nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Irish Championships 2021

sodacat11

With the latest predictions about vaccine rollouts the possibility of the Irish Championships being held this year is very real. It will be great to get back to playing live over the board real chess with proper time limits again.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

macelligott

1 GM, 4 IM’s, 1 WIM, 8 FM’s, 2 CM’s, 1 WFM, 1 NM.
29 entries.
Looking good so far!

HaraldSchmidt

RooksPawn wrote: »

Proof of being vaccinated is not a problem. Everybody vaccinated in Ireland receives a card showing exactly what they got (including batch number) and when.

I took a photo of my mother's vaccination card. It's a piece of cardboard with a sticker on it. I could easily make a copy of it, sticking my name and date of birth on it, and nobody would know the difference.

This is why in the USA, at least, they are giving out some crytographically secure proof of vaccination. It may still be fakeable, but not by anyone at home with a printer and a supply of stationery.

RooksPawn

HaraldSchmidt wrote: »

I took a photo of my mother's vaccination card. It's a piece of cardboard with a sticker on it. I could easily make a copy of it, sticking my name and date of birth on it, and nobody would know the difference.

This is why in the USA, at least, they are giving out some crytographically secure proof of vaccination. It may still be fakeable, but not by anyone at home with a printer and a supply of stationery.

Evidently you have a fundamental belief in the veniality of your opponents. Do you think they all cheat?

I reckon that something electronic and secure will be put in place by the time international travel resumes on a large scale. The certificates (or whatever they loom like) will be based on the information in the HSE records, collected by GPs and vaccination centres, and the cards in the meantime will be accepted by whoever wants proof.

mikhail

RooksPawn wrote: »

Evidently you have a fundamental belief in the veniality of your opponents. Do you think they all cheat?

Evidently you have a fundamental naivety about the honesty of your opponents. Do you think none of them cheat? :pac:

Inquitus

mikhail wrote: »

Evidently you have a fundamental naivety about the honesty of your opponents. Do you think none of them cheat? :pac:

I would guess blunder checking your moves would be nigh on undetectable in online chess, you play your own moves but simply blunder check them before playing. I would guess that's the approach used by many of the undetected cheaters that are out there? thoughts?

mikhail

Inquitus wrote: »

I would guess blunder checking your moves would be nigh on undetectable in online chess, you play your own moves but simply blunder check them before playing. I would guess that's the approach used by many of the undetected cheaters that are out there? thoughts?

I was just teasing Rookspawn for his confrontational post, and this is a bit off topic, but to answer your question I don't think it'd be undetectable. It probably depends on your propensity to blunder and centipawn loss threshold for changing your move. The higher the former and the lower the latter, the more your average centipawn loss will be statistically strange. I've played through a few games flagged publicly as engine-assisted, and they don't look that strange. I can't imagine how much higher my rating would be if I never made a move that lost more than, say, 0.5 pawns, but you're probably talking hundreds of points. That'll get spotted. Spotted slower than just copying the engine, sure, but it's not invisible.

Inquitus

mikhail wrote: »

I was just teasing Rookspawn for his confrontational post, and this is a bit off topic, but to answer your question I don't think it'd be undetectable. It probably depends on your propensity to blunder and centipawn loss threshold for changing your move. The higher the former and the lower the latter, the more your average centipawn loss will be statistically strange. I've played through a few games flagged publicly as engine-assisted, and they don't look that strange. I can't imagine how much higher my rating would be if I never made a move that lost more than, say, 0.5 pawns, but you're probably talking hundreds of points. That'll get spotted. Spotted slower than just copying the engine, sure, but it's not invisible.

It would only prevent you blundering tactics I would guess, and one move blunders, but if you keep playing your own candidate moves with that sort of sanity check, I am not sure how detectable it would be, you would still lose your fair share of games, but it would defo prevent 1-2 move blunders that would otherwise cost you a game.

I think blatant cheating is obvious, as is taking far too long for simple captures and obvious responses etc. when validating obvious moves with an engine, but if done in a minor way it would likely would be hard to detect especially in longer format games.

The amount of obvious cheating on chess.com verges on the ridiculous, Eric Hansen played at least 2 blatant cheaters in Arena Kings last week, New accounts at IM / GM Elo's and you can see how their play deteriorates from a high level to 1200 level as time runs low, and engine validation becomes impossible due to the time it takes.

macelligott

Rank ICU Irish Championship 2021 FIDE
1 2439 Sam E. Collins IM 2456
2 2369 Alex Baburin GM 2416
3 2419 Conor E. Murphy FM 2394
4 2307 Mark Quinn IM 2370
5 2296 Tarun Kanyamarala FM 2369
6 2282 Mark Heidenfeld IM 2360
7 2311 Conor O'Donnell FM 2331
8 2343 David Fitzsimons IM 2324
9 2280 Stephen Brady FM 2292
10 2261 Colm Daly FM 2285
11 2288 Joe Ryan FM 2271
12 2046 Anthony Doyle 2206
13 2158 John Delaney FM 2191
14 2178 Trisha Kanyamarala WIM 2180
15 2148 Shane Melaugh CM 2161
16 2124 Jonathan O'Connor 2153
17 2131 Daire McMahon FM 2115
18 2035 Peter Carroll CM 2059
19 2032 Kavin Venkatesan 2011
20 2009 John McMorrow 1997
21 1938 Gerard MacElligott CM 1966
22 1914 Peter Cafolla 1958
23 1960 Jonathon Peoples 1953
24 1858 Eamon Keogh NM 1944
25 1880 Diana Mirza WFM 1933
26 1824 Colm Quigley 1924
27 1763 John P. Aherne 1903
28 1966 Adam Collins 1887
29 1805 Conor Nolan 1884
30 1818 Kevin O'Flaherty 1884

macelligott

I count ten former champions entered in this years event. Most probably a record!

Retd.LoyolaCpt

macelligott wrote: »

I count ten former champions entered in this years event. Most probably a record!

As the great man himself said...

Retd.LoyolaCpt

Champions in bold.

Collins, Sam E. IM 2456
Baburin, Alexander GM 2416
Murphy, Conor E FM 2394
Quinn, Mark IM 2370
Kanyamarala, Tarun FM 2369
Heidenfeld, Mark IM 2360
O`Donnell, Conor FM 2331
Fitzsimons, David IM 2324
Brady, Stephen FM 2292
Daly, Colm FM 2285
Ryan, Joseph FM 2271
Doyle, Anthony 2206
Delaney, John FM 2191
Kanyamarala, Trisha WIM 2180
Melaugh, Shane CM 2161
O'Connor, Jonathan 2153
McMahon, Daire FM 2115
Carroll, Peter CM 2059
Venkatesan, Kavin 2011
McMorrow, John 1997
MacElligott, Gerard CM 1966
Cafolla, Peter 1958
Peoples, Jonathon 1953
Keogh, Eamon 1944
Mirza, Diana WFM 1933
Lyons, Brendan 1931
Quigley,Colm 1924
Aherne, John P. 1903
Nolan, Conor 1884
Kevin O'Flaherty 1884
Adam Collins 1887

sodacat11

Inquitus wrote: »

I would guess blunder checking your moves would be nigh on undetectable in online chess, you play your own moves but simply blunder check them before playing. I would guess that's the approach used by many of the undetected cheaters that are out there? thoughts?

I think that anyone who cheats online has serious character defects and possible mental problems and should seek professional help immediately. What possible motive can any sane person have for cheating online?

sodacat11

macelligott wrote: »

I count ten former champions entered in this years event. Most probably a record!

If everyone listed actually plays it will be a fantastic tournament. Sadly we are all too used to seeing entry lists full of esteemed players then a quarter of them withdraw days before the tournament starts.

macelligott

We have already reached the entry total of last year.
There are now 32 entries :-)

Retd.LoyolaCpt

40 entries as of this morning (10 champions in bold). Not expecting too many more, maybe 10-12. Entries now open for the two weekenders.

Collins, Sam E. IM 2456
Baburin, Alexander GM 2416
Murphy, Conor E FM 2394
Quinn, Mark IM 2370
Kanyamarala, Tarun FM 2369
Heidenfeld, Mark IM 2360
O`Donnell, Conor FM 2331
Fitzsimons, David IM 2324
Delaney, Killian FM 2300
Brady, Stephen FM 2292
Daly, Colm FM 2285
Ryan, Joseph FM 2271
Doyle, Anthony 2206
Delaney, John FM 2191
Kanyamarala, Trisha WIM 2180
Melaugh, Shane CM 2161
O'Connor, Jonathan 2153
McMahon, Daire FM 2115
Carroll, Peter CM 2059
Venkatesan, Kavin 2011
McMorrow, John 1997
MacElligott, Gerard CM 1966
Cafolla, Peter 1958
Peoples, Jonathon 1953
Casey, Eoghan 1952
Duffy, Seamus 1945
Keogh, Eamon 1944
Tirziman, Rudolf 1941
Mirza, Diana WFM 1933
Lyons, Brendan 1931
Putar, Lara 1930
Quigley, Colm 1924
Putar, Leon 1918
O'Gorman, Alice 1907
Scott, Luke 1906
Aherne, John P. 1903
Collins, Adam 1887
Nolan, Conor 1884
O'Flaherty, Kevin 1884
Moran, Darragh 1859

sodacat11

We certainly have a field worthy of a 100th Irish Championship only Lopez, Jessl, Li and defending champ O'Gorman missing but still plenty of time for them to enter.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

sodacat11 wrote: »

We certainly have a field worthy of a 100th Irish Championship only Lopez, Jessl, Li and defending champ O'Gorman missing but still plenty of time for them to enter.

I have their odds of playing at something like:
Lopez - 25-50%, Jessel - 0-10%, Li - 25-50%, O'Gorman - 50-75%.

Of the unentered, I have 7 probable, 14 maybe, 10 unlikely (then 120 odd that are eligible but presumably won't play)

cdeb

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Of the unentered, I have 7 probable, 14 maybe, 10 unlikely (then 120 odd that are eligible but presumably won't play)

Does this mean there's around 200 players eligible? 40 entered, 30 hopefuls, and 120 others? That's mad. I presume the "others" includes lapsed players, etc? I didn't think it was that high at all.

Edit - actually, to answer my own question, the FIDE rating list for Ireland - including inactive players - has Richard O'Donovan in 100th with a rating of 2052. So I could well see there being another 100 players down to 1900.

The Nov 2019 ICU rating list had 1386 players, and was the biggest in recent times. 124th was the 1900 cut-off. So I guess the difference is inactive players, foreign IRL players who've returned home, and 1900 FIDE being lower than 1900 ICU.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

cdeb wrote: »

Does this mean there's around 200 players eligible? 40 entered, 30 hopefuls, and 120 others? That's mad. I presume the "others" includes lapsed players, etc? I didn't think it was that high at all.

Edit - actually, to answer my own question, the FIDE rating list for Ireland - including inactive players - has Richard O'Donovan in 100th with a rating of 2052. So I could well see there being another 100 players down to 1900.

The Nov 2019 ICU rating list had 1386 players, and was the biggest in recent times. 124th was the 1900 cut-off. So I guess the difference is inactive players, foreign IRL players who've returned home, and 1900 FIDE being lower than 1900 ICU.

my list is very rough but yes, about 225 eligible. The pool of players who would/could realistically play is maybe 100-110.

RooksPawn

cdeb wrote: »

...The FIDE rating list for Ireland - including inactive players - has Richard O'Donovan in 100th with a rating of 2052.

It's unfortunate that 15th on that list is the late Philip Short.

sodacat11

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

my list is very rough but yes, about 225 eligible. The pool of players who would/could realistically play is maybe 100-110.

Entries for the tipping competition also look like being way up on previous years. A panel of actuaries, scientists, solicitors and analysts are currently working on the format for this year's competition and details will be announced in good time for tipsters to sharpen up their prediction skills and do whatever training is necessary for the event.
The fantasy football league that we have this year has been good fun, despite my very unlucky performance, would it be on to do something similar for the tipping competition? We could all pay 5 or 10 euro through the ICU and the money could be divided among the top tipsters.

CCR

I started learning Chess last year during first lockdown and would be interested in entering the first weekender. Have done all learning online so would like to try OTB.

How do these normally work, what time limit are matches and how many would you expect to play?

Thanks in advance

cdeb

There's a thread here with some advice on playing your first tournament. I'd say if you have a read through that, you'll get a good grounding of it, and it might also lead to some specific questions which you can post away then.

For the upcoming weekenders, they look like six-rounders, with time control probably something like 75 + 15 (that is, 75 minutes on each clock at the start, and 15 seconds extra added per move)

macelligott

I wonder what is the maximum limit on entries to the championship and are we near that limit?

dave grant

We think the cap on the number of players will be 48, it's looking like it will be a strong competition and the games will be one to remember. Lets hope all goes well and the players enjoy their games.

macelligott

Looks like there are now only 4 places left to be filled in the Irish Championship.
A great turnout in difficult times - or any times :-)

Joedryan

Any plans on the use of masks this year? I'd imagine with all improving and the tournament in August there will be a chance to play without masks?

mikhail

I'd guess the masks aren't going anywhere soon as I'd guess they'll be the last precaution to go. I could live with having to wear a mask at the board, but the screens and the two-board approach are off-putting. I'm keen to return to over-the-board play, but not like that.

cdeb

I think the screen was probably the bit that drew least comments last year?

Are you sure you're not overthinking it? Especially given you've not even played with a screen before

Joedryan

cdeb wrote: »

I think the screen was probably the bit that drew least comments last year?

Are you sure you're not overthinking it? Especially given you've not even played with a screen before

I am seeing tournaments now going on (e.g. Womens Grand Prix) with no masks, no screen, and players shaking hands.

I put this out there as a possibility - what about keeping the screen and ditching the masks?

I am saying this but I really dont think screens will be required this year, however I get it can be an added safety net.

edit - @cdeb I know you were on about the other poster there who was saying masks will stay.