Armstrong 2015/16

cdeb

So the league fixtures have been sent out to clubs. Time to get the new season threads open!

Guess we can start off with some predictions like last year.

1. Gonzaga - hard to see who'll stop them, especially if Henry Li has signed
2. St Benildus A - I think we underachieved last year, but a couple of players seem back in form, so maybe...!

11. St Benildus B - having not expected to get promoted in the first place, I think it'd be sticking my neck out to say we'll stay up! I think we can target staying off the bottom though.
12. Kilkenny - were 10th last year and if Curragh still have their top three boards, they should stay up. Doesn't seem to be anyone coming through for Kilkenny, so this might be their year to go down. Though they are up against Benildus B on the last day, so if they bring out the big guns, they could get a big score if needed!

League table is here

L1m1tless

I agree with your predictions for first and second.

I think the Curragh will stay up this time. It will he interesting to see how our rising starts fare against the elite. Our board one was only warming up last year after many years break from chess.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

It would be very very tough for benildus to both challenge for the title and keep their B team up. Absolutely no offence meant, it's just incredibly difficult to do, even with a large crop of promising juniors to bolster the ranks. Elm mount, Gonzaga, trinity will boast 1900s throughout the bottom boards with subs around that standard too

cdeb

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

It would be very very tough for benildus to both challenge for the title and keep their B team up.

This is true - which is why I haven't predicted it to happen.

I'm hoping we'll have a stable team like last year - the Armstrong only needed 10 subs, three on the final day when we were out of the running. The Heidenfeld were almost all regulars after Christmas. That'll be key. If we start using lots of subs, we'll be in trouble.

Though I do think there's two or three clubs the B team can target. Which is of course different to saying we'll finish ahead of two or three!

Tim Harding

Since Trinity generally request to postpone any September match (because undergraduate term won't have started), this means their first match will be against Gonzaga, potentially one of the most decisive match-ups of the season.

Why have Gonzaga got home advantage for the second season in a row?

Also why are there yet again only five rounds before Christmas (instead of six as in previous years?). Instead of the league finishing in March, as it used to, there are now two rounds in April. Who decided this?

wine and final destination

The home and away fixtures change every two years generally!

mikhail

Tim Harding wrote: »

Also why are there yet again only five rounds before Christmas (instead of six as in previous years?). Instead of the league finishing in March, as it used to, there are now two rounds in April. Who decided this?

Didn't Bray or someone propose to ban matches in December?

From cdeb's LCU AGM report here:
Motion 4. The rule that no fixtures be held between 14 December and 25 December should be rescinded. (Inchicore)

4) Withdrawn on the basis it wasn’t a rule in the first place (it was passed last year as a recommendation)

I guess with round 5 creeping into December, there just wasn't room for another round. The fixture-generating software developed a couple of years ago (I regret to say I can't remember by whom) seems to do a decent job otherwise, so it's probably not worth the volume of work it'd take to fix that by hand. Maybe we could look at starting a week earlier next year.

EnPassant

Elm Mount 6 Dublin 2

cdeb

St Benildus B 2-6 St Benildus A

Was looking a lot worse for a long time!

Retd.LoyolaCpt

cdeb wrote: »

St Benildus B 2-6 St Benildus A

Was looking a lot worse for a long time!

Any wins for the Bs? or 4 draws?

cdeb

A win on the bottom board - a sub for us.

Draws on 1 and 7

L1m1tless

Curragh 0 Gonzaga 8 didn't help by missing two of our top boards, but it was only ever going to be an exhibition match.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

Neo_Ninja wrote: »

Curragh 0 Gonzaga 8 didn't help by missing two of our top boards, but it was only ever going to be an exhibition match.

... Good things happen when you drop me...

