Armstrong 2019/20 season

cdeb

checknraise wrote: »

The 4ncl should not be prioritised over the Armstrong but I do believe the Armstrong should try to avoid fixtures clashes in the future.

That's probably something which would have to be discussed specifically at an AGM. The rules currently effectively mean the LCU only need avoid clashes with the four Leinster events (Malahide, Gonzaga, St Andrews, City of Dublin), and by special exemption Kilkenny and Bunratty are in there too.

But to avoid clashes with the 4NCL would put quite a strain on the leagues fixtures, especially with so many matches on Saturdays.

One thing which could help fixture congestion - and I know the LCU will be looking at this shortly - is for clubs to increase the number of matches they could stage at any one time. It's the single biggest restricting item when it comes to doing fixtures.

It would be nice to get to a stage where all games in any given round of the leagues are played in the same week, with no games in that league the following week.

For now though, avoiding clashes with the 4NCL would create a big headache for the leagues controller.

mikhail

While I don't personally have a problem with minor postponements, I understand that it is currently a rule that games can only be played in advance, and this is not currently enforced with the consent of at least some of the divisional controllers. In fact, I was due to play a postponed game tomorrow, only my opponents couldn't even declare a player on the original night the fixture last week. This should be teased out at the next AGM; either the rule is unpopular and/or impractical enough to replace, or the controllers and captains should be reminded of it.

1 week delays are fairly harmless, in my opinion, and much easier for captains to arrange than playing in advance when they may not get a final yes/no off of some of their flakier players until days before the match (less sometimes!) and so don't know their final board order sufficiently early. Those flaky players are sometimes just chronic procrastinators, but there are also people with short notice of irregular working schedules, family commitments, etc. and I'd rather facilitate them than make captains' lives harder. I remember instances of clubs taking the piss and not playing individual boards for months, which isn't okay either, but there should be a reasonable middle ground.

And of course this is separate from Bray's complaint, which I presume has been submitted to the committee.

undisputed

cdeb wrote: »

But to avoid clashes with the 4NCL would put quite a strain on the leagues fixtures, especially with so many matches on Saturdays.

You answered yourself. There are too many games on Saturdays. Clubs where possible should switch back to weekday plays. Most clashes will be avoided then.

cdeb

I suppose the flip side is that why should Dublin, say, change from Saturday Armstrong games if they've no interest in entering the 4NCL?

The other team that plays on Saturdays that doesn't need to is Gonzaga (x2). Ballinasloe, Balbriggan and Kilkenny are all country teams and have to play on Saturdays (though that rule seems to have been quietly lost a few years ago)

I think clubs aiming to host more matches would do more to alleviate fixture pressure (and they're not mutually exclusive options)

undisputed

cdeb wrote: »

I suppose the flip side is that why should Dublin, say, change from Saturday Armstrong games if they've no interest in entering the 4NCL?

Not just clashes with 4NCL. All clashes - bunratty, kilkenny etc

cdeb

But players from Dublin are very likely to want to play Bunratty or Kilkenny. The same can't be said of 4NCL. So why put extra pressure on the fixture list, or force Dublin to change their home night, for something they don't want to play in?

mikhail

cdeb wrote: »

But players from Dublin are very likely to want to play Bunratty or Kilkenny. The same can't be said of 4NCL. So why put extra pressure on the fixture list, or force Dublin to change their home night, for something they don't want to play in?

If we could argue it's to the benefit of Irish chess more generally to have teams in it... I don't know. Maybe we should ask the Gonzaga lads why they're playing in it. I suspect it's a healthy outlet for our elite club players (2000+), who are otherwise limited to a few dozen opponents nationally. That'd pretty much make it exclusively an Armstrong problem, which maybe is more manageable. Worth discussing, anyway.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

cdeb wrote: »

The other team that plays on Saturdays that doesn't need to is Gonzaga (x2).

The school doesn't allow us to keep it open past 10 during the week so weekdays are out for us.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

cdeb wrote: »

That's probably something which would have to be discussed specifically at an AGM. The rules currently effectively mean the LCU only need avoid clashes with the four Leinster events (Malahide, Gonzaga, St Andrews, City of Dublin), and by special exemption Kilkenny and Bunratty are in there too.

But to avoid clashes with the 4NCL would put quite a strain on the leagues fixtures, especially with so many matches on Saturdays.

