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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Chess IV's and The 2013 Irish Chess Championships
-
20-02-2013 3:29pmThey are to be hosted in the University of Limerick.
The intervarsity will be on March the 9th; details can be found here: http://ulchess.com/?page_id=727
The Irish Chess Championships will be on the 6th to the 14th of July; details can be found here: http://ulchess.com/?page_id=734
You can also check out http://icu.ie/ for more information.
Contact ulchessclub@gmail.com for more information about either event.
Since there wasn't any discussion in this forum about either topic, I said I would post it here!1
Comments
-
The college IV's are over - congradulations to UCC for winning it.
But I would like to remind people about the Irish Chess Championships on in July! Deadline to pay (before the €10 late fee kicks in) is Tomorrow!0 -
The 5-day am and pm tournaments look interesting.0
-
The 5-day am and pm tournaments look interesting.
I think that the Irish Championship in Galway in 1978 had a tournament in the evenings that you could play in as well as playing in the championship itself.
I've just entered for the main tournament but not the AM event. My plan would be to use the mornings to prepare for my next game.0 -
I think that the Irish Championship in Galway in 1978 had a tournament in the evenings that you could play in as well as playing in the championship itself.
I've just entered for the main tournament but not the AM event. My plan would be to use the mornings to prepare for my next game.
The Irish Championships are taking a similar format to the British Chess Championships. Not all players will take the opportunity to play the AM and the main event; however some players may wish to try out openings against opponents and prepare the night before.0 -
From the ICU website:Any player rated above 2240 entered to play in the Irish Championships (in the June FIDE rating list) are being offered a €100 cash incentive to play in the centenary Irish Championships taking place in Limerick from July 6th - 14th.
Additionally to mark the centenary; all previous winners of the Irish Championships are invited to play in the event free of charge (please email ulchessclub@gmail.com to enter).
The deadline to register for the Irish Championships is the 28th of June. The late fee deadline has been extended until the 28th of June.
After this date a late fee will be applied to the AM/PM and Weekender tournaments and you will not be allowed to register to play in the Irish Championships.
Free entry for those over 2100 or winners of previous years, paid to enter for those over 2240 and a €3k prize fund. But only 16 entries so far? Is there that little interest (or ability to take a week off work to play) in the championships? (16 out of a possible 156 people seems... small somehow).
And there seems to be a bit of contention over who can enter as well.0 -
Advertisement
-
Free entry for those over 2100 or winners of previous years, paid to enter for those over 2240 and a €3k prize fund. But only 16 entries so far? Is there that little interest (or ability to take a week off work to play) in the championships? (16 out of a possible 156 people seems... small somehow).
Free entry for over-2100s seems excessive to me. If the competition can be run without needing entry fees from that many players (half of last year's field), maybe too much ICU money is being spent on it. I can't find the entry fees for last year (the site seems to have disappeared) but I think only titled players got free entry. Presumably UL is a cheaper (and probably nicer) venue than the Red Cow so they can get away with charging less but I'd be happier if the savings went to the ICU than players.And there seems to be a bit of contention over who can enter as well.0 -
There's another two weeks before the entry deadline, I'd expect the usual last-minute rush we get for most events in Irish chess. Only 16 played last year so there should be an increase on that at least.
Free entry for over-2100s seems excessive to me. If the competition can be run without needing entry fees from that many players (half of last year's field), maybe too much ICU money is being spent on it. I can't find the entry fees for last year (the site seems to have disappeared) but I think only titled players got free entry. Presumably UL is a cheaper (and probably nicer) venue than the Red Cow so they can get away with charging less but I'd be happier if the savings went to the ICU than players.
There was 16 last year with some foreign players. The number of Irish only entries was less. The UL venue (hopefully) should be at least on par.That's what was voted on at the last AGM, it's a bit late to complain about it now. I have sympathy for players who have been playing in Ireland for years but it was a bit silly a few years back when the Irish champion was the fifth place finisher or something because they were the top Irish player.
I think the motion was a little short sighted. I think a clause allowing discretion or approval by the ICU would have made sense.
I'd be of the view that I'd rather the ICU used it's budget to get people norms at the Irish chess championship and used it as a method for our younger players to play harder players and improve.0 -
It does seem odd that paperwork isn't holding back one player but is holding back another; personally, I'd think that the better option would be to use the kind of eligibility criteria that the Olympic sports tend to use, which is that you can compete for the Irish championships if you are eligible to hold an Irish passport. That way we keep the "Irishness" (for whatever it's worth) but offload the controversy of what defines "being Irish" onto the Government. Keeps it all nice and neat - especially because you only have to be eligible, you don't have to actually get the passport, which includes all the athletes in Northern Ireland without stepping on anyones toes, and sidesteps any delays in the passport office or similar paperwork issues.0
-
It's interesting to note that there's still not a single entrant listed for the Irish Womens Championship.
I don't think the prize fund of 'only' €150 helps matters. That's nothing more than a token sum and frankly I would almost feel insulted.
Also given that the event takes place on the weekend of the 5th-7th, and it's not realistic to expect many people to give up two consecutive weekends to travel to Limerick and play chess,
(Nick Scallan had as much to say in the comments on the event page: http://ulchess.com/?page_id=760 )
I'm afraid many of our woman players might find it a more attractive proposition to play in the weekender or am/pm tournaments where there are better prizes on offer, stronger opposition to play, and the social buzz around the UL campus may be greater (I believe there's also an comic-book/anime convention on in UL that weekend)
If the aim is to get away from the usual routine of having womens prizes in the main event and giving the title to the highest placed, then I don't think the championship is being given a fair chance in it's infancy.
One of the ideas behind having women only events in the first place is to increase participation, but I fear we might be hampering it in this case.
Of course, there is still a week or so until the deadline so maybe there will be a flood of entries before then and I'll look like an idiot0 -
brilliantboy wrote: »It's interesting to note that there's still not a single entrant listed for the Irish Womens Championship.
Then factor in the point that the same FIDE list for women only shows four active players; so it's fair to say that Irish chess at the competitive level is a bit of a sausagefest.
Add those two factors together, and throw in the point that entry means either being unemployed or being able to take a week off work in an economic recession; and it's probably a fairly safe bet that few women are going to show up for the championships (and if they don't show up for the championships, they're probably not going to enter the women's championships). You might yet get some local juniors or lower-ranked players I suppose, but it doesn't seem like a great strategy to get the competitive-level female players on the list to show up.I don't think the prize fund of 'only' €150 helps matters. That's nothing more than a token sum and frankly I would almost feel insulted.
