PDA

View Full Version : 2010 NSWCA Interclub Grade Matches



Rincewind
27-05-2010, 07:55 PM
This year there are

Four Grades :

Under 2150 - four teams
Under 1800 - four teams
Under 1600 - eight teams
Under 1400 - eight teams

Six Clubs :

Harbord Diggers - three teams
Norths - five teams
Parramatta - five teams
Rooty Hill - two teams
Ryde Eastwood - three teams
St George - six teams


Should be interesting. Matches are under way from this week and hopefully by the weekend I can post a round 1 summary for all grades. Any team captains that are reading, please remember to lodge the results via email within 24 hours of completing the match.

Full results will also be available here (http://www.nswca.org.au/grade_matches.html).

Adamski
27-05-2010, 10:43 PM
Thanks, RW. A number of Round 1 results are already on the NSWCA web site link provided.

Rincewind
27-05-2010, 10:56 PM
Thnaks, RW. A number of Round 1 results are alreasdy on the NSWCA web site link provided.

Yes. What I have so far is already up on the www.nswca.org.au site.

ER
27-05-2010, 11:25 PM
GO NORTHS!!!!
GO PARRA!!!

Adamski
27-05-2010, 11:36 PM
GO NORTHS!!!!
GO PARRA!!!The time will come when you will have to pick between the 2. Just like it does for me when the Warriors play Manly in league!

Rincewind
27-05-2010, 11:46 PM
The time will come when you will have to pick between the 2. Just like it does for me when the Warriors play Manly in league!

Well based on team numbers alone, JaK has a 75% chance of picking the winner in the under 2150 grade.

Rincewind
29-05-2010, 11:34 AM
Under 1400

Parramatta looking to dominate early with both Parra teams doing well in round one. The Northern clubs faring worst from the opening round.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1400
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Parramatta Yellow XXXX 4 4
2 Parramatta Blue XXXX 3 3
3 Ryde Eastwood Knights XXXX 3 3
4 St George XXXX 2.5 2.5
5 Rooty Hill 1.5 XXXX 1.5
6 Harbord Diggers 1 XXXX 1
7 Ryde Eastwood Hawks 1 XXXX 1
8 Norths 0 XXXX 0


Under 1600

A pretty flat start to the competition with no stand out winners or losers. Chess Chat's Trent Parker featured on board 2 for Parramatta with a draw the result.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1600
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Harbord Diggers XXXX 2.5 2.5
2 Norths Grizzlies XXXX 2.5 2.5
3 St George Saints XXXX 2.5 2.5
4 Norths Brown Bears XXXX 2 2
5 Ryde Eastwood 2 XXXX 2
6 Parramatta 1.5 XXXX 1.5
7 Rooty Hill 1.5 XXXX 1.5
8 St George Dragons 1.5 XXXX 1.5


Under 1800

Norths plundered Harbord Diggers and the St George Teams finished all square. Chess Chat's Adamski featured on board 2 for Harbord Diggers but was not as successful as Trent.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1800
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Norths XXXX 3 3
2 St George Dragons XXXX 2 2
3 St George Saints 2 XXXX 2
4 Harbord Diggers 1 XXXX 1


Under 2150

The Parramatta Eels have leapt to the lead at the expense of the Parramatta Dolphins and St George edged out Norths in a close match. There are several players with Chess Chat connections including Gareth Charles and Anton Smirnov from Norths, Brian Jones playing for the rampaging Eels and Charles Zworestine playing for St George.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 2150
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Parramatta Eels XXXX 3 3
2 St George XXXX 2.5 2.5
3 Norths 1.5 XXXX 1.5
4 Parramatta Dolphins 1 XXXX 1


Full results including individual cross tables are available here (http://www.nswca.org.au/grade_matches.html).

Adamski
29-05-2010, 11:43 AM
Norths plundered Harbord Diggers and the St George Teams finished all square. Chess Chat's Adamski featured on board 2 for Harbord Diggers but was not as successful as Trent.

Actually, there is a question here. I played on Board 3 and we had an unrated player on Board 2. Our captain understood that he could play on any board from the rules. Is that correct? Does he get treated as Board 4 in the results, putting me on Board 2 even though I played with the colour of Board 3?

I just found the rules. 2.3..."Unrated palyers can play on any board." So it looks like I should show as on Board 3.

I won't be playing this week. My wife has an operation on Tuesday.

Rincewind
29-05-2010, 11:56 AM
Actually, there is a question here. I played on Board 3 and we had an unrated player on Board 2. Our captain understood that he could play on any board from the rules. Is that correct? Does he get treated as Board 4 in the results, putting me on Board 2 even though I played with the colour of Board 3?

I just found the rules. 2.3..."Unrated palyers can play on any board." So it looks like I should show as on Board 3.

That's true unrated players can play on board. However in the display or results players are ordered by rating and unrated players last in alphabetical order within teams. There is no attempt to replicate board order in the individual cross table as players may change board order from round to round (even rated players if their rating is within the 50 point limit).

I hope I've understood and answered the query.


I won't be playing this week. My wife has an operation on Tuesday.

Best wishes for a smooth procedure and a speedy recovery.

Adamski
29-05-2010, 09:37 PM
Thanks on both scores, RW. Yes, I see the display is in rating order within teams. That's fine.

Basil
29-05-2010, 09:51 PM
I won't be playing this week. My wife has an operation on Tuesday.
Meh. Tell her to make her own way home! Best wishes for speedy recovery.

Rincewind
04-06-2010, 06:46 PM
Under 1400

The Ryde Eastwood Knights have edged a small lead from the Parra Yellow. St George did well in round 2 to keep pace with the leaders.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1400
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Ryde Eastwood Knights XXXX 4 3 7
2 Parramatta Yellow XXXX 2.5 4 6.5
3 St George XXXX 2.5 4 6.5
4 Parramatta Blue 1.5 XXXX 3 4.5
5 Rooty Hill 1.5 XXXX 2 3.5
6 Norths 0 2 XXXX 2
7 Harbord Diggers 0 1 XXXX 1
8 Ryde Eastwood Hawks 1 0 XXXX 1

Under 1600

Ryde Eastwood caning Harbord Diggers means they now have a point pint lead. Apart from these two teams the table remains very bunched.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1600
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Ryde Eastwood XXXX 2 3.5 5.5
2 Norths Brown Bears 2 XXXX 2.5 4.5
3 St George Saints XXXX 2 2.5 4.5
4 Norths Grizzlies 1.5 XXXX 2.5 4
5 Parramatta 2 XXXX 1.5 3.5
6 Rooty Hill 1.5 XXXX 2 3.5
7 St George Dragons 1.5 2 XXXX 3.5
8 Harbord Diggers 0.5 2.5 XXXX 3

Under 1800

Some reversals of fortunes from the first round means Norths have been reined in and now share the lead with the Dragons. However Diggers and Saints are not far behind.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1800
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Norths XXXX 1.5 3 4.5
2 St George Dragons 2.5 XXXX 2 4.5
3 Harbord Diggers 1 XXXX 2.5 3.5
4 St George Saints 2 1.5 XXXX 3.5

Under 2150

The Parra Eels have fallenfrom grace and it is now the Dolphins and Norths who share a small lead from the Eels. However it is still early days and St George are not far behind.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 2150
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Norths XXXX 3 1.5 4.5
2 Parramatta Dolphins XXXX 1 3.5 4.5
3 Parramatta Eels 1 3 XXXX 4
4 St George 2.5 0.5 XXXX 3

Full results including individual cross tables are available here (http://www.nswca.org.au/grade_matches.html).

Duff McKagan
04-06-2010, 07:12 PM
Do you think on the NSWCA site you could show the performance ratings also? That would be interesting. Tulevski is going well on board 4 for the Parramatta Dolphins!

Rincewind
04-06-2010, 07:21 PM
Do you think on the NSWCA site you could show the performance ratings also? That would be interesting. Tulevski is going well on board 4 for the Parramatta Dolphins!

I don't feel particularly motivated to add that to the display since it is not very meaningful nor is it relevant to the competition. When it gets closer to the end (well basically at the end) we calculate those players who have qualified for performance prizes and highlight those players on the cross table.

It is interesting of the 12 players to have played both rounds of the 2150 competition there is no one with a perfect score and Norman and Tulevski are both leading that cohort on 1.5/2. (Everyone else who has played both rounds has a 50% or worse scores).

BTW Vasil's Performance rating using the mathematical formula assuming a normal distribution and standard deviation of 282 is 1956. But over two games that doesn't mean too much.