Sure, on paper. In practice, the LCU fixtures (during the tenure of the last two controllers) have been devised to avoid all major weekenders/events with the LCs doing a great job to put it all together. There was one instance of Cork getting blown apart by a major clash with dozens of fixtures a few years back. I think Cork was originally a week later or earlier on the calendar or was understood to be so; nothing the LCU can do in instances like that. After this I worked with organisers and the LC to make sure for the most part that all events that could be posted were in the books in August. Most events have kept this up since and have for the most part stopped moving their dates around and stuck to a weekend. Desmond does the same now just to sort out the junior coaching dates. I also used to give Best-guess dates for any event that didn't make the fixture cut-off (which is rare these days as Mulcahy, Gonzaga, Bunratty, Galway, IJCC, Easter and Malahide essentially have fixed dates or are well known in advance)

I cannot say for sure but I'm pretty sure I also fed the dates of the 4NCL to the LC in the past to avoid clashes with Gonzaga and Enniscorthy (no longer in 4NCL) fixtures. This year, like the last few, the Gonzaga 4NCL fixtures were put in place to avoid Gonzaga's Armstrong fixtures (and players like the TKs, KMP, etc just rearranged where possible). This was always with the proviso that if it was too much work for the LC or not possible, then don't worry about it (as all my requests are).

Again, I don't actually remember if I mentioned it to him this year, but I presumably gave the original 4NCL dates to the LC. These were later amended and rounds 1-2 (which happened last weekend) were moved from their original slot in October/November to February - because of a clash with the ECC.

I had a few things changed in the fixtures this year for full disclosure. The final round was originally 6 weeks after the last round (and clashed with Ennis) which was less than ideal so I requested it be moved forward so we could wrap up a little earlier. It was then moved forward to clash with Malahide by accident so requested to have it moved slightly further forward which was granted. I requested fixtures be amended to avoid a clash with Mulcahy which I think was done and I requested that fixtures for those involved in the ECC (those specific Armstrong teams rather than the whole 6 divisions) be avoided.

I don't expect the fixture list to avoid absolutely everything and I think the LC is fully in his right to tell me where to go once fixtures are made and difficult to change; but when I notice something, I generally point it out. I missed the one last week though as I generally only check when its originally released in September - I also haven't been doing much chess work this year compared to others.

undisputed

cdeb wrote: »

But players from Dublin are very likely to want to play Bunratty or Kilkenny. The same can't be said of 4NCL. So why put extra pressure on the fixture list, or force Dublin to change their home night, for something they don't want to play in?

Are you arguing with yourself? Cause that's what I'm saying. Dublin can play Armstrong games weekdays and bunratties weekends. No clashes

Retd.LoyolaCpt

VanMorrison wrote: »

The League Controller won't be in the job for long. He's an obvious idiot and Gonzo flunkie. Gonzaga CC are a crew of cheats. If it isn't some kid in the bogs reading moves off a smart phone, its flogging the rules about playing players up from the second team. Previously I didn't care if the Gonzos won the Armstrong, now I hope they lose it now.

sodacat11 wrote: »

Anyone who believes that Gonzaga College was "unavailable" today probably also believes in the Tooth Fairy. I wrote once about the sense of entitlement that Gonzaga had and I got slammed for it but this is just yet another example of what I was talking about. I think that Bray should be awarded an 8-0 win as it is crystal clear to everyone that the 4NCL is the real reason that Gonzaga couldn't field a team today. As Spidersweb says Gonzaga have enough strength in depth to field a strong team but of course they wouldn't do that because they feel "entitled" to win the Armstrong yet again. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

VanMorrison wrote: »

Since Bray didn't consent to any change can the League Controller change the fixture back to its original form, stop lying to the chess public this way, stop being manipulated by the Gonzaga controlled ICU and LCU, and then just resign his position.

VanMorrison wrote: »

Gonzaga originally suggested, through their surrogate the League Controller

VanMorrison wrote: »

Now we find the League Controller doing Gonzaga's bidding

For the record, I think the fixture should have gone ahead somehow on the published date if it was really only changed 10 days out.

However, a message to these two posters: I know exactly who both of you are and our club, with its two independent Armstrong teams (given you dragged our entire club into an issue between the A captain, the bray captain and the LCU), will remember these comments when we play you each year. From us to you - we look forward to those games. Pretending to be Eric with his unique vernacular will only get you so far VanMorrison when he's playing games in Bunratty at the times of your posts.

cdeb

undisputed wrote: »

Are you arguing with yourself? Cause that's what I'm saying. Dublin can play Armstrong games weekdays and bunratties weekends. No clashes

I'm saying why should Dublin play home games on weekdays though. They've nominated Saturday afternoon as their home times, and they know there'll never be a clash with Bunratty/Kilkenny.

