Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Good Old Days

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    The best player is the guy with the highest rating right?

    So why even bother running an Irish Championship? Just wait until all the entries are in and give the title to the highest rated entry.


  • Options
    #93
    zeitnot
    Registered Users Posts: 265 ✭✭zeitnot


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    The best player is the guy with the highest rating right?

    So why even bother running an Irish Championship? Just wait until all the entries are in and give the title to the highest rated entry.

    Because the ICU wants to see interesting chess played? A competitive event with well-matched players? A champion tested under pressure when it counts?

    There's something about this in the ICU constitution, under "Objectives". "To ensure that the Irish Chess Championship is held annually". Of particular note, it's not "to find out who the best player in Ireland is".


  • Options
    #94
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    zeitnot wrote: »
    Because the ICU wants to see interesting chess played? A competitive event with well-matched players? A champion tested under pressure when it counts?

    There's something about this in the ICU constitution, under "Objectives". "To ensure that the Irish Chess Championship is held annually". Of particular note, it's not "to find out who the best player in Ireland is".

    Well I don't know about you but I find rapidly improving youngsters far more interesting to follow than players who have been jealously guarding a 1900 rating for decades


  • Options
    #95
    macelligott
    Registered Users Posts: 382 ✭✭macelligott


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    Well I don't know about you but I find rapidly improving youngsters far more interesting to follow than players who have been jealously guarding a 1900 rating for decades
    How does one "jealously guard a 1900 rating for decades"? Unless you mean by not playing for decades :-)


  • Options
    #96
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    macelligott wrote: »
    How does one "jealously guard a 1900 rating for decades"? Unless you mean by not playing for decades :-)

    By raising a fuss whenever you face the injustice of having to play a lower rated player


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    macelligott
    Registered Users Posts: 382 ✭✭macelligott


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    By raising a fuss whenever you face the injustice of having to play a lower rated player

    If you loose games your rating goes down regardless of the rating of the opponent. The meat fact of playing opponents over 1900 will not keep your rating over 1900.


  • Options
    #98
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    macelligott wrote: »
    If you loose games your rating goes down regardless of the rating of the opponent. The meat fact of playing opponents over 1900 will not keep your rating over 1900.

    It's a far slower decline though isn't it? Easier to stomach :)


  • Options
    #99
    CafollasCat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32 ✭CafollasCat


    Great Irish Ch this year alright. The homepage of the ICU website has it all. Pairings and a link to a page dedicated to the tournament. We are being spoiled and just so lucky to witness such fantastic efforts to keep us all informed and updated with the latest information.

    It will be interesting to see what they do abut the odd number and the 1700 rated player. 20 Live Boards is looking to much now as maybe 7 or 8 will suffice, A bit of a mystery as to where the page with the live games is at this stage. Will there any late late entries?


  • Options
    #100
    CafollasCat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32 ✭CafollasCat


    Great Irish Ch this year alright. The homepage of the ICU website has it all. Pairings and a link to a page dedicated to the tournament. We are being spoiled and just so lucky to witness such fantastic efforts to keep us all informed and updated with the latest information.

    It will be interesting to see what they do about the odd number and the 1700 rated player. 20 Live Boards is looking to much now as maybe 7 or 8 will suffice, A bit of a mystery as to where the page with the live games is at this stage. Will there any late late entries?


  • Options
    #101
    mikhail
    Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭mikhail


    reunion wrote: »
    Then by all means explain to me how rating is a measurement.
    You're both right. The rating is a measurement of past performance, and is used as a predictor of future performance. And as the stockbrokers will tell you, past results don't guarantee future performance.

    Sodacat, I must admit that your complaint seems very well founded this year. http://www.chess-results.com/tnr229125.aspx?lan=1 seems to say Lopez has dropped out, and the tournament is extremely weak, which is a great pity. Maybe you should have played. You might have had a realistic (if small) chance of winning it this year if you played well and had one or two lucky results.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    mikhail wrote: »
    You're both right. The rating is a measurement of past performance, and is used as a predictor of future performance. And as the stockbrokers will tell you, past results don't guarantee future performance.

    Sodacat, I must admit that your complaint seems very well founded this year. http://www.chess-results.com/tnr229125.aspx?lan=1 seems to say Lopez has dropped out, and the tournament is extremely weak, which is a great pity. Maybe you should have played. You might have had a realistic (if small) chance of winning it this year if you played well and had one or two lucky results.