Gearoid MacGabhain

Balbriggan 6 Phibsbora 2

Gearoid MacGabhain

Uptodate table till I get access to the website
Team MP W D L Pts
1 Gonzaga 1 8 0 0 8
2 Elm Mount 1 5 2 1 6
3 St Benildus A 1 5 2 5 6
4 Balbriggan 1 4 4 0 6
5 St Benildus B 1 1 2 1 2
6 Dublin 1 1 2 5 2
7 Phibsboro 1 0 4 4 2
8 Bray / Greystones 0 0 0 0 0
9 Dublin University 0 0 0 0 0
10 Dun Laoghaire 0 0 0 0 0
11 Kilkenny 0 0 0 0 0
12 Curragh 1 0 0 8 0

sinbad68

Several incidences of games played in Armstrong this season in which players only got 1 hour 30 min each ( No increments ), This problem started after LCU decided to add The option of 90 mins + 30 secs increments to previous 2 hours per player for all the moves, which not only creates a problem for players using public transport late at night to get home if their game drags on, another problem is that alot of players are not familiar with using chess clocks and that's why mistakes happened . I've seen players who have been playing chess for decades and DO NOT know how to set the timer on their own club's chess clocks and constantly looking for others to help them !. If you are a player in a game or sports you should familiarise yourself with the equipment you need to use and clubs should make an effort in this field. Some chess clocks are unnecessarily complicated, they have functions like making sound or provide light, bootless functions which are disturbing to players and waste of battery but don't have the function of automatically switching off themselves after a few minutes if not being used and saving battery.

Couple of Armstrong games scheduled 9 days ago still do not appear in the league table. Why the delay, when reporting and updating is all done online ?.

mikhail

sinbad68 wrote: »

Couple of Armstrong games scheduled 9 days ago still do not appear in the league table. Why the delay, when reporting and updating is all done online ?.

The league software is kind of conservative. The division controllers have to copy emails from both teams into the league software, reconcile them, and report the result to the leagues controller, who later publishes it. It makes for a delay of at least a few days, and sometimes longer. (As for who's making the delay, it varies.) On the other hand, it does make for fewer errors.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

sinbad68 wrote: »

Couple of Armstrong games scheduled 9 days ago still do not appear in the league table. Why the delay, when reporting and updating is all done online ?.

Dublin University 3.5 - 1.5 Dun Laoghaire. 3 games rescheduled due to start of term.

Not sure about Kilkenny - Bray/Greystones.

mikhail

Which reminds me,

St Benildus 5.5-2.5 Balbriggan

cdeb

Ahem!

St Benildus A 5.5-2.5 Balbriggan

sinbad68

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Not sure about Kilkenny - Bray/Greystones.

kilkenny 1- Bray 6 and one game in dispute, apparently 3 of the games were played with 90 minutes each and NO increments( time frame)!, and one of those game is in dispute due to one person having winning position but shortage of time!.

mikhail wrote: »

The league software is kind of conservative. The division controllers have to copy emails from both teams into the league software, reconcile them, and report the result to the leagues controller, who later publishes it. It makes for a delay of at least a few days, and sometimes longer. (As for who's making the delay, it varies.) On the other hand, it does make for fewer errors.

Cut out the middleman and let captains report directly ( within 24 hours of match being played )to league controller as well as division guys, and the controller being someone who is prompt. The tables should be updated minimum once weekly.The icu rating site needs to be fixed as well, stephen brady played for st benildus last season and this and yet appears to be a phibsboro player according to icu rating site and didn't Alex byrne leave that club long time ago ?, too many examples, when people pay their annual icu fees they should state, which club (if any ) they are affiliated with or, is it joined with ?

As regarding chess clocks, if anyone asks you to set the clock for them, my advice is to teach them how to set the clock, because " Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish you feed him for life "

mikhail

sinbad68 wrote: »

Cut out the middleman and let captains report directly ( within 24 hours of match being played )to league controller as well as division guys, and the controller being someone who is prompt. The tables should be updated minimum once weekly.

You get to specify quality of service from people you pay to do something.

The icu rating site needs to be fixed as well, stephen brady played for st benildus last season and this and yet appears to be a phibsboro player according to icu rating site and didn't Alex byrne leave that club long time ago ?, too many examples, when people pay their annual icu fees they should state, which club (if any ) they are affiliated with or, is it joined with ?