But then, the main championships itself is set up daftly - the more I look at its entry requirements and the debate around them, the less sense it makes to me. Apparently we're trying to "preserve the integrity" (or "preserve the Irishness" if we're honest) of the championships by only allowing FIDE-registered IRL players to play, but when you look at the highest-rated player on the FIDE IRL list (who's Russian), it rather makes a mockery of the implementation of that idea, even if the idea itself had any merit at all, which bluntly I don't think it does - it's just stupid. I mean, there's a bloody good reason why Irish nationality law is lax by design -- when Irish people get to arguing about what it means to be Irish and who's Irish and who's not, things go pear-shaped and ugly in a great big hurry.
Personally, I'd say screw that nonsense and allow anyone to enter the championships (rating, nationality, declaration, all be damned). Grade the event so you don't wind up with GMs playing 800s (which isn't fair to either side) sure, but focus on making it the biggest event of the year, make it a celebration of the sport in Ireland, don't try to keep out "foreign" GMs but beg them to attend, pay them to attend, and cash in off the publicity on the back end.
And yes, give the national champion title to a national player, but don't be too restrictive there either - say "national player" means anyone who's eligible to be an Irish Citizen (and use the legal definition of that term so that the law takes the rap if there's a disagreement). And no, I don't mean "is an" I mean "is eligible to be an". The difference between the two in law is minuscule by design, and this way you have the more inclusive match and the title means more.
There's a time to restrict who can claim to be an Irish chess player, and it's when that player is representing Ireland abroad; at that point the whole thing about the IRL declaration to FIDE makes sense because it'd confuse things otherwise; but this is a competition within Ireland, so it doesn't make sense, it just wastes a bloody good opportunity to promote Irish Chess.Of course, there is still a week or so until the deadline so maybe there will be a flood of entries before then and I'll look like an idiot0 -
Advertisement
-
But then, the main championships itself is set up daftly - the more I look at its entry requirements and the debate around them, the less sense it makes to me. Apparently we're trying to "preserve the integrity" (or "preserve the Irishness" if we're honest) of the championships by only allowing FIDE-registered IRL players to play, but when you look at the highest-rated player on the FIDE IRL list (who's Russian), it rather makes a mockery of the implementation of that idea, even if the idea itself had any merit at all, which bluntly I don't think it does - it's just stupid.
Personally, I prefer an open championships (that is, no nationality restrictions), but it's a contentious issue. It's been done before - off the top of my head both 2007 and 2008 were open - and it isn't a panacea.0 -
But expected, surely? FIDE lists 157 active players over the required entry rating on the IRL list, and there are a total of 17 entrants so far, despite a few thousand in the prize fund and anyone over 2240 getting an appearance fee and it being an anniversary year and all that. So the entry percentages are low (11% or so) to start with.
Then factor in the point that the same FIDE list for women only shows four active players; so it's fair to say that Irish chess at the competitive level is a bit of a sausagefest.
Add those two factors together, and throw in the point that entry means either being unemployed or being able to take a week off work in an economic recession; and it's probably a fairly safe bet that few women are going to show up for the championships (and if they don't show up for the championships, they're probably not going to enter the women's championships). You might yet get some local juniors or lower-ranked players I suppose, but it doesn't seem like a great strategy to get the competitive-level female players on the list to show up.
Most of the research into motivation would suggest that the actual amount itself isn't relevant - it's the comparison between the "Championships" and the "Women's Championships" that would count - and it's not a great comparison. Far less prize money, no rating requirement or declaration requirement, and you can enter the main championships anyway so the "Womens Championships" doesn't really seem to be terribly valuable by comparison. And if you're hoping to get people to enter it because it's on at the same time as the championships, then you really need for people to be more motivated to go to the championships in the first place.
http://www.icu.ie/misc/games/sm/irishwomenschampionship2012/
Last years championship in Kilkenny had 12 players, and I'm sure it was hoped they could at least assemble a similar field for this years event.
It's interesting to note that even last year a few players decided to enter the Congress instead.But then, the main championships itself is set up daftly - the more I look at its entry requirements and the debate around them, the less sense it makes to me. Apparently we're trying to "preserve the integrity" (or "preserve the Irishness" if we're honest) of the championships by only allowing FIDE-registered IRL players to play, but when you look at the highest-rated player on the FIDE IRL list (who's Russian), it rather makes a mockery of the implementation of that idea, even if the idea itself had any merit at all, which bluntly I don't think it does - it's just stupid. I mean, there's a bloody good reason why Irish nationality law is lax by design -- when Irish people get to arguing about what it means to be Irish and who's Irish and who's not, things go pear-shaped and ugly in a great big hurry.
Personally, I'd say screw that nonsense and allow anyone to enter the championships (rating, nationality, declaration, all be damned). Grade the event so you don't wind up with GMs playing 800s (which isn't fair to either side) sure, but focus on making it the biggest event of the year, make it a celebration of the sport in Ireland, don't try to keep out "foreign" GMs but beg them to attend, pay them to attend, and cash in off the publicity on the back end.
And yes, give the national champion title to a national player, but don't be too restrictive there either - say "national player" means anyone who's eligible to be an Irish Citizen (and use the legal definition of that term so that the law takes the rap if there's a disagreement). And no, I don't mean "is an" I mean "is eligible to be an". The difference between the two in law is minuscule by design, and this way you have the more inclusive match and the title means more.
There's a time to restrict who can claim to be an Irish chess player, and it's when that player is representing Ireland abroad; at that point the whole thing about the IRL declaration to FIDE makes sense because it'd confuse things otherwise; but this is a competition within Ireland, so it doesn't make sense, it just wastes a bloody good opportunity to promote Irish Chess.
One of the biggest problems with a more open championship is that you could get a situation where the Irish champion finishes near the bottom of the field yet still becomes Irish Champion, and if you're pumping up the prize fund and offering incentives to foreign players, it's not at all inconceivable that it could happen. So in a situation where you should be crowning a champion, you're just crowning also-rans.
That being said, it's a bit of a ridiculous situation when players who live in the state, work in the state, pay taxes to the state, and always do their utmost to support Irish chess, are not allowed to play in what should be a celebration of Irish chess (not Irishness), while some of the stronger Irish players simply can't be arsed to play despite a healthy prize fund and generous conditions.0 -
He might be Russian-born, but he's lived here for decades and represented Ireland any number of times. He's not exactly the ludicrously non-Irish figure your point seems to indicate.
Google the current Irish Championships and read the links from the first page of results and you'll find two seperate arguments about the inclusion or exclusion of players based on their absence from the FIDE IRL list. The fact that those arguments are what come up and not links from the Irish Times covering the upcoming Irish Chess Extravaganza! is the real problem, not what rule we use to exclude people from the championships.
