Irish Championship 2016 flyer .........Problems!

sinbad68

http://www.icu.ie/system/events/flyers/000/000/797/original/Irish_Chess_Championships_2016.pdf?1461883109

Not wanting to bring down the wrath of organisers(and their friends !) on me again by reporting issues late and also for the benefit of both players/organisers, I want to highlight issues in the flyer posted on ICU site. I'll start by mentioning couple of blunders and then talk about more issues later on ....

1. Big blunder in the flyer is,.... The time frame for games in the Fide rated " Irish open weekender 2016 " is 90 min + 15 seconds, as this is an OPEN, if a player rated 2200 or over enters this tournament, it can NOT be rated!, increment needs to be increased to 30 seconds, the under 1500 section is the one which could do with 15 seconds increments instead of 30 secs and NOT the Open!.

2. The intermediate & Junior section are under the heading of " Closed Swiss events", first, It doesn't mention what it means by "CLOSED", is it referring to IRL federation or ICU members ?............THEN ............... in Notes in the flyer ( number 5 ) it says

5. Entry to the Irish Championship is restricted to players
registered as IRL with FIDE. For the other FIDE rated events, entry
is open to all however, those with no FIDE registration will have to
agree to be registered as IRL players or we cannot allow them to
play. This is in accordance with FIDE rules.

So it looks that these two events are NOT closed at all and are OPEN competitions ! I am discombobulated .

The good news is that, There appears to be NO barred pairing based on club affiliation up to round 3 which was used in the last Fide rated tournament I attended, which was in breach of Fide rules on pairing.

Bunrattyman

I am the person who made out the flyer and yes, Sinbad is correct on both his main points above ! I had corrected these points ( and a few others ) before but I accidentally uploaded the version of the flyer before the corrections were made.

Thanks for pointing them out, they should be fine now but if I've slipped up again, let me know.

sinbad68

@ Bunrattyman,Thanks, It's refreshing to see someone on boards.ie admit to making mistakes and correct them, which is an intelligent thing to do ( Sinbad has also made a lot of mistakes on the chess board and in his life! ) *mod snip*

Couple of other minor errors on flyer

1. Under ENTRY FEES section it says " players 2200+ on June 2014 ICU list ",obviously " on June 2014 ICU list" needs to get deleted, there is No need for replacement as June 2016 is already mentioned under "Entry fee" section.

2. In notes on flyer it mentions entry list ( with link) would be provided in early May, which is not the case ( not important).

Few other notes
1. The Junior ( Under 1500) section is Fide rated , with few in that section having Fide ratings, is it bit of waste of money?.

2. under 2000 rated pay 75 euro entry fee, clarity needed, does that apply to 1900-1999 section or anyone under 2000 ?

3. When senior section is posted as "CLOSED" and other events on the same flyer, perhaps " OPEN" should be used in their title to avoid confusion.

4. what happened to women championship which is supposed to be run at the same time as senior section Irish championship?, if forthcoming does it mean that women who qualify to play in senior section of Irish championship have to choose between women championship and Irish championship?

5. Setting the venue in UCD is a good move IMO, walking around late in night at weekends in city centre with little parking but plenty of drunks and junkies is NOT good for adults let alone children, having said that it creates problems for some of those using public transport, I wonder, would it be feasible if some kind of Taxi-uber share scheme could be arranged for those who are interested and living on other side of town, to drop them within walking distance of their residence weekend nights?

6. ICU is advertising a tournament being held in France, is there any advertisement of Irish championship ( Not senior section )in UK, France or Holland ? as July is holiday season, a few overseas players might decide to make it a chess holiday in Ireland if they knew about it.

macinalli

Hi Bunrattyman,
I'm based in UCD and regularly meet lost people who hadn't realised the size of the place. I would suggest that the flyer should include the name of the building - I think it's the UCD Student Centre? I know that Astra Hall is in there, but have never heard of the Quad room! Once people find the right building they'll be ok, but it's about 1km from the bus terminus to the student centre

Tuisceanch

sinbad68 wrote: »

@ Bunrattyman,Thanks, It's refreshing to see someone on boards.ie admit to making mistakes and correct them, which is an intelligent thing to do ( Sinbad has also made a lot of mistakes on the chess board and in his life! ) *mod snip*.