You're suggesting they move to weekdays to avoid clashes with the 4NCL, a tournament they don't appear to have any interest playing. Why would they do that?

undisputed

cdeb wrote: »

I'm saying why should Dublin play home games on weekdays though. They've nominated Saturday afternoon as their home times, and they know there'll never be a clash with Bunratty/Kilkenny.

You're suggesting they move to weekdays to avoid clashes with the 4NCL, a tournament they don't appear to have any interest playing. Why would they do that?

I'm suggesting as many clubs as possible to move to weekdays to avoid as many clashes as possible

cdeb

Yes. And I'm suggesting that (a) the main clashes are covered, and (b) why should Dublin (in this example) move to avoid something (4NCL) that, for them, isn't even a clash?

VanMorrison

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

For the record, I think the fixture should have gone ahead somehow on the published date if it was really only changed 10 days out.

However, a message to these two posters: I know exactly who both of you are and our club, with its two independent Armstrong teams (given you dragged our entire club into an issue between the A captain, the bray captain and the LCU), will remember these comments when we play you each year. From us to you - we look forward to those games. Pretending to be Eric with his unique vernacular will only get you so far VanMorrison when he's playing games in Bunratty at the times of your posts.

Most of us know who others here are. We still play by the rules and don't name people or even name who we think other people are pretending to be. Weird that you think I'm pretending to be a certain [snip] from Bray based on the vernacular peculiar. See. Now I sound like Saoirse Ronan.

Anyway we love that your very independent Gonzo B team (independent 'cept for NCC and 4NCL and borrowing from the lower divisions) are now motivated to play against 'usuns' (cryptically not named). Careful you don't lose that motivation otherwise you'll be in the Heidenfeld soon enough.

sodacat11

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

For the record, I think the fixture should have gone ahead somehow on the published date if it was really only changed 10 days out.

However, a message to these two posters: I know exactly who both of you are and our club, with its two independent Armstrong teams (given you dragged our entire club into an issue between the A captain, the bray captain and the LCU), will remember these comments when we play you each year. From us to you - we look forward to those games.

:eek: I think that I might be too scared to even turn up.

sodacat11

cdeb wrote: »

Yes. And I'm suggesting that (a) the main clashes are covered, and (b) why should Dublin (in this example) move to avoid something (4NCL) that, for them, isn't even a clash?

I agree.
It is a difficult enough job for the powers that be to devise a fixture list for the leagues which avoids clashes with Irish events without having to start taking into account tournaments in other countries that only the privileged few want to play in.

checknraise

Gonzaga 2 Bray 1, the rest of the boards will be played in Bray and Belfast in the next few weeks.

VanMorrison

checknraise wrote: »

Gonzaga 2 Bray 1, the rest of the boards will be played in Bray and Belfast in the next few weeks.

Belfast !?


Is this a joke?

cdeb

Bray's request

spidersweb

cdeb wrote: »

Bray's request

I heard it was the request of Gonzaga to play two games in Belfast- good will gesture, but I might be misinformed.

cdeb

I don't see why Gonzaga would request that in fairness.

3 games were played as scheduled because Gonzaga only needed 5 players for the 4NCL. Bray were asked to nominate a venue/time (within reason) for the other games. Which seems a fair compromise in the circumstances.

VanMorrison

cdeb wrote: »

I don't see why Gonzaga would request that in fairness.

3 games were played as scheduled because Gonzaga only needed 5 players for the 4NCL. Bray were asked to nominate a venue/time (within reason) for the other games. Which seems a fair compromise in the circumstances.

This doesn't make sense. 4NCL was last weekend.

cdeb

Good point actually.

Still, the overall compromise I believe was that Bray got to choose date/venue for the postponed games, hence some being in Belfast (for Waters/Cairns I presume)

spidersweb

cdeb wrote: »

I don't see why Gonzaga would request that in fairness.

Good will gesture? Seen as they created the problem, along with the controllers who made a balls of it, but to their credit, and Gonzaga, they seem to be keen to make amends and be as fair as possible.


Good outcome for all concerned considering everything and hopefully lessons learned to avoid such things happening again. At the end of the day it comes down to mistakes by a few individuals, 2-4 at most. Human error fixed by humans.

cdeb

Well they agreed to it as a good-will gesture, rather than requested it. It was the leagues controller (being called upon to resign here by a small minority!) who ended up brokering the deal.

spidersweb

cdeb wrote: »

Well they agreed to it as a good-will gesture, rather than requested it. It was the leagues controller (being called upon to resign here by a small minority!) who ended up brokering the deal.

