Richardson/Spens - what next?

[Keith Rose]

Some debate ideas have started in the topic 'Richardson/Spens results', beginning on page 3 with a posting by George Neave. There needs to be a wide discussion on how these tournaments continue, not least format and bona fide rules.

Given that this forum is used by a relatively small number of people can I ask that you raise these issues with your team-mates and wider club membership so we can get a good cross section of opinion? I will email the secretaries of all clubs in any event asking for opinions and hoping that the topic will reach everyone who might have an interest.

[George Neave]

Keith - I was chatting with a few guys about this at SNCL yesterday. Main messages I heard were that people are generally happy with teams of 8 and keeping it a prestige event. One interesting suggestion was to relax the player eligibility criteria. Some players may be keen to play but find their club is not able to field a team and so these guys are stymied in current setup. So idea would be they join up with whatever club sees fit to offer them a board. Obviously some controls will be needed to ensure no unethical parachuting in of stars at the 11th hour. Publishing team pools before the start of the event should cover this. Probably some detail needs worked out like how many players to allow in a pool, how to deal with players dropping out through sickness or moving away etc. Still this doesn't sound unworkable. The key point is in a single stroke we tap into a wider pool of players who are, by definition, keen to play. So we cut the risk of defaults and may even grow the event by adding some completely new teams. In a sense we have seen a similar evolution in SNCL where many teams are an amalgam of clubs (Dundee, Fife etc) or even just collection of friends. SNCL has grown to 5 divisions which shows there a fairly large community of players who are keen to turn out at least one day in their weekend given the opportunity.

[amuir]

George - what's wrong with a simple bona-fide rule ?
Player must have played in a club event first (e.g. Jacob - Edinburgh League, Andrew - Poly club champ, Stephen - Lightning) - easy to police
Let's scrap the 30 mile & fee payment rules as too hard to police
This should widen enough for good 2015-16 event

[George Neave]

George - what's wrong with a simple bona-fide rule ?
Player must have played in a club event first (e.g. Jacob - Edinburgh League, Andrew - Poly club champ, Stephen - Lightning) - easy to police
Let's scrap the 30 mile & fee payment rules as too hard to police
This should widen enough for good 2015-16 event

That sounds like progress but I think it would benefit from relaxing further e.g. 2 clubs both with 4-5 players keen to play by joining together. Having 4-5 from one club all turn out once in some other random event for the other club seems silly to me. Also say someone is living down south or oversees and would be willing to travel to Scotland for a few Richardson games - why force them to play in some other event first which would be costly to arrange? It seems spurious to me. Personally I prefer following:
On entry, teams provide a player list of up to 12 players. Teams can add or replace players up to this limit at any time but players added must wait 2 weeks before eligible to play. Player lists should be published on the CS website (maybe this noticeboard?) No player can be list for 2 different clubs during one season. [END] Why not?

[Ianbrownlee]

One interesting suggestion was to relax the player eligibility criteria. Some players may be keen to play but find their club is not able to field a team and so these guys are stymied in current setup. So idea would be they join up with whatever club sees fit to offer them a board.

absolutely spot on I personally know of loads of players who cant play in the Richardson/spens because their club wont commit to any tournament partly due to the cost of playing in a potentially one round tournament. Possibly the Spens and Richardson should be completely divorced from each other and run differently. I can see the argument of keeping the prestige of the Richardson cup but surely the spens cup etc can be relaxed as per George's suggestion. I think it is more important to have a healthy entry in the Spens cup where quite frankly I see participation is becoming more and more difficult. I would suggest if it is the general desire to keep the Spens Cup under the present similar conditions, then membership should be designated by the stringent use of a player registration form at the beginning of the tournament. Once a player is registered he is tied to that team for the duration of the tournament. Players can only be added with the blessing of the tournament director whose decision is beyond reproach. Wheres the problem, a registration form and then tournament director approval for any late additions

[amuir]

""Also say someone is living down south or oversees and would be willing to travel to Scotland for a few Richardson games - why force them to play in some other event first which would be costly to arrange? It seems spurious to me.""

Then a club is going to bring a random GM from England as a "star player" - this is a step too far. It would become like the 4NCL where a club lists Adams, Short etc at the start of the season.

We should instead be trying to get unattached Scots to play to enhance national team - Kai Pannwitz, Douglas Bryson etc don't play Richardson

[andyburnett]

""Also say someone is living down south or oversees and would be willing to travel to Scotland for a few Richardson games - why force them to play in some other event first which would be costly to arrange? It seems spurious to me.""

Then a club is going to bring a random GM from England as a "star player" - this is a step too far. It would become like the 4NCL where a club lists Adams, Short etc at the start of the season.

We should instead be trying to get unattached Scots to play to enhance national team - Kai Pannwitz, Douglas Bryson etc don't play Richardson

Possibly an easy solution to this would be players must be SCO registered and/or have played in Scotland the previous season?

[amuir]

I like the SCO registration idea.
We want more clubs, not to strengthen the big clubs.
Therefore the group of players who don't have a club - what's the big deal about playing one match, artificial or not, to join another club ? Then the opponents can prepare. Without the one match rule, the ringer can join mid-season and turn up unannounced, or we set up ridiculous player pools at the start , artificially enlarged to cover all eventualities.

[Ianbrownlee]

Possibly an easy solution to this would be players must be SCO registered and/or have played in Scotland the previous season?

its doable except for ungraded players and say for example Edinburgh Uni who have players coming in quite legitimately to study at UNI. Unless they have a grade or previously listed as Scottish then they couldn't play. There has to be a human element in this to judge legitimacy in individual cases and there has to be a process in this, for example a so-called enquiry or registration can be no later than say 24 hours, or a week before a game. I'm sure players would not want to be tied if its a knockout phase (possibility of only one game) therefore the player registration shows a level of commitment (less likely to parachute a ringer)
Let the tournament director do his job. If there is any doubt or competency he shouldn't do it and\or removed at the next AGM. Coming to think of it. Maybe there should be an elected official specific to this task, taking the burden off the elected director of these club competitions. The resources to do this job are already there with the existing grading system

[Jim Webster]

How about changing the format a bit.

8 teams of 8 players
2 sections of 4 (A & B) - CS to place teams in Sections
All-play-All (one game)

10 nominated players per team, 6 of which must be club members
(1 change permitted in season, but must be submitted to CS prior to implementation)
All must be SCO registered and CS Members (particularly non-club members)
Team nominations must be submitted before 1st game played

Fixtures arranged by section teams before 1st game (if possible) and submitted to CS for website
CS to set completion date for all section games prior to fixture meeting

Create a specific page on Chess Scotland website for results and cross-tables
(rather than only using forum)

Top 2 section A & B form final section to play for Richardson Cup
Bottom 2 form section to determine relegation (if needed)
...... or
Section A winner v Section B runner-up
Section B winner v Section A runner up
Bottom team in each section to decide relegation ( 2 relegated, or play-off for 1 relegated)

Optional extras
- FIDE Rated
- Section games can be played on same day at a single venue, possibly different venues for each section