Personally, I prefer an open championships (that is, no nationality restrictions), but it's a contentious issue. It's been done before - off the top of my head both 2007 and 2008 were open - and it isn't a panacea.
I mean, some of the comments I've read online from people who really should know better are just horribly myopic, like celebrating the loss of significant commercial sponsorship from the championships. You'd get the feeling that things had been a bit too insular for a bit too long when people are cheering the loss of money and interest in a match instead of remembering that the bigger and more inclusive the match, the more it gets noticed, the more the title is remembered, and the more the sport can be developed.
Consider this; if you had a really large chess tournament, with hundreds of players from all levels, in Dublin (sorry lads, but it's the Minister for Sport's constituency and the major population center - a few years ago, you'd have used Killarney or Valentia for this), and several famous (to non-chess players) GMs in attendance and the Irish Champion was to be decided on at that tournament, then getting the Championship award handed over by the Minister for Sport and getting that on the news and in the papers would be a fairly easy thing to arrange because it's a pretty nice PR gig; and when that's happening, it's a lot easier to go to the ISC and ask for official recognition as a sport because if they refuse, that's another easy story to get on the news and in the papers (ISC snubs Minister for Sport is a nice headline...).0 -
brilliantboy wrote: »One of the biggest problems with a more open championship is that you could get a situation where the Irish champion finishes near the bottom of the field yet still becomes Irish Champion, and if you're pumping up the prize fund and offering incentives to foreign players, it's not at all inconceivable that it could happen. So in a situation where you should be crowning a champion, you're just crowning also-rans.
Seriously, look at the FIDE lists. The Irish Champion, even in a highly restrictive Championships, is still an also-ran because they're going to be hundreds of points below the world championships level. Our highest rated player is rated 2520 -- and don't get me wrong, that's damn impressive -- but it doesn't get him into the top six hundred players internationally. It only barely gets him into the top five hundred in Europe.
I think people would have to be in serious denial to worry about the Irish Champion looking less impressive for not winning an Open Championships!
However -- if you just accepted that that's the current situation, threw out the worry and went down the road of making it a huge celebration of chess; wouldn't that draw in more people, get more people playing, help get more funding, help set up more clubs, and help drive up the standard of chess as we get more coaching and more tournaments to cope with the new people? And wouldn't that mean that in ten years time, we could say the Irish Champion was in the top two hundred players in Europe instead of the top five hundred? And mightn't that continue to improve over time?
Big fish, small pond syndrome. It's surprising how often you see this pattern in Irish sports :pac:That being said, it's a bit of a ridiculous situation when players who live in the state, work in the state, pay taxes to the state, and always do their utmost to support Irish chess, are not allowed to play in what should be a celebration of Irish chess (not Irishness)while some of the stronger Irish players simply can't be arsed to play despite a healthy prize fund and generous conditions.
Has anyone asked them?0 -
brilliantboy wrote: »One of the biggest problems with a more open championship is that you could get a situation where the Irish champion finishes near the bottom of the field yet still becomes Irish Champion, and if you're pumping up the prize fund and offering incentives to foreign players, it's not at all inconceivable that it could happen. So in a situation where you should be crowning a champion, you're just crowning also-rans.
http://icu.ie/tournaments/display.php?id=511 (Ir-Ch 2008, A. Baburin 1st/Champion)
http://icu.ie/tournaments/display.php?id=468 (Ir-Ch 2007, B. Kelly/S. Brady =3rd/Champions).
Way adrift of the lead, all of them....then getting the Championship award handed over by the Minister for Sport and getting that on the news and in the papers would be a fairly easy thing to arrange because it's a pretty nice PR gig...0 -
However -- if you just accepted that that's the current situation, threw out the worry and went down the road of making it a huge celebration of chess; wouldn't that draw in more people, get more people playing, help get more funding, help set up more clubs, and help drive up the standard of chess as we get more coaching and more tournaments to cope with the new people? And wouldn't that mean that in ten years time, we could say the Irish Champion was in the top two hundred players in Europe instead of the top five hundred? And mightn't that continue to improve over time?
How do you do such a thing without having a good deal of funding in place already? If you could attract Carlsen and his pals to play in an open then of course the publicity and interest from sponsors would be immense, but that's not exactly realistic. And all due respect to them but a slew of middling Eastern-European GMs wouldn't have the same effect on public interest. There's also the case that the more higher profile the players you attract, the further the Irish contingent are likely to slip down the standings.Yes, because practice indicates that exactly that would happen.
http://icu.ie/tournaments/display.php?id=511 (Ir-Ch 2008, A. Baburin 1st/Champion)
http://icu.ie/tournaments/display.php?id=468 (Ir-Ch 2007, B. Kelly/S. Brady =3rd/Champions).
Way adrift of the lead, all of them.
Baburin was the 2nd seed, Kelly the 5th, and Brady the 6th. You haven't exactly dealt a killing blow to my point.
If we continued to have an open championships, as the profile of the event increases you would see a far greater number of strong foreign players entering, which is absolutely something we want to see, but why in the guise of a national championships?0 -
Way adrift of the lead, all of them.
But look at it another way - which Irish Champion title is worth more, the one where you beat eleven other people from a restricted field to win it or the one where you beat 51 (or 43 if you only count the IRL-registered) other people from an open field to win it?
I can tell you which one the media would find more impressive...I understand the Leinster Chess Union is stuck for a new PRO. Any interest?!!0 -
brilliantboy wrote: »How do you do such a thing without having a good deal of funding in place already?
Or to be more clear, unless it was Carlsen, then getting forty "random" east-european GMs that nobody has heard of outside of chess would be better than getting (say) Nakamura to play because as far as the media knows, there's Carlsen (because he's ready-made media content being both a world champion contender and a bit of a clotheshorse to boot), and there's "Grandmasters" (because that's easy for non-chess readers -- ie. the vast majority of readers -- to understand), and that's about it really. Ask your average person who Capablanca was and they won't know. Ask them for famous chess names and you'll get Fischer, Kasparov, maybe Short in the UK and Ireland (primarily because of the world championships bid and the televised rapid matches, even if they now look like a genesis video gone horribly wrong), and possibly Spassky (but that'll be because of Fischer). Hell, Deep Blue will get more recognition than Tal or Karpov. So if you can't get the one name they know, just get as many GMs as you can.There's also the case that the more higher profile the players you attract, the further the Irish contingent are likely to slip down the standings.
That's just reality. Just because you see it doesn't mean it's only now just shown upbut why in the guise of a national championships?0 -
I completely disagree with a few of the points raised above.
