PDA

View Full Version : Tasmanian (Chesskids) State Interschool Finals



Kevin Bonham
22-10-2007, 12:18 AM
Starting in about eight hours in Launceston!

The finals are run by Chesskids by arrangement with the TCA and are this year, for the first time, a formally TCA-sanctioned title. Nine-round individual swiss with team pairings barred, in two divisions, team score determined by top four pointscores by team members. Number of players per team is at least five but some teams have earned extra places by repeatedly qualifying.

129 players from 21 schools in Primary division
68 players from 12 schools in Open Secondary

If all these show up I think it will be a new record for most players in a chess event in Tasmania (beating last year's final IIRC!)

Winners eligible for ASTC. Top three teams (I think) in each division eligible for Chesskids national finals.

Kruupy
22-10-2007, 12:23 AM
KB,

where is the tournament at and at what time?

Cheers,
Kruupy

Kevin Bonham
22-10-2007, 12:27 AM
Launceston Church Grammar Senior Campus (Mowbray Heights) 9-3.

Kevin Bonham
24-10-2007, 12:38 AM
OK, we had 124 players from 20 schools in the Primary and 57 from 10 schools in the Open Secondary. So that's 181 in all which just broke last year's record for the largest chess tournament of any kind ever held in Tasmania.

The primary competition was a really close fight all day with the lead chopping and changing between four or five schools. In the end the reigning champions Forth Primary defended their title by the narrowest of margins - they beat West Ulverstone on tiebreak with Princes St (Hobart) half a point behind in third! These were followed by Sacred Heart Newtown, St Aloysius (Kingston), Sheffield District, Goulburn Street (Hobart), Sacred Heart Geeveston and Campania.

In the Secondary division (where the reigning champs St Brendan Shaw didn't even qualify as they had one less Hendrey than last year!) Ulverstone High bolted to a four point lead around the midpoint of the competition, but were hauled in by Latrobe who caught them in the very last round, tying their score and winning on tiebreak! St Patricks (Launceston) were third, followed by Friends, St Marys and Hutchins. The southern challenge in the Secondary section wasn't as strong as it could have been with the very strong Claremont College team not participating and Friends missing their strongest player Max Rintoul and some of their other strong players.

(The tiebreak method is that if the top four players have the same total score, the score of the fifth highest player for each team is considered, then the sixth, etc)

In the Secondary division the three players with four-figure ratings predictably dominated the individual standings with Justin Hood (St Patrick's) collecting the day's only picket-fence on 9/9. Andrew Fifield (Burnie High) was second on 7.5 and Charlie Smith (Ulverstone) third on 7. Aaron Radford (Latrobe) managed a crucial draw from a losing position vs Fifield in the final round to tie for fourth with Ethan Duniam-Douglas (Ulverstone) on 6.5. On 6 were Marcus and Lawrence Bretag (St Marys), Daniel Nolan, Alex Rigby and Nick Hunn (Friends), Kurt Temple, Joey Clarke and Reuben McCormack (Latrobe) and Kieran Davis (Ulverstone).

In the Primary division it's no surprise that the state U12 champ the last two years running, Vincent Horton (West Ulverstone) was at the top. His score included a win against Miles Deka who has given him trouble lately, but in a sharp heavy piece ending Deka should have taken a perpetual and instead exchanged queens, perhaps trying to win the game on the clock, but Vincent's passed pawns were too much in the rook ending that resulted. A fantastic result was acheived by Alina Krasnicki (Sacred Heart NT) who tied with Vincent on 8.5/9. In fact Alina was beating Vincent in their game, but also had to swindle two other games from lost positions. James Hogue (also Sacred Heart NT) scored an excellent 7.5. On 7 were Harry Briant and Ella Thain (Princes St) and Miles Deka and Sam Langmaid (Forth) and on 6.5 were David Pierce (Forth), Taran Duniam-Douglas (West Ulverstone), Daniel Brighton (Goulburn St), Alex Riches (Sheffield) and Luke Bombadieri (St Aloysius).

I was really impressed with the good results from some of the little country schools like St Marys District High and Campania.

Full standings Primary (http://interschool.chesskids.com.au/tournament/169/p/) and Secondary (http://interschool.chesskids.com.au/tournament/169/os/).

Disclaimer: as well as being involved via the TCA, I was also employed by ChessKids in running this tournament and many of the qualifiers for it.

Kevin Bonham
26-10-2007, 10:27 PM
This is what just part of the biggest chess event in Tasmanian history looks like! Naturally, I couldn't fit them all in! Fellow arbiter Ian Little centre front.

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/therealsleepycat/statefinal.jpg

Kevin Bonham
27-10-2008, 11:25 PM
Numbers a little down this year (but still very high!) overall as some of the usual suspects failed to qualify and a few others qualified but didn't show. Primary 84 students from 13 schools, Open Secondary 67 from 10 schools.

The Open Secondary was a great contest. Calvin Christian had a narrow lead for much of the day but were caught in the closing stages and going into the final round six of the ten teams were either leading or within one point of the lead! As it turned out it was the team from St Marys (pop 588) District High on the east coast who got the job done with wins by their top four players in the final round. St Marys were headed by the Bretag brothers who both scored 8/9 but couldn't have done it without solid support from Patrick Escobar and Mason Pitstock (5/9). The only player to defeat the Bretags was Owen Short (Calvin) who won the individual standings with 8.5/9 (his sole draw being to Nick Hunn (Friends) in the last round - a huge escape as Owen was a rook down in the early endgame!) Owen outplayed Lawrence Bretag while Marcus Bretag made a touchtake blunder that was about to cost him a queen and resigned on the spot.

With southern schools Friends and Calvin filling the minor placings, the north-western domination of this event appears to be over - at least for this year!

Secondary results here: http://chesskids.com.au/interschool/tournament/356/os/

In the primary section the north-west coast domination continued with another battle between West Ulverstone and Forth (Forth had won the CK finals the last two years in a row and WUPS the two years before that). WUPS were about three points ahead most of the day. In the final round Forth closed this down to a point but it was too late. Princes St from Hobart got up for third (actually they tied with Forth and were third on tiebreak). Vincent Horton was not surprisingly the star of the individual show with 9/9 and nobody else managed more than 7!

Primary results here: http://chesskids.com.au/interschool/tournament/356/p/

DOP: David Cordover. Arbiters: Ian Little (mostly Primary) and Kevin Bonham (mostly Open Secondary). Also thanks to many parents + coaches for their help. Above disclaimer applies.

Saragossa
29-10-2008, 02:57 PM
I had a worse position but the reason Owen won that game outright is due to good sportsmanship on my part not claiming the touch move rule. You may have witnessed the sacrifice forr stalemate swindle? If so you also witnessed Owen playing Ne4+ which was illegal due to him being in check in this case i could have easily claimed touch move and forced him to block the check with the knight drawing the game. I don't know how to post the position but i'll try to figure it out if you didn't see it. P.S I don't regret my decision as I find the touch move rule silly in the first place. Also i agree that i was outplayed but i would be more then glad for a multiple game rematch and have all the confidence of a victory. And thank you for Arbiting and score keeping for the day it was a big help to all the players. Lawrence Bretag.

Kevin Bonham
29-10-2008, 07:00 PM
I had a worse position but the reason Owen won that game outright is due to good sportsmanship on my part not claiming the touch move rule. You may have witnessed the sacrifice forr stalemate swindle?

I didn't see that bit (always worth a try!). Yes, if it is possible for him to block the check with the knight you could force him to do it - I have seen some very big losses in interschool when someone touches their queen unaware that they are in check and are then forced to interpose their queen and lose it for nothing.

ER
30-10-2008, 10:26 PM
I read Laurence's post and I really feel for him. He is obviously a sensitive young person who understands much more than many adults the rules of fair play, and most importantly practices what he says.:clap:
He did not force his rightful claim to the touch rule (because he thinks it is stupid anyway)! Now how wonderfully grandiose is his related statement! Some people might think it is naive but I find it most original and heart warming!
Then, after all is over he challenges his opponent for a match and does not forget to congratulate the DOPs for their contribution.:clap:
Son congratulations! With young people like you this country has a future! (and not only in Chess)!:clap:
PS Select a book of your choice and tell me the title. I will organise with one of our Chess Book selling Authorities here so you can go and pick it up!
Cheers and good luck with your chess and studies!

hendreyth
31-10-2008, 03:27 PM
I didn't see that bit (always worth a try!). Yes, if it is possible for him to block the check with the knight you could force him to do it - I have seen some very big losses in interschool when someone touches their queen unaware that they are in check and are then forced to interpose their queen and lose it for nothing.

Hey David is generally not so bothered by FIDE rules in his tournaments. In announcing the rules he often says 50 move rule applies when and only when one player has only a king (not restarting after pawn moves or piece captures) and that touch move rule does not apply when the player is in check. Presumably since the Chess Kids interschool tournament is now recognised by the TCA in Tassie this is no longer the case there?

Also Kevin you no doubt know the wording of the touch move rule. My understanding is that it has some proviso that the player touching the piece must be intending to make a legal move. It occurs to me that some wordings may allow a creative argument that since there was no move Owen was intending to make that was in fact legal he was clearly not intending to make a legal move of the piece and therefore should not be forced forced to move it. :P

Kevin Bonham
31-10-2008, 07:20 PM
Hi Thomas!


Hey David is generally not so bothered by FIDE rules in his tournaments. In announcing the rules he often says 50 move rule applies when and only when one player has only a king (not restarting after pawn moves or piece captures)

I often also simplify the 50 move rule for the interschools, especially the weaker qualifiers, for practical reasons. Generally if someone can't mate a bare king in 50 moves they don't deserve a win anyway (especially not if they are mucking around trying to get a win on the clock instead of going for checkmate). Another thing I often do (and warn all the players in advance that I will do) is step in and declare the game drawn if one player is just needlessly moving the same piece over and over (say ten or more times in a row) instead of using pieces together to get a mate.


and that touch move rule does not apply when the player is in check. Presumably since the Chess Kids interschool tournament is now recognised by the TCA in Tassie this is no longer the case there?

The TCA has not put any constraints on David concerning how the tournaments are refereed.


Also Kevin you no doubt know the wording of the touch move rule. My understanding is that it has some proviso that the player touching the piece must be intending to make a legal move.

The player must intentionally (as opposed to accidentally) touch the piece, but whether the player intends to make a move that is actually legal, make a move that is actually illegal (but they don't know it), or even throw the piece out the window is irrelevant - under FIDE laws if the piece has a legal move and is intentionally touched, it must be moved.

One unusual consequence of this that sometimes happens is that if you try to capture a piece with a piece that cannot move (because it is pinned), you might be forced to capture it with another piece.

hendreyth
01-11-2008, 12:05 PM
Thanks for clearing that up.

