusive by changing from only 2 or 3 2100 players participating to all 2100 and titled 2000 players being able to play. I think I may offer 2 or 3 places to juniors in future Championships.

With regards to the prize funds, these are based on the numbers that enter each section. The Championship benifits from both the Championship Bonus and requiring fewer numbers to reach the same prizes as the U2200, U1800 and U1400 sections. This means that if 4/4 is scored in the top section the prize fund will be £450, which is more than the U1800 which currently stands at £300. It is also only £75 shy of the £525 on offer in the U2200 and U1400 with only 8 competitors, with 4 more players the Championship would have surpassed both.

[AndrewGreen]

I really enjoyed this tournament. Got three competitive games - I hope the format works out. I suspect you may have to lower it to a 2000 floor as I don't think there are enough active players above 2100 to make it sustainable, especially for the tournaments that are further out. 

From a junior perspective, I think it is actually quite beneficial. Juniors will be motivated to get into the top section. I have noticed a pattern where rating conscious juniors (and adults) enter the open as even if they lose all their matches, their rating does not go down. This results in them playing very negatively and groveling for a draw. It is much better in my opinion for them to play opponents that are of similar strength or slightly stronger where they play for a win. I would suggest the winner (adult or junior) of the U2200 section qualifies for the Championship section next year. This is what is done at the Tata Steel tournament in the Netherlands.   

I hope the championship section brings back the top players to the Scottish congress scene.

[George Neave]

I really enjoyed this tournament. Got three competitive games - I hope the format works out. I suspect you may have to lower it to a 2000 floor as I don't think there are enough active players above 2100 to make it sustainable, especially for the tournaments that are further out. 

From a junior perspective, I think it is actually quite beneficial. Juniors will be motivated to get into the top section. I have noticed a pattern where rating conscious juniors (and adults) enter the open as even if they lose all their matches, their rating does not go down. This results in them playing very negatively and groveling for a draw. It is much better in my opinion for them to play opponents that are of similar strength or slightly stronger where they play for a win. I would suggest the winner (adult or junior) of the U2200 section qualifies for the Championship section next year. This is what is done at the Tata Steel tournament in the Netherlands.   

I hope the championship section brings back the top players to the Scottish congress scene.

I agree with all of that. Prior to this event I had always thought that there should always be an open if only to ensure everyone is included since it's very difficult for any organizers to anticipate all player circumstances and find a formula that works for all. Simpler just to have an open and players can decide what is best for them. OK, that said, an open does have the disadvantages that Andrew mentions. Also, shock horror, it's not only about the juniors!!! It's about catering for everyone who wants to spend a weekend playing chess - including higher rated adults. So, that being said, I really enjoyed this event, Usually in an open, if you lose, you may get a mismatch next round which is not really a great way to spend your weekend. In this event, you lost then you got another tough game next round...perfect!

I do agree with Andrew that 2000 is a better cut-off, though, based on #active players > 2000 in Scotland.

[hamish olson]

I had a lovely time this weekend. I think the format is a really welcome change. Whether every event should be like this is another matter as I do have some sympathy for Steven's points - variety is the spice of life and perhaps the less central locations should be opens to boost the numbers.

It is worth looking at it from players over 2100s perspective though. Usually for the likes of me opens end up being 4 games against 1700 - 1900 and then if and only if we have managed to win all of those (by no means a sure thing!) then a last round decider against someone our own level (or a beatdown from Andrew Greet!). I hardly ever get to play against 2100+ or even 2000+ in Scottish congresses in the normal run of things (except Edinburgh).

For example the last tournament I played in Scotland was Perth and there was only one clash between two players rated over 2000 in the whole tournament (Declan Shafi against David Findlay).

2000 is definitely a better cut off than 2100 or 2200 - Scottish chess is just too small for it to be otherwise.

Hopefully these events can lure out some more of our top 10 players in future - I have spent the summer in the Czech Republic and Serbia in order to get that kind of opposition because it doesn't exist in Scotland and is necessary for me to improve. Not something that will be easy to do with limited annual leave when I finally stop being a student.

---

I also should point out another bonus of this format - when I was a 2000 it was absolutely impossible to win any money whilst players 100 - 150 points lower would be raking it in every other challengers. Or it certainly seemed like that to me at the time!
This format gives the guys who are too good to play in challengers but who struggle to win opens a chance.

[Robert Lothian]

Not something that will be easy to do with limited annual leave when I finally stop being a student.

---

I don't think you'll need to wait till you stop being a student - we can ensure that you have no time for chess before that ;-)

[Matthew Turner]

Like Hamish, I really enjoyed the tournament. There were a lots of players, the vast majority seemed to enjoy themselves so Gary should be very pleased with what he has achieved.
Positives for me
1. Great Venue, very nice playing conditions, easily accessible.
2. I liked the format with 4 rounds, a Friday night round increases the expense and is just inconvenient for working people.

Hopefully, it won't be too long until I'm back up for another event.

Many thansk to Gary and the team for organizing.

[hamish olson]

Not something that will be easy to do with limited annual leave when I finally stop being a student.

---

I don't think you'll need to wait till you stop being a student - we can ensure that you have no time for chess before that ;-)

Ok maybe I should have just said until I retire in 2062! 

[David Deary]

Not something that will be easy to do with limited annual leave when I finally stop being a student.

---

I don't think you'll need to wait till you stop being a student - we can ensure that you have no time for chess before that ;-)

Ok maybe I should have just said until I retire in 2062! 

Ahhh, I strangely feel smug when I see that retirement age. 2051 for me!  Only a mere 33 years to go...