Ipswich B v Clacton

Primary tabs

Division 3 Rapidplay Cup Wed 8th Nov 2023   Verify
PDF | XL | PGN | FIDE
BoardHomeIpswich BClactonAway
1 (B) 1682 (1757)
G
Riley, Simon		0 - 1
P
Stephens, Robert W		1782 (1733)
2 (W) 1773 (1739)
S
Jones, Les J		1 - 0
B
Chovardas, Kyriakos		1772 (1695)
3 (B) 1588 (1788)
S
Gordon, Tom		½ - ½
S
Estlea, Warwick		1417 (1516)
4 (W) 1757 (1607)
S
Paez, Alonso		1 - 0
B
Todd, Andrew		1337 (1501)
5 (W) 1682 (1757)
G
Riley, Simon		1 - 0
P
Stephens, Robert W		1782 (1733)
6 (B) 1773 (1739)
S
Jones, Les J		0 - 1
B
Chovardas, Kyriakos		1772 (1695)
7 (W) 1588 (1788)
S
Gordon, Tom		1 - 0
S
Estlea, Warwick		1417 (1516)
8 (B) 1757 (1607)
S
Paez, Alonso		1 - 0
B
Todd, Andrew		1337 (1501)
Adjustment-1½ - 1½
Total136004 - 4Total12616

Last update Sam Gaffney Sun 7th Jan 2024 08:38. Reported by Sam Gaffney Sun 7th Jan 2024 08:38. Verified By

Comments

apaez

Wed, 08/11/2023 - 23:48

great match

sgaffney

Thu, 09/11/2023 - 07:08

Rapidplay ratings should be used to determine board order. We normally allow teams to ignore P-ratings in favour of a standard play rating The ratings of the Ipswich team should be as follows:

  1. Simon Riley 1674 - Simon's rapidplay K-rating
  2. Les Jones 1712 - no rapidplay K-rating so Ipswich can use standard play rating (shown here)
  3. Tom Gordon 1779 - Tom only has a standard play rating (shown here)
  4. Alonso Paez 1621 - no rapidplay K-rating so Ipswich can use standard play rating (shown here)

Tom Gordon violates the 80pts board order rule. His results become wins for Clacton.

apaez

Thu, 09/11/2023 - 11:30

Sam, Think this is HUSH !!! As i was entering results I realized that maybe i should have been 1st board and order should have been reversed.
Rapidplay is coming in fashion but lacks stats and reliable ratings. And until that is achieved we should be more tolerable.
WE had a wonderfull match, so did Clacton - to be spoiled this way. Please reverse desicion.
Alonso

jlambert

Fri, 10/11/2023 - 12:02

Hi Alonso, I don't agree with all the rules in SCCA, but they are clearly written and there is a link from LMS to them. Sam does a difficult job I know that because I was once comp sec and resigned over players questioning interpretation of rules. At this stage it would be disrespectful to question his decision. I think you just have to accept that Ipswich have blundered and take it on the chin. Best regards John

pdolewka

Fri, 10/11/2023 - 14:24

Hi John,
The case is not as simple as appears. Tom just got his standard rating this month. In October he was still provisional, and that way he was assigned to the board before ECF grades had been updated. Rules for rapid are not clear if they mix different types of ratings, including live ratings. I think, more fairness should be taken into account than simple rules interpretation. Otherwise, even in our last U1650 match, the result of my game could be revised as it was interference by a spectator in a significant way. But in my opinion, it wouldn't be fair to my opponent, so we didn't challenge this situation. In your opinion was I wrong? Tom's situation was exceptional and was caused by an extraordinary change in his grade, which can happen mostly only when the player is changing his rating from provisional to standard.

apaez

Mon, 13/11/2023 - 23:24

I'll gather a consensus opinion of what we think as a club and get back to you all. Before 15th !!