The Good Old Days

sodacat11

mikhail wrote: »

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

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

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

sodacat11

brilliantboy wrote: »

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

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

sodacat11

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

Ballynafeigh Chess

sodacat11 wrote: »

Before anyone starts banging on about low rated players getting some good results in the Irish Championship let me say

That I'm getting my excuses in early!

Ballynafeigh Chess

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

cdeb

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

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

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

sodacat11

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

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

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

Ballynafeigh Chess

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

sodacat11

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

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

I would be VERY surprised if there was even a single 1900+ player who didn't enter out of fear. I am probably the only one who "boycotted" the event (others probably had other reasons for not playing) and I can assure you that my record against Irish lower rated players is probably as good(maybe even better) as most 2200s . I lose most rating points playing by playing guys rated higher than me and against very young kids in foreign tournaments where there published ratings are often hundreds of points lower than their actual playing strength. I have often lost to guys in Prague rated 1250 who a year later turn out to be 22 or 23oo.

Pete Morriss

cdeb wrote: »

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

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

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

2bts

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

Tim Harding

ComDubh wrote: »

Looking on the bright side of things, the top few seeds this year would make very worthy champions. A few predictions: I am certain that the winner will be either Lopez or Jessel and I see them both notching up a very high score.

Lopez doesn't seem to be playing after all so I expect/hope Jessel will win.
This looks like the weakest/ smallest Irish Championship field in living memory?
Moving the event to an earlier date in the year would have some advantages:
a) people who work would not have to give up precious summer holiday dates to compete;
b) In the even numbered years the Champion could actually play in that year's FIDE olympiad.

Ted111

sodacat11 wrote: »

One would think that with evolution the human race would get smarter

There would be no noticeable change between individual generations.

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

cdeb

Pete Morriss wrote: »

anybody at UCD who kept his/her eyes and ears open would have known well in advance about the noisy event held outside the main playing hall yesterday, and would have checked out the sports hall.

This is it. The college rather than the organisers screwed up with the issues on day 1 of the senior tournament (there was a gig arranged for right outside the room - not sure how the organisers would have known that necessarily). But one look at the sports hall would show it's not a suitable venue for a chess tournament.

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

mikhail

Tim Harding wrote: »

This looks like the weakest/ smallest Irish Championship field in living memory?

Weakest, I think, but it's been smaller:
http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2000_allfiles/pairings_irlch2000.html
http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2006_allfiles/pairings_irlch2006.html

reunion

sodacat11 wrote: »

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

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

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

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

sodacat11 wrote: »

the higher rated player is at a disadvantage in these games as he HAS to win

Funniest thing I've read all day.

mikhail wrote: »

Weakest, I think, but it's been smaller:
http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2000_allfiles/pairings_irlch2000.html
http://www.irlchess.com/irlch2006_allfiles/pairings_irlch2006.html

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

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


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

mikhail

reunion wrote: »

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

Fair point, though you're comparing the average ratings of an Open with an >1900 tournament in that case. The 2007 tournament had far more strong players. This year's tournament has only three players over 2100, whereas 2007 had 14 Irish players over that rating, plus assorted foreign players including GMs. I think it's fair to call this one weaker, average rating or no.

sodacat11

reunion wrote: »

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

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

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



Funniest thing I've read all day.



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

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


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

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

reunion

sodacat11 wrote: »

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

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

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

Going back further won't paint a truer picture of your current playing strength (maybe of your wins and losses) but it won't give me your current performance. Similarly only looking at sub-1900 rated opponents won't give me your current performance either, though it does highlight an area you should probably improve on (playing sub-1900 players).

mikhail wrote: »

Fair point, though you're comparing the average ratings of an Open with an >1900 tournament in that case. The 2007 tournament had far more strong players. This year's tournament has only three players over 2100, whereas 2007 had 14 Irish players over that rating, plus assorted foreign players including GMs. I think it's fair to call this one weaker, average rating or no.

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

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

sodacat11

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

Lucena

2bts wrote: »

See photo of Round 1 of the championships here -> http://www.icu.ie/images/1317

That has to be the most depressing looking tournament I've ever seen.

sodacat11

I think by now that almost everyone (with the probable exception of Reunion) agrees that this year's Irish Championship is far from ideal and that something needs to be done to revive the event before it deteriorates even further. We have more than enough active players of over 1900 to make a decent championship possible so all we have to do is to create the conditions which would be likely to see them participate.
It is very evident that almost none of this year's field are married so obviously family commitments are a big obstacle for many people. Nine days of the summer holidays are not easy to explain away to a loved one unless you happen to be a school teacher or a student of some type. I am not sure how this problem can be addressed, nine rounds in five days perhaps would help and this would have the added advantage of making a hotel much more affordable but I don't know how acceptable this would be.
Location,location,location, another huge factor. My own preference is for somewhere on the outskirts of Dublin (Red Cow , Green Isle) that is easily accessible for people travelling from beyond the Pale but I know that some people prefer a city centre venue or at least somewhere that has a bit more to do for the players when they aren't playing chess. This is another advantage of the 9 rd in 5 day format, less time to be filled in away from the board.
A stronger tournament would undoubtedly attract more players but it is a chicken and egg situation. I am sure that if three or four of our titled players made an early commitment to play then many more strong players would follow suit. Rigidly adhering to an ICU 1900 rating floor would also make a big difference.
Decent grading prizes act as a juicy carrot for those of us with little chance of winning the title.
I am not saying that my proposals are the best possible but something needs to be done and the matter needs to be discussed at the next AGM. THE most important thing is that ONLY those eligible to play in an Irish Championship( ie 1900+players) should have any say in what is to be done. If you let every Tom, Dick and Harry vote then of course they are going to undermine the whole thing just to suit themselves or vote out of ignorance because they have no understanding of what it used to mean to play in an Irish Championship.

CafollasCat

Lucena wrote: »

That has to be the most depressing looking tournament I've ever seen.

Why? Looks like a decent room and good playing environment?

Ballynafeigh Chess

Hi Sodacat11,

You have made a perfectly reasoned argument on a valid discussion about our national chess championship.

You have considered the situation and its importance.
You have observed the trends historical and current.
You have identified failings and problems.
You have articulated alternatives and compromises.

Then just as you get me nodding in agreement to many of your proposals you go and obliterate your valid and reasoned argument with blinding arrogance. Your perception of democracy is different to mine and that of many others I would expect.

I believe everyone entitled to a vote should have a vote.
You believe only you and your mates should vote.
I believe the strength of a union comes from its size.
You believe a union s size comes from its strength.

To label the members of the Irish Chess Union under the elitist rating of 1900 as any Tom Dick or Harry is crass and grossly offensive. The vast majority of the ICU membership is under 1900 the ordinary base of the numerical pyramid that provides the finances that make the playing of the Championships feasible and possible. The event that you so desperately wish to keep away from the input of the ICU membership only exists because of that membership, such an undemocratic and elitist stance have no place in a progressive chess union.

Ask the union members, I m proud to be a Tom Dick and Harry because I m proud to be a member of the union. I agreed with many of your points, especially concerning a fixed criteria for entry. If they were proposed at a union meeting they would find my raised hand behind them in support, as I am sure the majority of Tom Dick and Harry s would. Have faith in your union to deliver what s best for Irish chess not an elitist buddies club with the potential agenda of self interest.

I'm confident that this is not what you desire or wish, that your campaign is aimed at a better championship in the future. However long term the failure to encourage and seek the support of the membership could encourage the opposite of what you yearn for.

CafollasCat

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

Hi Sodacat11,

You have made a perfectly reasoned argument on a valid discussion about our national chess championship.

You have considered the situation and its importance.
You have observed the trends historical and current.
You have identified failings and problems.
You have articulated alternatives and compromises.

Then just as you get me nodding in agreement to many of your proposals you go and obliterate your valid and reasoned argument with blinding arrogance. Your perception of democracy is different to mine and that of many others I would expect.

