Posts: 358
Threads: 79
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
0
With the current tournaments nearing their end perhaps now, while memories and events are still fresh in mind, is the time to think about how we might improve some aspects.
The latest edition of Scottish Chess magazine contains an article that largely discusses the Richardson Cup. For the benefit of those who don’t get the mag (and why not  ?), the following is a summary of suggestions:
Richardson
• Open to the top (8 or 16) CS clubs, with play offs for relegation to the Spens with winner of the Spens being promoted; Or -
• 2 (or 4) groups of 4 all-play-all, and then semi-finals for group winners (and runners-up if 2 groups) and then a final.
• Clubs to be ranked according to the published start-of-season grading list according to the average grade of their top 8 players who have 10 or more rated games;
• Top 4 seeds not being paired together in first round and a complete draw made at outset (unless of course the group option is adopted);
• If more than 8/16 entries for the Richardson Cup, the unsuccessful clubs would be entered into the Spens Cup. Promotion/relegation to start at the end of 2014/5 season;
• Any club not fulfilling a fixture would drop automatically to losing play off fixtures;
• 5-board teams to help with car-sharing and encourage interest from smaller clubs;
Spens
• 5-board teams as above;
• Top 4 seeds not being paired together in first round and a complete draw made at outset;
The points above are not proposals but are intended as a starting point for discussion and reasoned debate. More/other suggestions would be welcome.
The current rules can be found at:
http://www.chessscotland.com/membership/...pt2013.pdf
Posts: 1,003
Threads: 101
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
1
Just a quick initial thought about the Richardson, Keith, as I was thinking about it as you posted: 5 boards is a very small team, although 8 seems a bit large for some clubs? I understand the car-sharing point, but the European Club Cup, which both finalists qualify for, is over 6 boards - would this be a better compromise?
Posts: 358
Threads: 79
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
0
Andy - I hadn't considered the Euro Cup. I'm not sure if it would necessarily be beneficial to be consistent with this but equally 6 boards for the Rich seems reasonable enough to me. I had actually anticipated some argument from the bigger/stronger clubs against reducing the team size, so a calm start!
Posts: 1,003
Threads: 101
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
1
Keith Rose Wrote:Andy - I hadn't considered the Euro Cup. I'm not sure if it would necessarily be beneficial to be consistent with this but equally 6 boards for the Rich seems reasonable enough to me. I had actually anticipated some argument from the bigger/stronger clubs against reducing the team size, so a calm start!
Don't worry Keith, I know for a fact that those arguments are on their way 
Posts: 247
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
0
andyburnett Wrote:Keith Rose Wrote:Andy - I hadn't considered the Euro Cup. I'm not sure if it would necessarily be beneficial to be consistent with this but equally 6 boards for the Rich seems reasonable enough to me. I had actually anticipated some argument from the bigger/stronger clubs against reducing the team size, so a calm start!
Don't worry Keith, I know for a fact that those arguments are on their way
And here they come....
I really like the 8 board format for a couple of reasons. It is the only event in Scotland to use it, so it feels more special, in line with 4ncl. However, my main reason for liking it is that it takes a real club effort, and not just the same people again and again, there is a lot of variation from b5-8 normally. You get interesting match ups produced by the 8 board format. Generally the teams in Scotland who progress further fall into one of two categories: strength in depth, or top loaders. The more you reduce the boards, the more the competition swings in favour of whoever has the strongest couple of players, and in all honesty, it's not hard to spot the clubs that would then dominate.
Another point is possible seeding of teams. It would definitely favour the bigger clubs, and in a way it will engineer the final. Not seeding gives the smaller clubs a chance, much like the romance of the FA cup, where Hull and Sheffield United will compete in the semi, and I can tell you first hand that the buzz created by a smaller club doing well is huge. In either way of doing it, the strongest club should win anyway. If you win all your games, you lift the cup. So it really boils down to what you want the Richardson cup to do: produce stronger match ups on paper, or allow smaller clubs the chance to go further at the expense of the stronger ones.
Posts: 72
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2012
8 Board format is best and works well, reducing to 5 is a really bad idea, we already have SNCL for that.
The format of the event needs fixing though, there are not enough rounds and certain teams have been having to play a round more last few seasons, not right and needs sorted!
Posts: 458
Threads: 53
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
3
Quote:The format of the event needs fixing though, there are not enough rounds and certain teams have been having to play a round more last few seasons, not right and needs sorted!
Any constructive suggestions?
Posts: 232
Threads: 14
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
0
Suggestions for Richardson:
Central venue, competition runs on 2 full days e.g. 2 Saturdays or 2 Sundays.
2 games per day, one game in the morning, one in the afternoon.
8 teams, split into 2 groups of 4, who each play a round-robin.
Rounds 1 and 2 are played on day one, am and pm games.
Round 3 of the group games is the am game of day two.
In the afternoon, play 1st/2nd, 3rd/4th, 5th/6th, 7th/8th play-off games, like in hockey competitions, according to ranking within the groups.
I get my kicks above the waistline, sunshine
Posts: 358
Threads: 79
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
0
Quote:Central venue, competition runs on 2 full days e.g. 2 Saturdays or 2 Sundays.
2 games per day, one game in the morning, one in the afternoon.
8 teams, split into 2 groups of 4, who each play a round-robin.
Rounds 1 and 2 are played on day one, am and pm games.
Round 3 of the group games is the am game of day two.
In the afternoon, play 1st/2nd, 3rd/4th, 5th/6th, 7th/8th play-off games, like in hockey competitions, according to ranking within the groups.
I can see two likely obstacles regarding central venue scenarios: finding a venue suitable for 8 teams and the cost of hire.
If anyone thinks they can find such a place at a reasonable cost (i.e. low!) please come forward.
Posts: 1,000
Threads: 94
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
2
I vote for status quo. Only change - 60 min rule for defaults and tidy up wording so that Richardson graded friendlies can be played on SF day
|
