Richardson & Spens

[AndrewGreen]

I would like to see team lists posted in advance. Adam's solution is simple and would work. It is common practice in other tournaments and I think CS should aspire to offer the best tournaments possible.

[Phil Thomas]

So many people have stated that admin burden for exchanging team lists in advance is onerous.

Lets have a detailed look at the admin required to publish team lists in advance.


1. Find a neutral volunteer who has e mail and will be on-line at the deadline for publication.
2. Team A sends him their team list.
3. Team B sends him their team list.
4. The volunteer copies the content of the mail from team A and sends it to all on the mailing list from team B
5.The volunteer copies the content of the mail from team B and sends it to all on the mailing list from team A

That is the admin needed in advance

Copy / Paste / Reply all
Repeat

If team B mail fails to arrive - DO NOTHING.


If colours need to be known in advance.
Either away team white on odds.
Or the same volunteer tosses a coin and tells one captain he has won the toss.

Or easier the two incoming mails state if the team wishes to have white or black on top board.
If not stated just assume the captain would call white on odds.



And if a player has to be subbed on the day - Rules need to be decided upon but
I would suggest the sub plays on the board of the player he replaced.
So that prepping for the wrong player only happens for a withdrawal on the board in question.

[amuir]

Three problems with advance pairings:
1. The home team has a big advantage in less travel time = more preparation time.
This does not happen in 4NCL where people already are at venue or in tournaments abroad.
2. Knowing colours in advance is a problem too as this favours the team with board 1 as white as they can win on board count if 4-4.
3. The poor arbiter is only a volunteer and in addition to making the draw, sending results to FIDE, resolving disputes, has to co-ordinate team lists too.

[Adam Bremner]

Three problems with advance pairings:
1. The home team has a big advantage in less travel time = more preparation time.
This does not happen in 4NCL where people already are at venue or in tournaments abroad.
2. Knowing colours in advance is a problem too as this favours the team with board 1 as white as they can win on board count if 4-4.
3. The poor arbiter is only a volunteer and in addition to making the draw, sending results to FIDE, resolving disputes, has to co-ordinate team lists too.

1. It's a small advantage sure, but if pairings are the night before, travel is generally no more than 1hr to any venue (because of the halfway rule), and both teams have a window of close to 14hrs. Nobody preps for almost all of that.

2. The team with white on 1 is barely at an advantage, but wouldn't you rather know you were black in advance? Or how about combine problem 1 with problem 2 and find a solution, so the side slightly disadvantaged with travel can have the slight advantage of white on 1?

3. Tell you what, for the literal 10mins it would take to forward on the emails basically, I will even volunteer to do it for a neutral match to me if it is too much for the organiser.

[Alex McFarlane]

Without getting involved otherwise there is a definite flaw in some of what has been said.

This does not happen in 4NCL where people already are at venue

Not all teams arrive the night before for the first round. Anything which encourages teams to travel earlier is to be encouraged!!!!

I will even volunteer to do it for a neutral match to me if it is too much for the organiser.

"]
There are other checks needed on teams so the organiser would need to send them to you after doing those, which sort of defeats the purpose.

On the colours issue, I have often felt teams should have white on 1,4,5,8 and the opposition on 2,3,6,7. If white wins all the games board count is the same!! Of course then we have board elimination ...

[Jim Webster]

The Management Board are to undertake a review of the Richardson Cup at the April Board meeting.

A formal announcement has been placed in the News section of the website front page. This also includes details of have to input into the review.

Please note that non-CS members must submit through their club secretary.

Jim Webster
President

[amuir]

What is the scope of the review ?
Can it be changed from K/O to league ?
6 boards instead of 8 ?
Increments ?
Or are we purely looking at submitting teams in advance or not ?

[Jim Webster]

I am only going to reply to one of your questions:-

What is the scope of the review ?

The review will be as wide ranging as the submissions dictate.

The intention is to consider all submissions CS members wish to make, but to make some of the major changes you list you would need to garner considerable support.

The Richardson is a club team event and all players and teams can have an input.
It is unlikely that the demands of an individual’s(s) or a single club will win the day.

This season, for instance, the Richardson started with 8 teams of 8 players. Basically, they all have an input.

As the post says, we will consider all submissions, but NOT from the forum.

To be honest trawling the forum for posts, deciding if they are proposals or discussions, then validating the individual poster against the CS membership is not really a feasible or practical enterprise. This is one of the reasons we have asked for written email submissions and why forum submissions will not be considered.

We have also allowed non-CS members to have an input through their club secretary, providing the club is a club member of CS (which it must be to play in the Richardson).

I cannot possibly answer every query here on the forum, but I will acknowledge emails sent in and bring them into the review by the Board.

There has been a lot of discussions on the forum in the past leading nowhere, now we are giving you a real opportunity to have an input. It's up to you to take it.

[Jim Webster]

4 days to go for the submission date to the Richardson review and so far I received have: -

ONE.

There have been numerous discussions, suggestions, comments on the Richardson in various threads in the past and when we actually offer to take on board your thoughts and suggestions to deal with them
- we get one submission!

Guess people are not as serious about change as much as we thought.

................., we will consider all submissions, but NOT from the forum. To be honest trawling the forum for posts, deciding if they are proposals or discussions, then validating the individual poster against the CS membership is not really a feasible or practical enterprise. This is one of the reasons we have asked for written email submissions and why forum submissions will not be considered.

[Alan Tate]

We want team lists in advance. There, no need to trawl through the forum.