In your previous thread where your ostensible purpose was to provide constructive feedback you described the organizers as 'not useful' and said that their efforts regarding posting final standings and the draw were 'half arsed'. You also described any other party that did not concur with your approach as 'fools'. In what universe is that not abusive?. You were asked to elaborate on your criticisms regarding the draw and your desire to see the entry list and I explained in detail the rationale for the design of the site and how perhaps it might not be easy to use on mobiles and if you could confirm whether that was the case. There were 'facts and figures' aplenty as you choose to call it for you to ponder and respond in a non-contentious and constructive manner but you blithely declined to. Please don't be so naive as to expect other people to accept your,perhaps unintentional, rudeness with sang-froid. If you want to criticize my efforts I'm quite happy for you to discuss that with me over a coffee when our paths next cross. Perhaps you might have design issues you would like me to consider? Other people chose another path when confronted with issues e.g. the unavailability of the Paypal service after a minor change was implemented by contacting the organizers using the contact details provided and the issue was resolved promptly and without unnecessary conflict. I kindly request that I don't want to be involved in any further spats with you online as I think it is very unpleasant.

sinbad68

@Tuisceanch. I have praised the effort organisers made in your tournament and on more than one occasion called them nice & friendly. I have answered your previous questions.I have offered to help with the next tournament ( offer declined!).I made some valid criticism( NO abuse) in the hope that it will lead to improvement in the tournament which will benefit players and the tournament in the future and you should not be thin skinned when it comes to valid criticism.I don't like beating around the bush and like to speak the Truth and was never good at sugar coating it. As regards discussion over coffee, thanks but No thanks, I fear you may have a chip on your shoulder now and any discussion will lead to a pointless argument and within a few minutes lead to a noise higher on decibel scale than the noisy door which tormented Sinbad for 3 days. I am done talking about this subject, If you want to get the last words in, you are welcome to it.

Tuisceanch

sinbad68 wrote: »

I have praised the effort organisers made in your tournament

Only as an afterthought and which was acknowledged but queried why you could not have prefaced your original comments with that sentiment before maturely offering your unsolicited advice.

sinbad68 wrote: »

and on more than one occasion called them nice & friendly

Damning with faint praise and qualifying it subsequently by describing them as not useful. How charming!

sinbad68 wrote: »

@Tuisceanch.I have answered your previous questions.

No you didn't. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous. You described the format of the draw as cumbersome and drew attention to the oversight in round 2 which was not posted. It was explained to you that it was an oversight and I requested you to elaborate on what you meant by cumbersome. I described in length the reason why we cannot use the Swiiss master format. You just ignored that response to your 'valid criticism'. If you want to raise issues or 'valid criticisms' as you phrase it then have the good manners to respond when an answer is forthcoming. Otherwise why did you bother raising it, if your ostensible purpose was to improve the process. I still don't know what you meant by cumbersome so you haven't helped in any shape or form.Thanks for that. I wouldn't have bothered replying if I had realized that it seemed your sole intent was to snipe from afar and glorify in your own wisdom. Harsh but I don't need to sugar coat my true feelings on the matter since, presumably, your penchant for speaking the truth to people is not a one way street?

sinbad68 wrote: »

I have offered to help with the next tournament ( offer declined!).

Could be construed as the height of arrogance. Also why piggyback on the previous long established efforts of others when you could easily run your own tournament?

sinbad68 wrote: »

I made some valid criticism( NO abuse) in the hope that it will lead to improvement in the tournament which will benefit players and the tournament in the future and you should not be thin skinned when it comes to valid criticism.

I already quoted the examples where your language was abusive and it was pointed out to you at the time and, regardless of your intent, you should recognize when you have caused offense and have the humility to apologize. Also people who run tournaments,coach kids and facilitate dissemination of information are promoting chess. Raising issues, like the ones you do, are predominantly done on a personal basis or by simply contacting the relevant parties with no animosity on either side. Sniping on social media does nothing to promote chess at all. Also when errors or issues arise in a tournament you are entitled to bring them to the attention of the parties concerned but to criticize anonymously on a public forum is,in my opinion, the height of ill manners. Considering the language and manner in which you chose to conduct yourself I think you were treated with more respect and dignity than your behaviour merited. You need to recognize that you are talking to real human beings with feeling, just like you.

sinbad68 wrote: »

I don't like beating around the bush and like to speak the Truth and was never good at sugar coating it. As regards discussion over coffee, thanks but No thanks, I fear you may have a chip on your shoulder now and any discussion will lead to a pointless argument and within a few minutes lead to a noise higher on decibel scale than the noisy door which tormented Sinbad for 3 days..