The Irish Chess championship used to attract the best players in Ireland year after year until maybe 15 years ago!? Winning the tournament used to be a significant achievement and the main goal of any chess player in Ireland. It should still be viewed as a significant achievement and I would hope winning the title would look very favorable to any potential employer or university. I find the current situation where the best young players main aim not being to win the tournament worrying and the I dont believe the Irish championships will improve until that changes. Is winning a international title more prestigious to a non chess compared to winning your national title - I dont think so.
What you are suggesting sparks to bring "40 random grandmasters from Eastern Europe" would cost around €100,000 after prize money, accommodation, flights and expenses are paid. Have you got a spare €100,000 at the moment as I am a little short... Dont get me wrong I would love to have an international open tournament in Ireland of that standard but there is no reason we cannot have both.
Irish chess has been steadily in a decline for the last decade but I am optimistic for the future but that is only to do with the amount of junior players who have started playing recently particularly in Leinster and I really am not sure the ICU have had any influence over that. I just hope it continues to improve.
The top players in Ireland are role models to the junior players and with all the top players playing in tournaments they would get a chance to see them play regularly either at a tournament or their local club. You never know what would happen then they could get to analyse there games with master or get to play a blitz game or 2 - They might even end up winning a game! I believe if the above happens attendances in club/tournaments will grow rapidly. I know its not realistic due to work and family commitments but I think you would be surprised what could happen if a bit more effort was made.0 -
checknraise wrote: »I find the current situation were the best young players main aim not being to win the tournament worrying and the I dont believe the Irish championships will improve until that changes. Is winning a international title more prestigious to a non chess compared to winning your national title - I dont think so.What you are suggesting sparks to bring "40 random grandmasters from Eastern Europe"
Honestly, if you stay so focused on having high performances, you ignore the participation levels (and when you look up from the local pond, the high performances just aren't that high).The top players in Ireland are role modelsI believe if the above happens attendances in club/tournaments will grow rapidly. I know its not realistic due to work and family commitments but I think you would be surprised what could happen if a bit more effort was made.0 -
Advertisement
-
I dont know how to use quotes so forgive me
Every employer would automatically assume that if you had Irish Chess champion on your CV that you were the best player in Ireland at the time same way if you put down bridge, boxing or tiddlywinks. I am not sure they would understand the difficulty in winning a international title.
They majority certainly wouldnt be a role model on any level except chess.
I think everybody would love to see a massive open tournament organised in Ireland every year but it would cost a significant amount of money to organise an event like that. E2E4 have ran a tournament for the last few years with a handful of GM's playing.
http://e2e4.org.uk/dublin/Apr2013/masters.htm0 -
checknraise wrote: »Every employer would automatically assume that if you had Irish Chess champion on your CV that you were the best player in Ireland at the time same way if you put down bridge, boxing or tiddlywinks. I am not sure they would understand the difficulty in winning a international title.They majority certainly wouldnt be a role model on any level except chess.E2E4 have ran a tournament for the last few years with a handful of GM's playing.0
-
But that's still the 20-40 players range. It's the 200-400 range you need, at least. And making it the nationals makes that easier to do (not easy, just easier :pac: ).
Where do you get the 200-400 players? Where do you put them? And how do you pay for it all?
Even then, you really need to throw a few Super GMs in to get any notice whatsoever.
Look at Bunratty, there was over 300 players this year spread across the 4 sections, yet outside the chess world it was almost completely ignored. I live minutes from Bunratty and I can tell you that there are people even living in the place who have no idea the biggest chess tournament in Ireland takes place there every year
I agree there is much much more that can be done to promote Irish chess and we are all failing, the membership and the executive, in that regard.0 -
brilliantboy wrote: »Where do you get the 200-400 players?Look at Bunratty
...specifically the large distance between B (Bunratty) and A (the constituency of the Minister for Sport).
I mean, it's not even that it's outside Dublin, its that it's too far from TDs looking to look good. Stick it in the Castleknock hotel ten minutes drive from the Minister for Sport's clinic, get him to open it or give out prizes and you make getting PR a lot easier...0 -
brilliantboy wrote: »It's interesting to note that there's still not a single entrant listed for the Irish Womens Championship.
I don't think the prize fund of 'only' €150 helps matters. That's nothing more than a token sum and frankly I would almost feel insulted.
Would it be better if there was no listed minimum prize fund? 1800 was the highest rated Irish player at the event 8 months ago. The entrants were a little unbalanced and I gather the life blood of the event (players rated below 1200 (minor section players) or 9 out of 12 players) don't want to come back to a one-side event (top player was nearly double the highest under 1200 player).brilliantboy wrote: »http://www.icu.ie/misc/games/sm/irishwomenschampionship2012/
Last years championship in Kilkenny had 12 players, and I'm sure it was hoped they could at least assemble a similar field for this years event.
It's interesting to note that even last year a few players decided to enter the Congress instead.
That wasn't last years event; that was this years event (2012/2013). This is a second women's championship held in the same playing year.
There are a number of factors (not prize money) that would contribute to low entry.
1. location from dublin (some Irish players won't leave dublin)
2. It clashes with the Main event or with the trainer courses.
3. The first wasn't that great (in comparison to the kilkenny event).
4. The difference between the women's and every other event can be felt in the advertising. The poster for the women's is different entirely to advertising for the rest. It is even a seperate event on the ICU website.
5. People have to choose between the 1st weekend or the 2nd (that would tell me how much they don't care about the event that it's worth less than a different tournament)
6. Reason listed above - standard too extreme
7. Second women's championship in this year; reduces the impact of gaining such a title
Prize money would NOT be on that list. This is an event with a minimum prize fund of €150 (pretty generous when there are 0 entries) and only started in the last 8 months. Women make up; lets say 5% of total players. 1000 players in the ICU that's 50 women that could possibly play. Not all 50 can make it. Something needs to be done to get that 5% up higher.brilliantboy wrote: »If the aim is to get away from the usual routine of having womens prizes in the main event and giving the title to the highest placed, then I don't think the championship is being given a fair chance in it's infancy.
That isn't the reason. The reason is to develop women's chess in Ireland. more needs to be done getting more female players involved rather than simply holding a tournament.brilliantboy wrote: »One of the ideas behind having women only events in the first place is to increase participation, but I fear we might be hampering it in this case.
Of course, there is still a week or so until the deadline so maybe there will be a flood of entries before then and I'll look like an idiot
The entries close the day of the event (but I gather if no one is entered who would come down to it). The late fee comes into effect after the 28th of June.brilliantboy wrote: »I'm afraid many of our woman players might find it a more attractive proposition to play in the weekender or am/pm tournaments where there are better prizes on offer, stronger opposition to play, and the social buzz around the UL campus may be greater (I believe there's also an comic-book/anime convention on in UL that weekend)
On that note: Every entry to any event during the Irish Championship gets free entry to that Anime and gaming convention called brocon (see here)brilliantboy wrote: »One of the biggest problems with a more open championship is that you could get a situation where the Irish champion finishes near the bottom of the field yet still becomes Irish Champion, and if you're pumping up the prize fund and offering incentives to foreign players, it's not at all inconceivable that it could happen. So in a situation where you should be crowning a champion, you're just crowning also-rans.