Duff McKagan
04-06-2010, 07:28 PM
Ok, sounds good.

Rincewind
04-06-2010, 07:28 PM
Ok, sounds good.

Please note my BTW which I edited in later.

Vlad
05-06-2010, 12:23 PM
Do you think on the NSWCA site you could show the performance ratings also? That would be interesting. Tulevski is going well on board 4 for the Parramatta Dolphins!

Vasil's opponent was late by about 40-45 minutes last Thursday. Vasil insisted that the clocks were not started until the opponent's arival. Nice to see that some people still believe in a fair play.:clap: :clap: :clap:

CameronD
05-06-2010, 12:43 PM
Vasil's opponent was late by about 40-45 minutes last Thursday. Vasil insisted that the clocks were not started until the opponent's arival. Nice to see that some people still believe in a fair play.:clap: :clap: :clap:

You generally dont get that choice up here. The arbiters immediately starts the clocks regardless of objections.

Rincewind
05-06-2010, 02:57 PM
Vasil's opponent was late by about 40-45 minutes last Thursday. Vasil insisted that the clocks were not started until the opponent's arival. Nice to see that some people still believe in a fair play.:clap: :clap: :clap:

Actually that is a bit problematic in evening competitions when club closing times dictate the latest possible start time. The other issue is if a team is travelling in one car (as usually happened when I was playing in the Grade Matches although in that case the distances were more extreme) since it holds up the whole team.

But where possible I try and do the same and I having played Dr Tulevski a few times (including in past grade tournaments) I've always found him to be a most courteous (but tenacious) opponent.

Rincewind
05-06-2010, 04:08 PM
BTW Vasil's Performance rating using the mathematical formula assuming a normal distribution and standard deviation of 282 is 1956. But over two games that doesn't mean too much.

I'm favour the normal distribution as I see it more often and so I can remember the equations. For that distribution the equation for performance rating is

P.R.(norm) = mu + sigma *sqrt(2) *erf^{-1} (2 *phi -1)

where mu is the mean of opponent ratings, sigma is the deviation (root of the variance), phi is the performance (mean of results) and erf^{-1} is the inverse of the error function. In the prior calculation I used a sigma = 282 but to be precise the assume deviation is 200 * sqrt(2) which is 282.8427124.... Using this sigma the performance rating for Vasil (mu = 1776, phi=0.75) works out to 1956.774510..., slightly more than I reported above due to the more precise and slightly larger value of sigma.

Now there is an argument that goes the logistical distribution is better for ratings and indeed Glicko is based on the logistical distribution. Using that distribution the equation for performance rating is simpler (very few calculators have implemented the inverse error function)

P.R.(log) = mu - sigma *sqrt(3) *log ((1 - phi) / phi) / Pi

where everything is as before, log is the natural logarithm (base e) and Pi is the usual 3.1415... Using this formula Vasil's performance rating works out to 1947.316898... So pretty close but perhaps the second is more in line with the ACF rating system.

Vlad
05-06-2010, 04:45 PM
You better try to calculate performance rating of Sean Gu in the under 1800 section.:)

There was an article in chessbase where the authors said that from now on the performance rating calculated by chessbase for cases when 100% is scored, would be calculated as if one of this games suddenly happened to be a draw. Before this rule was introduced chessbase was assuming that score was 99% or something like that.

I personally prefer the original method. With the new rule if you actually score a draw, then your performance rating will remain the same even though you obviously did not do that great in the last round.

Rincewind
05-06-2010, 04:52 PM
You better try to calculate performance rating of Sean Gu in the under 1800 section.:)

There was an article in chessbase where the authors said that from now on the performance rating calculated by chessbase for cases when 100% is scored, would be calculated as if one of this games suddenly happened to be a draw. Before this rule was introduced chessbase was assuming that score was 99% or something like that.

I personally prefer the original method. With the new rule if you actually score a draw, then your performance rating will remain the same even though you obviously did not do that great in the last round.

The issue is that for phi = 0 or 1 then both formulae are not defined. I didn't see the article but it seems a bit unfair that someone who actually did score a draw against the same opposition would have the same performance rating as someone who had a 100% score against them.

I have heard of a method that you add an additional result as a draw against oneself. That would change both mu and phi but again leads to nonsensical results in some cases.