Please refrain from personal abuse and stop projecting your own fears for personal contact on me. I'm not wont to involve myself in a heated manner over trivial matters like this but would probably conclude it was a pointless on the basis that the other person is not inclined to take on board what has being said to him and/or was unqualified,due to lack of real experience,to discuss with any real insight. I sincerely hope you do not think it appropriate to talk to people, like you have here,in person.

sinbad68 wrote: »

I am done talking about this subject, If you want to get the last words in, you are welcome to it.

Well good, then stop going on about how you were victimized in another thread when nobody and I repeat nobody was of the same opinion as you on that matter. Thanks for allowing me the last word on this subject which was raised due to your,in my opinion, gross misrepresentation of facts and here it is..
Treat people like you would like to be treated yourself is good advice I feel.

sinbad68

Looking at entries to Irish championship in link below ( scroll down the page in the link )

http://www.icu.ie/events/797

It appears that the senior section is now open to any IRL federation player regardless of rating despite flyer stating that the competition is for over 1900 rated players!.
So now a 2150 rated player will pay 50 euro to enter the the competition and a player rated 1094 ( already entered) pays 75 euro, a difference of 25 euro only.

25 euro divided by 9 rounds = 2.78 euro per round ( rounded up)
a bag of tesco peanuts costs = 3.55 euro

http://www.tesco.ie/groceries/Product/Details/?id=292011673

So now even an unrated player can enter Irish senior championship vs a 2150 rated player for a daily price of less than a bag of peanuts from Tesco!.

IMO, if standards are being done away with and entry to Irish championship is for sale, it should not be cheaper than a bag of peanuts per day.

British chess championship entry fee for under 2000 is £300 ( approx 400 Euro) and for 2000-2149 rated is £200 and many players have paid it.

http://www.britishchesschampionships.co.uk/entrants/

L1m1tless

The player probably hit the wrong option when entering, I'm sure it will be fixed.

sinbad68

Neo_Ninja wrote: »

The player probably hit the wrong option when entering

Did the Benildus player who entered and doesn't qualify, according to the flyer also hit the wrong button ?!.

Neo_Ninja wrote: »

I'm sure it will be fixed.

Are you in the loop of decision making of Irish championship ?, If not, then you are just guessing and why are you using The word " Sure" in your sentence ?. You seemed sure that Benildus B will stay up in Armstrong last season.

L1m1tless

I knew when I replied to you that you would come back with a smart answer. You might be better suited to spending your money on peanuts than chess if the system bothers you so much.

sinbad68

Yes, there has been changes in Irish championship info & entry section on ICU site in the past few hours

http://www.icu.ie/events/797

The Benildus Junior and the Sub 1100 rated players names have mysteriously vanished from the championship entry list and no where to be seen in any of the sections !. It now appears that 1900 rating is once again the floor for entry into the senior section, A few days ago I posted here that there should be clarity whether by Sub-2000 they meant anyone under 2000 rating or those in 1900-1999 rating section( I was ignored), and it appears as a result of this confusion the mentioned players entered the senior section, If The unqualified players can't get into senior section they will very likely enter one or both of weekenders. The interesting new language in entry fees means that if you are exactly 2000 or 2200 rated, you have the option of either paying 50 euro or 75 euro to enter in the case of the former and 50 euro or 40 euro for the latter !.

Knowing Benildus club so well, I don't expect them to let this go and to argue with the organiser that the Junior attempting to enter senior championship had a rating from couple of months ago which was over the entry threshold and that he is a prodigy.
Last year Benildus argued and succeeded to put another Junior into the senior section claiming that he was a prodigy which created an odd number and problems,......... a year later,.......... that Junior has a rating which is lower than the one he entered the senior championship with!.

Anyway, hopefully I'll be able to play in both weekenders.

mikhail

sinbad68 wrote: »

Knowing Benildus club so well...

Obviously we're a monolitic entity, and in no way are you just talking ****e about two children.

sinbad68

mikhail wrote: »

Obviously we're a monolitic entity, and in no way are you just talking ****e about two children.