I believe everyone entitled to a vote should have a vote.
You believe only you and your mates should vote.
I believe the strength of a union comes from its size.
You believe a union s size comes from its strength.

To label the members of the Irish Chess Union under the elitist rating of 1900 as any Tom Dick or Harry is crass and grossly offensive. The vast majority of the ICU membership is under 1900 the ordinary base of the numerical pyramid that provides the finances that make the playing of the Championships feasible and possible. The event that you so desperately wish to keep away from the input of the ICU membership only exists because of that membership, such an undemocratic and elitist stance have no place in a progressive chess union.

Ask the union members, I m proud to be a Tom Dick and Harry because I m proud to be a member of the union. I agreed with many of your points, especially concerning a fixed criteria for entry. If they were proposed at a union meeting they would find my raised hand behind them in support, as I am sure the majority of Tom Dick and Harry s would. Have faith in your union to deliver what s best for Irish chess not an elitist buddies club with the potential agenda of self interest.

I'm confident that this is not what you desire or wish, that your campaign is aimed at a better championship in the future. However long term the failure to encourage and seek the support of the membership could encourage the opposite of what you yearn for.

*mod snip*

Oh you mean that you only joined the ICU as a paid up member for political reasons very late last year. *mod snip*

All because you are such a fan of "Democracy" that you thought it fair and proper for you to be able to vote at two AGM's for the price of one membership. *mod snip*

*mod snip*
Yes it would be great for the Irish Championships to be organised by you or every Tom Dick and Harry who has a vote.

Sodcat might be mad and way off with some of his notions but he has actually played in an Irish Championships a few times. Knows a thing or two about chess (the game that is)

Amusing to note how little or nothing is wrote here about the actual Irish Championships as a contest and the games played or results. Nice game yesterday by Jessel I thought? Looks like he is unstoppable but maybe Alex Lopez will put a stop to him in the coming rounds.

I dare say that Sodcat would do well to draw with almost any of the 16 players playing this year. And he could have entered the tournament when there was only a single player below 1900, one who nevertheless had a rating of 1847 and is a promising and fast improving junior.

Yes I agree the standard should be 1900 but I would like it clarified if people mean 1900 ICU or 1900 Fide or either. Given that it is the national championships one could argue that it should be ICU 1900, or maybe and 2000 Fide

Which is it to be? I see nothing fundamentally wrong with 1900 Fide or ICU so long as it is strictly followed with very very rare exceptions (that prove the rule)

However the biggest myth is that the event is weak or poor because there are so many players this year under the 1900 - some of whom only entered or were published as entrants at the last minute- thus they did not deter the entry of Sodcat or players higher rated.

The biggest problem (aside from apportioning blame -not the time fr this now) is the lack of good numbers of players 2000 plus playing. More notice of the event and proper ground work done could have made the event far better than it became.

zeitnot

CafollasCat wrote: »

Amusing to note how little or nothing is wrote here about the actual Irish Championships as a contest and the games played or results. Nice game yesterday by Jessel I thought? Looks like he is unstoppable but maybe Alex Lopez will put a stop to him in the coming rounds.

Bit unlikely, I'd have thought.

cdeb

Mod note - I've split the discussion about the 2016 tournament itself to a separate thread here - this thread can continue to look at ways to improve it in future years.

reunion

CafollasCat wrote: »

Oh you mean that you only joined the ICU as a paid up member for political reasons very late last year.

All because you are such a fan of "Democracy" that you thought it fair and proper for you to be able to vote at two AGM's for the price of one membership.

Unfortunately the last executive made some big mistakes, this being one of them. They removed some paid members right to vote at the AGM as they opened membership for the next year too early. Though that's not for discussion here.

CafollasCat wrote: »

Yes it would be great for the Irish Championships to be organised by you or every Tom Dick and Harry who has a vote.