I would just prefer to use +∞ or -∞ as the case may be. :)

Vlad
05-06-2010, 05:57 PM
I have heard of a method that you add an additional result as a draw against oneself. That would change both mu and phi but again leads to nonsensical results in some cases.


Yes, that is what I meant: draw against yourself...

ER
05-06-2010, 06:00 PM
Vasil's opponent was late by about 40-45 minutes last Thursday. Vasil insisted that the clocks were not started until the opponent's arival. Nice to see that some people still believe in a fair play.:clap: :clap: :clap:

Dr Tulevski was always a gentleman since I remember him (more than 30 years ago) :clap: however, I understand that the arbiters have to do their job.
Another positive aspect of Dr Tulevski's attitude is that it contributes to the creation of friendly relationships amongst Clubs! :clap:

Garvinator
05-06-2010, 07:12 PM
Dr Tulevski was always a gentleman since I remember him (more than 30 years ago) :clap: however, I understand that the arbiters have to do their job.From my understanding of NSWCA Interclub, teams play in divisions on a home and away basis on the night of the home club. This means that there is no formal arbiter at each of the games.

If each round was held at a single venue, then it would be easier to have one arbiter whose responsibility it would be to make those decisions. As it is, it is left up to the captains of the teams.

I think it is extremely unfair to ask the opponent whether they want the clocks started or not. This places them in a very awkward situation. Also, what happens next time if an opponent says no. It could create ill feeling, or the belief that one person is more 'honourable' than another, when all the second person wanted was the game to start on time.

As also pointed out, clubs have different closing times, so decisions like this do create unequal playing conditions.

Kevin Bonham
05-06-2010, 07:18 PM
There was an article in chessbase where the authors said that from now on the performance rating calculated by chessbase for cases when 100% is scored, would be calculated as if one of this games suddenly happened to be a draw.

I think they said that they would add a notional draw between the player and himself/herself.

Bill Gletsos
05-06-2010, 07:36 PM
From my understanding of NSWCA Interclub, teams play in divisions on a home and away basis on the night of the home club. This means that there is no formal arbiter at each of the games.

If each round was held at a single venue, then it would be easier to have one arbiter whose responsibility it would be to make those decisions. As it is, it is left up to the captains of the teams.

I think it is extremely unfair to ask the opponent whether they want the clocks started or not. This places them in a very awkward situation. Also, what happens next time if an opponent says no. It could create ill feeling, or the belief that one person is more 'honourable' than another, when all the second person wanted was the game to start on time.

As also pointed out, clubs have different closing times, so decisions like this do create unequal playing conditions.The start time isnt at the discretion of the players or the team captains.
The NSWCA Grade Match rules explicitly state the games start at 7.30pm sharp.

Kevin Bonham
05-06-2010, 08:31 PM
Also, what happens next time if an opponent says no. It could create ill feeling, or the belief that one person is more 'honourable' than another, when all the second person wanted was the game to start on time.

Indeed. There's nothing dishonorable about starting the clock when the opponent fails to arrive on time anyway. It's their responsibility to be organised enough to get there on time. Avoidably arriving late is poorer form than starting the clock on the dot.

I like to wait a few minutes then start the clock, if the arbiter allows me to do so. As an arbiter I like to say "If your opponent isn't there, start their clock" and not indicate any choice in the matter. If the player doesn't do so that is no big deal unless it creates a potential scheduling issue. In such cases the arbiter can always start the clock themselves.

Rincewind
05-06-2010, 09:37 PM
But where possible I try and do the same and I having played Dr Tulevski a few times (including in past grade tournaments)

My memory was playing tricks on me. I've only played Vasil once. In the 2003 grade matches.

bergil
09-06-2010, 08:49 AM
Vasil's opponent was late by about 40-45 minutes last Thursday. Vasil insisted that the clocks were not started until the opponent's arival. Nice to see that some people still believe in a fair play.:clap: :clap: :clap:
Yeah and It was rewarded by the club trying to kick him out because the game finished late :wall:

Waiting 15 minutes is fair waiting 45 minutes for a potential 3.5 hour game isn't smart. I'm glad it work out and the good guys won ;)

Could Parramatta be on top in the 3 division they entered by Thursday night? :pray:

Vlad
09-06-2010, 10:07 AM
[Event "Grade Matches"]
[Date "2010.06.08"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Smirnov, A."]
[Black "Tulevski, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8.Ne4 Qc7 9. f4 Qb6 10. c4 Bb4+ 11. Ke2 f5 12. exf6 Nxf6 13. Be3 Qc7 14. Nxf6+ gxf6 15. Kf2 Ba6 16. Qh5+?! Ke7 17. a3 Qa5! 18. Qd1? Bc5 19. b4 Bxe3+ 20. Kxe3 Qc7 21. Be2 d5 22. Rc1 Rad8 23. Qa4 Bb7 24. Qxa7 d4+ 25. Kd3 Rd7 26. Qc5+ Kf7 27. g3 Ra8 28. Ra1 e5 29. fxe5 fxe5 30. Bf3 Kg7 31. Rhf1 Rf7 32. a4 Raf8 33. Bg2 Re8 34. Rxf7+ Qxf7 35. Rf1 Qg6+ 36. Be4 Qh6 37. Re1? Qxh2 38. Qd6 Qxg3+ 39. Ke2 Rf8 40. Kd1 Rf7? 41. Qe6 Qg5? 42. Bd3 c5 43. Qxe5+ Qxe5 44. Rxe5 cxb4 45. Kc2 Rf2+ 46. Kb3 Rf3 47. Kc2? b3+ 48. Kd2 Ba6 49. Re7+ Kf6 50. Rxh7 Rf2+ 51. Ke1 Rf3
52. Ke2 Re3+ 53. Kd2 Ke5 54. Rh5+ Kf4 55. Rf5+ Kg4 56. Rd5 b2 57. Rxd4+ Kg3?? 58. Kxe3 Bxc4 59. Rxc4 1-0

We planned to play 12. Nf2 here, but Anton forgot, remembered only after he played the move. However, it worked out even better than if he played Nf2.

16.a3! would be better. That move would describe a good positional player. We still have a long road ahead of us.

18.c5! was the right move.

24...d4+ Just before this move was played one of the famous St George personalities approached me (I was sitting in 2 metres from the game, analysing position with Arthur.) and said loud enough - after d4 he is completely lost. Well, I had an idea to come back to him at the end of the game and say something like - Well, you did not tell his opponent all the moves, this is why he did not loose.:owned:

37.Rf3 would be easily winning.

40c5! was winning. It is actually mate in something. At this stage Vasil is short on time, remember that it is a "sudden death" time control.

47. Kb4 or 47. Re7+ would be better.

57...Kg3?? was a crutial mistake but at this stage Vasil only had 2 minutes and even if he played 57...Kf3 it is lost after 58. Kb2...

Rincewind
11-06-2010, 04:22 PM
Under 1400

The Ryde Eastwood Knights faltered slightly this round and the Parramatta Yellow have now opened up a one and a half point lead.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1400
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Parramatta Yellow XXXX 3 2.5 4 9.5
2 Ryde Eastwood Knights 1 XXXX 4 3 8
3 St George XXXX 1.5 2.5 4 8
4 Parramatta Blue 1.5 2.5 XXXX 3 7
5 Rooty Hill 1.5 XXXX 2 3 6.5
6 Norths 0 2 XXXX 3 5
7 Harbord Diggers 0 1 1 XXXX 2
8 Ryde Eastwood Hawks 1 0 1 XXXX 2

Under 1600

Harbord Diggers did well againt Norths Brown Bears to get themselves off the bottom of the ladder. At the top, Parramatta opened the slightest of leads. However this table is still pretty bunched up with positions changing dramatically on one good or poor result.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1600
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Parramatta XXXX 2 1.5 4 7.5
2 St George Saints 2 XXXX 2.5 2.5 7
3 Rooty Hill XXXX 3 1.5 2 6.5
4 Ryde Eastwood 1 XXXX 3.5 2 6.5
5 Harbord Diggers 2.5 0.5 XXXX 3 6
6 Norths Brown Bears 2 1 XXXX 2.5 5.5
7 Norths Grizzlies 1.5 2.5 1.5 XXXX 5.5
8 St George Dragons 0 1.5 2 XXXX 3.5

Under 1800

The initial leaders Norths are now in the middle of the table with the Saints. The Dragons open up a one and a half point lead no the back of a solid 3-1 result over Harbord Diggers.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1800
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 St George Dragons XXXX 2.5 2 3 7.5
2 Norths 1.5 XXXX 1.5 3 6
3 St George Saints 2 2.5 XXXX 1.5 6
4 Harbord Diggers 1 1 2.5 XXXX 4.5

Under 2150

After the first full set of rounds we have the top three teams separated by only half a point. Looks like it will be a closely contested division but still only one third of the way through and so there is still plenty of time for any team to stand up and dominate.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 2150
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Parramatta Eels XXXX 1 3 3 7
2 Norths 3 XXXX 2 1.5 6.5
3 Parramatta Dolphins 1 2 XXXX 3.5 6.5
4 St George 1 2.5 0.5 XXXX 4

Full results including individual cross tables are available here (http://www.nswca.org.au/grade_matches.html).

Rincewind
18-06-2010, 02:17 PM
Under 1400

Parramatta Yellow continue to move ahead with a 3-1 result against Rooty Hill. Board 4, Mirakla Mithran has been performing particularly well with 4 wins in the first four rounds. Her team mates Cyril Alofi and Arif Hassani are not far behind on 3.5 each so far. :clap:

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1400
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 Parramatta Yellow XXXX 3 2.5 3 4 12.5
2 Ryde Eastwood Knights 1 XXXX 2 4 3 10
3 St George XXXX 1.5 2.5 2 4 10
4 Parramatta Blue 1.5 2.5 XXXX 3 2.5 9.5
5 Rooty Hill 1 1.5 XXXX 2 3 7.5
6 Norths 0 2 2 XXXX 3 7
7 Harbord Diggers 0 2 1 1 XXXX 4
8 Ryde Eastwood Hawks 1 0 1.5 1 XXXX 3.5

Under 1600

St George Saints and Parramatta are starting to open up a bit of a lead on the field now. The top performers in those teams have been Thierry Ollivian for St George Saints (3 wins and a draw) and Chess Chat's own Trent Parker for Parramatta (2 wins and 2 draws). :clap:

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1600
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Total
1 St George Saints XXXX 2 2.5 3.5 2.5 10.5
2 Parramatta 2 XXXX 2.5 1.5 4 10
3 Norths Brown Bears XXXX 2.5 2 1 2.5 8
4 Norths Grizzlies 1.5 1.5 XXXX 2.5 2.5 8
5 Rooty Hill 1.5 1.5 XXXX 3 2 8
6 Ryde Eastwood 2 1.5 1 XXXX 3.5 8
7 Harbord Diggers 0.5 2.5 3 0.5 XXXX 6.5
8 St George Dragons 1.5 0 1.5 2 XXXX 5

Under 1800

The second third of the round robin began this week. As it stands the Dragons have improved their lead slightly with a 2.5-1.5 win over their club mates. The top performer for St George Dragons has been Sean Gu with 3 wins and 1 draw so far. :clap:

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1800
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 St George Dragons XXXX 2.5 2/2.5 3 10
2 Norths 1.5 XXXX 1.5 3/2 8
3 St George Saints 2/1.5 2.5 XXXX 1.5 7.5
4 Harbord Diggers 1 1/2 2.5 XXXX 6.5

Under 2150

The top three teams in this division are very evenly placed. The best performing player at present is young Anton Smirnov, who has racked up 3 wins and only 1 loss for Norths. Rated 1783 (March '10) and normally playing on board 3 or 4, this week Anton collected the scalp of Charles Zworestine from St George playing on board 2. :clap:

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 2150
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Norths XXXX 2 3 1.5/2.5 9
2 Parramatta Dolphins 2 XXXX 1/2.5 3.5 9
3 Parramatta Eels 1 3/1.5 XXXX 3 8.5
4 St George 2.5/1.5 0.5 1 XXXX 5.5

Full results including individual cross tables are available here (http://www.nswca.org.au/grade_matches.html).

Owing to my impending relocation, this will be my last bulletin for the next few weeks. I hope to return (and maybe even catch up for lost time) well before the end of the competition.

Captain's are reminded to continue sending results to the official email address graderesults@... but be aware that I will probably not be the one collecting and publishing them for the next couple of weeks.

Trent Parker
18-06-2010, 05:16 PM
Under 1400

Parramatta Yellow continue to move ahead with a 3-1 result against Rooty Hill. Board 4, Mirakla Mithran has been performing particularly well with 4 wins in the first four rounds. His Her team mates Cyril Alofi and Arif Hassani are not far behind on 3.5 each so far. :clap:

Hi RW! note my proposed alteration to your above post! lol

Rincewind
18-06-2010, 05:33 PM
Hi RW! note my proposed alteration to your above post! lol

Thanks Trently, 'tis fixed. I have also corrected some formatting problems with the U 2150 division cross table with thanks to Vlad for pointing out the problem.

Adamski
19-06-2010, 10:13 AM
Owing to my impending relocation, this will be my last bulletin for the next few weeks. Quite understandable and much empathy from here. Today I start to attack the task of tidying up, involving what to keep and what to chuck out as our moving date is 29 July to Penrith.

Back on the subject at hand, it is high time I had a result for HDCC U 1800 team. 0% so far!!! All my opponents have been significantly higher rated than me but it is still not good enough....

Rincewind
19-06-2010, 11:38 AM
Back on the subject at hand, it is high time I had a result for HDCC U 1800 team. 0% so far!!! All my opponents have been significantly higher rated than me but it is still not good enough....

I've been concentrating on the positive performances but I have noticed you haven't been going so well. From other comments about the board it sounds like you have been distracted winning games where you had some advantage which is annoying but symptomatic of concerns elsewhere like moving. It is a good thing I haven't been playing rated chess lately or I would probably be going backwards too.

ER
19-06-2010, 12:24 PM
GO NORTHS! GO PARRA!!!!

Rincewind
19-06-2010, 01:13 PM
You better try to calculate performance rating of Sean Gu in the under 1800 section.:)

Sean had a draw in round 3 so I can now do this. He is still going very well (3.5 out of 4 against an average rating of 1803) with a logistical performance rating of 2106 (or assuming a normal distribution 2128).

Vlad
23-06-2010, 12:32 AM
Juniors seem to be a hard currency in this competition. The more juniors a team has the more likely it is to win.

Tonight North had 2 juniors playing in the under 2150 and 2 juniors playing in the under 1800 divisions.

About 1.5-2 hour after the games started North was already leading 2:0 in the under 2150 division and leading 1:0 in the under 1800 division; all games North juniors vs adults from other clubs finished quickly and brutally.

At that time the adults on the other boards have not yet really started playing - they all were sitting pretty much in the openings. The only North junior who had not finished his game at that stage was playing against some other junior. That was a fight between "real" warriors.:)

The rest of the games finished 50:50, the final result was 3:1 victory for the under 2150 and 2.5:1.5 victory for the under 1800.

Adamski
23-06-2010, 12:40 AM
Harbord Diggers had a good 3-1 victory against St George Saints in the U 1800 division.

Vlad
26-06-2010, 12:09 PM
Sean had a draw in round 3 so I can now do this. He is still going very well (3.5 out of 4 against an average rating of 1803) with a logistical performance rating of 2106 (or assuming a normal distribution 2128).

Last Tuesday was the last game Anton played in this competition. I have calculated his final performance, in FIDE rating terms it was 2271 (4 out of 5 against an average FIDE rating of 2010). It is pity that the tournament is not FIDE rated. :lol:

Vlad
26-06-2010, 12:47 PM
[Event "Grade Matches under2150"]
[Date "2010.06.15"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Smirnov, A."]
[Black "Zworestine, C."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B01"]
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Nxd5 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Be2 e6 6. c4 Nb6 7. b3 Nc6 8. Bb2 Bb4+ 9. Nc3 Qd7 10. Qd3 O-O-O 11. O-O-O Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Nxd4 13. Qe4 c5 14. Nb5 f5 15. Qe5 Bd2+ 16. Rxd2 Nxb3+ 17. axb3 Qxd2+ 18. Kb1 Rd7 19. Rd1 Qg5 20. Rxd7 Kxd7 21. Qc7+ Ke8 22. Nd6+ 1-0

Probably the most interesting game from this tournament was against Charles. Unfortunately, Charles did not play his best, as a result some of very nice variations did not happen.:)

The game started with Anton making a couple minor positional mistakes which allowed Charles to equalize. Instead of 12...Nd4?! he could play 12...Qd4 and after 13. Qe4 Qe5 14 Ne2 (nice dancing of queens:)) the position would be roughly equal where for a pawn white would have some space advantage and a pair of bishops.

After 13. Qe4 position becomes very sharp. 13...c5? and 14...f5?? make position pretty much resignable on a spot. But even the best move 13...c6 would allow either 14. Na4... or 14. Nb5 where both moves are leading to some advantage for white.

Adamski
04-07-2010, 03:35 PM
I had my well overdue first win in the U 1800 on Tuesday night at St George. v Mirsad Zekic, 1602. Sadly we lost 3-1 to the leaders.
Now for some home games, starting with v Norths tomorrow night. Ok gararge is cleaned out so time to do a little prep!

michaelrichards
23-07-2010, 05:21 PM
An interesting Najdorf game from the second last round of the U2150
Parramatta Yellow v Norths
Robert Hvistendahl v Jack Ruan


1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qc7 8. Qf3 Nbd7 9. 0-0-0 b5 10. e5 Bb7 11. Qh3 dxe5 12. Nxe6 fxe6 13. Qxe6 Be7 14. Bxb5 0-0-0 15. Qxe7 axb5 16. Nxb5 Qb6 17. Nd6+ Kb8 18. fxe5 Nd5 19. Qxg7 Rhg8 20. Qh6 Rg6 21. Bxd8 Qxd6 22. exd6 Rxh6 23. c4 Ne3 24.Bc7+ Ka7 25.Rd4 Bxg2 26. Re1 Nf5 27.Rd2 Bc6 28. Kc2 Rh4 29. Kc3 Nc5 30.Kb4 Na6 31. Kc3 Nc5 32.b3 Rh3 33. Kc2 Ne3 34.Kb1 Be4 35.Kc1 Bf5 36.Rxe3 Rxe3 37.Rd5 Re5 38.Rxe5 Nd3+ 39.Kd2 Nxe5 40.Kc3 Nf3 41.b4 Bd7 42.b5 Kb7 43.a4 Nxh2 44.c5 Nf3 45.Kc4 h5 46.Kd5 h4 47.c6 Kc8 48.cxd7 Kxd7 49.Ke4

Black should play axb5 a move earlier, white is winning after 14..0-0-0
A quicker win for white is 18.Nxb7 instead of fxe5; 18.Nxb7 Qxb7 19.fxe5 if 19..Ne4 I think e6 is good

Rincewind
01-08-2010, 06:59 PM
After my forced hiatus and getting back into the routine of collating results I'm starting to get back a little on top of these things. Anyway, just in time as two of the competitions have already finished.

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 2150
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 Parramatta Dolphins XXXX 2/3.5/2.5 3.5/2/1.5 1/2.5/3 21.5
2 Norths 2/0.5/1.5 XXXX 1.5/2.5/2 3/3/1 17
3 St George 0.5/2/2.5 2.5/1.5/2 XXXX 1/3.5/1.5 17
4 Parramatta Eels 3/1.5/1 1/1/3 3/0.5/2.5 XXXX 16.5

Parramatta Dolphins won convincingly. They weren't always the highest rated team but they had a core four players who played every round, and this can be a good indicator of performance. Congratulations to Gary McNamara, Brendan Norman,Arthur Huynh and Vasil Tulevski.

There was only one individual prize in this division and it goes to Vasil Tulevski (1813) of the Parramatta Dolphins who scored 6.5 from a possible 9 which is a percentage of 72.22%. Well done all. :clap:

I would also like to mention Anton Smirnov who scored 80% (4/5) but unfortunately did not play enough rounds to qualify for an individual prize.

Also completed is...

2010 NSWCA Grade Matches Under 1800
Team Cross Table

# Team Name Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Total
1 St George Dragons XXXX 2.5/1.5/1.5 2/2.5/3 3/3/3 22
2 Norths 1.5/2.5/2.5 XXXX 1.5/3/1 3/2/2 19
3 St George Saints 2/1.5/1 2.5/1/3 XXXX 1.5/1/4 17.5
4 Harbord Diggers 1/1/1 1/2/2 2.5/3/0 XXXX 13.5

Won by St George Dragons. :clap: (Note the Dragons used quite a varied player roster which is an exception to my earlier "rule". However Sean Gu, Peng Yu Chen, Chris Waterman and Mirsad Zekic were the mainstays).

The individual prizes go to

Sean Gu 1787 St George Dragons 6.5/7 92.86%
Peter Lay 1702 Norths 6.5/9 72.22%

The other two division should be completed next week and I will post final results when I know them.