I did NOT say you were a monolithic( correct spelling) entity. I've been to Benildus club and have met and spoken to many of your club members over the years and majority are nice & friendly .It is unbecoming of you to u̶s̶e̶ imply foul language,there is No need for it, The statement I made about what happened last year is correct, I am just curious as what will happen in this year's championship, that's all.

cdeb

sinbad68 wrote: »

Knowing Benildus club so well, I don't expect them to let this go and to argue with the organiser that the Junior attempting to enter senior championship had a rating from couple of months ago which was over the entry threshold and that he is a prodigy.
Last year Benildus argued and succeeded to put another Junior into the senior section claiming that he was a prodigy which created an odd number and problems

For the record, so far as I'm aware, both of these claims are nonsense. But I think sinbad knows this.

I did argue on here that our player was worthy of entry last year - and he proved this in the tournament - but that can hardly be said to have contributed to the organisers' decision to allow him enter.

checknraise

I dont have any issue with someone playing up playing however the lowest rated player registered should be advised that their entry is conditional on a even number playing in order to avoid a bye.

The bigger problem for Irish chess is most of the stronger players do not play tournaments anymore, I think the ICU should survey the 2000+ players and see what if anything can be done to get them to play more often.

sodacat11

Bernd Thee has a FIDE rating of over 1900, Ross Beatty does not so why is he being allowed to enter the Irish Championship? Maybe he is the greatest child prodigy since Sammy Reshevsky but a line has to be drawn somewhere and that line is 1900. What happens now if six more 1800 players try to enter? they can hardly be denied entry if Beatty is accepted.

sodacat11

checknraise wrote: »

I dont have any issue with someone playing up playing however the lowest rated player registered should be advised that their entry is conditional on a even number playing in order to avoid a bye.

The bigger problem for Irish chess is most of the stronger players do not play tournaments anymore, I think the ICU should survey the 2000+ players and see what if anything can be done to get them to play more often.

I was a regular participant in the Irish Championship for many years and indeed would have played this year had the 1900 floor been observed but if years of tradition are going to be ignored then I won't bother my (_x_) entering.
Surely an EGM should be needed to change (or ignore) the rules for an Irish Championship or can the Controller just do whatever he feels like regarding our national championship?

cdeb

sodacat11 wrote: »

Bernd Thee has a FIDE rating of over 1900, Ross Beatty does not so why is he being allowed to enter the Irish Championship? Maybe he is the greatest child prodigy since Sammy Reshevsky but a line has to be drawn somewhere and that line is 1900.

Don't know the reason for this, but Ross was above 1900 until recently - maybe he entered while above 1900? I don't know when entries opened.

Also, is the system of exec invites still in operation? I think it was there last year. That could explain it too.

Above is just guesswork though.

Chessrookie

My understanding is that the ICU officer is still able to invite one deserving junior who does not meet the 1900 threshold.
Ross has won two weekend tournaments this calendar year, has been close to 2,000 this year and is on the Irish Glorney team next month. He also plays nearly every weekender.
If the above does not meet the criteria for an invited place, surely nothing will.

sodacat11

Chessrookie wrote: »

My understanding is that the ICU officer is still able to invite one deserving junior who does not meet the 1900 threshold.
Ross has won two weekend tournaments this calendar year, has been close to 2,000 this year and is on the Irish Glorney team next month. He also plays nearly every weekender.
If the above does not meet the criteria for an invited place, surely nothing will.

That's all very well but what happens if someone rated 40 points higher than Beatty but still below 1900 wants to enter? Would it be fair not to let them play?
Ratings don't lie,especially for someone who plays as often as Beatty does.If he was 1900 strength then he would have a 1900 rating.

cdeb

Well if it is that Ross has qualified by virtue of a wild card - which was passed at the ICU AGM - then another player under 1900 who doesn't receive a wildcard hasn't been hard done by, no.

If there are wildcards being handed out, I think they should be indicated though.

sodacat11

checknraise asked why so many strong players don't play in tournaments any more.One of the reasons is because rating floors are ignored. Tournaments that insist on high standards like Bunratty continue to flourish.
It used to really mean something just to be eligible to play in an Irish Championship but the people who have been running Irish Chess for the past few years have no sense of history, tradition or integrity and are just diluting our national championship to no more than an elongated weekender.

cdeb

I think that's getting a bit hyperbolic to be honest.

