18-09-2013, 07:55 PM
Hi Andy
Firstly an apology to you and everyone else, I misunderstood the information I got re the voting - it wasn't at the AGM, it was a captain's vote. I'm not sure how it was carried out but I'm not going to look back, it's time to move on. I don't think, though, that it really changes anything.
Frankly, I'm not convinced either that there is any benefit to this variation rule. I suspect that it all comes down to swings and roundabouts, what might be gained on one board might be lost on another. Perhaps the reasons for it are subtler than that.
I didn't go for the change out of support for its concept, but only to see something change. Keep arguing, at the end of the season I'll be asking for views about all the changes that have been introduced over the four tournaments. Perhaps by then your view will have prevailed.
No, it won't be FIDE rated, it does seem that it would be complicated and costly though I haven't looked too closely. Again, something to mull over during the season. Here's a question for you - what is the difference between a five hour game played against another strong player in a non-FIDE-rated tournament and a five hour game played against another strong player in a FIDE-rated tournament? I'm not being funny here, I really don't know, but maybe that's because I don't have a FIDE grade and don't care if I never get one. The Richardson certainly won't be an elite event if its strongest players don't take part so I do hope you reconsider.
Actually, I don't read your posts as negative, quite the reverse. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts - it's the way to remodel an event on what people really want.
I shall continue to soak up other people's ideas.
Keith
Firstly an apology to you and everyone else, I misunderstood the information I got re the voting - it wasn't at the AGM, it was a captain's vote. I'm not sure how it was carried out but I'm not going to look back, it's time to move on. I don't think, though, that it really changes anything.
Frankly, I'm not convinced either that there is any benefit to this variation rule. I suspect that it all comes down to swings and roundabouts, what might be gained on one board might be lost on another. Perhaps the reasons for it are subtler than that.
I didn't go for the change out of support for its concept, but only to see something change. Keep arguing, at the end of the season I'll be asking for views about all the changes that have been introduced over the four tournaments. Perhaps by then your view will have prevailed.
No, it won't be FIDE rated, it does seem that it would be complicated and costly though I haven't looked too closely. Again, something to mull over during the season. Here's a question for you - what is the difference between a five hour game played against another strong player in a non-FIDE-rated tournament and a five hour game played against another strong player in a FIDE-rated tournament? I'm not being funny here, I really don't know, but maybe that's because I don't have a FIDE grade and don't care if I never get one. The Richardson certainly won't be an elite event if its strongest players don't take part so I do hope you reconsider.
Actually, I don't read your posts as negative, quite the reverse. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts - it's the way to remodel an event on what people really want.
I shall continue to soak up other people's ideas.
Keith