    It must be the weakest Irish Championship ever. I am glad that I didn't play. Unless something is done to restore the Irish Championship to what it was before I very much doubt that I will ever play in it again.
    I will be eligible for the "Seniors" 60+ next year so I will just concentrate on winning that, unless of course they start allowing 50year olds into it.
    I take no pleasure in being right about what would happen to the Irish Championship when they started ignoring the rating requirements. I would have loved to have played in it this year had it been for 1900+ players only.


  • Options
    #103
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    Well I don't know about you but I find rapidly improving youngsters far more interesting to follow than players who have been jealously guarding a 1900 rating for decades

    I wonder if I have been "jealously guarding my 1900 rating" by playing over 1600 rated games and in numerous open competitions spread across something like ten different countries?
    As MacElligott rightly points out, the only way you can fully protect your rating is by not playing.


  • Options
    #104
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Before anyone starts banging on about low rated players getting some good results in the Irish Championship let me say that of course there will be some upsets. Some low rated players are probably better than their ratings and every dog has his day. I would also point out that the higher rated player is at a disadvantage in these games as he HAS to win, even as black, and often he can overpress in a position where he wouldn't risk it against a peer. Finally, it is hard to get motivated against someone you feel shouldn't even be playing especially when you know that even a draw is going to cost you a hat full of rating points.


  • Options
    #105
    Ballynafeigh Chess
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Ballynafeigh Chess


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    Before anyone starts banging on about low rated players getting some good results in the Irish Championship let me say
    That I'm getting my excuses in early!


  • Options
    #106
    Ballynafeigh Chess
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Ballynafeigh Chess


    Must admit having had a look at the line ups in the different sections it is abundantly clear it is not as strong as one would expect for a National championship.
    That said, good luck to all those courageous enough to compete.


  • Options
    #107
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,154 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    There's other events on as well of course - Intermediate and Junior this weekend.

    Apparently the Intermediate is in a sports hall right beside a gym, which obviously isn't ideal. (In fact, it's probably the least suitable venue for a chess tournament I've ever seen) And there's an odd number of players, with the bottom-rated player some 120 points adrift of the rating band. I don't really agree with refusing a player entry into the Irish Senior to even up the numbers, but I don't see why this person couldn't have been bumped down to their actual section to even things up. There's been byes in the bottom section as well, though the numbers are fluctuating by round as it seems some players have withdrawn mid-tournament.

    Looks like the overall tournament could well be a bit of a disaster, unfortunately.


  • Options
    #108
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »
    Must admit having had a look at the line ups in the different sections it is abundantly clear it is not as strong as one would expect for a National championship.
    That said, good luck to all those courageous enough to compete.

    What is courageous about playing in a tournament where you know you are going to get a lot of easy games???
    It isn't very courageous of the low rated players either as they are in a win win situation. It would have been much braver to play their peers in the Intermediate event where they belong.


  • Options
    #109
    Ballynafeigh Chess
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Ballynafeigh Chess


    I disagree Sodacat11, when those that registered did so they were not aware of exactly who else had also done so. Thus they were prepared to face whomever without reservation. Those that boycotted took an opposite view apparently in some cases for fear of being spanked by a lower rated player.


  • Options
    #110
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »
    I disagree Sodacat11, when those that registered did so they were not aware of exactly who else had also done so. Thus they were prepared to face whomever without reservation. Those that boycotted took an opposite view apparently in some cases for fear of being spanked by a lower rated player.
    I would be VERY surprised if there was even a single 1900+ player who didn't enter out of fear. I am probably the only one who "boycotted" the event (others probably had other reasons for not playing) and I can assure you that my record against Irish lower rated players is probably as good(maybe even better) as most 2200s . I lose most rating points playing by playing guys rated higher than me and against very young kids in foreign tournaments where there published ratings are often hundreds of points lower than their actual playing strength. I have often lost to guys in Prague rated 1250 who a year later turn out to be 22 or 23oo.


  • Options
    #111
    Pete Morriss
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭Pete Morriss


    cdeb wrote: »
    Apparently the Intermediate is in a sports hall right beside a gym, which obviously isn't ideal. (In fact, it's probably the least suitable venue for a chess tournament I've ever seen).