FIrst off, "the people who have been running Irish chess for the past few years" have varied a lot in the past few years; there's been some very different committees, often at loggerheads with each other. I don't think you can generalise about them quite like that!

But also, the general membership of the ICU, not solely its (various) executives, approved at an AGM the idea of offering some wildcards for the Irish Senior Championships.

sodacat11

cdeb wrote: »

I think that's getting a bit hyperbolic to be honest.

FIrst off, "the people who have been running Irish chess for the past few years" have varied a lot in the past few years; there's been some very different committees, often at loggerheads with each other. I don't think you can generalise about them quite like that!

But also, the general membership of the ICU, not solely its (various) executives, approved at an AGM the idea of offering some wildcards for the Irish Senior Championships.

Let me rephrase that then, the present crowd are even worse than their predecessors because instead of undoing the damage done to the Irish Championship they have actually legitimized it!!
It is just so typical of the way kids are treated nowadays. They(well most of them) expect everything handed to them on a plate without ever having to earn anything and well meaning buffoons who sit on committees are all to eager to pander to them. Where are all these child prodigies that we have bent the rules for in the past? Most of them are no longer even active in chess.
I am blue in the face arguing about rating floors being strictly adhered to yet no one has ever been able to tell me just what is wrong with the idea that people should have to qualify and earn the right to participate in elte events.

cdeb

sodacat11 wrote: »

Let me rephrase that then, the present crowd are even worse than their predecessors because instead of undoing the damage done to the Irish Championship they have actually legitimized it!!

The current ICU exec can't simply take a decision to ignore motions previously passed by the general membership at an AGM.

I agree with respecting rating floors, and have been glad to see a notable tightening up in that regard in recent years. However, mol an óige agus tiochfaidh sé - the idea of encouraging youth is hardly new, we've got the best young generation now since the boom sparked by Fischer v Spassky and while some will inevitably drop off, I don't see any problem in the wildcard system if encouraging players - and the wildcards aren't just for juniors - to progress.

mikhail

I have a slight itch at the moment in the knuckle at the base of my little finger on my left hand. That's about how irritated I am about ratings floors generally. I once lost to a 1400 in an over 1600 section; I know that pain. But the guys pissing and moaning about ratings floors? Those guys are a real pain in the arse.

sodacat11 wrote: »

checknraise asked why so many strong players don't play in tournaments any more.One of the reasons is because rating floors are ignored. Tournaments that insist on high standards like Bunratty continue to flourish.

You know how I know you're full of crap?

The Bunratty Major (1200-1600) had 9 1100s playing this year. One of them finished in the top half.
The Bunratty Challengers (1600-2000) had 11 1500s playing this year. Two of them finished in the top half.
The Bunratty Masters (2000+) had 9 1900s playing this year. One of them finished in the top half.

The reason strong players play in Bunratty is that yet stronger players play there, and it's good fun, and they go there every year. It has sweet feck all to do with enforcement of ratings floors.

I qualify to play in the Irish this year, by the skin of my teeth. My FIDE teeth, not my ICU teeth. I may enter. I sure as hell don't care whether I'm bottom seed or fifth bottom. I'll bet neither do our IMs.

EnPassant

Isn't there a simple answer to the Irish Championship rating qualification?

Pass a motion such as this at the next ICU AGM:
"Qualification for the Irish Championship shall be restricted without exception to
a) players with a rating of 1900 on the latest FIDE rating list
b) players who have a achieved an ICU rating of 1900 at any time since the previous 1st September"

High-tide ICU ratings are already used for some selection purposes - it should be easy to calculate for Irish Championship qualification also. It would keep the requirement to achieve a 1900 rating while not excluding someone who had a bad tournament just before the Irish Ch, and it would mean that you wouldn't have people avoiding tournaments in order to protect their rating.