It depends on what the purpose of the Irish Chess Championship is. Once you know why the Irish Chess Championships exist; it's easier to decide on the criteria to enter.
For example: Is it to find the best player in Ireland (no rating restrictions should be in place)? Is it to promote chess in Ireland (more GMs and ICU PRO publicisies it more)? Is it meant to be the best tournament in Ireland (more GM's etc)?
Personally; if you limit it to IRL with FIDE only (or no nationallity with FIDE); you have to scrap the rating requirment. otherwise the competition becomes is just for the top 20 in Ireland that can take the week off work....specifically the large distance between B (Bunratty) and A (the constituency of the Minister for Sport).
I mean, it's not even that it's outside Dublin, its that it's too far from TDs looking to look good. Stick it in the Castleknock hotel ten minutes drive from the Minister for Sport's clinic, get him to open it or give out prizes and you make getting PR a lot easier...
What is your obsession with the Minister for Sport? Surely a munster rugby player/president of ul or something similar would also generate PR aswell. This just depends on a good PRO from both the event organisors and the ICU.
[QUOTE=Sparks;85174591Consider this; if you had a really large chess tournament, with hundreds of players from all levels, in Dublin and several famous (to non-chess players) GMs in attendance and the Irish Champion was to be decided on at that tournament, then getting the Championship award handed over by the Minister for Sport and getting that on the news and in the papers would be a fairly easy thing to arrange because it's a pretty nice PR gig; and when that's happening, it's a lot easier to go to the ISC and ask for official recognition as a sport because if they refuse, that's another easy story to get on the news and in the papers (ISC snubs Minister for Sport is a nice headline...).[/QUOTE]
The ISC would laugh at your face for thinking that because the Minister for Sport is at an award ceremony that you are a sport. Chess players don't think logically when it comes to real life. No national organisation will suddenly go "ah sure, we had it wrong all those years and we are changing it today". There was a push in 2003 (I think) to get chess as a sport. This had 10,000 signatures during the boom years. When that doesn't work; you know that the government won't issue legislation or abuse their powers to do what you want. What we should do (as I keep saying on boards) is apply for the ICU to be the national governing body for chess and be recognised by the ISC. You'd be surprised at how something that small can make a huge difference.0 -
I'm not sure what the last bit was in bold.. Anyway different post as the last one was quite long!
Anyway Next years championship (if they are going to have the rating requirement) should allow people to qualify for it irrespective of rating (I say qualify; they don't get free entry). This could generate interest in more tournaments around Ireland and when you qualify for a place; you are kinda less likely to give it up...
Top X under 18 players automatically qualify
Winners/runners-up of the Under-18/16 sections qualify
Women's champion qualifies
Winners of sections rated above 1600 around Ireland.
Players that have a rating performance with the ICU of 1800/1900 or more (and played all the rounds in an event).0 -
What is your obsession with the Minister for Sport?The ISC would laugh at your face for thinking that because the Minister for Sport is at an award ceremony that you are a sport.This had 10,000 signatures during the boom years.
10,000 votes, maybe - shooting had success getting McDowell to row back on a proposed policy when that many shooters showed up in TD's clinics across the country to tell them that they wouldn't be getting a vote in the upcoming election or any future election because of that policy - but petitions just don't change things on their own (they're needed because their absence can be noted, but they don't win any arguments on their own).What we should do (as I keep saying on boards) is apply for the ICU to be the national governing body for chess and be recognised by the ISC
It's cheap, underhanded, sneaky and utterly not rocket science0 -
sam collins has decided to play in e2-e4 five round open competition in sunnigdale in UK rather to play in irish championship in same weekend. explanation ?
Much lower prize fund too -- money's not always the answer to the motivation problem.0 -
Two GMs there, higher average ratings, 60-odd entrants, none of the drama above and you don't have to take a week off work because it's a weekend event?
Other factors: Entrance fee is alot lower. Larger pool of players available (players can travel from around the UK); it's not capped with a rating.Much lower prize fund too -- money's not always the answer to the motivation problem.
SOOO true. High rated players have this belief that larger prize money = better players. It's true (as you attract foreign players) but when you are limited to irish only AND rated above a certain level; numbers won't increase (drastically) with prize money.
The e2e4 event (the open) has the same number of entrants as the main event of the Irish Championships. The other sections have more players than the weekender of the Irish Championships (10 more players).
Sam could play in both events; he could get a half point bye in rounds 1 and 2 and play rounds 3 - 9 (original post). Hopefully he will at least play in the weekender or make an appearance!Killian Delaney wrote:It does look like it will be shaping up to be a good tournament but I will be taking travelling byes for the first two rounds and I hope it doesnt affect people too much.0 -
Advertisement
-
The e2e4 event (the open) has the same number of entrants as the main event of the Irish Championships.
Irish Championships:
Average rating: 2095
e2e4 Sunningdale:
Average rating: 2157
I guess it makes more sense to spend less money and have a better shot at increasing your rating!0 -
Yeah, but the overall event is larger (60-something people) so there should be more fun outside of the playing area, and inside the playing area, well, look at the ratings histograms:
I guess it makes more sense to spend less money and have a better shot at increasing your rating!
You aren't comparing the same thing here. You are comparing 3 sections of the e2e4 event (60 people) with 1 section of the Irish Chess Championships (20 people). If you compare the entire event; the Irish Chess Championships (open, weekender, etc) is the same price and has similar entry numbers (less numbers currently). Along with outside the playing area, there is a gaming convection that weekend which everyone playing in the Irish Chess Championships can go to for free (more fun outside the playing area).
The average rating of the e2e4 event is higher and has more GM players. I suppose its a trade off between prize pool and titled players. However the e2e4 event isn't exclusive to Irish only players (which would limit the available high rating players).0 -
You aren't comparing the same thing here. You are comparing 3 sections of the e2e4 event (60 people) with 1 section of the Irish Chess Championships (20 people).Along with outside the playing area, there is a gaming convection that weekend which everyone playing in the Irish Chess Championships can go to for free (more fun outside the playing area).
Yes, if anime is your thing.
It's not everyone's thing.
In fact, it's not even most people's thing.
