19-12-2012, 12:03 PM
Having finally remembered my log-in!!!
The issue of FIDE rating an event is a complicated one.
Clearly for younger and under-rated players the more opportunities to play FIDE rated games the better. However, for those with established and high(ish) ratings this can be a double edged sword. The argument that the more games played the more accurate the figure is not correct. Many players feel that their weekend performances are better than their league ones played after a day’s work. To some extent this reflects the preparation that is possible. Also people only like to play FIDE rated games if they have been able to prepare for a particular opponent. This factor is recognised by FIDE. Serious FIDE rated events always allow some preparation time hence the one round per day.
I have seen comments on this forum with regard to the SNCL that a certain club has an advantage in that their board order is flexible so proper preparation ahead of meeting them is not possible. I consider this to be a genuine concern of the serious player.
The next paragraph is intended to be controversial but is necessary for what follows.
Scotland has two national team events. Neither is totally satisfactory. The Richardson attracts more of the top players but is short of teams. The SNCL has large numbers but the winners are not really seen as Scottish Champions. If we were starting from scratch would we run these events under their current formats? I think that is doubtful. In England, its equivalent of the Richardson has all but died. The 4NCL is the dominant event. We are heading that way in Scotland but the SNCL still lacks that bit of prestige necessary to complete the ‘take-over’. My personal opinion is that the two events should be merged to provide a meaningful championship. The format of that is a different matter and for another topic.
Back to the Richardson. An obvious question is to query whether having only one rated game is worth the effort. I really doubt if the current format makes going for FIDE rating, in light of any opposition, a worthwhile activity.
If there is to be any real point in having FIDE rating then a sensible number of games must be possible. This would require a change from the knockout formula. To make rating viable, the Richardson could be held as a five round Swiss. The draw is published 3 weeks before each round. Team lists have to be submitted 18 hours in advance (assuming a 2pm start). These lists are published by the organiser by 9am on the day of the round. There would need to be consideration given to what would happen if a player withdraws but the suggested timescale should limit the impact of that.
I don’t think this is ideal but it might be worth considering.
The issue of FIDE rating an event is a complicated one.
Clearly for younger and under-rated players the more opportunities to play FIDE rated games the better. However, for those with established and high(ish) ratings this can be a double edged sword. The argument that the more games played the more accurate the figure is not correct. Many players feel that their weekend performances are better than their league ones played after a day’s work. To some extent this reflects the preparation that is possible. Also people only like to play FIDE rated games if they have been able to prepare for a particular opponent. This factor is recognised by FIDE. Serious FIDE rated events always allow some preparation time hence the one round per day.
I have seen comments on this forum with regard to the SNCL that a certain club has an advantage in that their board order is flexible so proper preparation ahead of meeting them is not possible. I consider this to be a genuine concern of the serious player.
The next paragraph is intended to be controversial but is necessary for what follows.
Scotland has two national team events. Neither is totally satisfactory. The Richardson attracts more of the top players but is short of teams. The SNCL has large numbers but the winners are not really seen as Scottish Champions. If we were starting from scratch would we run these events under their current formats? I think that is doubtful. In England, its equivalent of the Richardson has all but died. The 4NCL is the dominant event. We are heading that way in Scotland but the SNCL still lacks that bit of prestige necessary to complete the ‘take-over’. My personal opinion is that the two events should be merged to provide a meaningful championship. The format of that is a different matter and for another topic.
Back to the Richardson. An obvious question is to query whether having only one rated game is worth the effort. I really doubt if the current format makes going for FIDE rating, in light of any opposition, a worthwhile activity.
If there is to be any real point in having FIDE rating then a sensible number of games must be possible. This would require a change from the knockout formula. To make rating viable, the Richardson could be held as a five round Swiss. The draw is published 3 weeks before each round. Team lists have to be submitted 18 hours in advance (assuming a 2pm start). These lists are published by the organiser by 9am on the day of the round. There would need to be consideration given to what would happen if a player withdraws but the suggested timescale should limit the impact of that.
I don’t think this is ideal but it might be worth considering.