Sodcat might be mad and way off with some of his notions but he has actually played in an Irish Championships a few times. Knows a thing or two about chess (the game that is)

Playing in the Irish Championships or having a high rating mean nothing about organising the Irish Championships. When is the last time a high rated player organised the Irish Championships? It's paid for and run by the ICU members. The ICU members get to determine how THEY want to determine THEIR champion. It is not high rated elite getting to decide how to spend other people's money crowning themselves Irish Champion. If the members want an open then it will be an open; if they don't want an open it won't be an open. If the elite don't want to play, then they won't be Irish Champion. Our aim is to run a tournament ICU members are happy with.

CafollasCat wrote: »

Yes I agree the standard should be 1900 but I would like it clarified if people mean 1900 ICU or 1900 Fide or either. Given that it is the national championships one could argue that it should be ICU 1900, or maybe and 2000 Fide

Which is it to be? I see nothing fundamentally wrong with 1900 Fide or ICU so long as it is strictly followed with very very rare exceptions (that prove the rule)

I would argue for 1900 ICU or 2000 FIDE - considering FIDE ratings are higher than ICU in general by 100 points anyway. So if you have 1900 FIDE it's the same as essentially having an 1800 (or less) ICU rating but you can afford to play in FIDE rated events (which is typically abroad).

CafollasCat wrote: »

However the biggest myth is that the event is weak or poor because there are so many players this year under the 1900 - some of whom only entered or were published as entrants at the last minute- thus they did not deter the entry of Sodcat or players higher rated.

The biggest problem (aside from apportioning blame -not the time fr this now) is the lack of good numbers of players 2000 plus playing. More notice of the event and proper ground work done could have made the event far better than it became.

We don't know if this year is due to bad timing (David Fitzsimons is going for an IM norm so wouldn't have played irrespective of sub-1900 players) or rule changes. Last year was the first year with these rule changes and the tournament was fine. I would suspect this year is just bad timing (5 players turned down the Olympiad and 3 haven't played enough games so aren't really active in Ireland!). Taking the intermediate as an example - entry in the intermediate jumped from ~30 to ~40 (2014 - 2015) after the rule was implemented but has dropped this year to 17. The standard in that tournament is also about 100 points down (1585 this year, 1656 last year and 1605 in 2014). So I suspect timing could be an issue.

The Junior event seems to be holding stead at ~40 players.

I also feel the fact that the winner of this year's event doesn't get a spot at the Olympiad probably turned some away. Maybe in future it might make sense to move this event to before selections for the Olympiad?


*mod note* Attack the post not the poster. Thank you.

Ballynafeigh Chess wrote: »

I believe everyone entitled to a vote should have a vote.
You believe only you and your mates should vote.
I believe the strength of a union comes from its size.
You believe a union s size comes from its strength.

...

The vast majority of the ICU membership is under 1900 the ordinary base of the numerical pyramid that provides the finances that make the playing of the Championships feasible and possible. The event that you so desperately wish to keep away from the input of the ICU membership only exists because of that membership, such an undemocratic and elitist stance have no place in a progressive chess union.

THIS!!! Too many high rated players who are quite vocal, believe lower rating = no opinion. They truly fail to realise the 900 sub-1900 members pay for a tournament they aren't entitled to every play in (~75 are entitled to play in it). It cost €4.5k last year of members money to run this tournament, or everyone pays ~€4.65 of their membership fee to run this tournament.

sodacat11

Why on earth should people rated below 1900 have a say in how the Irish Championship should be run when it does not concern them except as spectators? In football ,teams in the Championship and the first and second divisions do not get a vote on matters concerning the Premiership and nor should they.
Someone once said to me that the problem with democracy is that it only counts heads and not what is in those heads. At the time I was aghast at such a comment but following Brexit and the ICU AGM I now must concede that he had a point.
Someone made a silly point about my deciding not to play when there was only one non qualifier in the event. Well,all I can say is that it lucky that I didn't hand over 70 euro to play in a 1900+ event then turned up on the day to find a lot more underrated players playing.
Someone said that I would be lucky to get a draw against any of the participants LOL, I wonder then how I ever managed to beat seven of the eight participants that I have played? (I have a plus score against four of that 8)

Ballynafeigh Chess

sodacat11 wrote: »

Why on earth should people rated below 1900 have a say in how the Irish Championship should be run when it does not concern them except as spectators?

Has your account been hacked? Surely you didn't honestly write that above quote and post it here expecting it to be respected.
It's the Irish championship not the Sodacat11 championship! They (the members of the ICU) through their union pay for the venue, they have contributed to the equipment, they have paid for the prize money that you actually want increased and have openly stated so.
If this is the ghastly position you are determined to adopt on this matter I assure you that your appeals will fall on deaf ears and what support you have will quickly evaporate.

reunion

sodacat11 wrote: »

Why on earth should people rated below 1900 have a say in how the Irish Championship should be run when it does not concern them except as spectators? In football ,teams in the Championship and the first and second divisions do not get a vote on matters concerning the Premiership and nor should they.

The Premier league is determined by the FA council which has 10 Premier league reps and 82 non-premier league reps. So yes teams not in the premier league can decide how to run the premier league. For instance they reduced it from 22 to 18 teams in the 1992-93 season.

Your lack of basic research, knowledge and understanding is quite shocking. The Irish Championships is run on behalf of ALL members of the ICU to determine THEIR champion.

sodacat11 wrote: »

Someone once said to me that the problem with democracy is that it only counts heads and not what is in those heads.

You would be one of those people that would be better left out of the room when it comes to voting as you are thinking for yourself and not the ICU as a whole.

reunion

sodacat11 wrote: »

Someone said that I would be lucky to get a draw against any of the participants LOL, I wonder then how I ever managed to beat seven of the eight participants that I have played? (I have a plus score against four of that 8)

It's ok that means nothing by your own words. They were at a disadvantage and there will be some upsets. Not impressive at all.

sodacat11 wrote: »

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

sodacat11

More excellent anoraking reunion LOL, you really should consider entering Mastermind!! If you think that Doncaster, Halifax and Grimsby have as much of a say as Chelsea, Man City and Man U then so be it but I can tell you that if any decision was made that didn't suit those big clubs then they would threaten to withdraw and form an elite European league and things would soon be reversed. That is actually what is happening in Irish chess, the people who aren't even eligible to play in The Championship brought in rules which weakened it and now most of the big fish are playing elsewhere e.g Fitzsimons in Budapest or not at all.
I really don't know why you and the righteous Ballynafeigh are even arguing, just look what the Irish Championsship has been reduced to, is that what you really want????
I don't know why I am arguing either because in all likelihood I have played my last Irish Championship and have been perfectly content this week fishing (I caught a pike), playing golf (Captain's prize this weekend), watching Wimbledon and Euro 16 and spending time with my girlfriend. There is more to life than chess!!

reunion

sodacat11 wrote: »

If you think that Doncaster, Halifax and Grimsby have as much of a say as Chelsea, Man City and Man U pest or not at all.

When you or other over-1900 players start generating money for the ICU (such as the money generated by those clubs for the FA) then your opinion may carry more weight. At present your opinion is as valid as the beginner who just learned how to play.

sodacat11 wrote: »

in all likelihood I have played my last Irish Championship

Oh then you can't comment on the Irish Championships anymore (using your logic). Glad to know you are taking my initial advice.

reunion wrote: »

If you can't handle being equal to a fat man or a small girl, don't play chess.

ComDubh

Perhaps you two could do this over email?

Lucena

CafollasCat wrote: »

Lucena wrote: »

That has to be the most depressing looking tournament I've ever seen.

Why? Looks like a decent room and good playing environment?

Well I guess I'm used to seeing either a huge Open with hundreds of players, or when there an elite tournament with only a dozen players, you see lots of flags, logos, cameras and the like.

To be honest, the playing conditions look good for the players (they could maybe have provided separate tables for each board) but for anyone outside of chess (potential sponsors, for example), it's a bit austere looking.