Whereas you can be reasonably sure that most people going to a chess tournament would cite chess as being their thing, so having more people to socialise with outside of the games would seem to be a more widely appealing social option.The average rating of the e2e4 event is higher and has more GM players. I suppose its a trade off between prize pool and titled players.However the e2e4 event isn't exclusive to Irish only players (which would limit the available high rating players).0 -
For the histograms you mean? No, those are comparing the section of the e2e4 that Sam's entered in and the section of the Irish Championships he would have been entered in (and the bin sizes are the same by the way - those histograms are directly comparable). Same number of people, different ratings distribution. I just mentioned the 40 others in the e2e4 event to indicate that there'd be more social craic outside of the match itself.
I know but the way you presented it seems a little misleading. You should be comparing the weekend of the weekenders (open/intermediate/juniors and the Irish Championships) to the e2e4 event when you are mentioning craic outside the match itself.
While if we take purely the Irish champs and the e2e4 open; you are comparing an open versus a closed event. Not to mention a tournament that is open to 1 million+ players versus one thats open to only 200 players. You have a difference in available players by a factor of 10,000. However, if we compare the e2e4 event as being purely english, you still have a factor of 10 more players, a 2621 average rating and 35 GMs versus Irelands 2392 average rating and 1 GM. The fact that the Irish Championships can attract a similar number with a similar average rating for 9 days is quite interesting.Er.
Yes, if anime is your thing.
It's not everyone's thing.
In fact, it's not even most people's thing.
Whereas you can be reasonably sure that most people going to a chess tournament would cite chess as being their thing, so having more people to socialise with outside of the games would seem to be a more widely appealing social option.
It's an anime and gaming convention. Chess = game. Should be something interesting; even if it's a 5 second look at something going on. Even if that's not your thing; still about 50-60 other chess players you can still socialise with.Well, if Sam went to the championships, he'd have the highest rating and any draw or loss would mean he'd lose more points than he could gain by winning; which isn't the case at the e2e4. So I guess for the players, the tradeoff is between money and ratings points...
Sam could be going to try to get a GM norm; maybe he couldn't take 9 days off work?
There is always a trade off between money and ratings. However in this case; I don't think an increase in the prize fund would = more higher rated players. With everyone over 2200 (i think) getting offered €100 appearance fee and €240 towards expenses AND a large prize fund, I can't see players over 2200 waiting for the last second to enter.That would appear to be a lesson to be learnt...
I don't think that's the lesson to be learnt. It comes back to what you see the event being. Otherwise we are going to have this cycle of Irish only - everyone - Irish only. Like how do you even measure the success of an Irish Championship? The average rating? The attendence? The prize fund? The media coverage?
After 100 years, I'm not sure the Irish Championships ever knew what purpose it served. Is it the place where the best players (top 10) should just play each other? Should it be a place where we get GM/IM norms for our players? The best tournament in Ireland?0 -
I know but the way you presented it seems a little misleading. You should be comparing the weekend of the weekenders (open/intermediate/juniors and the Irish Championships) to the e2e4 event when you are mentioning craic outside the match itself.While if we take purely the Irish champs and the e2e4 open; you are comparing an open versus a closed event.
Nobody really seems to have definitively nailed down what "better" means in this case, but here we get a comparison on both performance level and participation levels (and the open tournament wins out).The fact that the Irish Championships can attract a similar number with a similar average rating for 9 days is quite interesting.
C'mon, you know a hundred points isn't a small difference! And just look at that histogram, it's a comparison between a gaussian and a poisson distribution!Sam could be going to try to get a GM norm; maybe he couldn't take 9 days off work?I don't think that's the lesson to be learnt. It comes back to what you see the event being. Otherwise we are going to have this cycle of Irish only - everyone - Irish only. Like how do you even measure the success of an Irish Championship? The average rating? The attendence? The prize fund? The media coverage?
There are about a thousand people in the ICU, and probably quite a few more than that playing chess in Ireland - to say that four or five high-ranked players are the only ones who can have an opinion on what the goals of the championships should be is... well, again, we need a euphemism to remain polite Let's just say it's not a great approach. It doesn't include 99% of the people who pay their ICU dues, let alone those who play.
So unless the goal of the championships is to see who wins a tournament out of the small select few who can take a week off work and go play in the middle of a recession, well, perhaps a better approach is needed. Personally I think the attendance level, especially amongst the strongest players, says that there's definitely something wrong.
And maybe there's a discussion to have there on the fundamentals of what it is the championships should be for and how we judge if they've been a success, before we ever get to the discussion of how we go about running them...0 -
Yes, but I think that that's a fair comparison since there was discussion over whether a closed or an open tournament was "better".
Nobody really seems to have definitively nailed down what "better" means in this case, but here we get a comparison on both performance level and participation levels (and the open tournament wins out).
I think comparison to a previous open Irish Championships would be more appropriate (a closed event in the UK has a higher pool of average ratings to draw from and a lot more players). However, I think a comparison of a closed event and an open event does provide general influences (but not neccesarily large factors).Well, it's a similar average rating allright, in the sense that they both start with the same number and have the same number of digits...
C'mon, you know a hundred points isn't a small difference! And just look at that histogram, it's a comparison between a gaussian and a poisson distribution!
it's an average rating difference of 62 points (or having 2 GMs at the event). When England has 34 more GMs and a higher average rating of nearly 230 points; an average rating of 62 points lower isn't that bad. Ideally the Irish Championships would trump most other tournaments, but we are small chess playing nation. Having such a high average rating with such a player base is quite impressive given the size of our chess union.I was wondering about the norm, but can he get a GM norm at e2e4? I thought there were requirements on the size and ratings level of the tournament?
If another GM plays I think so. There are standards and scoring results required.Like I said, I don't think anyone's defined "better" yet (or what the championships are for or any of the other fundamental questions). And I don't see much in the way of meaningful debate about it. There's plenty of loudly held if poorly reflected-upon opinion out there from several... can we be polite and say "characters"? But their views alone are really a bad way to try to define the point of the championships.
I agree. I think the championships was more inherited by the ICU from the hibernian chess Association who inherited it from another group. I feel the championships is going in circles in organisations with split views of Irish Open, titled tournament, etc.There are about a thousand people in the ICU, and probably quite a few more than that playing chess in Ireland - to say that four or five high-ranked players are the only ones who can have an opinion on what the goals of the championships should be is... well, again, we need a euphemism to remain polite Let's just say it's not a great approach. It doesn't include 99% of the people who pay their ICU dues, let alone those who play.
Every member of the ICU is informed of motions as AGMs. Membership numbers could be 1000 but in fairness maybe 900 don't care about ICU policies or decisions and really just want to play in weekenders and that's it.So unless the goal of the championships is to see who wins a tournament out of the small select few who can take a week off work and go play in the middle of a recession, well, perhaps a better approach is needed. Personally I think the attendance level, especially amongst the strongest players, says that there's definitely something wrong.
