Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 106 to 117 of 117
  1. #106
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    13,600
    Arranging play-offs is sometimes tricky. I can recall how some years ago there was an Aus championship tie between Speck and Johansen and it took a while to organise. For junior titles, unless its a a couple of quick blitz games right after their games end...it would be even more tricky.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #107
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    943
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    Fortunately ACF has plenty of time to decide what it wants to do about a tie in the Reserves.

    Typically there are ten or so players in the Championship who might win it in a good year. The remainder have little realistic chance of winning but serve the purpose of providing a test for the top contenders. Viewed in that light, splitting hairs between players with identical scores in the Reserves is not very productive, especially when you will often get different results depending on the tie-break method.

    Given the performance needed to finish near the top of the Reserves relative to those of the lower levels of the Championship it could be argued that having only one qualifier is a little conservative. I think there is a case for having the top two or three qualifying.
    I disagree. I think one player qualifying from the Reserves is enough. Anyone who is not eligible can always apply to the ACF to enter on the grounds that they are of the appropriate standard.

    In passing, in my attempts to find the relevant by-laws on the ACF website I searched “Australian Chess Federation” but the ACF website did not come up (I gave up looking after 3 pages). Is there a problem with the site not being ranked highly on search lists?
    Still searching for Bobby Fischer....
    and fighting against those humourless bureaucrats who are forever lost in the minutiae.

  3. #108
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,251
    Quote Originally Posted by jammo View Post
    I disagree. I think one player qualifying from the Reserves is enough. Anyone who is not eligible can always apply to the ACF to enter on the grounds that they are of the appropriate standard.
    This is true, but on the same argument you could have zero qualifiers from the Reserves and just use it as a subsidiary event.

    As a general principle qualifying for higher events via the level below is the purest form of competitive structure. Only one place in the Candidates is on rating, or 1.5 allowing for rating putting a player on the short list for the wild card, the rest have to qualify. But while qualification to the Aust Championship by other mechanisms seems to err on the side of inclusiveness, qualification through the Reserves is quite stringent.

  4. #109
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Yes I also think that is the intention but we have got out of the practice (if it existed) of specifying a way to resolve the tie in the event of there being one in the event conditions.
    This is also relevant. If no tie-break is specified before the event (either by the ACF or the tournament conditions) it's a bit hard on the tied players to then impose one afterwards.

  5. #110
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,300
    Quote Originally Posted by jammo View Post
    In passing, in my attempts to find the relevant by-laws on the ACF website I searched “Australian Chess Federation” but the ACF website did not come up (I gave up looking after 3 pages). Is there a problem with the site not being ranked highly on search lists?
    It doesn't for me on the first 5 pages either - bit of a worry. That said the Wikipedia link that comes up first has a prominent link to it.

    Re Reserves qualification, I generally agree that one qualifier is enough. An issue with having more qualifiers from the Reserves who wouldn't have been selected anyway is that they will reduce the average FIDE rating of the Champs field and make norms in the Champs more difficult. However a tie for first, in the absence of any clear rule about countback or playoffs, and with the players from different states and hence any playoff after the date likely to be impractical, is a special case and I don't see any fair alternative to both of them qualifying. (Whether either of them (i) is interested (ii) would be selected anyway if they applied makes the whole thing potentially irrelevant).

  6. #111
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,300
    Posts moved

    Further (and useful) discussion re ACF website Google search issue has been moved to ACF website thread.

  7. #112
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    (ii) would be selected anyway if they applied makes the whole thing potentially irrelevant).
    Been a while since I have been in the weeds of ACF by laws, but isn't winning the Reserves meaning you get automatic qualification to the next Australian Championship?

    So, since it seems rather clear that there are no playoff provisions for two or more players finishing first in the Reserves, surely both would qualify. Then it is up to them to decide if they want to play in the 2022 Australian Championship.

    If having more than one player is seen as such a problem, then the ACF should shut the door on this eventually asap by re-writing the by laws to introduce either a player directly after the event. The playoff can either be for the Reserves title (Winner of the playoff finishes first, gets the title, first place prizemoney and the Reserves spot in the Championship, or the playoff is solely for the 1 place in the next Australia Championship)

    I think the former would be more likely to have two players who are interested in the playoff. If the playoff was just for the Aus Champ spot, I could easily see a situation where even before the playoff, one of the players says that they are not interested in the next Aus Champ spot, where the other player is very interested.

  8. #113
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    545
    Do the FIDE regulations apply here in the absence of stated tiebreaks on the entry form or ACF rules, or is this one where the "prize" is shared by allowing both to enter?
    IA Craig Hall

    www.chess.org.nz - Canterbury Chess Club
    http://respectrum.nz - Major sponsor

  9. #114
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Garvinator View Post
    Been a while since I have been in the weeds of ACF by laws, but isn't winning the Reserves meaning you get automatic qualification to the next Australian Championship?
    You get automatic qualification if you are "the winner of the previous Australian Major". I agree with jammo in #102 that this seems at least intended to imply a single winner, and doesn't necessarily guarantee that multiple co-winners qualify.

  10. #115
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    You get automatic qualification if you are "the winner of the previous Australian Major". I agree with jammo in #102 that this seems at least intended to imply a single winner, and doesn't necessarily guarantee that multiple co-winners qualify.
    I agree with you that the wording implies one winner, but there is not further elaboration on how the 'one winner' is determined. So, with no further elaboration, and being by laws, exceptions can be made.

    As I previously said, this shows a clear case where the ACF By laws need to be updated quickly to clarify what happens with more than one winner in the Australian Championship lesser division (Major/Reserves, which ever it is called).

  11. #116
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    82
    If there has to be one winner, a quick 0 1 game across the internet or arm-wrestle in 2 years time 5 mins before the start of the tournament should suffice. It doesn't have to be too complicated...

  12. #117
    CC FIDE Master Metro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by Adamski View Post
    Congrats to new Australian champion Kuybokarov!
    He is the first Western Australian player in the 135 year history of the event to win the title.*
    *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temur_...v#cite_note-15
    Last edited by Metro; 21-01-2020 at 06:14 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Australian Junior Chess Championships 2020
    By Afitz in forum Upcoming And Current Tournaments
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 25-01-2020, 12:31 AM
  2. Australian Championship and CCLA Major Events for 2015
    By Brian_Jones in forum Correspondence Chess News
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 15-08-2015, 12:29 PM
  3. World Youth Championships splitting into two separate events
    By Garvinator in forum Overseas Tournament News and Results
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-07-2011, 12:49 AM
  4. Applications for World Junior events/Asian events/team events
    By brett in forum Overseas Tournament News and Results
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-04-2007, 11:47 PM
  5. Australian National Events Reports
    By adelaideuni in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-02-2004, 03:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •