tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post7194172563918709635..comments2023-12-28T02:11:22.501+00:00Comments on The Streatham & Brixton Chess Blog: What a Crockett IIITom Chivershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09850710685193416732noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-45406524954382900882016-02-04T00:34:29.345+00:002016-02-04T00:34:29.345+00:00I suppose playing in an Open can be a subtle way o...I suppose playing in an Open can be a subtle way of losing grading points. You don't even have to try to under perform if you aren't good enough to survive in elite company.<br /><br />RdCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-63212820945844339602016-02-03T16:48:01.687+00:002016-02-03T16:48:01.687+00:00Just a comment on C playing in some higher section...Just a comment on C playing in some higher sections. Yes he did. But this is because my campaign against him was so intense he did it to prove a point. He did it to say oh look I sometimes play up. On the few occasions he did play up he lost virtually every game and quickly! Lost rating points and could say see I play up sometimes to me. He knows how dodgy it looks going up and down in rating and keeping his grade low also. Lee Bullocknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-64060836852539684412016-01-31T08:13:25.021+00:002016-01-31T08:13:25.021+00:00Carry on. Part IV at 0955 GMT today.Carry on. Part IV at 0955 GMT today.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-88653430815345330312016-01-30T22:19:21.860+00:002016-01-30T22:19:21.860+00:00(Comments off until morning again. See you then.)(Comments off until morning again. See you then.)ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-5613659004337349552016-01-30T21:44:55.698+00:002016-01-30T21:44:55.698+00:00Ok. I hope to get on to this subject before the se...Ok. I hope to get on to this subject before the series concludes, but while I think there's an argument for putting some onus on tournament organisers, I think the organisers themselves are likely to argue that it's not up to them to decide who is competiting legitimately and who is not.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-91448334317293150612016-01-30T21:40:41.423+00:002016-01-30T21:40:41.423+00:00''If C paid his entry fee like everyone el...<br />''If C paid his entry fee like everyone else and was accepted as an entrant then the other tournament players are also by default accepting his presence by entering the same tournament knowing he is playing.<br /><br />Not sure I follow this. Do people usually know who else is competing when they enter a weekend tournament?''<br /><br />Not in all cases but most will these days with on line entrant lists often published well in advance- plus they would see who is playing on the day and could complain to the controller if they didn't feel any entrant should be entitled to play.TCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-60810188709350624952016-01-30T20:58:49.101+00:002016-01-30T20:58:49.101+00:00Simon G - the answer is "when one of the blog...Simon G - the answer is "when one of the blog authors feels like writing about one of those subjects". That's the way this blog works.Jack Ruddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17433574267085964238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-25800216919546414582016-01-30T20:58:32.181+00:002016-01-30T20:58:32.181+00:00When can we expect the next article about somethin...<i>When can we expect the next article about something significant in the chess world</i><br /><br />Never, I should think. Being a regular reader you'll know I almost never write about anything significant.<br /><br /><i>If C paid his entry fee like everyone else and was accepted as an entrant then the other tournament players are also by default accepting his presence by entering the same tournament knowing he is playing.</i><br /><br />Not sure I follow this. Do people usually know who else is competing when they enter a weekend tournament?ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-55577282513248643312016-01-30T20:50:13.318+00:002016-01-30T20:50:13.318+00:00When can we expect the next article about somethin...When can we expect the next article about something significant in the chess world/one of the top players rather than this repetitive rubbish about some low level chess player as I think you have more than made your point?Simon G - a rapidly becoming bored regular reader..noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-52088631611497827982016-01-30T20:22:01.269+00:002016-01-30T20:22:01.269+00:00Andrew B - is your expectation that people should ...Andrew B - is your expectation that people should do this sufficient grounds to single out one individual like this and condemn him as some sort of cheat?????Abinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-84211165689743864042016-01-30T20:19:59.535+00:002016-01-30T20:19:59.535+00:00There's evidence that C has entered quite a fe...There's evidence that C has entered quite a few sections that are higher than he needs to from the grading record though Andrew so am not sure its so straightforward as you suggest in this case. Also it seems a lot of the poor results (though not all) have indeed come in the higher sections he has played in. Besides the honourable attitude argument- (which a lot of chess players from my experience don't follow!!) if C entered tournaments and his record was publicly available to a tournament controller then by accepting his entry is not that an acceptance that he is eligible to compete under the same terms as others? A lot of people enter sections when they have had higher ratings previously and they are allowed to. Not all the responsibility can therefore rest with the individual player. If C paid his entry fee like everyone else and was accepted as an entrant then the other tournament players are also by default accepting his presence by entering the same tournament knowing he is playing. If organisers did not accept the entry then it couldnt happen. If other players didnt happily play in the event or complained then the organiser would need to consider that.TCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-2406046612173990472016-01-30T18:06:38.808+00:002016-01-30T18:06:38.808+00:00Let's set aside the "sand-bagging" a...Let's set aside the "sand-bagging" arguments. Let's suppose a hypothetical player has a habit, when a tournament has started badly, of losing interest/getting depressed and playing well below what he's capable of and losing most of the remaining games.<br /><br />Wouldn't the honourable attitude for this player be: "Well, because of how grading works, I'm eligible for (say) the u120 event, but then I'd be playing against a field much weaker than me, so I'll enter the u160 event. After all, if things go wrong again I might just as well get 0/6 in the u160 as the u120"?