Again, I'm not sure. We should really compare scales here. The British Championships attracts X players from Y membership that can play. Do we attract a similar percentage?
I would be in favour of a qualification system (similar to the British Championships). I do particularly like the lowered rating entry for younger players.And maybe there's a discussion to have there on the fundamentals of what it is the championships should be for and how we judge if they've been a success, before we ever get to the discussion of how we go about running them...
I agree but the conversation shouldn't center around open or closed but rather what the Irish Championships is. That should be put in place for a period of 4 years and then changed if appropriate. A once off change doesn't really show any correlation0 -
Advertisement
-
I think comparison to a previous open Irish Championships would be more appropriateWhen England has...Ideally the Irish Championships would trump most other tournaments, but we are small chess playing nation. Having such a high average rating with such a player base is quite impressive given the size of our chess union.
On a minor tangent, a comparison of player bases themselves might be of more use if you want to look at the sport as a whole - and pick Finland for an example instead of the UK. Finland's often used for comparing Ireland to in terms of sport because we have very similar populations (to within a million or so) and about the same amount of money (almost exactly the same GDP per capita even now; we used to have more than them). Their active FIDE-rated player base is 501 players ranging from 1420 to 2599; ours is 191 players ranging from 1356 to 2520, and the histograms show that their average is higher than ours and not because of one or two outliers either, it's just a solidly healthier player base:
(Ireland in green, Finland in blue)
Which probably explains their national championships histogram
And it's not like it's down to a stronger junior program or anything, their age profiles are younger than ours on average, yes, but not excessively so. Though if you look carefully, there's a plateau in the 18-40 age demographic in Ireland that you don't see in Finland (and that's interesting because that's the core of your working life, when you have the least amount of free time - how do the Finns hang on to their players and even increase them during that age bracket while we don't?):
BTW, they charge more for their equivalent of ICU membership fees (€75 -v- €35) and that doesn't include their version of the ICJ, which is an extra €45.Every member of the ICU is informed of motions as AGMs.Membership numbers could be 1000 but in fairness maybe 900 don't care about ICU policies or decisions and really just want to play in weekenders and that's it.
And saying that people don't care about ICU policies isn't really accurate - it's more that people have mortgages to pay and jobs to hold down and families to raise, and getting into a four-hour peeing match in an AGM over some mundane triviality isn't high on their priority list. Policies can be of interest; petty politics not so much. People have too much to do to get involved in that; they kindof expect that the organisation will find out what they need and use their membership dues to provide as much of it as is possible. When all they get in return is politics and noise, going to the AGM to fix it isn't the option most chose; ignoring it and going to go play online chess (or even something else entirely) on the other hand...I agree but the conversation shouldn't center around open or closed but rather what the Irish Championships is. That should be put in place for a period of 4 years and then changed if appropriate. A once off change doesn't really show any correlation0 -
It is an interesting question : how do you measure the success of an Irish Championship?
Criteria might be:
A. Percentage of the top 20 active players participating
B. Percentage of eligible players taking part
C. Number of provinces represented
D. Number of new players participating
E. Number of people who travel to the tournament
I am sure there are other criteria also ...0 -
BTW, they charge more for their equivalent of ICU membership fees (€75 -v- €35) and that doesn't include their version of the ICJ, which is an extra €45.
I don't know what the y-axis means on that graph...It is an interesting question : how do you measure the success of an Irish Championship?
Criteria might be:
A. Percentage of the top 20 active players participating
B. Percentage of eligible players taking part
C. Number of provinces represented
D. Number of new players participating
E. Number of people who travel to the tournament
I am sure there are other criteria also ...
It's a conversation I'd like to see. Because criteria A and C are completely different (the best players are typically from Leinster with maybe 1 or 2 from munster). I'm not certain what criteria I'd apply for a championship to be successful; I suppose uptake and interest from non-playing individuals (spectaters online/offline).0 -
I don't know what the y-axis means on that graph...It's a conversation I'd like to see.
I'd add to the potential list the following candidates as well:- "Amount of media coverage"
- "Number of resulting new players/members"
- "Average rating of participants, broken down by division"
- "Total number of participants"
- "Net profit/loss" (Not that this should ever be the primary factor in decision-making, but if the event bankrupts the ICU, it can't really be a success story...)
- "Strongest competition for the title" (which is measurable by looking to rating differentials, post-game analysis and so forth)
There are probably more - maybe it'd be useful if people gave their ideas of what might be candidate metrics for success?0 -
It's a histogram of ages, but with a moving average filter applied (the raw histogram is the fainter dotted line). So the y-axis is number of people (on their FIDE ratings list) at that age +/- 5 years. Gives an easier to recognise profile.
Oh ok. Well with Finland having 5x more players I'd expect to see 5x more on that graph in every location. If you could plot that as a % of the total playing pool instead of number of players, I'd say Ireland and Finland match up fairly well.I'd add to the potential list the following candidates as well:- "Amount of media coverage"
- "Number of resulting new players/members"
- "Average rating of participants, broken down by division"
- "Total number of participants"
- "Net profit/loss" (Not that this should ever be the primary factor in decision-making, but if the event bankrupts the ICU, it can't really be a success story...)
- "Strongest competition for the title" (which is measurable by looking to rating differentials, post-game analysis and so forth)
There are probably more - maybe it'd be useful if people gave their ideas of what might be candidate metrics for success?
See some of those points are vague... Like the Cork congress would meet criteria 1 and would be a success. I wouldn't want that happening at the Irish Chess Championships!
It's hard to determine how many new players play as a result of 1 tournament. There are too many factors.
It's a tough one to determine as the Irish Chess Championships mean different things to different people.
It certainly should be the ICU's highlighted tournament of the year.0 -
Advertisement
-
Oh ok. Well with Finland having 5x more players I'd expect to see 5x more on that graph in every location.
- Why do Finland have five times as many players given that they have about the same population and the same budget nationally?
- Why do we see a drop-off in our figures for the 18-40 age range when Finland doesn't? (Compare those two lines in the graph - we flatten out for that age range, they don't).
If you could plot that as a % of the total playing pool instead of number of players, I'd say Ireland and Finland match up fairly well.See some of those points are vagueLike the Cork congress would meet criteria 1 and would be a success. I wouldn't want that happening at the Irish Chess Championships!It's hard to determine how many new players play as a result of 1 tournament. There are too many factors.It's a tough one to determine as the Irish Chess Championships mean different things to different people.
It certainly should be the ICU's highlighted tournament of the year.
http://www.chessdom.com/heart-of-finland-2012/0 -
Which raises two questions:
- Why do Finland have five times as many players given that they have about the same population and the same budget nationally?