sodacat11

It is quite clear from mikail's use of language that he is not the most articulate of people so I won't glorify his nonsense with a reply.
En Passant, on the other hand, makes a sensible suggestion. I don't care if the rating floor is 1800 or 2200 ( in fact 2200 would be my preference) but whatever it is just let us stick to it, no nepotism, no special treatment for juniors or kids whose parents are sponsoring the tournament, no special treatment for gays, ethnic minorities, Travellers, handicapped people, people with blonde hair, blue eyes, big boobs, long noses, hairy arms ,dog owners, friends of the Controller etc etc,,,,,,,,,just pick a number,,1800, 1900, 200, 2100,2200, whatever,,,,,,,,,AND STICK TO IT.
Two of the most enjoyable tournaments I played this year were Gonzaga and Enniscorthy,both full of kids and people playing up but all within the advertised criteria so no problem. What I object to is an Irish Championship being advertised as being for over 1900 (and this can be either ICU or FIDE) but then lower rated players who can't achieve that rating on either list being admitted.
I am tired of this debate now. I wanted to play in the Irish this year but looking at the entrants so far I find it hard to get motivated and would probably be better off going fishing or playing golf for those nine days.

cdeb

sodacat11 wrote: »

It is quite clear from mikail's use of language that he is not the most articulate of people so I won't glorify his nonsense with a reply.

mikhail wrote: »

You know how I know you're full of crap?

Mod note - can we drop the aggressive posting style please? It doesn't help either side.

sodacat11 wrote: »

Two of the most enjoyable tournaments I played this year were Gonzaga and Enniscorthy,both full of kids and people playing up but all within the advertised criteria so no problem. What I object to is an Irish Championship being advertised as being for over 1900 (and this can be either ICU or FIDE) but then lower rated players who can't achieve that rating on either list being admitted.

But you're still ignoring that the Irish Championship rules currently allow for wildcard invites, which negates your entire argument here.

sodacat11

"But you're still ignoring that the Irish Championship rules currently allow for wildcard invites, which negates your entire argument here"
And who proposed and passed that stupid rule??? Probably people with vested interests and little or no chance of ever reaching 1900. Most players are below 1900 so obviously if you let them decide the rules we end up with this silly situation we now have.Only 1900+ players should have a vote when it comes to deciding the rules for the Irish Championship, doing otherwise is like giving fish a vote on whether angling should be allowed or letting ducks decide when the shooting season starts.

cdeb

sodacat11 wrote: »

And who proposed and passed that stupid rule???

It was proposed by the ICU exec - specifically, I think, the secretary at the time, who is below 1900, but who has never made any intimation of using the rule for personal gain.

You've already been told it was passed by the general membership of the ICU - passed by a decent majority, as I recall, with 1900+ players in attendance.

sodacat11 wrote: »

Only 1900+ players should have a vote when it comes to deciding the rules for the Irish Championship

No, the ICU exec should have a vote because, you know, the ICU exec's role is to run Irish chess. 1900+ players are more than welcome to go along to the AGM to vote or even to make representations against a certain motion (none did - and this motion was carried forward from the previous year to allow it to be re-worded, so it was hardly a surprise motion)

mikhail

sodacat11 wrote: »

And who proposed and passed that stupid rule??? Probably people with vested interests and little or no chance of ever reaching 1900. Most players are below 1900 so obviously if you let them decide the rules we end up with this silly situation we now have.Only 1900+ players should have a vote when it comes to deciding the rules for the Irish Championship, doing otherwise is like giving fish a vote on whether angling should be allowed or letting ducks decide when the shooting season starts.

You must be very happy it isn't an Open so.

You know what's silly and stupid? Every other AGM there's some motion about the senior championship, and it's always about some trivial stuff like this. There are so many serious problems for Irish chess, but people are too shortsighted to see that the senior championship is small and irrelevant because the chess community here is small an irrelevant. It reminds me of the League of Ireland despertely trying to compete with English football by changing the number of teams in the top flight every other season.

sodacat11

mikhail wrote: »

You must be very happy it isn't an Open so.

You know what's silly and stupid? Every other AGM there's some motion about the senior championship, and it's always about some trivial stuff like this. There are so many serious problems for Irish chess, but people are too shortsighted to see that the senior championship is small and irrelevant because the chess community here is small an irrelevant. It reminds me of the League of Ireland despertely trying to compete with English football by changing the number of teams in the top flight every other season.

It almost IS an Open and I do regularly play in and enjoy Opens but I think that the Irish Championship should be something above an Open.
As for our chess community being small and irrelevant,yes it is small but is it any less "relevant" than the Russian, Norwegian or Chinese chess communities?? I don't see why it is, size isn't everything as you are no doubt well aware.

cdeb

It's nowhere near being an Open.