    My experience as a tournament organizer is that the first year in a new venue is a learning process for the venue's management, which has to come to terms with our rather unusual requirements, such as complete silence outside the playing room(s). Things tend to work better the second year if the venue wants to keep the business. Given that the Irish Championship seems to be almost always in Dublin, it is strange that it is always held in a different venue. Conversely, if there are no affordable venues good enough to be worth persevering with in Dublin, there is a very strong case for it moving around the rest of the country - perhaps moving around the venues that do have considerable experience of hosting chess tournaments.

    Also, my experience with dealing with university administrators (which unfortunately is considerable) is that one cannot rely on the university's administration to look after the organization of an event: it is essential to have an active member of the tournament organization team on the ground. This was done in Limerick in 2013 (perhaps the most efficiently run Irish Champs in recent years) and to a lesser extent in Trinity in 2014, but seems not to have been done at all this year: anybody at UCD who kept his/her eyes and ears open would have known well in advance about the noisy event held outside the main playing hall yesterday, and would have checked out the sports hall.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    2bts
    Registered Users Posts: 82 ✭✭2bts


    The venue for the open weekender 8-10th July could not be more different from the sports hall used for the first 3 rounds of the Junior and Intermediate on 1st and 2nd. (The final two rounds on 3rd were held in the excellent Fitzgerald Chambers - a purpose built debating chamber). The Astra Hall is a large conference type facility with good sound proofing. Also, there are no other events on the Astra Hall foyer area for all three days.


  • Options
    #113
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    ComDubh wrote: »
    Looking on the bright side of things, the top few seeds this year would make very worthy champions. A few predictions: I am certain that the winner will be either Lopez or Jessel and I see them both notching up a very high score.
    Lopez doesn't seem to be playing after all so I expect/hope Jessel will win.
    This looks like the weakest/ smallest Irish Championship field in living memory?
    Moving the event to an earlier date in the year would have some advantages:
    a) people who work would not have to give up precious summer holiday dates to compete;
    b) In the even numbered years the Champion could actually play in that year's FIDE olympiad.


  • Options
    #114
    Ted111
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭Ted111


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    One would think that with evolution the human race would get smarter

    There would be no noticeable change between individual generations.

    See Biology curriculum, pass level, for Leaving Cert or whatever it's called these days.


  • Options
    #115
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,154 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    Pete Morriss wrote: »
    anybody at UCD who kept his/her eyes and ears open would have known well in advance about the noisy event held outside the main playing hall yesterday, and would have checked out the sports hall.
    This is it. The college rather than the organisers screwed up with the issues on day 1 of the senior tournament (there was a gig arranged for right outside the room - not sure how the organisers would have known that necessarily). But one look at the sports hall would show it's not a suitable venue for a chess tournament.

    In fairness, the room was changed for today, and it was a much better venue - even had a viewing gallery, which was kind of cool.


  • Options
    #116
    mikhail
    Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭mikhail


    Tim Harding wrote: »
    This looks like the weakest/ smallest Irish Championship field in living memory?
    Weakest, I think, but it's been smaller:
    http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2000_allfiles/pairings_irlch2000.html
    http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2006_allfiles/pairings_irlch2006.html


  • Options
    #117
    reunion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭reunion


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    I can assure you that my record against Irish lower rated players is probably as good(maybe even better) as most 2200s

    So if we take your Irish tournaments performances in the last year only against players sub-1900, your rating would be 1892 (7/9 from an average rating of 1792).

    If we take Killian Delaney (closest to 2200 rated player in the Irish Championships) he had a performance of 2033 (17/20 from an average rating of 1753).

    if we took someone (Kevin Butler) with a similar rating to yourself playing in the Irish Champs this year, they would have a rating of 1878 (7.5/8 from an average rating of 1738). So it seems you do as well as someone rated ~<2000.
    sodacat11 wrote: »
    the higher rated player is at a disadvantage in these games as he HAS to win

    Funniest thing I've read all day.
    mikhail wrote: »
    Weakest, I think, but it's been smaller:
    http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2000_allfiles/pairings_irlch2000.html
    http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2006_allfiles/pairings_irlch2006.html

    Depending on your metric for "weakest", I would have said the 2007 tournament was the "weakest" (see average ratings below) - though people had a chance for norms, foreign titled players and a large prize fund. So it really depends on the metric used to determine "weakest".

    2003 average rating 2049
    2004 average rating 2102
    2005 average rating 2037
    2006 average rating 2061
    2007 average rating 1887
    2008 average rating 1976
    2009 average rating 2021
    2010 average rating 2034
    2011 average rating 1984
    2012 average rating 2040
    2013 average rating 2022
    2014 average rating 2025
    2015 average rating 2014
    2016 average rating 1946


    If we took out everyone rated below 1900 (except 1 so the numbers are even), we would have an all play all tournament of 10 players with an average rating of 2035.


  • Options
    #118
    mikhail
    Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭mikhail


    reunion wrote: »
    Depending on your metric for "weakest", I would have said the 2007 tournament was the "weakest" (see average ratings below) - though people had a chance for norms, foreign titled players and a large prize fund. So it really depends on the metric used to determine "weakest".
    Fair point, though you're comparing the average ratings of an Open with an >1900 tournament in that case. The 2007 tournament had far more strong players. This year's tournament has only three players over 2100, whereas 2007 had 14 Irish players over that rating, plus assorted foreign players including GMs. I think it's fair to call this one weaker, average rating or no.


  • Options
    #119
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    reunion wrote: »
    So if we take your Irish tournaments performances in the last year only against players sub-1900, your rating would be 1892 (7/9 from an average rating of 1792).

    If we take Killian Delaney (closest to 2200 rated player in the Irish Championships) he had a performance of 2033 (17/20 from an average rating of 1753).

    if we took someone (Kevin Butler) with a similar rating to yourself playing in the Irish Champs this year, they would have a rating of 1878 (7.5/8 from an average rating of 1738). So it seems you do as well as someone rated ~<2000.



    Funniest thing I've read all day.



    Depending on your metric for "weakest", I would have said the 2007 tournament was the "weakest" (see average ratings below) - though people had a chance for norms, foreign titled players and a large prize fund. So it really depends on the metric used to determine "weakest".

    2003 average rating 2049
    2004 average rating 2102
    2005 average rating 2037
    2006 average rating 2061
    2007 average rating 1887
    2008 average rating 1976
    2009 average rating 2021
    2010 average rating 2034
    2011 average rating 1984
    2012 average rating 2040
    2013 average rating 2022
    2014 average rating 2025
    2015 average rating 2014
    2016 average rating 1946


    If we took out everyone rated below 1900 (except 1 so the numbers are even), we would have an all play all tournament of 10 players with an average rating of 2035.

    I really have to laugh at this anoraking. Have you nothing better to do with your time than to sift through my results for some nitpicking? LOL
    Perhaps if you look at my results over a 35 year period, especially when I was more active in chess, you would get a truer picture, that should keep you happily occupied for a while.:)


  • Options
    #120
    reunion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭reunion


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    I really have to laugh at this anoraking. Have you nothing better to do with your time than to sift through my results for some nitpicking? LOL
    Perhaps if you look at my results over a 35 year period, especially when I was more active in chess, you would get a truer picture, that should keep you happily occupied for a while.:)

    You'd be surprised at how good the new ICU website is, how easy it is to copy and paste things into excel and how quick computers are at calculating these things!

    I had a spare 5 minutes and I figured it was good to bring you down to earth and back to reality. You seem to think you are 1900 rated with a 2200 performance which is just plain wrong.

    Going back further won't paint a truer picture of your current playing strength (maybe of your wins and losses) but it won't give me your current performance. Similarly only looking at sub-1900 rated opponents won't give me your current performance either, though it does highlight an area you should probably improve on (playing sub-1900 players).
    mikhail wrote: »
    Fair point, though you're comparing the average ratings of an Open with an >1900 tournament in that case. The 2007 tournament had far more strong players. This year's tournament has only three players over 2100, whereas 2007 had 14 Irish players over that rating, plus assorted foreign players including GMs. I think it's fair to call this one weaker, average rating or no.

    It certainly is a weak >1900 (with exceptions) tournament though it's only limited to 73 players on the ICU rating list (more on the FIDE rating list) so getting 9 players in this top 73 isn't bad. It's just the range the 9 are coming from are more from the sub-2000 rating band.

    It's a shame Alex Lopez pulled out and it's a shame that more 2100+ players didn't play, but I wouldn't jump to conclusions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    reunion says "It's a shame Alex Lopez pulled out and it's a shame that more 2100+ players didn't play, but I wouldn't jump to conclusions"
    Why do you want more 2100+ players when you seem to think that ratings count for nothing and that there is little difference between 1700 and 2100 players? You are a bit like the brexit voters, you wanted the 1700s in but now that you see the consequences you want something else.


Advertisement