- Why do we see a drop-off in our figures for the 18-40 age range when Finland doesn't? (Compare those two lines in the graph - we flatten out for that age range, they don't).
They have 25% more population wise. Also chess is considered a sport in Finland (I think - my finnish is a bit rusty) which could have an impact.Possibly, but I can't find a source anywhere for the total playing pool for either nation ("total playing pool" not being the same as "total number of members of the national chess federation"). I don't think the number is available to anyone for either nation.
If you do a search of players and just modify things in excel you can take the data and plot it against total playing population.
As you can see from the graph below the numbers don't trail off from 18-35. Our peak tends to be at 55 but for finland at 50. The average total age is 44.45 and 1968 for Ireland while Finland has an average age of 45.9 and rating of 1967.Again, true if you're looking for conclusive proof, but we can track the numbers of new people coming in and at least look for correlations between the timings of events and media coverage and increases in the numbers. It may not be perfect, but it's better than no data at all.
Numbers would increase at a club level (players showing up to random clubs) but not a national level (and even less so at international level). Tracking players at a club level is impossible.Agreed, but to use Finland again, would you rather see the championships as they are with a small closed entry, or as something like the Heart of Finland event?
http://www.chessdom.com/heart-of-finland-2012/
This kinda removes colms point about national championships earlier (could have been on a different site). He used Spain as an example but now Finland is a counter. I'd rather see events around Ireland having higher rated players rather than July which is full of other national tournaments (like Finland). When our top players are higher rated it brings up the players below them too. When England got their first home grown GM; suddenly more started appearing.0 -
They have 25% more population wise.If you do a search of players and just modify things in excel you can take the data and plot it against total playing population.As you can see from the graph below the numbers don't trail off from 18-35. Our peak tends to be at 55 but for finland at 50. The average total age is 44.45 and 1968 for Ireland while Finland has an average age of 45.9 and rating of 1967.
(Dark blue is Finnish players -v- age; light blue is % of Finnish players -v- age; dark green is Irish players -v- age; light green is % of Irish players -v- age; and the axis on the left is for the number of players while the right axis is for % of players)This kinda removes colms point about national championships earlier (could have been on a different site). He used Spain as an example but now Finland is a counter.When our top players are higher rated it brings up the players below them too.0 -
That hardly scales to give them almost four times as many FIDE-rated players though.
Well if you factor in chess also being a sport there it could. There are more factors at play than just population. Ireland has 1 GM per 1 million people but Iceland has 12 per 319,000 people. It really isn't down to just population.Where do you get the total playing population number from?
If you go to ratings.fide.com you can do an advanced search and find all players from whichever country you prefer. Copy and paste into excel and you can do what you'd like with the information. You can also go and download the entire FIDE rating database located here. This was prepared with active players only.
The graph below is a 5 year moving average (stupidly done as 5 5-year moving averages)
Below that graph is % of total added. So if we have 1% aged <5 and 2% aged 5-10 we have 3% aged <10. The reason this graph doesn't get to 100% is DOB are missing for some players.
It would seem to me between 40-55 is when players stop playing.To be fair, you've actually misread my (not clear enough) post - the Heart of Finland event isn't the Finnish championships, that's a closed event as well, but they get even fewer than we do, despite the larger available population and the success of the Heart of Finland event.
I wouldn't compare heart of finland to the Irish Championships; I'd compare it to Bunratty.Well, so long as they embrace that role, yes; but it does tend to depend on the personality of the person involved...
Kinda but an ahole is enough to encourage someone to beat them just as much as a nice guy is encouraging enough to improve the standard. I don't think I've ever heard of standard increasing and it being worse for any chess nation.0 -
Well if you factor in chess also being a sport there it could. There are more factors at play than just population. Ireland has 1 GM per 1 million people but Iceland has 12 per 319,000 people. It really isn't down to just population.If you go to ratings.fide.com you can do an advanced search and find all players from whichever country you prefer.The graph below is a 5 year moving average (stupidly done as 5 5-year moving averages)I wouldn't compare heart of finland to the Irish Championships; I'd compare it to Bunratty.Kinda but an ahole is enough to encourage someone to beat them just as much as a nice guy is encouraging enough to improve the standard.
I mean, this is chess, not the GAA. If there's some git in the local chess club, I can just go online and play chess there at enormously less hassle to myself. Whereas if there's some git in the local GAA club, I have to give up GAA if I want to avoid them.0 -
Well, the entry deadline is passed, and the entry list looks like this according to the ULChess website:Name|Rating
Colm Daly|2339
David Fitzsimons|2331
Philip Short|2260
Mark Orr|2247
Mel O’Cinneide|2225
John Redmond|2217
Jonathan O’Connor|2149
Paul Walsh|2118
Killian Delaney|2117
Rory Quinn|2101
Ciaran Quinn|2098
Anthony Fox|2093
Gerard MacElligott|2050
Gordon Freeman|2047
John Hughes|2046
Raymond O’Rourke|2023
Eamonn Keogh|1994
Martin Crichton|1965
John Cormican|1965
Martin O’Grady|1903
Kevin O’Flaherty|1880
0 -
The size of the entry is fairly typical for Irish Championships outside Dublin - it's also much better than last year. It should be very competitive also - the top 6 are within 122 points of each other.
It's not too surprising that there was a poor entry from 1800-1900 rated players - it can be a tough tournament if you're not playing well.
I'm not sure what benefit there is in having weekend tournaments alongside the Irish Championship (do they make money for it?). Would it be better to have a 9-round under-2000 tournament in parallel with the Irish championship. In Norway, they run a range of 9-round tournaments for various rating/age bands - the 2012 Norwegian championship results are here:
http://tournamentservice.com/standings.aspx?TID=Landsturneringen2012-SjakklubbenCaissa. Obviously we don't have the numbers Norway does, but 2 9-round tournaments should be possible.0 -
david fitzsimon is going to win it , i think0
-
From the ICU website:The Irish Chess Championships is accepting entries for the Main event until Thursday the 4th of July at 5pm. The entry fee has been reduced for players rated between 1800-2000 to €50. Any player who has entered already and paid €100 will be reimbursed €50 on the day This is the last chance to enter the main event.
The FIDE course and ICU CI and SI courses have a deadline of Wednesday the 3rd of July, spaces are limited!0 -
No late entries as far as I can tell. The draw will probably look something like the sample one that Colm Daly has on the irishchesschampionships.com site. Really looking forward to this event now, though a bit apprehensive at the same time. Its a commitment in terms of time and effort so just hoping I wont bomb.0
-
Advertisement
Advertisement