2bts

The following motions were passed at AGM 2014 as minuted in the minutes approved at AGM 2015

25. Players in the Irish Chess Championships may have the rating requirement ignored provided they are nominated by:
a. The ICU Executive (maximum 3 players)
b. The Junior Officer (maximum 3 players who must be under-18)
c. Provincial delegates (maximum of 1 player per province)
d. The tournament organisers (maximum 1 player)

26. The Irish Women’s Champion, Irish Veteran’s Champion, Irish Intermediate Champion, Irish Open Champion are automatically nominated to play in the Irish Championships irrespective of rating.

sodacat11

2bts wrote: »

The following motions were passed at AGM 2014 as minuted in the minutes approved at AGM 2015

25. Players in the Irish Chess Championships may have the rating requirement ignored provided they are nominated by:
a. The ICU Executive (maximum 3 players)
b. The Junior Officer (maximum 3 players who must be under-18)
c. Provincial delegates (maximum of 1 player per province)
d. The tournament organisers (maximum 1 player)

26. The Irish Women’s Champion, Irish Veteran’s Champion, Irish Intermediate Champion, Irish Open Champion are automatically nominated to play in the Irish Championships irrespective of rating.

In other words we could have TWELVE underrated players in an Irish Championship, probably as many as are rightly qualified to play.
I am tired of this argument now, I was merely making the point that I always looked forward to playing in Irish Championships but now,because of the way that it has been diluted, I no longer feel inclined to do so.Maybe I am the only one in the country that feels this way but then again there could be others who feel the same as me but just do not say so and likewise will not bother entering. Nothing will ever convince me that making the tournament weaker makes in better in any way whatsoever.

ComDubh

I agree that the quoted motions allow way too many underrated players into the event, but this is what we, the ICU membership, voted for. It does reduce the status of the Irish Championship and sodacat is definitely not the only player who is less inclined to play the Irish for this reason

On a closely related topic, I find it odd that so many people want to be permitted to play events that have a minimum rating above their current rating, rather than working on their chess to improve their rating to qualify for the event properly. There is nothing 'elitist' about the Irish Chess Championship. You don't have to know the selectors or play exciting chess or have gone to a certain school or anything like that. You simply have to achieve a 1900 rating in competitive play. I agree with making an exception for Junior players who are close to 1900 and ready for the experience, but other than that, people should get the rating to qualify to play. Nothing like a fixed goal to motivate us to perform better!

Ficheall

ComDubh wrote: »

On a closely related topic, I find it odd that so many people want to be permitted to play events that have a minimum rating above their current rating, rather than working on their chess to improve their rating to qualify for the event properly.

To improve their rating by, say, scoring points against higher rated opponents?

cdeb

Yep.

If you're at the top of a rating band, it can be hard to improve your rating - the law of averages says you'll lose some games against lower-rated players, but there are no higher-rated players to beat to make up for that.

So if you stick to tournaments strictly based on rating, it can actually be hard at times to break through to the next section.

In addition, it's generally recommended playing players maybe 100 points higher than you if you do want to improve - which, again, you can't do as a top seed.

I don't agree with, say, 1400s looking to play up to a 1600-2000 section. But I've no problems with the current general rule that if you're within 50 points of a rating band, you can choose whether to play up or down.

Also, while the motion allows for a maximum of 12 extra players, I think the spirit of the motion was that wildcard entries would never actually get close to that. They're to be used for deserving players, not to be handed out willy-nilly.

ComDubh

You can improve your rating by beating players at the same level or below you as well. If you're top of your rating band, one good tournament will pop you over to the next band. And the players near the top of a rating band really don't want to play weak opponents who should be in a lower rating band.

I'd like to see the rating requirement for the Irish being raised, and raised quite a lot, to 2100 or even 2200. Every top player in the country would play in it if they possibly could, and the 'subtop' would do all they could qualify for it. Trying to increase numbers in the Irish by creating more ways to enable weaker players to play it in will never make for a great event.

cdeb

But statistically, you're going to score only 0.75 against players rated 200 below you - you will lose one in four. This balances out ordinarily with your 0.25 score against players rated 200 points ahead of you - but it can't do so if you're not playing those players.