No doubt you can suggest that the club field be mandatory for subscriptions to whoever is currently running it. Maybe it is. For all I know, Stephen is still a member of Phibsboro. I know several people who have some degree of assocaition with more than one club.

mikhail

cdeb wrote: »

Ahem!

St Benildus A 5.5-2.5 Balbriggan

Yet another reason to ban B teams from divisions.

sinbad68

mikhail wrote: »

You get to specify quality of service from people you pay to do something.

Are you telling me people providing the service are unpaid volunteers ?!! If so, they volunteered, then they love their job and should do it faster than reluctant paid individuals.

cdeb

sinbad68 wrote: »

kilkenny 1- Bray 6 and one game in dispute, apparently 3 of the games were played with 90 minutes each and NO increments( time frame)!, and one of those game is in dispute due to one person having winning position but shortage of time!

Interesting. I presume that final game has to go against the player who lost on time (or because of time)? It's surely incumbent on both players to make sure the clock is set up correctly, and you can hardly complain about it after the game, no more than you can claim a draw or call touch move after a game is over.

sinbad68

@ cdeb. I am not sure if a player lost on time or paused the clock and called the arbiter when low on time. unfortunately I am not as good in eavesdropping as I used to be.

Clubs pay LCU a fee ? for services , how much is it and what is spent on ?

FortKnox

Does this impact FIDE rating? The 1 1/2 hours only works if the increments bring the total time to 120 mins based on a 60 move game.

From Fide website
Rate of Play
1.1

For a game to be rated, each player must have the following minimum periods in which to complete all the moves, assuming the game lasts 60 moves.
Where at least one of the players in the tournament has a rating 2200 or higher, each player must have a minimum of 120 minutes.
Where at least one of the players in the tournament has a rating 1600 or higher, each player must have a minimum of 90 minutes.
Where all the players in the tournament are rated below 1600, each player must have a minimum of 60 minutes.

cdeb

sinbad68 wrote: »

@ cdeb. I am not sure if a player lost on time or paused the clock and called the arbiter when low on time.

I would have thought in either circumstance, the result over the board stands though. Both players were responsible for letting the game go on with the erroneous time control, so I don't see how either could claim a win.

sinbad68 wrote: »

Clubs pay LCU a fee ? for services , how much is it and what is spent on ?

Yes. Fee is detailed in the LCU rules. Accounts were presented at the AGM - your club rep should be able to fill you in. From memory, the main chunk is the last day of the leagues (venue hire and trophies) and a subsidy for the City of Dublin.

@FortKnox - I would presume the important bit is what the rules state the time control is, and if there's a mistake, that's outside of the rules and doesn't affect FIDE ratings.

But that's just a guess obviously.

Tim Harding

It should be possible to tell within a few moves that the clock is not applying a 30-second increment. FIDE rule 6.10 applies. The clock should be stopped and adjusted (by the team captains in the absence of the league arbiter).

IMHO if the player(s) didn't notice or chose to do nothing about it, then they cannot complain about time trouble later or appeal the result and rating of the game.

UpTheJunction

Armstrong should be scrapped maybe?

sinbad68

Tim Harding wrote: »

It should be possible to tell within a few moves that the clock is not applying a 30-second increment. FIDE rule 6.10 applies. The clock should be stopped and adjusted (by the team captains in the absence of the league arbiter).

IMHO if the player(s) didn't notice or chose to do nothing about it, then they cannot complain about time trouble later or appeal the result and rating of the game.

In the first few moves, players should notice if 30 seconds being added on , but some players get immersed into the game from the start and don't notice the clock till towards the end.

UpTheJunction wrote: »

Armstrong should be scrapped maybe?

No, Mustafa !

pawntof4

sinbad68 wrote: »

No, Mustafa !

Aaawwww why did you have to go and do that!! We were all having fun pretending we didn't know.

You must be one of those vested interests

cdeb

sinbad68 wrote: »

In the first few moves, players should notice if 30 seconds being added on , but some players get immersed into the game from the start and don't notice the clock till towards the end.