I often also simplify the 50 move rule for the interschools, especially the weaker qualifiers, for practical reasons. Generally if someone can't mate a bare king in 50 moves they don't deserve a win anyway (especially not if they are mucking around trying to get a win on the clock instead of going for checkmate).Yes in a recent tournament I regretted allowing the move count to be restarted after a pawn was moved. The kid who lost that game complained to me a few times but I there is no way in one of those tournaments I can't go around reversing decisions. Though maybe had I gone the other way the other kid would have complained. The way I see it neither has any grounds for compaint since one doesn't deserve to win and the other doesn't deserve to draw.

Another thing I often do (and warn all the players in advance that I will do) is step in and declare the game drawn if one player is just needlessly moving the same piece over and over (say ten or more times in a row) instead of using pieces together to get a mate.That's an interesting idea. I'd imagine just the threat of you actuaclly doing that would be quite helpful.

The player must intentionally (as opposed to accidentally) touch the piece, but whether the player intends to make a move that is actually legal, make a move that is actually illegal (but they don't know it), or even throw the piece out the window is irrelevant - under FIDE laws if the piece has a legal move and is intentionally touched, it must be moved.

One unusual consequence of this that sometimes happens is that if you try to capture a piece with a piece that cannot move (because it is pinned), you might be forced to capture it with another piece.Shame - now my exploitation of the fact that 'he intended to...' is an intensional context (sorry couldn't resist) would have to be far more blatant. e.g. he did not intend to touch a piece which could not make a legal move, the knight could not make a legal move, hence he did not intend to touch the knight!

hendreyth
01-11-2008, 12:08 PM
showing my lack of experience here. How do you make multiple quotations? My above attempt clearly didn't work :doh:

Kevin Bonham
01-11-2008, 12:18 PM
There also seems to be a convention that if you firmly pick a piece up then that is the same as intentionally touching it (even if you actually intended to move a different piece).

I fell foul of this in one of my first rated tournaments where I meant to play ...e6 against 1.d4 and picked up my f-pawn by mistake. Not aware that the Dutch was a playable opening I played 1...f6 (surprisingly, my subsequent loss of the game was actually due to an endgame howler and not my unintended choice of opening.) I remember another case where there was a jam of pieces in the middle of the board including two white knights and the player with the knights (Pablo Oriol, ex Tas junior champion + very talented imaginative player) reached out to move one but picked up the other (which cost him a pawn.)

Kevin Bonham
01-11-2008, 12:29 PM
showing my lack of experience here. How do you make multiple quotations? My above attempt clearly didn't work :doh:

You need to intersperse the quote tags through the quoted text so that each bit you are quoting opens with {QUOTE} and ends with {/QUOTE} (but replacing the curly brackets with square brackets)

Kevin Bonham
01-11-2008, 12:32 PM
Yes in a recent tournament I regretted allowing the move count to be restarted after a pawn was moved. The kid who lost that game complained to me a few times but I there is no way in one of those tournaments I can't go around reversing decisions. Though maybe had I gone the other way the other kid would have complained. The way I see it neither has any grounds for compaint since one doesn't deserve to win and the other doesn't deserve to draw.

Indeed, so it is best to just make a decision and stick by it.

When dealing with some of the weaker events I sometimes find there might be four or five boards at once where a player is floundering around trying to win against a bare king or negligible material. It's just not possible to explain all the ins and outs of the rule to inexperienced players in that time when you have other games to supervise so in that case just saying "you've got 50 moves to win or the game's a draw" and moving on to the next table is the most practical solution.

hendreyth
02-11-2008, 12:27 PM
It's just not possible to explain all the ins and outs of the rule to inexperienced players in that time when you have other games to supervise so in that case just saying "you've got 50 moves to win or the game's a draw" and moving on to the next table is the most practical solution.

Agreed. This was a case where I was called over to the board for some reason. Thanks for fixing my previous post.

Desmond
03-11-2008, 09:34 AM
I fell foul of this in one of my first rated tournaments where I meant to play ...e6 against 1.d4 and picked up my f-pawn by mistake. Not aware that the Dutch was a playable opening I played 1...f6 (surprisingly, my subsequent loss of the game was actually due to an endgame howler and not my unintended choice of opening.)I played in a simul yonks ago and intended to play the Grob, but picked up the f-pawn instead. Then I "corrected" my mistake and played g5 a move or two later. I wouldn't advise the f5-g5 pawn advances against a GM. It didn't work out too well. :lol:

Kevin Bonham
15-10-2009, 09:38 PM
Final is on again on Monday. At present 88 players from 14 schools have entered for the primary division though; in total 20 schools are entitled to send 127 players between them.

For the high school section, 67 players from 12 schools are currently entered; in total 15 schools have qualified 83 possible places.

Not every school that qualifies for the final competes in it but it already looks like there will be more players this year than last year; not sure if the record set in 2007 (181) will be in danger.

For the Primary section I'm expecting West Ulverstone Primary, Forth Primary and Princes St to be near the top of the table.

For the Secondary section it will be hard for St Marys to repeat their remarkable win from last year now that they are down to one Bretag instead of two. Very open comp because some teams have a big gun and some depth while others have a lot of depth. I think Tasmanian Academy (Don) with Alastair Dyer and Charlie Smith might just have the edge on paper but there are many other teams with good chances of winning.

Kevin Bonham
17-10-2009, 07:26 PM
Now 104 primary from 16 schools and 76 secondary from 14 schools entered.