So it is statistically harder to improve your rating if you're only playing players rated below you.

There's plenty of occasions where tournament winners on 5/6 gain only a handful of points, or even drop points. This is particularly the case if you don't qualify for bonus points.

And as I said, to gain in strength (as opposed to rating), it is often recommended to play players 100 points above you - so again, the benefit of playing up as opposed to being top seed is clear.

checknraise

I dont buy that argument at all, if I am an improving player I would wager it would be allot easier to gain rating playing players of the same level or below especially the higher up the bands you go.

I believe the current situation is doing more harm than good for Ireland to produce really strong players as very few are playing tournaments. What is going to be better for the development of a promising player 6 games against 2000+ opposition or 6 games against 1600+ opposition?

cdeb

checknraise wrote: »

I dont buy that argument at all, if I am an improving player I would wager it would be allot easier to gain rating playing players of the same level or below especially the higher up the bands you go.

Well you've not got statistics on your side for a start anyway. Or lots of coaching guidelines, which generally agree that you should play players a bit (but not too much) stronger than you. (Remember, the aim is to improve your strength, not your rating)

checknraise

Of course in a ideal world everyone would like to play stronger players but the reality is usually different. My point is that if a player is improving and playing above their rating their true rating will be reflected quite quickly - especially with juniors.

That statement proves my point tho. In Ireland the majority of tournaments are practically opens which gives opportunities for people to play stronger players. What you have to think about is why would the stronger players play tournaments, what is in it for them?

Just compare the 2016 Leinster Championships with 2006 and see the difference in players.

http://www.irlchess.com/leinsterchmasters2006_allfiles/pairings_leinsterchmasters2006.html

http://ratings.icu.ie/tournaments/865

That was a random and recent example I could use but I think it is clear that the entry on master level players is way down in tournaments.

cdeb

checknraise wrote: »

My point is that if a player is improving and playing above their rating their true rating will be reflected quite quickly - especially with juniors.

While this is true, you improve quicker by playing better rated players - so playing up if you are near the top of a rating band does make sense.

checknraise wrote: »

In Ireland the majority of tournaments are practically opens which gives opportunities for people to play stronger players.

What? No they're not.

checknraise wrote: »

What you have to think about is why would the stronger players play tournaments, what is in it for them?

This is a point worth investigating alright. The example you give isn't even a particularly good one - though it does show the point alright. I found some booklets from the 1981 Irish Championships going through some old books up the club recently - it was a very very strong tournament. 38 players, all over 2000, and many over 2200. Last year's tournament had half the number of entrants, and wasn't anywhere near as strong.

I guess it's worth asking the players concerned why they're not playing. Looking at the list for the Leinsters you've given, I think a few of those players simply don't have time for tournaments at the moment because of work commitments. Obviously one has passed away, which doesn't help.

But I think looking at the bigger picture, there's a bigger wave of junior players coming through than at any time in maybe the last 40 years, and the potential is there to get back to the level of the 1981 championships. I don't see any harm in encouraging some players to play in order that the tournament does reach that level again in the future.

sodacat11

There is another side to things. When a tournament has a number of more mature entrants there is a certain sense of camaraderie and friendship between the players (granted there is the odd twat that this doesn't apply to) as most of us have known each other for years and have developed a friendly rivalry. It is not unusual to have a pint or a coffee with an opponent after the game. This aspect goes out the window when your opponent is some acne faced nerd who is going to post the fact that he beat you all over Facebook or Twitter within minutes of the game ending. It is also very difficult to get motivated when playing these little plonkers as a draw or loss costs a heap of points whereas a win is no big deal and not worth much rating wise.

cdeb

Well that's probably the daftest rant I think I've heard in a long time.

Particularly given that we know who in Irish chess tends to do most posting of silly stuff all over facebook and twitter, and it isn't "some acne faced nerd"

sodacat11

cdeb wrote: »

Well that's probably the daftest rant I think I've heard in a long time.

Particularly given that we know who in Irish chess tends to do most posting of silly stuff all over facebook and twitter, and it isn't "some acne faced nerd"

I did say that there was the "odd twat" who is the exception to the norm.

cdeb

Fair enough.

The rest of your rant is still just bizarre though.

sodacat11

Not half as bizarre as the dumbing down of our national championship for a few players not good enough to get a 1900 rating without being spoonfed.