06-04-2012, 05:51 PM
Pat,
How about a compromise. Every time you intend to field a team against either George's team or my own, you simply let us know your board order a few days in advance? If preparation doesn't interest your lot either way, but does interest us, then problem solved since nobody else seems to care too much
I absolutely refuse to play sh*** like 1.b4 or ...b5 [or 1.a3/a4 so forget that idea Pat] just to avoid preparation (whether YOU take advantage of that bonus knowledge or not!) and I'm sure George feels the same way. We approach chess differently to you and your Hamilton boys and take it very seriously. Again speaking for myself and George (and I hope he doesn't mind too much) we are not 'natural' players like yourself, Joe and Steven - we have to work much harder to get good results.
In the Edinburgh League over the last few years I have had to play 2nd (3rd/4th!) fiddle to Alan Tate, Nicol Bathie, and Mark Orr. Until I prove myself to be a stronger player than them (and grading is the only realistic measure that we have in chess) then I have no right to ask them to play below me. There's nothing 'selfish' about asking you to improve your grade so you can play on a higher board - think of it as a challenge.
The rule in the SNCL may not only favour Hamilton as you have pointed out, but it is an 'uneven' rule which favours some over others - I was told last weekend that Neil Farrell was disappointed that I couldn't play the SNCL match against Ed. West as he was looking forward to re-dressing our personal score a bit! But how is it fair that I am at a disadvantage because I don't know if George, Neil or Jonathan is gunning for me!? And this isn't a purely selfish concern - I play for my team and take the team result above all else in team matches (e.g. accepting a draw offer in the recent Richardson semi as it was highly likely to put us over the winning line). I/my team shouldn't have to face a disadvantage in any way, shape or form, end of story
Regards,
Andy
How about a compromise. Every time you intend to field a team against either George's team or my own, you simply let us know your board order a few days in advance? If preparation doesn't interest your lot either way, but does interest us, then problem solved since nobody else seems to care too much
I absolutely refuse to play sh*** like 1.b4 or ...b5 [or 1.a3/a4 so forget that idea Pat
] just to avoid preparation (whether YOU take advantage of that bonus knowledge or not!) and I'm sure George feels the same way. We approach chess differently to you and your Hamilton boys and take it very seriously. Again speaking for myself and George (and I hope he doesn't mind too much) we are not 'natural' players like yourself, Joe and Steven - we have to work much harder to get good results.In the Edinburgh League over the last few years I have had to play 2nd (3rd/4th!) fiddle to Alan Tate, Nicol Bathie, and Mark Orr. Until I prove myself to be a stronger player than them (and grading is the only realistic measure that we have in chess) then I have no right to ask them to play below me. There's nothing 'selfish' about asking you to improve your grade so you can play on a higher board - think of it as a challenge.
The rule in the SNCL may not only favour Hamilton as you have pointed out, but it is an 'uneven' rule which favours some over others - I was told last weekend that Neil Farrell was disappointed that I couldn't play the SNCL match against Ed. West as he was looking forward to re-dressing our personal score a bit! But how is it fair that I am at a disadvantage because I don't know if George, Neil or Jonathan is gunning for me!? And this isn't a purely selfish concern - I play for my team and take the team result above all else in team matches (e.g. accepting a draw offer in the recent Richardson semi as it was highly likely to put us over the winning line). I/my team shouldn't have to face a disadvantage in any way, shape or form, end of story
Regards,
Andy