Three schools are still unconfirmed for the primary but the secondary looks pretty much maxed out now. Don are down to four players which makes it much tougher for them now (it's the best four scores so they don't have any leeway).

Kevin Bonham
19-10-2009, 11:42 PM
102 primary school players from 16 schools and 74 high school players from 14 schools attended the State Final, just five players shy of the record total of 181 set in 2007.

I was arbiter for the high school section so I saw much more of that than the primary.

In the primary it was soon clear that the usual frontrunners Forth and West Ulverstone were no longer as much of an outright threat as they used to be. Princes Street (Hobart) and St Thomas Mores (Launceston) made the early running with Princes Street outright leading after rounds 3, 4, 5, and 6. The odd thing was that Princes St were doing most of us without their strongest player Harry Briant, who had a loss in round 4 and another in rounds 5 or 6 and wasn't featuring in the team top four at this time.

Sacred Heart (New Town) had sat in third for much of the day, but in round seven their top four scored 3.5 points while Princes Street's top four scored only half a point, and with that SH(NT) moved into a tie for the lead with STM. SH(NT) had another strong round in round eight and suddenly they had a three point lead with one round to play and a player on each of boards 1-4. Once Oscar Brown had won his last round game Sebastian Krasnicki offered a draw which his opponent accepted and Sacred Heart (New Town), coached by Tom Krasnicki, had sealed the title from Princes St and St Thomas Mores. A surprising result from a team of improving players who stood up to be counted at the critical parts of the day. Oscar Brown tied with Schyler Walker (STM) for individual honours on 8/9. Full results at http://chesskids.com.au/ratings/#tourn-2306

In the very competitive secondary tournament there were no real upsets in round one but in round two Calvin Christian, one of the favourites, had an inauspicious start with Owen Short defeated by Mustagh Rezaie (Prospect) and Josiah Muggeridge by Tom Cleary (Claremont).

In round three Vincent Horton (Ulverstone) had a tough game for a long time and almost ran out of time in getting the win down against Brandon Alpha (Friends) but in the end Vincent won on time with 6 seconds on his own clock. After this round Ulverstone, St Brendan Shaw and Claremont led with nine schools within a point of the lead.

In the biggest clash of round four, Charlie Smith (Tasmanian Academy (Don)) won a piece against Kevin Hendrey (SBS) and ultimately the game. With all the crossfire between the various schools the defending champions St Marys District High were the leaders at this point with five schools tied for second half a point behind them.

In the most exciting game that I saw Alastair Dyer (Tasmanian Academy) had a wild ride in round five against Vincent Horton (Ulverstone) who sacrificed a piece for a very scary attack. The position was a mess but Alastair managed to kill the attack by returning the piece and from here on Vincent's clock was terminal. On board two a materially even but mutually tricky knight ending between Charlie Smith and Jamie Briant (Hutchins) was agreed drawn.

In round six Calvin's luck improved when Josiah Muggeridge won against James Hogue (Sacred Heart) from an incredibly lost position. (I believe it was something like two rooks vs rook, queen and bishop). Friends and Claremont now led by half a point from Hutchins and Tasmanian Academy with Launceston Grammar and Calvin another half a point behind.

A critical round seven game was between Kurt Temple (Tasmanian Academy) and Kevin Hendrey. In this Kevin was completely lost on the board and at risk of losing on time but Kurt lacked the time scramble experience of his opponent (who often gets into serious time trouble even with increments), and somehow a minute vs thirty seconds and a rook up turned into a loss on time with the rook off the board. Now Calvin and Tasmanian Academy led Hutchins by half a point with Friends another hald point back.

A further calamity befell the Academy in the game between Lawrence Bretag (St Marys) and Charlie Smith in round 8. In this game Lawrence had done well to contain the damage to two exchanges down (a material balance that can actually make things tricky for the player with the rooks if they are in time trouble). Charlie returned one exchange but then dropped the remaining rook to a pawn fork and that was that.

Tasmanian Academy's other three players won this round so TA still went into round nine leading Calvin by 1.5 points. But with Vincent Horton defeating Charlie Smith on board 2, and the Calvin top four racking up 3.5 points in the final round, Tasmanian Academy were only able to tie Calvin in the final standings.

If the standings based on the top four scores are tied then the countback takes the score of the fifth player from the team. Tasmanian Academy had no fifth player and therefore Calvin Christian are the Tasmanian champions. Ulverstone took the bronze ahead of St Marys whose fourth place was a very creditable title defence under the circumstances.

Top individual scores were Alastair Dyer 9/9 (and not really troubled by anyone much except for Vincent) Vincent Horton and Lawrence Bretag 8/9. Full scores http://chesskids.com.au/ratings/#tourn-2307

Garvinator
20-10-2009, 12:56 AM
I take it from reading your report that both sections of the Interschools is run using an individual swiss format with points awarded to the top four point scorers from each school. Is this correct?

How come it is not run in the usual 4 board team format? Just looking at pros and cons.

Libby2
20-10-2009, 07:27 AM
I take it from reading your report that both sections of the Interschools is run using an individual swiss format with points awarded to the top four point scorers from each school. Is this correct?

How come it is not run in the usual 4 board team format? Just looking at pros and cons.

ChessKids run all of their events (to my knowledge) as individual swiss tournaments. You don't play other members of your own team and top four scores are the team total (5th player used for tiebreak).

In the ACT we use an individual swiss like that for our secondary girls as we offer individual prizes by year level, as well as team prizes. That has allowed girls who don't have other team members, or less than 4 team members, to continue to engage with interschool chess. All our Open events, and our Primary girls, are run on the 4-member team format.

Kevin Bonham
20-10-2009, 12:10 PM
I take it from reading your report that both sections of the Interschools is run using an individual swiss format with points awarded to the top four point scorers from each school. Is this correct?

Correct. Players are barred from playing members of their own team.


How come it is not run in the usual 4 board team format? Just looking at pros and cons.

The main advantages of this format are flexibility and increased participation. A team can have any number of players between four and 14 (or in the final between four and however many have been qualified). In qualifiers, schools can send any number of players in multiple teams. A school that has exactly seven willing players doesn't have to leave three of them behind doing nothing or make complex decisions about who will be reserve in which round (etc).

Another advantage is that a strong school's result isn't badly undermined if one of their players has a bad day, provided that they bring extra players.

A third one is that teams find their own level. If one team has much more depth than the others then the player who might otherwise have got 7/7 on board 4 will get to play top players from the other teams and be more thoroughly tested. If a team is weak they will play weaker players from the other teams instead of getting hammered senseless on boards 1 and 2 and struggling to pick up even a single point.

A fourth one is that all the issues around "board order" are avoided.

The only real downsides I have noticed with this system are:

* SP will sometimes have major pairing issues when it comes to pairing rounds 4 and 5 especially, on account of its propensity to double-downfloat and also the pairing blocks. Sometimes (on average about 5% of the qualifiers) it is necessary to rejig pairings or even remove the pairing blocks to get around this. This only tends to happen in fairly small qualifiers with uneven team strengths. I have not yet noticed whether Swiss Tournament, which David is using now, ever has the same problem.

* When a large team wins not every player from that team gets a medal. The degree to which children become fascinated by the medals is astonishing and every now and then some "I didn't get a medal" sob story case needs consoling (if necessary the team can buy extra medals).

My view (and not just because I am paid to run events under this format) is that the individual swiss system with barred team pairings is very much superior as an interschool model to the Olympiad-style teams-of-four setup.

Garvinator
20-10-2009, 12:54 PM
My view (and not just because I am paid to run events under this format) is that the individual swiss system with barred team pairings is very much superior as an interschool model to the Olympiad-style teams-of-four setup.I agree with this when the objective of the event is to encourage participation, whilst at the same time attempting to qualify schools for the next round.

Another 'advantage' I thought of is that if you have two or three schools that are a lot stronger than the rest then there is a strong likelihood that reps from those schools will play each other more than once ie board one from School A could meet Boards 1, 2 and 3 from School B.

This could help to ensure that whichever team finishes first has met the other school regularly.

Kevin Bonham
14-10-2010, 01:40 AM
Tasmania's largest annual tournament is on again next Monday.

Current status of entries:

Primary: 85 from 13 schools have names entered and a further 5 schools are entitled to enter (111 spots available); at least one of these will definitely do so.

Secondary: 67 from 12 schools have names entered and a further 3 schools are entitled to enter (85 spots available).

In the primary section the defending champions Sacred Heart (New Town) have had tough contests with Princes Street this year (SHNT just won one and Princes St won the other easily) and it will be interesting to see how these teams go and whether any of the northern and northwestern schools are a threat to them.

In the secondary section the Tasmanian Academy team has more depth than last year and must be considered the favourite. Of the southern schools it is notable that defending champions Calvin Christian have been twice bested by Hutchins in qualifiers this year, and unlike some previous years the Hutchins team is at full strength.

This is always one of my favourite events to be involved with!

Tony Dowden
15-10-2010, 08:41 PM
Tasmania's largest annual tournament is on again next Monday.

Current status of entries:

Primary: 85 from 13 schools have names entered and a further 5 schools are entitled to enter (111 spots available); at least one of these will definitely do so.

Secondary: 67 from 12 schools have names entered and a further 3 schools are entitled to enter (85 spots available).

In the primary section the defending champions Sacred Heart (New Town) have had tough contests with Princes Street this year (SHNT just won one and Princes St won the other easily) and it will be interesting to see how these teams go and whether any of the northern and northwestern schools are a threat to them.

In the secondary section the Tasmanian Academy team has more depth than last year and must be considered the favourite. Of the southern schools it is notable that defending champions Calvin Christian have been twice bested by Hutchins in qualifiers this year, and unlike some previous years the Hutchins team is at full strength.

This is always one of my favourite events to be involved with!
Sounds fantastic Kevin :D

Kevin Bonham
17-10-2010, 10:36 PM
Primary: 95 from 14 entered
Secondary: 71 from 12 entered.

Kevin Bonham
18-10-2010, 07:29 PM
173 players competed, 108 from 17 schools in the primary and 65 from 12 schools in the secondary.

The primary section was a day-long battle between three southern teams - Goulburn St, Princes St and the defending champions Sacred Heart (New Town). Going into round 4, Shuqi Yu (PS), Harry Briant (PS), Bill Chen (PS), Matthew Barnes (SHNT), Oscar Brown (SHNT) and William Wardlaw-Kelly (GS) were the leading players on 3. However in this round Yu was defeated by Rodney Kim (Scotch) who played an excellent endgame. Princes St 14.5 led SHNT 14 and Goulburn St 13 at this point.

In round 5 Briant and Barnes drew and in round 6 Brown defeated Chen and Briant defeated Bradley Vince (St Aloysius) in a time scramble delivering mate with 20 seconds left. Sacred Heart 20.5 now led the two other teams on 19.5 each.

In round 7 Brown and Briant drew (Harry initially refused a draw in a rook ending a pawn down!) and Barnes defeated Tristan Harris (Goulburn St) to keep his team in the lead again by a point over the challengers.

The real drama of the event came in the final two rounds. In round 8, Oscar Brown and William Wardlaw-Kelly (GS) had a fine game with aggressive play by both into the late middlegame - where the game ended when Oscar, convinced his opponent had forced mate, prematurely resigned (he had not realised he could interpose a piece because he had overlooked that one of the pieces attacking it was pinned. I think had the defence been seen the game was level.) With Chen and Briant both winning this round Princes St jumped to a 1.5 point lead going into the final round.

Wardlaw-Kelly was involved in a second drama in the final round when he went exchange up against Harry Briant but unfortunately for William his winning chance succumbed to a rook blunder. Thus, Princes St finally won the title for the first time after about four seconds and a third.

A very notable result was achieved by Strahan Primary from the west coast who came 4th.

29/36 Princes St (medals: Bill Chen, Harry Briant, Shuqi Yu, Raman Law)
28 Sacred Heart (New Town) (medals: Oscar Brown, Matthew Barnes, Blake Zamykal, Hazeq Dzulhisham)
26 Goulburn St (medals: William Wardlaw-Kelly, Callum Kershna, Tristan Harris, Gabe Deayton)
24 Strahan
21.5 Scotch Oakburn
21 Forth
20.5 Launceston Church Grammar
(etc)

Individual medals: Bill Chen (gold) 8/9, Harry Briant (silver) 8/9, Oscar Brown (bronze) 7.5/9

In the secondary tournament the first big clash came in the very first round when 4th seed Kevin Hendrey (St Brendan-Shaw) was repaired with 6th seed Mason Carter (Dover) after both their opponents failed to show (the game was drawn.) The first big upset also came in round 1 with Charlie Smith (Tasmanian Academy (Don)) defeated by Shaun Hamilton (Seabrook).

Evan Gale (Scotch Oakburn), a young player who showed a lot of potential in this event, defeated top-10 seeds Michael Manthey (Hutchins) and Josiah Muggeridge (Calvin) in rounds 2 and 3, though he had to be very careful to refute Josiah's attempt to swindle a draw with a "rambling rook".

The top two seeds, Alastair Dyer (TA(D)) and Justin Hood (St Patrick's) surprisingly met in round 4 although there were six other players from various schools on 3. Probably a colour thing. Dyer won. Also in this round Hendrey had a neat win against Jamie Briant (Hutchins). After this round Tasmanian Academy (Don) and Hutchins had 13 with Scotch-Oakburn in 12.

In round 5, Dyer defeated Vincent Horton (Ulverstone). There was a fascinating heavy piece ending on board 2 between Owen Short (Calvin) and Nick Gribble (Hutchins). Short had castled long to expedite a kingside attack, but his king was loose and Gribble got a queenside attack as a result. Short was forced to sacrifice a rook and go perpetual-hunting although Gribble almost ran out of time trying to avoid the inevitable draw.

After Dyer easily defeated Kevin Hendrey in round 6, Don on 19 led Calvin 16.5, surprise medal contenders Dover 16.5 and Scotch 16. However, in round 7 Dyer got short of time against Owen Short, and in a position with rook and pawn for two knights he blundered in time trouble giving Short an upset win. This dramatic development didn't stop TA keeping their lead at 21 from Calvin and Dover 18.5 and Hutchins 18.

In round 8 Nick Gribble became the latest to discover that playing Alastair after he has lost is no picnic; he ended up totally zugzwanged with a rook, a bishop and various pawns on the board. Owen Short easily defeated Mason Carter this round and with one round to go the Don lead was cut to 1.5 points over Calvin with Scotch another pawn back.

It should have been enough but it was not: Don's top players scored only two points in the final round while Calvin's top four all won and the defending champions had retained their title by half a point. Owen Short sealed the win (and a great day for him personally) with a victory against Vincent Horton.

Jamie Briant was especially luckless - both he and his team finished =3rd but missed a medal on countback. However as some compensation Hutchins still qualify for the Chess Kids nationals.

26 Calvin Christian (medals: Owen Short, Josiah Muggeridge, Dale Short, Mattison Bodini, Clancy Kent)
25.5 Tasmanian Academy (medals: Alastair Dyer, Reuben McCormack, Lukas Krellman, Jackson Jolly, Charlie Smith)
24 Scotch Oakburn (medals: Evan Gale, Duncan Mayne, Emily Burrage, Dean Saville)
24 Hutchins (4th - tiebreak)
20.5 Dover, Ulverstone
18.5 St Patrick's
17.5 St Marys
(etc)

Individual medals: Owen Short (gold) 8.5/9, Alastair Dyer (silver) 8/9, Justin Hood (bronze) 7/9

I will post a link to full results when they are up.

Capablanca-Fan
19-10-2010, 02:00 PM
I had a worse position but the reason Owen won that game outright is due to good sportsmanship on my part not claiming the touch move rule. You may have witnessed the sacrifice forr stalemate swindle? If so you also witnessed Owen playing Ne4+ which was illegal due to him being in check in this case i could have easily claimed touch move and forced him to block the check with the knight drawing the game. I don't know how to post the position but i'll try to figure it out if you didn't see it. P.S I don't regret my decision as I find the touch move rule silly in the first place. Also i agree that i was outplayed but i would be more then glad for a multiple game rematch and have all the confidence of a victory. And thank you for Arbiting and score keeping for the day it was a big help to all the players. Lawrence Bretag.
OTOH, the great Australian master C.J.S. Purdy argued that good sportsmanship included not only abiding by rules like touch-move but also enforcing them.

The rule is actually a very good one, discouraging hovering and premature moving, and hindering cheating.

Garvinator
19-10-2010, 02:14 PM
where has Saragossa's quote come from?

Kevin Bonham
19-10-2010, 02:22 PM
where has Saragossa's quote come from?

Post 7 from two years ago. He wasn't a player this year but his former team (St Marys) did pretty well considering that they are no longer Bretag-powered.

Garvinator
19-10-2010, 05:18 PM
Post 7 from two years ago. He wasn't a player this year but his former team (St Marys) did pretty well considering that they are no longer Bretag-powered.No wonder I did not easily see it in reports or comments from this years finals.

On a slightly different topic, I am surprised that the finals are not played in fixed board order, but I assume that has to do with the disputes of the past between TCA and chesskids.

Kevin Bonham
19-10-2010, 08:13 PM
On a slightly different topic, I am surprised that the finals are not played in fixed board order, but I assume that has to do with the disputes of the past between TCA and chesskids.

What past disputes?

As I noted in #24 there are a number of advantages this system (essentially an individual swiss but with pairings barred) has over the old method of teams playing each other in fixed board order. I tend to agree with David C that for fast-paced junior tournaments the Olympiad-style system is anachronistic and inferior. Incidentally the new pairing methods he is using gets around the problems with SP that I mentioned in #24, though they're still not perfect and now and then there's a bug of some kind.

Kevin Bonham
19-10-2010, 08:20 PM
Results online: http://tornelo.chesskids.com.au/tournaments/tas-state-finals

DOP: David Cordover
Staff arbiters: Kevin Bonham, Mellissa Harvey, Ross George
assisted by: Tom Krasnicki and Don Robertson.

Kevin Bonham
24-10-2011, 12:35 PM
I wasn't involved this year (and overseas when the final was on) but see that Launceston's Scotch Oakburn have claimed the senior title, defeating the 2009-10 champions Calvin Christian by two points with Don College third. Reuben McCormack, Vincent Horton and Evan Gale tied for individual honours on 8/9 with each scoring +1-1 against the other two.

In the primary section it was a southern trifecta with Goulburn Street winning for the first time, 3 points ahead of defending champions Princes St (whose team this year was weaker than last) with Mount Stuart making the podium for the first time. Known suspects Bill Chen, Bradley Vince, William Wardlaw-Kelly and Tristan Harris all 8/9.

186 players competed in the finals, a new record for the event (120 primary 66 secondary).

Kevin Bonham
16-10-2012, 08:07 PM
Again I wasn't involved but I see that Scotch Oakburn have successfully defended their title, finishing half a point ahead of Ulverstone High with Latrobe High third another half point back (beating Sacred Heart New Town for third on countback). Calvin Christian and Hutchins were only half a point off third place so another very close finals finish.

Former Tas Open co-winner Vincent Horton (Ulverstone) not surprisingly topped the individual standings with 9/9 ahead of Evan Gale (Scotch) 7.5 and Oscar Brown (SHNT) 7. There were 70 players from 11 teams.

In the Primary section, Princes St have recaptured the title from Goulburn St, finishing half a point ahead of the defending champions. Cygnet Primary were a new force at this level four points back in third, ahead of Montagu Bay, Table Cape, Strahan, South Hobart etc.

Three players - William Wardlaw-Kelly and Callum Kershna of Goulburn St, and Shuqi Yu of Princes St - scored 8/9, with Raman Law and Byron Oh (Princes St) and Mitch Torok (Montagu) 7/9. Lenard Lange who has been a strong player in adult events was perhaps not so suited to the fast time controls and lost to both the top Goulburn St players. 123 players from 20 teams competed.

The total turnout was 193 players which is another new record for the event.

Results online https://tornelo.chesskids.com.au/tournaments/state-finals-tas--1

Rincewind
16-10-2012, 08:17 PM
Does Tasmania enter in the Australian Schools Teams Chess Championships?

Kevin Bonham
16-10-2012, 09:45 PM
Does Tasmania enter in the Australian Schools Teams Chess Championships?

This has not happened for several years.

A major problem is that because the commercially run Chess Kids events - which at one stage were formally TCA-approved but now are not - are the only organised interschool events here, the schools are embedded within a system that leads to a different set of nationals. They know the product, they know the format, they've heard about it at the events all year, they get discounts and so on. It's not that easy to convince them to play in a second set on top of that, usually at greater cost, involving a second trip to the north island a week apart. The best teams generally know the CK final is a second-tier competition, but it's one they're fairly competitive in without dominating (none have won it yet), and they're happy with that.

For a while the TCA, despite not formally endorsing the CK event, accepted it as a qualifier for the ASTC and invited the winners to play in the ASTC, but without success. I'm confident the TCA would still endorse the CK winners, or failing that any other well-performed team, if they ever wanted to go.

I'd like to see Tasmanian teams in the ASTC again but someone here other than me will have to do nearly all the running on making it happen. I gave up a couple of years ago.

James Peirce
02-11-2012, 08:18 AM
I suspect that the pairing system used in chesskids tournaments is serously flawed. For example in the state final (TAS) Evan Gale scored 7 1/2 out of 9. However because he lost in the first round he avoided playing Vincent Horton who scored 9/9 this means that it is a better strategy to deliberately lose in the first round to avoid playing the top seed.