Small minority calling for the resignation of the controllers? (Totally untrue, fabrication or figment of your imagination- unless I am overlooking some posts here. feel free to direct me to them) What on earth do you mean? There was only ever a single poster in this very long thread that called for that, none agreed or condoned that, or some of the over the top borderline abuse.

He (Van The Man) could be dismissed as being angry and frustrated I guess and not taking seriously to judge by the responses.

The fact is, that they (controllers) made a balls of it and this has correctly raised concerns and asked questions about how they went about things. At least lessons can be learned.

The further fact that they are now cleaning up their mess also means they deserve credit for that, as do Gonzaga, who were much maligned when the reality is that it was not a Gonzaga club matter, so much as an individual or two, who in turn do more good much more of the time anyway.

Main thing is that it is being sorted in a good spirit of fairness.

cdeb

spidersweb wrote: »

Small minority calling for the resignation of the controllers? (Totally untrue, fabrication or figment of your imagination- unless I am overlooking some posts here. feel free to direct me to them) What on earth do you mean? There was only ever a single poster in this very long thread that called for that, none agreed or condoned that, or some of the over the top borderline abuse.

Sounds like a small minority to me.

spidersweb

cdeb wrote: »

Sounds like a small minority to me.

Sounds like a solitary lone voice to me.

spidersweb

checknraise wrote: »

Anchor has made lots of sensible points in the thread and its hard to disagree with anything he has written.

Agree that Anchor has indeed made many very good points in the post that was made, but it would be easy to also not only disagree with some minor things he wrote, but also easy to point out some factual errors and refute some (not many) misguided notions too.

However, overall it is not worth the bother as the gist of it, and much of the details, were very good.

checknraise wrote: »

The 4ncl should not be prioritised over the Armstrong

Sorry but this is just weird. Thanks for allowing people think it ok NOT to prioritize the 4NCL,the 5 NCL,the 99 NCL, the Bundesleague. The French National Leagues or perhaps even the Siberian Armstrongsky Cup too, over the LCU Armstrong Cup, here in Leinster, Ireland.

checknraise wrote: »

but I do believe the Armstrong should try to avoid fixtures clashes in the future.

Sorry but this seems so wrong. Have you really learned so little from this thread and the whole mess of issues involved?

I think your belief is not only misguided but makes little sense at all surely? The Armstrong Cup and all LCU Leagues should only organize and concern itself with the needs and wants of the LCU clubs, players and national chess life, and chess federation of and within Ireland- period!

If there are any select interests of a tiny number of players and clubs within the LCU Leagues, who wish to make special representations, and try change the function and focus of the LCU, and or it's Leagues, then they can feel free to do so through the due processes available. Like at an AGM.

I suspect that about 99% of people playing chess in the LCU leagues would find it strange and totally irrelevant to them to even think outside of getting through their own season, and as such, be against any such moves made in that direction. In short, what happens in the Leagues, of another province, let alone country, are irrelevant. Doubtless Munster Leagues have fixtures that clash with LCU fixtures too.

checknraise wrote: »

All of Irelands best players have played in the 4ncl over the years and it should be encouraged as they get opportunities to play much stronger opposition compared to what they would in Ireland .

I think you are just wrong again. and it is still totally irrelevant anyway. Vast majority of "Irelands best players" have never played, and never will play in the 4NCL,the 5 NCL,the 99 NCL, the Bundesleague. The French National Leagues, or perhaps even the Siberian Armstrongsky Cup too.

A tiny selection of individuals and two clubs have participated in the aforementioned 4 NCL. Very nice that is, but what has that to do with the Armstrong Cup, unless a very small and selective number of people wish to make it an issue? Best of luck at the AGM with this topic.

Enniscorthy CC managed to also play there too, but do they not count somehow, because they are not among "Irelands best players" ? Clubs and players are answerable to themselves. They can encourage each other to their hearts content.

It would not matter either way anyway. The LCU Leagues are not about "Irelands best players" no more than they are about any special self designated group of players and individuals. How about the Irish left handed players? More of them playing the the LCU Leagues than Irish based players playing in the4 NCL.

Players of varying playing strength play in all Leagues, including the 4 NCL and LCU leagues, one has nothing to do with the other. Individuals and clubs are free to participate in whatever events they like. Nice to see alright, but nothing more.

checknraise wrote: »

In the last few years there have been players from Gonzaga, Elm Mount, Balbriggan, Trinity, Bray, Dublin and Kilkenny. Thats nearly every club in the Armstrong.