Entirely possible alright (though you don't tend to get that immersed in a game in the first five moves, by which time you should be spotting the time error) - but still, that's both players' fault, and one can't subsequently claim a win on that basis.

sinbad68

cdeb wrote: »

Entirely possible alright (though you don't tend to get that immersed in a game in the first five moves, by which time you should be spotting the time error) - but still, that's both players' fault, and one can't subsequently claim a win on that basis.

Prevention is better than cure .Clock should be set properly in the beginning and perhaps tested by players to make sure increments work before the start of the real match.It should be duty of the host club or players to set their club clocks for the visitors.

rob51

sinbad68 wrote: »

Prevention is better than cure .Clock should be set properly in the beginning and perhaps tested by players to make sure increments work before the start of the real match.It should be duty of the host club or players to set their club clocks for the visitors.

Actually I'm surprised that increments seem to be a new feature in the Leinster Leagues. While I accept Sinbad's point that there can be issues in having the clocks set correctly I think you will find that there will be far less disputes overall using increments.

Certainly that has been the experience in the Munster Leagues where 90% of disputes used to be caused by allegro finishes and they just don't occur anymore.

cdeb

Leinster Leagues generally operate on weeknights, so increments are less useful as they give the potential for games to run on quite late. I presume that's the main reason why they didn't come in until recently (and are technically still, if not optional, then negotiable - you can play without increments if both players agree)

There's still no increments outside the top two divisions.

sinbad68

@ cdeb. I actually prefer 90 min+30 sec to 2 hours but weeknights is not the time to do it, also 30 seconds increments have No place if you are running more than 2 games in one day which is happening in ulster masters ( masters ). Some committees get bored and come up with silly ideas to change things ( usually for the worse ) like Dublin city council wanting to close some city centre streets like O'Connell street to traffic which will hurt city centre shops and make traffic around Dublin worse.

As for the clocks, if you have " who is responsible ?" if clock is set wrong in the air, mistakes and arguments occur but would be far fewer, once you hold one party ( host club & players) responsible, then you will see greater effort and far less mistakes. cdeb as I said , next time your club member asks you to set the clock, show him how it's done, perhaps you could have a clock setting tutorial and teach several people together or make a youtube video ?:)

cdeb

Showing now as a 7-1 win for Bray.

Looks like a freak result - I had assumed the big win meant Kilkenny were weaker again this year, but they out-rated Bray on 5 boards. Actually, it's Bray who were surprisingly weak; I presume they were missing a few players.

sinbad68

cdeb wrote: »

it's Bray who were surprisingly weak; I presume they were missing a few players.

You don't need to presume , this is bray's armstrong panel

http://leinsterchess.com/lcu1516/div1/panel4.htm

Bray's strength at kilkenny should be NO surprise, bray were playing away at kilkenny and some club players are reluctant to travel long distance to play a single game. Kilkenny are in trouble this season and highly likely will be relegated.

cdeb

Good spot. Although not sure how often Colm's going to be playing this year, which won't help. But yeah, add three 1900s and they'll be grand.

Wouldn't write off Kilkenny quite yet (even though I've tipped them to go down as well). Phibsboro's team for their first game was really weak; again, they're missing a couple of players it seems, and also for a Saturday away game (albeit only in Balbriggan) - but they won't want to have too many teams like that out.

Maybe the surprise of the round was Dublin having a strong team for an early away match.

Tim Harding

Gonzaga 4 Trinity 4 today so there's a good chance the Armstrong won't be decided before the last round this season.

Karl McPhillips beat Sam Collins.

The Trinity v Dun Laoghaire match is not yet finished as far as I'm aware because their player Tom O'Gorman was away at the junior internationals.

cdeb

0/2 for Sam so. Not doing his GM chances much good (as in reaching 2500)

Edit - that's nonsense actually; mixing Sam up with David Fitzsimons, who lost in round 1

EnPassant

Dun Laoire - Elm Mount finished as a 5.5 to 2.5 win for Elm Mount.

Bray have a good chance of going top of the table after round 2 - they need 5.5 against Benildus B on Wednesday.