Kevin Bonham
02-11-2012, 08:48 AM
It's fairly odd for first to not play second with 9 rounds but in a large field it does happen sometimes. In this case there were not many draws so it took until round seven for Vincent to start playing score groups lower than his own. Even then Evan had a draw which kept him out of the group Vincent was playing until round 9. And in round 9 Evan could not play Vincent because he had floated up (played a player on a higher score) in round 8, which is why Vincent played Rainjan Blakers instead.

There is no advantage as such in losing in round one to avoid playing the top seed if you lose to someone who you would have otherwise beaten in the process. But Swiss systems are prone to "gambits" - players who lose in round 1 get a run of easy opponents and are much fresher when they come to play the tournament leader. I have seen tournaments won this way. I'm not aware of anyone doing it deliberately - it's very risky because if the "gambiter" should lose a second game there is no way back for them.

James Peirce
02-11-2012, 09:05 AM
I just find it annoying that i started with 5/5 so i had to play Vincent which i almost drew. My performance rating was also unusual as only the top 3 had higher performance ratings yet i barely scrapped into the top 10 with the highest Avg. Opponent rating. Even more annoying was that i had to play Evan in the last round. If Evan had played Vincent i am confident my school would have come 1st

Kevin Bonham
02-11-2012, 04:54 PM
My performance rating was also unusual as only the top 3 had higher performance ratings yet i barely scrapped into the top 10 with the highest Avg. Opponent rating.

This tends to happen when a player starts very strongly and then loses a few games at the end. Because they have been playing strong players all the way through their PR is higher than that of a player who starts poorly but finishes strongly.

The Swiss system is designed to find the most deserving winner(s). It struggles a bit with getting the order quite right below that and it wasn't designed for awarding team results based on totals from an individual Swiss.

James Peirce
06-11-2012, 08:15 AM
Perhaps using performance ratings to calculate the indvidual standings would give a more accurate reflection of who played better in the tournament

Kevin Bonham
26-10-2013, 10:20 AM
James has another thread on this year's events here: http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?14426-Chesskids-Tasmania-Tournaments-amp-News-2013

but I thought I'd post here just to keep all the finals results in one place.

There was again a record rollup with 116 players from 19 teams in the primary and 92 from 16 in the secondary for a total of 208.

The primary section resulted in a tie between Cygnet Primary and St Marys District High Primary both on 24.5. It looks like Cygnet took the title on tiebreak if the usual rules were applied. Both schools are from small Tasmanian country towns. St Marys have previously won the secondary title when they had the Bretag brothers in charge. Their star in winning the primary this year was David Escobar who cleaned up with 9/9. No one else got more than 7; a score managed by Joshua Perrin (Howrah), Raman Law (Princes St), Oliver Pridmore (Montagu), Sean Carpenter and Seth Batchelder (Cygnet). Friends were third on the team scores on 24 and the Mind Moves CC were permitted to enter a team which placed fourth. Defending champions Princes St were fifth.

The secondary section was won by Scotch Oakburn for the third year in a row with a comfortable margin of two points, 27 to Sacred Heart (New Town) 25 and Latrobe 24 then St Aloysius fourth and Calvin Christian fifth. A very well contested individual title with Jonathan Popiel (Marist) winning on 8/9 ahead of Evan Gale (Scotch) and Davis Kim (St Aloysius) 7.5. Max Davey (Scotch), James Kim (St Aloysius), Nathan Hill and Matthew Barnes (SHNT) and Brendan O'Sullivan (Latrobe) all scored 7 with O'Sullivan inflicting Popiel's only loss.

A lack of depth in female playing strength is notable - Yuvini Perera wasn't playing and the top females were 30th in the primary and 70th in the secondary.

Tony Dowden
27-10-2013, 09:00 AM
... In the Secondary division the three players with four-figure ratings predictably dominated the individual standings with Justin Hood (St Patrick's) collecting the day's only picket-fence on 9/9 ...

Well done Justin :clap: :clap:

Kevin Bonham
27-10-2013, 10:01 AM
Well done Justin :clap: :clap:

It was well done, but it was also six years ago!

Saragossa
28-10-2013, 12:50 AM
Good to see David Escobar, someone I've known since he was born, showing St Marys has still got game. I was disappointed the team I coach couldn't compete due to administrative disorganization. I maybe in Melbourne next year, so they might not have a chance either, if no one brings it together. Looking at Scotch's results Marcus and I really should have got our act together at LC and ended that streak, still very proud to see Vincent Horton picketing against them. It's odd to see such a consistent team as Scotch not having present on the longer timed tournament scene, I would have thought with the growth of chess in schools maybe the junior tournament scene would liven up. Anyway, all together another good year and I think CK has had a great impact on chess in Tasmania and I hope it grows in the future.

Oh yeah, and where is Mason 'Carlsen' Carter?

James Peirce
28-10-2013, 08:09 AM
Next year should be better with myself, (James Peirce), Kiran Walker, Josh Newman, Mitchell Reid and Vincent Horton all at Don College next year and we should be able to take the fight to Scotch Oakburn with them losing a number of players.

James Peirce
27-08-2014, 12:17 PM
For the state finals this year wildcards should be extended to player of high strength if there school has not qualified for the state finals. The players currentely under consideration are James Peirce,Vincent Horton,Mason Carter and perhaps a few more.