So what? Again I doubt your numbers. A handful (or two?) at most overall, and outside of Gonzaga (a handful, maybe two) there is then Elm Mount 1 player, Balbriggin 2 players (starting this year only) Trinity maybe 1-2 ever? Bray Zero?, Dublin zero, maybe 1? Kilkenny 1-2 if ever maybe?

While individuals have played in the 4 NCL who also play in the Armstrong Cup, none have made it an issue, or any sort of clash or conflict. They just played in whatever matches they wanted.

But regardless, this has never been an issue or concern of anybody playing in the LCU Leagues as they have worked around the assumption that the LCU Leagues have nothing to do with other Leagues. Players can make their own choices, fulfill their club obligations in the Armstrong as suits and have no relevance to the fixtures of another League.

Plenty of opportunities for players of all strengths to play against players of all strengths throughout the LCU Leagues. What happens in other Leagues is irrelevant, especially those in another country. Choice is the key word.

checknraise wrote: »

February is the most congested time of year for fixtures as clubs are having to fit in 3 league matches plus Bunratty.

Agreed, which is why it is madness to even consider things outside of Ireland and the purview of the LCU and ICU. The only exception that is ever made that I am aware of, is where a player is on representative duty for Ireland in an official and team capacity, like an Olympiad. Exceedingly rare but it does happen.

checknraise wrote: »

On the Balbriggan/Kilkenny match I imagine it wouldn't have been possible to play in advance. Rating lists are now published monthly so its important to play and rate in the month which I am sure will be the case.

All the more reason why the fixture list should not be changed and clubs and their players stay within the rules and play fixtures on the set date, or well in advance, when and where possible.

In order to keep thinks working well, even mutually agreed change of dates, for games between players, should always be in advance, notwithstanding there might be the odd and rare exception in which players and a club are content to accommodate each other with more flexibility.

One prolonged "adjournment" already resulted in a null and void game within a match. Thankfully this has not happened again with this same player after the mutually agreed change of dates for two games between Kilkenny and Balbriggin was played within a short period, and won't impact them being Fide rated in time either.

checknraise wrote: »

The Balbriggan players are Irelands most promising players and just want to play chess.

Not strictly true, they are AMONG Irelands most promising players for sure, but we have many others too. These two players, as it happens, have received nothing but adulation and encouragement, and rightly so.

They are indeed among Irelands most promising juniors and exciting prospects for sure, but we don't wont to facilitate or encourage any practice or tendency towards special selective treatment, and or cliques, just because certain players find themselves playing for the same team in a foreign League for example. That is also unfair to such young players too, and in the case of these two particular juniors they are, by all accounts, great kids.

Would you be more or less inclined to focus on preferential treatment and attention to and for players on your own team, or club, or not in your club, and not on the same team as you? This is a question we could all ask of ourselves.

checknraise wrote: »

I don't think its fair to bring them or Balbriggan club into the matter.

The only poster being so unfair as to bring these two players into this matter is curiously enough yourself (unintentionally I assume). The players are utterly irrelevant to the issues. Might as well be Carlsen or and Kasparov for all it matters. Same could be said of any of the players playing in the league. The issue is about clubs, captains and controllers. The players are all entirely innocent and frankly irrelevant.

What is relevant, is the fact that the club in question, Balbriggin happens to be the same club as the controller and he is a team member of the Armstrong Cup Balbriggin team, who changed the fixtures and gave the reason for doing so because of a problem with the venue, as opposed to the date itself.

While at the same time there is the suggestion, and some evidence, to support the claim that this was not the real or full reason for the change of fixtures. None of us know the exact details of this murky aspect with any degree of certainty.

So, there was a change which facilitated and enabled Gonzaga field players in the 4 NCL, on the same date as the match with Bray was supposed to take place, and then funnier still, two players from the same club as the controller, who were also playing for Gonzaga in the 4 NCL, had their games "adjourned" to play on different dates, instead of the set fixture dates, when all other six games from this match were played on the set fixture date.

At least that was with the mutual agreement of Kilkenny and Balbriggin, with those games played quickly. Hilariously enough, in Gonzaga along side the 3 Bray V Gongzaga games apparently!

Proving that clubs within our LCU Leagues can, and will, accommodate each other with practical help, when the need arises. Full credit to Gonzaga for that.

Pointing all these things out, expressing concerns and asking questions is a healthy way to clear the air, and have transparency, trust, plus confidence which helps to avoid such situations from recurring again.

It seems like all concerned have gone on to make a great effort to sort things out with a fair and amicable resolution to the matte.

I think the two controllers and Gonzaga CC, along with Bray, all deserve credit, and appreciation, for dealing with the matter.