<br /><br />And not: "Well, those 0/6 events last month were pretty grim at the time, but at least they mean that now I can beat up another bunch of patzers, who entered this event in good faith expecting to meet other u120-standard players"?<br /><br />Andrew B.Andrew B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12054400570279868608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-81705531409190154102016-01-30T17:47:30.991+00:002016-01-30T17:47:30.991+00:00I disagree that the situation couldn't arise w...I disagree that the situation couldn't arise with an Elo based system. What would happen is that the Elo rating would rise and then plummet. Tournaments using the common practice of basing their entry limits on a particular list would still have to allow the entry of a plummeted star. It's only if you base entry requirements on maximum rating achieved in the past, that you avoid this problem and this could be done with the ECF system.<br /><br />If you have an ailment which prevents you from playing well, should you declare yourself unfit and not play? It's gaming the system to use the poor results from these periods to retain an eligibility to enter restricted tournaments.<br /><br />RdCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-72774131385454393392016-01-30T17:38:47.352+00:002016-01-30T17:38:47.352+00:00I'd like to see the ecf come out and support C...<i>I'd like to see the ecf come out and support C or otherwise</i><br /><br />So would I, but if they do so I'd like to see that the evidence has actually been gone through properly.Of course had it been done properly back when the problem occurred, this situation wouldn't exist now.<br /><br /><i>After winning a couple of "minors" I would expect a controller to seriously consider "promoting" a player to a higher section in subsequent events. </i><br /><br />So would <a href="http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?p=167674#p167674" rel="nofollow">I</a>.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-78197362380133681432016-01-30T15:09:16.920+00:002016-01-30T15:09:16.920+00:00I'd like to see the ecf come out and support C...I'd like to see the ecf come out and support C or otherwise given the sheer amount of talk on this subject recently. They have a pretty shabby history of supporting their employees and volunteers, notably when arbiters had their reputations attacked in the British chess championships of 2012 by the then ECF president which potentially left them in a difficult position with their lives outside of chess too. <br /><br />I'm sure C must have a life too outside chess if he is only an unpaid volunteer and it can't be very helpful to be left high and dry to face this continued innuendo and speculation by the organisation he is meant to represent.Matthewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-77161295781417078132016-01-30T11:23:22.318+00:002016-01-30T11:23:22.318+00:00After winning a couple of "minors" I wou...After winning a couple of "minors" I would expect a controller to seriously consider "promoting" a player to a higher section in subsequent events. Why would anyone object to that? Some tournaments now give prizes for "rating performance" (ie improvement against your current grade) rather than best score within a rating band. This suggests that the whole premise of the Grand Prix needs to be reviewed and possibly reorganised. FIDE grades are updated monthly so this situation could never arise anyway in most other countries. The ECF grading system is due for retirement.Joe Skielnikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04119312515338854109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-36078311172110483812016-01-29T12:02:33.751+00:002016-01-29T12:02:33.751+00:00I think they are, because you're not trying to...I think they are, because you're not trying to locate an exact figure (in the sense that we know that the chances of throwing three consecutive sixes are 1/216) but to give an idea of the unlikelihood of a given sequence occurring. Of course there are various ways to perform the exercise and all of them are potentially useful.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-23160257953866782382016-01-29T11:46:11.052+00:002016-01-29T11:46:11.052+00:00An investigative statistic would be to look at typ...An investigative statistic would be to look at typical out performance and under performance. So you take the tournament records of everyone playing more than x in a season and see what their best performance relative to their grade has been and their worst. I'd suspect the biggest variation would be of players in Opens, but Opens themselves are of variable strength depending on whether Keith, Mark and others show up. Someone winning an Under 120 with 5/5 might perhaps have faced a 110 field, so that's a 160 performance. Someone scoring 0/5 might only have faced a 100 or lower field, so that's 50 or worse. <br /><br />Successive chess games by the same player aren't sufficiently independent to use the logic that if there's a 1 in 6 chance of losing one game, it's 1 in 36 of losing two. The mathematics of throwing unbiased dice and getting sixes doesn't apply. <br /><br />RdCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-53439120537304710802016-01-29T11:12:40.879+00:002016-01-29T11:12:40.879+00:00That'd be an interesting exercise (though not ...That'd be an interesting exercise (though not all the grades are available) but of course there's a problem with it if the grades are not to be relied on.<br /><br />Re: Roger's point, of course there's nothing exceptional about having rapidplay grades and standardplay grades that differ a lot - have a look at my record, for example - <i>except when the player concerned is winning lots of rapidplay games and competitions</i>. That's where it starts getting whiffy.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-83766193227712162252016-01-29T10:27:56.320+00:002016-01-29T10:27:56.320+00:00Go on, plus all the ecf / bcc grades into a spread...Go on, plus all the ecf / bcc grades into a spreadsheet and output the stats.<br />His Facebook page kind of reminds me of Colm Daly's writing.<br /><br />-theblueweaselAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-63423694198317862172016-01-29T10:15:56.386+00:002016-01-29T10:15:56.386+00:00If you look at standard play results for both 2009...If you look at standard play results for both 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, you get a mixture of the poor, the moderate and prize winning. That's as you would expect for a frequent player. Also lots of draws in league games. But then his standard grade was 139 for both seasons and his rapidplay grade (six monthly) 138, 137 and then 133. July 2011 after the losing spell starting halfway through the British Rapidplay the rapid grade plummeted to 119 so 20 points worse than the standard play one.<br /><br />RdC Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com