L1m1tless

Phibsboro 5 curragh 3

cdeb

St Benildus B 4-4 Bray

Retd.LoyolaCpt

cdeb wrote: »

St Benildus B 4-4 Bray

wow, good result for your Bs

cdeb

Given Bray beat our As 6-2 last year, yep, it's a brilliant result!

Suddenly this season is like last season, where we started seriously thinking early on if we could actually get promoted - now we're seriously thinking if we can actually stay up this year.

2000, 1900 and 1800 on the top three boards gives us a bit of strength on the top, which is where B teams usually fall down I think. 1600 on the bottom boards is solid enough too, if far from spectacular.

Possibly one of the youngest Armstrong teams in recent times as well with two 14-year-olds and a 16-year-old?

Tim Harding

I just heard the Trinity-Dun Laoghaire match has finished 5.5-2.5.

So the real standings after two rounds are:

Gonzaga 12, Benildus A and Elm Mount 11.5, Bray 11, Trinity 9.5, Balbriggan & Dublin 8.5, Phibsboro 7, Benildus B 6, Dun Laoghaire 5, Curragh 3 and Kilkenny 2.5.

With rd 3 featuring Bray-Benildus, Trinity-Phibsboro and Elm Mount-Gonzaga the shape of things should look clearer by the end of the month but it does look like a more competitive league this year which is of course an excellent state of affairs.

sinbad68

cdeb wrote: »

Suddenly this season is like last season, where we started seriously thinking early on if we could actually get promoted - now we're seriously thinking if we can actually stay up this year.

Yep, In heidenfeld you spent the first half of last season, worrying and talking about fighting relegation and your team actually ended up getting promoted to armstrong!. Why do you continuously display lack of confidence in yourself and your team one season after another ?, or perhaps you are using an old Persian proverb which says " The best way to avoid disappointment is to lower your expectation ? "

I have done some analysis and computer says %94 chance Curragh & Kilkenny would be relegated.

cdeb

sinbad68 wrote: »

Why do you continuously display lack of confidence in yourself and your team one season after another ?, or perhaps you are using an old Persian proverb which says " The best way to avoid disappointment is to lower your expectation ? "

Absolutely.

Pessimism is the best way - you're either right, or pleasantly surprised.

In fairness, last year's Heidenfeld team wouldn't have had a hope of staying up; adding boards 1, 2 and 3 is a huge plus.

sinbad68

cdeb wrote: »

Absolutely.

Pessimism is the best way - you're either right, or pleasantly surprised.

Pessimism is the best way ?!, That is a Negative & Wrong attitude to have and do yourself and your team a disservice.

Self-confidence is very important. If you don’t think you can win, you will take cowardly decisions in the crucial moments, out of sheer respect for your opponent. You see the opportunity but also greater limitations than you should. I have always believed in what I do on the chessboard, even when I had no objective reason to. It is better to overestimate your prospects than underestimate them.

cdeb, Imagine if you were Ireland's football manager, in dressing room before the match with Germany, your pep talk be, instead of telling players "to believe in themselves" ,, " Go for it ", " you can do it " would be like " Be scared, they are the world champions", " they are really strong", " don't let too many goals in " so you can blog later and avoid disappointment!?.

Looking at armstrong teams , player on phibsboro board 2 is shown as unrated, quick look at fide site and two guys have this name, if he is one of these two, his fide rating should be displayed on LCU site and if not, his national rating with an *astrix beside his name to let us know, it is a national rating . If a player has NO rating whatsoever from any federation, then he's got NOTHING to prove his strength, he should not be allowed to be placed on any board the captain likes him to be, should not be allowed for example to occupy boards 1-5 in armstrong.( perhaps cdeb who has long history of involvement in LCU can elaborate on any rules regarding this ?)

Back to phibsboro club. Marius Antohi is a 1482 rated player in the Armstrong

http://leinsterchess.com/lcu1516/div1/pt1210.htm

but he is a 1650 rated player in heidenfeld!

http://leinsterchess.com/lcu1516/div2/pt1102.htm

This is either the case of, they are two different people, for example ( father & son ) OR in LCU the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing !.