PDA

View Full Version : Box Hill OPEN __ 2004



ursogr8
16-08-2004, 08:20 AM
A feature of this years Box Hill OPEN will be a first prize of $500.
(This is about three times anything on offer previously, for this event).

First round is Friday 17 September.

Early bird discounts will be very significant with the really early joiners paying just half of the entry of those who leave it to the last moment.

Details to come later this week.

starter

ursogr8
16-08-2004, 07:02 PM
A feature of this years Box Hill OPEN will be a first prize of $500.
(This is about three times anything on offer previously, for this event).

First round is Friday 17 September.

Early bird discounts will be very significant with the really early joiners paying just half of the entry of those who leave it to the last moment.

Details to come later this week.

starter


2004 Box Hill Open Championship a 7 round super-accelerated*swiss in 2 sections, on 7 consecutive Fridays
from September 17 to October 29
This year with enlarged prize fund of $1000*including a first prize of $500.
Considerable discounted early bird entry fees closing 10 PM Tuesday September 7
Other entries close 7.30 PM Friday September 17*
BHCC members:*** early bird fee $20. Full fee $30
Visitors: *** *** *** *** early bird fee $30. Full fee $40
Rate of Play 90 min plus 30 seconds per move / from move one.
For more details visit the web site www.boxhillchess.org.au <http://www.boxhillchess.org.au>

ursogr8
22-08-2004, 07:02 PM
Box Hill OPEN will be a first prize of $500.


First round is Friday 17 September.

Early bird discounts are being taken now as they are very significant in size. EB finishes 7/9

starter

Garvinator
22-08-2004, 07:58 PM
For more details visit the web site www.boxhillchess.org.au <http://www.boxhillchess.org.au>
where is the more information on the website, i cant find it :confused:

ursogr8
23-08-2004, 08:12 AM
where is the more information on the website, i cant find it :confused:

gg''

:oops:
I will go chase the web-guys.

starter

ursogr8
25-08-2004, 08:27 AM
where is the more information on the website, i cant find it :confused:

gg''
The web-guys have been active and got the details and the electronic entry form in place. Please re-visit http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/
and click the obvious menu item.

Did the $500 first prize attract you?

starter

ursogr8
04-09-2004, 07:51 PM
Box Hill OPEN will be a first prize of $500.


First round is Friday 17 September.

Early bird discounts are being taken now as they are very significant in size. EB finishes 7/9

starter

Wow. Early bird discount is having a great effect on entries; or is it the $500 first prize?
More than half the field limit now filled even though we are two weeks away from the start of the event.

starter

ursogr8
12-09-2004, 10:13 AM
The web-guys have been active and got the details and the electronic entry form in place. Please re-visit http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/
and click the obvious menu item.

Did the $500 first prize attract you?

starter


Entries currently stand at 70 for start of play next Friday night 17/10.

The $500 first prize has proved attractive with David Hacche joining the Box Hill OPEN field for the first time (in my memory). His rating is 2149 and there would be a few quality juniors licking their lips at the prospect of gaining a share of some of these points.
Peter Froehlich, 2399 has entered.

starter

ursogr8
17-09-2004, 10:55 PM
Entries currently stand at 70 for start of play next Friday night 17/10.

The $500 first prize has proved attractive with David Hacche joining the Box Hill OPEN field for the first time (in my memory). His rating is 2149 and there would be a few quality juniors licking their lips at the prospect of gaining a share of some of these points.
Peter Froehlich, 2399 has entered.

starter

We began the tournament tonight with 104 entrants.
Many players took advantage of the EARLY BIRD discount offer and we were able to announce the pairings 3 minutes after the scheduled start time. That is, we started at 7.48pm.

There are a few entrants who advised that they could not attend on the first night. Their catch-up games are scheduled for Tuesday next. Therefore any VIC players wanting to join the OPEN late should ring the mobile phone number on the entry form and I will schedule a catch-up game for Tuesday also. (Or enter through the Box Hill web-site).


starter

eclectic
20-09-2004, 07:58 AM
We began the tournament tonight with 104 entrants.
Many players took advantage of the EARLY BIRD discount offer and we were able to announce the pairings 3 minutes after the scheduled start time. That is, we started at 7.48pm.

There are a few entrants who advised that they could not attend on the first night. Their catch-up games are scheduled for Tuesday next. Therefore any VIC players wanting to join the OPEN late should ring the mobile phone number on the entry form and I will schedule a catch-up game for Tuesday also. (Or enter through the Box Hill web-site).


starter



Entries are open to every one who pays the fee
up to the field limit.

The $500 First Prize isn't OPEN to everyone who enters, is it?

Perhaps things have changed this year?

ChessGuru has had a battering this year due to having allegedly exercised poetic licence with certain matters.

So how about truth in advertising here?

I'd be interested to know how, for instance, those in the bottom half of the NSWCA Championship division swiss would feel if they were told from the outset they weren't entitled to win.

eclectic

ursogr8
20-09-2004, 08:27 AM
The $500 First Prize isn't OPEN to everyone who enters, is it?

Perhaps things have changed this year?

ChessGuru has had a battering this year due to having allegedly exercised poetic licence with certain matters.

So how about truth in advertising here?

I'd be interested to know how, for instance, those in the bottom half of the NSWCA Championship division swiss would feel if they were told from the outset they weren't entitled to win.

eclectic

Good point eclectic.
But perhaps a bit premature because no decision yet obvious to back-up what you suggest. It will be interesting to see what the D.O.P. decides. You will probably be correct though.

However your point is probably entirely hypothetical and an extreme-outlier. I challenge you to name any Australian OPEN event (with more than 100 entrants) in the past 100 years where the winner has been a rated player from the bottom half of the table. You have until 4pm 24/9/2004 to rise to the challenge.

starter

ps A bit harsh to quote the NSW Championship mate. If my memory is correct they also run an U1600 or Reserves or something. If this is correct it is hardly an OPEN.
Even so, my challenge to find a winner who startered in the bottom half of the ratings would still probably find you out.

bobby1972
20-09-2004, 11:49 AM
any news on the open looks big ,none at box hill site

Garvinator
20-09-2004, 12:08 PM
A bit harsh to quote the NSW Championship mate. If my memory is correct they also run an U1600 or Reserves or something. If this is correct it is hardly an OPEN.
are you talking about nsw championship or nsw open?

ursogr8
20-09-2004, 01:08 PM
any news on the open looks big ,none at box hill site

hi Ascaro,

A few catch-up games will be played tomorrow night so we will hold off web-site update till then.

But, I have a good deal for you if you want to be a late entrant. I have an odd number of entrants at the moment and the unpaired guy has a NSW rating of 1797.
This is the genuine opportunity to kick-start your ratings-recovery. Your potential opponent has a rating yet-to-be-savaged by the Box Hill juniors and is ripe. Get in early for your share of these points.

starter

ursogr8
20-09-2004, 01:17 PM
are you talking about nsw championship or nsw open?

I was just following eclectic's post.

ursogr8
20-09-2004, 01:25 PM
The $500 First Prize isn't OPEN to everyone who enters, is it?

Perhaps things have changed this year?



So how about truth in advertising here?


eclectic
hi eclectic, me again

Check back at my post #2........I said there were two sections.

starter

bobby1972
20-09-2004, 01:55 PM
ok i play ,so tuesday i be there thankyou.

ursogr8
21-09-2004, 11:12 AM
ok i play ,so tuesday i be there thankyou.

Thanks Ascaro
Your late entry is very welcome and improves the rating_average by heaps. :cool:

Your catch-up game is Tuesday 28/9.
See you next Friday...24/9...clocks start at 7.45pm. for your round 2 game.

starter

Garvinator
21-09-2004, 11:24 AM
Your catch-up game is Tuesday 28/9.
See you next Friday...24/9...clocks start at 7.45pm. for your round 2 game.

starter
im curious, how do you correctly seed and play a round two game before the round one game is played? :uhoh:

ursogr8
21-09-2004, 11:40 AM
im curious, how do you correctly seed and play a round two game before the round one game is played? :uhoh:

Well hello gg''

It is like this.
First. You get your mindset correct.
> Are you in the business of being strictly correct, or are you in the business of encouraging chess participation?
>> Are you sure Ascaro can beat the Welsher patzer that has been set up?
>>> Is it OK to to accept late (strong) entrants at the start of a tournament and not jeopardise the integrity of the eventual prize distribution?

Then
Second...you get the drift.


starter

Garvinator
21-09-2004, 08:28 PM
Well hello gg''

It is like this.
First. You get your mindset correct.
> Are you in the business of being strictly correct, or are you in the business of encouraging chess participation?
>> Are you sure Ascaro can beat the Welsher patzer that has been set up?
>>> Is it OK to to accept late (strong) entrants at the start of a tournament and not jeopardise the integrity of the eventual prize distribution?

Then
Second...you get the drift.


starter
actually mr starter sir, i was just curious if you guys had devised some way to keep the 'correct' running of the swiss system, while allowing players to be added late, especially if the late entrant would have been a highly seeded player had they entered on time.

ursogr8
22-09-2004, 07:55 AM
actually mr starter sir, i was just curious if you guys had devised some way to keep the 'correct' running of the swiss system, while allowing players to be added late, especially if the late entrant would have been a highly seeded player had they entered on time.
Good morning g''g''
I did not interpret your original post as asking that because I could see no way of achieving 'correctness'; hence I read other between the lines.
starter

ursogr8
22-09-2004, 09:03 PM
Round 1 results for the 2004 Box Hill OPEN now appear at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round1.htm


Round 2 pairings (provisional) also available on the Box Hill site.

ursogr8
26-09-2004, 07:57 AM
Round 1 results for the 2004 Box Hill OPEN now appear at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round1.htm


Round 2 pairings (provisional) also available on the Box Hill site.

Round 2 pairings had to be adjusted at the last moment due to the late entry of strong junior Sam Chow.

This gives the following field of players over 1900 rating points as
1. Froehlich, Peter 2399
2. Rashid, Abdulwahab 2205
3. Chow, Sam 2173
4. Hacche, David J 2149
5. Dragicevic, Domagoj 2090
6. Nemeth, Janos 2031
7. Bourmistrov, Denis 2028
8. Pecori, Ascaro 2020
9. Stojic, Dusan 1985
10. Holt, Kenneth P 1918
11. Voon, Richard 1915
12. Dutka, Janusz 1911

starter

JGB
27-09-2004, 02:54 AM
I had no idea the Box Hill Open drew such a strong field. Sounds like a good competition. Ill keep updated through the Box Hill Interent site, hope I can partake next year.

Recherché
27-09-2004, 04:00 PM
I had no idea the Box Hill Open drew such a strong field.

Well, this year is a much stronger field than last year (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2003/e0309fop/results.htm), and a good 20 players larger to boot. One might certainly assume the elevated prize pool had a significant impact on entries this year.

ursogr8
27-09-2004, 05:27 PM
Well, this year is a much stronger field than last year (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2003/e0309fop/results.htm), and a good 20 players larger to boot. One might certainly assume the elevated prize pool had a significant impact on entries this year.

Rob

The field was 100 players in 2002 without the elevated prize money being on offer. 2004 is the first year with a significant prize pool.
The field in 2003 was the lowest figure for 5 years.

2000: 112 PLAYERS
2001: 111 PLAYERS
2002: 100 PLAYERS
2003: 81 PLAYERS
2004: 104 PLAYERS

starter

Garvinator
27-09-2004, 05:45 PM
Rob

The field was 100 players in 2002 without the elevated prize money being on offer. 2004 is the first year with a significant prize pool.
The field in 2003 was the lowest figure for 5 years.

2000: 112 PLAYERS
2001: 111 PLAYERS
2002: 100 PLAYERS
2003: 81 PLAYERS
2004: 104 PLAYERS

starter
have any conclusions been made about how come the 20% lower attendance in 2003?

ursogr8
27-09-2004, 05:56 PM
have any conclusions been made about how come the 20% lower attendance in 2003?
Yes
Bulletin from Round 1 attached.

Garvinator
27-09-2004, 06:15 PM
Yes
Bulletin from Round 1 attached.
I have read the article and even though the problems mentioned are less than ideal, i dont think i saw an actual reason as to why people didnt enter at all.

eclectic
27-09-2004, 08:51 PM
I have read the article and even though the problems mentioned are less than ideal, i dont think i saw an actual reason as to why people didnt enter at all.

wasn't 2003 the first time that the event was split into 2 divisions?

was that a possible cause of the drop in numbers?

the extra prize money might have helped restore respectability but i suspect only in the "division a" department

eclectic

Garvinator
27-09-2004, 08:59 PM
wasn't 2003 the first time that the event was split into 2 divisions?

was that a possible cause of the drop in numbers?

the extra prize money might have helped restore respectability but i suspect only in the "division a" department

eclectic
how am i supposed to know?

eclectic
27-09-2004, 09:11 PM
how am i supposed to know?

simply offering reasons

of course you wouldn't know or you wouldn't have posed attendance query

eclectic

ursogr8
27-09-2004, 09:45 PM
wasn't 2003 the first time that the event was split into 2 divisions?

was that a possible cause of the drop in numbers?

the extra prize money might have helped restore respectability but i suspect only in the "division a" department

eclectic

eclectic

You let me down mate. Usually you are first to go searching the source data. If you had done that you would have found that 2001, 2002, and 2003 and 2004 all had two divisions.

And also not like you to slip a low punch on the prize distribution. I think Box Hill, more than most, has spread the prize-money around. Don't you remember the digs from a few when we got the VIC Open week-ender awarded?


starter

ursogr8
27-09-2004, 09:48 PM
I have read the article and even though the problems mentioned are less than ideal, i dont think i saw an actual reason as to why people didnt enter at all.

gg''
The attachment was my bulletin. Just thought I would get you to read it.


Now as to reasons.
2000 = 7 rounds
2001 = 7 rounds
2002 = 9 rounds
2003 = 7 rounds
2004 = 7 rounds

starter

eclectic
27-09-2004, 10:04 PM
eclectic

You let me down mate. Usually you are first to go searching the source data. If you had done that you would have found that 2001, 2002, and 2003 and 2004 all had two divisions.

And also not like you to slip a low punch on the prize distribution. I think Box Hill, more than most, has spread the prize-money around. Don't you remember the digs from a few when we got the VIC Open week-ender awarded?


starter

i made the mistake of misreading the round 1 link rather than the crosstable and thinking it was a regular pairing

also the intrductory blurb for 2002 does not mention 2 divisions

if the split division is not the cause and going on last year's round 1 report can we, after eliminating the greek orthodox church bells which would seem to be an easter thing, safely make rubberchickenman the scapefowl for the attendance abberation?

:hmm:

eclectic

ursogr8
28-09-2004, 08:08 AM
if the split division is not the cause and going on last year's round 1 report can we, after eliminating the greek orthodox church bells which would seem to be an easter thing, safely make rubberchickenman the scapefowl for the attendance abberation?

:hmm:

eclectic

eclectic

Not the Greek bells, not rubberchickenman, not 2 divisions, maybe the late reaction to 9 rounds, perhaps lack of brochures, ... actually,... I don't know.

starter

ursogr8
28-09-2004, 08:22 AM
Round 2 results for the 2004 Box Hill OPEN now appear at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round2.htm


Round 3 pairings (provisional) will be available on the Box Hill site on Wednesday, after the completion of 4 postponed games tonight.

There were a few scares to the top seeds in round 2. Hacche was winning against Campara but could not capitalise in a long end-game. Similarly Voon could only draw with Fitzpatrick. Pecori went home shell-shocked after a really tough encounter to edge out G Lindberg. And Sam Chow looked to be gone until Shane Lawson sacked a piece for a clear win that wasn't.


starter
ps I tipped 3 games out of a select 4 would be upsets.
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/bulletin.htm
Only 1 of my predictions was correct.

Recherché
28-09-2004, 11:12 AM
The field in 2003 was the lowest figure for 5 years.

Oh, I see. As a 2003 joiner I had nothing else to compare it to. The big 80+ player friday tournaments have always seemed huge to me. :)

bobby1972
28-09-2004, 11:47 AM
is there ANY other weekly club turny with 100 plus players anywhere its incredible every time i play at BH turny its 100 plus .

Recherché
28-09-2004, 05:14 PM
is there ANY other weekly club turny with 100 plus players anywhere its incredible every time i play at BH turny its 100 plus .

Not in Australia, I don't think, although the previous tournament you were in at Box Hill was the Winter Interclub, in which case there's probably one of equivalent size in NSW as well.

Garvinator
28-09-2004, 11:37 PM
Hello Starter,

After the Box Hill Open is finished, would it be possible to get a copy of the swiss perfect files. I would like to have a look at how the draw is done exactly :cool:

ursogr8
29-09-2004, 08:03 AM
Thanks Ascaro
Your late entry is very welcome and improves the rating_average by heaps. :cool:

Your catch-up game is Tuesday 28/9.
See you next Friday...24/9...clocks start at 7.45pm. for your round 2 game.

starter

:eek: :eek:
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
:confused: :confused:

Ascaro

Is this something you learnt elsewhere? Offering a draw as the higher rated player?
Mate. I don't know where you go now for some cinchy rating points.

starter

bobby1972
29-09-2004, 11:40 AM
yes i offered just before he saw that after Rh6 gh,Qg6+ Kf8 ,Qh6+ kg8, Qd2 Nf6 this he had seen as he still had 20 minutes left i thought he is going to see Qg5+ very soon so after about 5 minutes waiting for him to move i offered draw he told me that he was up to Nf6 in his calculation,very luky again

3r2k1/3nqpp1/2R4p/1p1Bp2Q/1P6/2P3P1/3r1P1P/5RK1 w - - 0 27

ursogr8
30-09-2004, 05:45 PM
Round 3 pairings for the 2004 Box Hill OPEN now provisionally made and appear in the attachment

Games that I will be watching are:

Board 1 Chris Wallis v Peter Froehlich
Board 3 Sam Chow v Zhigen Wilson Lin
Board 24 Bruce Simpson v James Morris
Board 27 Eugene Schon v Norm Wilson
Board 35 Vladimir Zacharczenko v Alan Glenton


starter

ursogr8
01-10-2004, 09:30 PM
Round 3 pairings for the 2004 Box Hill OPEN now provisionally made and appear in the attachment

Games that I will be watching are:

Board 1 Chris Wallis v Peter Froehlich
Board 3 Sam Chow v Zhigen Wilson Lin
Board 24 Bruce Simpson v James Morris
Board 27 Eugene Schon v Norm Wilson
Board 35 Vladimir Zacharczenko v Alan Glenton


starter

Just as I expected, the board 3 game is a beauty. Zhigen Wilson Lin seemed to miss a win early around 12...but I am sure jeffrei will post the game and commentary.


Anyhow.........there were 6 more late entrants tonight....bringing the field size up to 110.
Prize fund has increased by 30% to $1300 as a consequece of the entries over budget.


Only downer I can see is that the number of ladies is less than 10. We need a critical mass.

starter

ursogr8
01-10-2004, 11:07 PM
Just as I expected, the board 3 game is a beauty. Zhigen Wilson Lin seemed to miss a win early around 12...but I am sure jeffrei will post the game and commentary.

starter

Sam Chow looks as though he has recovered enough to win the end-game. But the crowd watching that game has moved away to listen to GM Dejan Antic who is visiting the Club for the first time.

starter

Garvinator
01-10-2004, 11:14 PM
Sam Chow looks as though he has recovered enough to win the end-game. But the crowd watching that game has moved away to listen to GM Dejan Antic who is visiting the Club for the first time.

starter
and while this is all happening, you are sitting at the computer arguing about guruboy :eek:

ursogr8
02-10-2004, 03:51 PM
and while this is all happening, you are sitting at the computer arguing about guruboy :eek:

gg''

Sorry I did not answer this on the night, but a sensation was occurring in another part of the Hall. A crowd around Chris Wallis' board alerted me to investigate. This pesky jeffrei-clone was drawing with IM Peter Froehlich.
And that is the way it finished.
You will remember this junior........he was the one that I asked Bill to fix up his rating when he had super results in the VIC OPEN week-ender. Now the poor old IM will lose more points than Ascaro seems to squander.

Probably off the differential scale I should think.

jeffrei, can you post and analyze on a slow-loading thread?

starter

Garvinator
02-10-2004, 06:13 PM
jeffrei, can you post and analyze on a slow-loading thread?

starter
no, can you post here so everyone can actually view the game please.

ursogr8
02-10-2004, 07:03 PM
no, can you post here so everyone can actually view the game please.

Me? No. I have not tackled finding the game-loading instructions.




jeffrei...maybe he will.

ursogr8
03-10-2004, 08:03 AM
and while this is all happening, you are sitting at the computer

Round 3 results... absolutely fascinating.
Full details at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round3.htm



See attachment for local bulletin text.


starter

ursogr8
03-10-2004, 10:04 AM
Sam Chow looks as though he has recovered enough to win the end-game. But the crowd watching that game has moved away to listen to GM Dejan Antic who is visiting the Club for the first time.

starter

GM Dejan Antic has a FIDE rating of 2488, and is 24th on the list of active Serbia & Montenegro players. Serbia is 19th on Country rank by average rating of top 10 players. (Australia ranks 51st).

starter

Recherché
03-10-2004, 10:56 PM
See attachment for local bulletin text.

There was a bit of an upset on board 19 as well. ;)

ursogr8
04-10-2004, 07:51 AM
There was a bit of an upset on board 19 as well. ;)

R.

I noticed this later when I was calculating the index. Good win by a bloke whose name starts with R.
Well done.

starter

jeffrei
04-10-2004, 03:42 PM
jeffrei, can you post and analyze?


Sure. I should have receive both the games soon, and then I'll put them up. Must admit that both Wallis-Froehlich and Chow-Lin were rather anticlimactic, we were thinking 1.5-0.5 or 2-0 at the start of the night!

- Chris did a 'Leko' and agreed a draw in a superior position where he underestimated his chances, thus prompting some serious agonizing later about his thought processes.
- Actually Zhigen misplayed the opening a bit. He didn't miss a win on move 12 - both players had that worked out OK. Sam gained a little edge and nursed it rather well to gain a decisive endgame advantage, then blundered and let the endgame turn drawn, then Zhigen blundered and made it winning for Sam again, then Sam blundered again and made the position drawn, then Zhigen blundered again and let Sam win. This is not typical of either of them!

PS: Yes, a good win by R on board 19. He's one of the most underrated players going around at Box Hill, and I certainly wasn't pleased when I saw Zhigen was paired against him in round 1 of this tourney!

ursogr8
06-10-2004, 08:02 PM
Round 4 pairings now available at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round4.htm


This is very significant as an achievement worth noticing here...the pairings this week (and in particular lodging on the web-site) entirely done by our second-string web-master. First rule of management > identify your risk and manage it by having a deputy. So, numero uno has been away at Ocean Grove, and we have turned to our strongest Polish player. Well done Janusz.

The games I will be watching are
board 1 (of course Froehlich v Sam Chow
board 4 Pecori v Wallis (shades of the VIC INTERCLUB)
board 6 Zhigen Wilson Lin v Bourmistrov (nah, the youngster couldn't could he?)
board 20 Fell v Meldau

starter

Tony_Chow
06-10-2004, 10:37 PM
Starter,

Well done. Sound risk management practice. Always useful to see the pairings a few days ahead.

It has been a while since I visited the Box Hill Chess Club. Good to see the club in good shape, as to be expected, given the strength of the management team.

Yes, it is evident that Chris Wallis and Wilson Lin are rapidly developing chess players. I will be a spectator for their games this Friday night, apart from Board One, of course.

Tony Chow

bobby1972
07-10-2004, 09:41 AM
is the draw correct why is board 55, 55 Liston,H [3] : Holt,K [1.5].thanks

ursogr8
07-10-2004, 10:16 AM
is the draw correct why is board 55, 55 Liston,H [3] : Holt,K [1.5].thanks

Ascaro

I have sent the details in a private mail to you.

Pairings are as published.
I thought you would relish to the opportunity to take Wallis on...it was INTERCLUB that he had success against you?



starter

Bill Gletsos
07-10-2004, 11:13 AM
Ascaro

I have sent the details in a private mail to you.
Although it would seem that the draw is the typical "Box Hill" swiss system at work it does not explain why this particular pairing is down on board 55.

As such it seemed a reasonable question that deserved an answer that everyone could see.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 09:03 PM
Round 4 pairings now available at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round4.htm


This is very significant as an achievement worth noticing here...the pairings this week (and in particular lodging on the web-site) entirely done by our second-string web-master. First rule of management > identify your risk and manage it by having a deputy. So, numero uno has been away at Ocean Grove, and we have turned to our strongest Polish player. Well done Janusz.

The games I will be watching are
board 1 (of course Froehlich v Sam Chow
board 4 Pecori v Wallis (shades of the VIC INTERCLUB)
board 6 Zhigen Wilson Lin v Bourmistrov (nah, the youngster couldn't could he?)
board 20 Fell v Meldau

starter

The Pecori v Wallis game is underway and was a bit of a problem early. Pecori seemed to get Wallis into something he was unfamilar with and hence the kid slowed down. That makes Ascaro get up and walk around the room and generally be a good bloke; too good sometimes.

The game has evened out now and Ascaro is paying full attention to the board.

Froehlich v Sam Chow has taken an unexpected turn.....a SLAV where the IM has pushed the pawn to c5..........does that mean along game I wonder.


Board 17 was all over in 6 moves.....I will chase up the scoresheet for my own interest if not the losers.

starter

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 09:14 PM
Board 17 was all over in 6 moves.....I will chase up the scoresheet for my own interest if not the losers.

starter
Here is the game (?)
1 e4 c6
2 Nc3 d5
3 Nf3 de
4 Ne4 Nd7
5 Qe2 Ngf6
6 Nd6++

starter

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 09:26 PM
Froehlich v Sam Chow has taken an unexpected turn.....a SLAV where the IM has pushed the pawn to c5..........does that mean along game I wonder.

starter
Well that is a relief.......Froehlich has sacc'd a piece for some pawns and the attack. Looks like they may finish at a reasonable hour, one way or the other.

Zhigen Wilson Lin v Denis Bourmistrov is already down to the small bits. The Australian Junior Champion needs to be careful...the young kid coudn't win could he?


starter

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 09:28 PM
Transfer games have already started in the back room. I think I have got up to establish quiet about 5 times already.
Does anyone know a cure for the outbreak of this rash?

starter

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 09:52 PM
Sorry for the hiatus there.
Some galah parked their Mercedes in front of the car of an early finisher. Had to get a crew to bump the Mercedes out of the way.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 09:56 PM
Some good news at last. Fludey beat devrim van Dijk. Count that as one at last for the oldies..




And Hacche V Richard Voon is a beauty. Heavy pieces all on the board, a knight each, 5 pawns each.
Hacche is trying to play the one known strategy at Box hill....PIN IT AND WIN IT. Go the g-pawn.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 10:03 PM
Froehlich's attack is getting to be advanced. I think he will find a nice finish.


Hacche either has a pawn that is going to win, or is going to prove to be over-extended. Attracting quite a crowd that game.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 10:07 PM
Sally Yu ( a young junior) beats Steuart Snooks (a Dad). Sally is showing Steuart where he was winning most of the game; the crunch move; and what he missed, allowing Sally to win.

This is the last game in the room with the 10 bottom boards. That is a goodness because we don't have to worry about the noise level in that room now.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 10:11 PM
Eugene Schon won some money in a recent junior tourney. He is picking over the 100 or so books on sale in the bookstore. His coach jeffrei is trying to guide Eugene's choice.

(I wonder if I have 100 books at home? And how many read?)

Eugene's mum looks over my shoulder as I type and tells me that she posted for the 1st time last night..........over on the Mt B thread. Well that is another lady on the BB...good news.

starter

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 10:28 PM
Pecori v Wallis has petered a bit. Ascaro's king-side is shattered but neither seem to have much obvious play. Both look glum.

Voon has won Hacche's advanced pawn. So it was weak eh.
But the pin is still there.


Bourmistrov v the Kid was a draw. Some give in too quickly so that they can socialise I think.

Marcel Rothlisberger v Ruperto Lugo was an early draw...now that does surprise me...usually both are late to finish.

starter

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 10:56 PM
Three games of Lightning against Norm Wilson. He wins the first and gloats a little. The second is drawn. There are cries of "score-sheet', "scoresheet", on the third.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 10:59 PM
Froehich has left Sam Chow with a week-end of less than joy.

Ex-Preident Meydan snatches defeat from the jaws of victory in his game... always trying the piece sac. instead of the steady win, is Arie.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 11:03 PM
Pecori v Wallis has come to life again. Wallis has the bishop and 5 pawns; Pecori has the knight and 5.

Hacche must have made the pin count...he is the exchange up and equal pawns.


Flude is still analysing 90 minutes after his game finished. :rolleyes:

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 11:24 PM
Analysis of Froehlich v Chow game proceeding. Crowd of 7 watching. This is the best time of the night...like a free lesson from an IM.
Another IM starts to suggests moves...a certain tension fills the air. Then more hands on the board than should be. A polite request to PO and we get back to the owners of the game doing the analysis.



Four coaches at various parts of the building are going through their charges games. No wonder those juniors keep improving.

I wish some-one would post the cricket-score on the cricket thread.

ursogr8
08-10-2004, 11:35 PM
Only two games still in motion after the 54 or so that started. I think Hacche is a cert. to win against Voon. But Pecori v Wallis........to hard for me to call. Pecori has not left his chair for an hour.

Volunteers starting to pack up in most rooms.


Can I find 4 more posts?

ursogr8
11-10-2004, 08:31 AM
The Box Hill OPEN for 2004.
Round 4
A night when the highly fancied candidates start to be truly tested.
On board 1 the Froehlich-Chow game was in the balance, but the IM’s experience came though. On board 4, Pecori-Wallis was a beauty with Pecori pressing in the end-game but unable to cash-in his advantage. Zhigen Wilson Lin versus Denis Bourmistrov was also a draw, but not as hard fought.
Rukman Vijayakumar benefited from Arie Meydan self-destructing, as is his want. Peter Schultzer continued Abdulwahab Rashid’s tough introduction to the Box Hill Chess Club. Miralem Campara continued to struggle against strong juniors; and this time Edward Rice took the full point.
John Nemeth’s opponent specialises in the Caro-Kann defence but fell for the cheapest known trap in that opening…6 moves; ask John to show you.
Trevor Chong could not get over his nemesis Artem Nikolayevsky. A fine win to Eugene Schon over Alan Elliott.
Bruce Simpson had a shock loss to Tim Feng, but the found his attempt at a quick get-away hampered by some sloppy parking.
Matthew Partridge spoilt Derek Yu’s run as did Farn Ling’s win over Paul Sanderson.
The best result of the night was Susan Sheng’s draw against Paul Qian…a huge rating difference. Thomas Poole did well against Jerome Lugo.

starter

bobby1972
11-10-2004, 10:31 AM
any results please

ursogr8
11-10-2004, 10:37 AM
any results please

hi bobby1972

One that I can remember is
Pecroi v Wallis 1/2 -1/2

The others are in the hands of the web-master and I expect he will put them up after the postponed game on Tuesday night.

Any in particular you wanted to see...I might be able to remember.

starter

ps What about you put your game against the pesky kid up here.

jeffrei
11-10-2004, 04:24 PM
Actually I'll go one better and put the game up with Chris's very detailed annotations. However, my 'good' computer is the only one that can post games for some reason, and it's playing up. I'll try to get it fixed and post something.

ursogr8
11-10-2004, 09:06 PM
any results please

1 Froehlich 1-0 Chow
2 Hacche 1-0 Voon
3 Umber 0-1 Dragicevic
4 Pecori 1/2-1/2 Wallis
5 Rothlisberger 1/2-1/2 Lugo
6 Lin 1/2-1/2 Bourmistrov
7 Stojic 1-0 Burack
8 Meydan 0-1 Vijayakumar
9 Ly 1-0 McCulloch
10 Fitzpatrick 0-1 Lindberg
11 van Dijk 0-1 Flude

Recherché
11-10-2004, 09:54 PM
9 Ly 1-0 McCulloch

An interesting game that one (from my point of view that is; the game is probably not more broadly interesting), with some valuable lessons learnt. :)

ursogr8
12-10-2004, 10:47 AM
any results please


All results now can be viewed at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round4.htm

M_Chess
14-10-2004, 09:28 AM
Can Someone please advise me when the round five draw might be posted

Thanks

Recherché
14-10-2004, 10:27 AM
Can Someone please advise me when the round five draw might be posted

Thanks

Well I don't have any inside info, but last week it went up on Thursday, if memory serves; I'd keep your eyes peeled. :)

(postponed games that aren't played until Tuesday night tend to delay the generation of the draw for the next round)

ursogr8
14-10-2004, 05:31 PM
Well I don't have any inside info, but last week it went up on Thursday, if memory serves; I'd keep your eyes peeled. :)

(postponed games that aren't played until Tuesday night tend to delay the generation of the draw for the next round)

I just spoke with the Webizer Overlord and he said the pairings should be on the Box Hill site by 6.15pm

starter

Recherché
14-10-2004, 06:22 PM
I just spoke with the Webizer Overlord and he said the pairings should be on the Box Hill site by 6.15pm

starter

Well it's now 6:20 and the pairings (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round5.htm) are up. :)

ursogr8
14-10-2004, 08:18 PM
The games to watch this week are:

Board 1 Hacche v Liston
Board 5 Wallis v Stojic
Board 6 Lindberg v Rothlisberger
Board 13 Morris v Yachou
Board 19 Holt v Lycett
Board 38 Zacharczenko v Butler
Board 50 van Dijk v Shuyu Wang

Visitors welcome. No entry fee.

ursogr8
22-10-2004, 07:51 AM
Games in round 6 that you should watch if you visit the Box Hill Chess Club this Friday are >

Board 4 Dragicevic v Wallis should be a beauty
Board 10 Meydan v Flude pits two previous champions
Board 13 Lin v Voon should be more that just the short name derby
Board 24 Ravinagesh v Nikolayevsky is the counterpoint to 13
Board 43 Khung v Yu is a form of martial arts

For all pairings left mouse click here (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round6.htm)

starter

bobby1972
22-10-2004, 10:22 PM
how about some updates on results please if possible

eclectic
22-10-2004, 10:29 PM
how about some updates on results please if possible

you could even ask starter to arrange for a live webcam cross !!!!

:rolleyes:

eclectic

ursogr8
22-10-2004, 10:52 PM
how about some updates on results please if possible


hi Ascaro

Here is some news
> Gerrit Hartland returned to the Club after an overseas sojourn. A welcome sight.
>> James Morris struggling in a rook and pawn ending
>>> Froehlich v Hacche started as Queens Indian, which cramped Hacche early. I think Hacche will be suffocated
>>>> Ladies with high heeled shoes make a noise on the hard-board floor
>>>>> Dragicevic beat Wallis early
> Rothlisberger v Chow, I think favours Chow
>> Zacharzcenko v Elliott looks like it could go till dawn
>>> Rashid won
>>>> All Fengs have left the building
>>>>> Canteen closing
> Tuan Le and Andrew Cantos into their third hour of blitz playing
>> Scott Sharman wearing a tie... a rare sight
>>> The social club is meeting outside tonight...must be the mild weather
>>>> Simpson is ahead of Thakur but the pawns are rolling.

starter

ursogr8
22-10-2004, 11:02 PM
Fielder v Wollert 0-1

bobby1972
22-10-2004, 11:22 PM
thanks,man you should have been a reporter

ursogr8
22-10-2004, 11:29 PM
thanks,man you should have been a reporter


Chow beats Rothlisberger


Froehlich is a pawn up against hacche with a N and B each ...5 p v 4.


Voon and Flude analysing a noisy ending.........Rashid, Morris, and elliott geting a free lesson, but in what?

starter

ursogr8
23-10-2004, 07:55 PM
Results against the ratings were

Lugo defeated Bouristrov
Chong drew with Holt
Nincevic drew with Morris
Stones defeated Fell R
L Dalton drew with Brooks
Rengan drew with Vanja Rozenblat
Paul Qian defeated Fred Tischmann
Alan Elliott drew with Vladimir Zacharczenko
M Collins defeated Patrick Tan
Nathan Fell defeated Arthur Goudy
Thomas Feng defeated Paul Sanderson
Dean Wright defeated Jeffrey Jiang

ursogr8
27-10-2004, 08:31 AM
Three catch-up games played last night to complete round 6 of the Box Hill OPEN.

Results were >

Pecori defeated Liston

Braham defeated Galiabovitch

A Snooks defeated James Shackell

All results from last Friday's games are at the
web-site page (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round6.htm)

ursogr8
28-10-2004, 05:49 PM
Round 7 pairings for the 2004 Box Hill OPEN are available at a left mouse click (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/round7.htm)

This is the final round. First prize is $500.

Obvious games of interest include >

Board 1 Pecori v Froehlich
Board 2 Chow v Hacche
Board 19 Morris v Wilson Lin
Board 24 John Butler v Braham
Board 27 Schon v McCulloch (aka umlaut v grav)
Board 33 Rozenblat v Fielder
Board 36 Galiabovitch v Collins
Board 41 Ziffer v Lauder



starter

Recherché
29-10-2004, 09:54 AM
In the past the divisions have usually been quarantined from each other in the final round, presumably because the prizes are being decided and it makes sense for the people contesting them to be playing off against each other.

Is there any particular reason for it being done differently this time? :)

(personally I'm happy either way, though I might be a bit less happy if I were a B-division player contesting the prizes)

ursogr8
29-10-2004, 10:15 AM
In the past the divisions have usually been quarantined from each other in the final round, presumably because the prizes are being decided and it makes sense for the people contesting them to be playing off against each other.

Is there any particular reason for it being done differently this time? :)

(personally I'm happy either way, though I might be a bit less happy if I were a B-division player contesting the prizes)

Rob

I don't think the basic premise in your first sentenced is correct. You might need to tell me more.
1 I don't think we could quarantine given the way that we set up SP.
2 I don't think I agree with your conclusion either. If I was player 64 I would be happier to be playing 55 than 63 frankly. (Of course if I was 64 and paired to play 54 that would be a different argument).

In summary, I don't think we have ever quarantined, and I don't think we would want to.

regards
starter

Recherché
29-10-2004, 01:03 PM
I don't think the basic premise in your first sentenced is correct. You might need to tell me more.

Well, every time I was up the top of B-division in a Tournament over the last year or so, in the final round the draw was changed from the default pairings (which look like the current Round 7 draw), so that B-division players were playing against other B-division players.

For instance, the club championship this year, I was vying for first place in B-division with Surya, and we played each other in the final round, but I think we wouldn't automatically have been paired against each other.

I recall another B-division win (against Eric Neymanis) where we weren't initially paired against each other by swiss-perfect, but B-division was "quarantined" somehow, and we were matched in the final round.

Because of the intermingling, often the top two players in B-division won't have played each other when the final round comes along.

In B-division of the Open this year, first spot will decided between Douglas on 5, and Anton and Surya on 4.5, though if they all lose, any of the players on 4 points could potentially move up to tie with Douglas (in fact it's guaranteed that either Laurie or Kingsley will end up on five points with the current draw).

None of the top three have played each other. It would seem to be a much fairer way of determining the prizes if they're playing each other rather than assorted A-division players.

The current draw disadvantages all of the top three, moreover it increases the likelihood of large scale ties for first and second in B-division significantly. I wouldn't be surprised to see a three or even four way tie for first on 5 points with the current draw. However, with B-division quarantined, a decisive result is likely, and no more than two players can possibly tie for first place.

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 01:16 PM
None of the top three have played each other. It would seem to be a much fairer way of determining the prizes if they're playing each other rather than assorted A-division players.

The current draw disadvantages all of the top three, moreover it increases the likelihood of large scale ties for first and second in B-division significantly. I wouldn't be surprised to see a three or even four way tie for first on 5 points with the current draw. However, with B-division quarantined, a decisive result is likely, and no more than two players can possibly tie for first place.
I dont agree Recherche. Even though it is nice to have ppl who are in the running for prizes playing each other, to change the sp draw to make this happen is unfair.

The reason for this is that B quartile players in previous rounds would have played players from the A quartile and most likely lost or at best drew. This must then be applied in the last round as well so that the draw is as 'balanced' as much as possible.

ursogr8
29-10-2004, 01:25 PM
Because of the intermingling, often the top two players in B-division won't have played each other when the final round comes along.

In B-division of the Open this year, first spot will decided between Douglas on 5, and Anton and Surya on 4.5, though if they all lose, any of the players on 4 points could potentially move up to tie with Douglas (in fact it's guaranteed that either Laurie or Kingsley will end up on five points with the current draw).



Rob

I don't have the detail of the prize-list with me; however we can look closer this evening.
Douglas on 5 points can't win B division because he is not rated.

starter

Recherché
29-10-2004, 03:32 PM
I dont agree Recherche. Even though it is nice to have ppl who are in the running for prizes playing each other, to change the sp draw to make this happen is unfair.

No, actually it's much more fair if you understand how the tournaments at Box Hill work.


The reason for this is that B quartile players in previous rounds would have played players from the A quartile and most likely lost or at best drew. This must then be applied in the last round as well so that the draw is as 'balanced' as much as possible.

Because of the "two intermingling divisions" system, the people in B-division with the highest number of points have also generally played more, and harder, A-division players than anyone else in B-division (and/or had more success against them). They have, at minimum, had an equally hard run to anyone else in the division.

After having performed above everyone else in the division for the tournament, to make them play A-division players while other B-division players who can pass them to grab first prize in the division play B-division players, is what would be unfair.

Recherché
29-10-2004, 03:37 PM
Douglas on 5 points can't win B division because he is not rated.

OK. Well, the point still stands for Anton and Surya. And, for that matter, all the players on 4 points in B-division (with the exception of Kingsley and Laurie). They should be playing the other people they are in competition with for the prizes, not taking pot luck as to the difficulty of their A-division opponents.

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 03:43 PM
No, actually it's much more fair if you understand how the tournaments at Box Hill work.
:hmm: i think you accelerate the top division for every round in a two division field, giving them a 2 point acceleration for each round.

Recherché
29-10-2004, 04:38 PM
:hmm: i think you accelerate the top division for every round in a two division field, giving them a 2 point acceleration for each round.

It's not technically acceleration (or so starter says), because the divisions are seperate, with seperate prize pools. It's just that they intermingle, with the strongest (performing) players in Division B breaking playing the weakest (performing) players in Division A once we've gone through enough rounds for them to make up the 2 point bonus that Division A gets for pairing purposes.

For example, in the club championship this year, I had four B Division wins, and a win and a draw against A Division players, for 5.5/8 going into the final round. There was another player on 5.5/8, and we played off for first place in the final round. But we wouldn't have been playing against each other with an unquarantined final round. Not only that, but there were three people on 5 points just behind us. They would have gotten weaker A Division (or B Division) opponents than us, and if we lost and any of them won, they'd be into first place.

Does it seem reasonable to you that two players, leading their division, on the same number of points, who have not played each other, should not be playing each other for first prize in that division, especially given they are not eligible for prizes in the other division(s)?

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 04:44 PM
It's not technically acceleration (or so starter says), because the divisions are seperate, with seperate prize pools. It's just that they intermingle, with the strongest (performing) players in Division B breaking playing the weakest (performing) players in Division A once we've gone through enough rounds for them to make up the 2 point bonus that Division A gets for pairing purposes. different term, same result. in sp, the dop would tick a box for apply accelerated pairings, put in the number of rounds, so in this case, all of them and then would set where the different groups are.


For example, in the club championship this year, I had four B Division wins, and a win and a draw against A Division players, for 5.5/8 going into the final round. There was another player on 5.5/8, and we played off for first place in the final round. But we wouldn't have been playing against each other with an unquarantined final round. Not only that, but there were three people on 5 points just behind us. They would have gotten weaker A Division (or B Division) opponents than us, and if we lost and any of them won, they'd be into first place. I would want to see the files myself for that tournament before commenting properly.


Does it seem reasonable to you that two players, leading their division, on the same number of points, who have not played each other, should not be playing each other for first prize in that division, especially given they are not eligible for prizes in the other division(s)? the problem i have with this is that it is not done for all rounds, so there is a chance that one player could have played harder opposition than the other person. Player A might have gotten a really difficult player in the early rounds and Player B could have been due to play that really difficult player in the last round. to then pair player A and player B together is to player B advantage, in my opinion. Maybe as the pairings fall, player C might be advantaged somehow.

Recherché
29-10-2004, 05:10 PM
different term, same result. in sp, the dop would tick a box for apply accelerated pairings, put in the number of rounds, so in this case, all of them and then would set where the different groups are.

Actually, that's not how it works. A Division is given a "bonus" value.


I would want to see the files myself for that tournament before commenting properly.

The words "club championship" were meant to be a link, but I forgot to add it in. Here you go (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0404fcc/event.htm). The "cross table" and "results" pages will give you the relevant info. Also take note of the "Progr" scores on the results page, I'm pretty sure they're based on the ratings of your opponents during the tournament, and how well you do against them.


the problem i have with this is that it is not done for all rounds, so there is a chance that one player could have played harder opposition than the other person. Player A might have gotten a really difficult player in the early rounds and Player B could have been due to play that really difficult player in the last round.

That doesn't happen, you're thinking like a normal swiss. B Division is buffered for the first two (nearly three, really) rounds. Because of this the leaders don't get a disproportionate number of A Division opponents. Take a look at the tournament.

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 05:20 PM
Actually, that's not how it works. A Division is given a "bonus" value. yes, two points for all rounds, which is part of the programming and can be varied.

Bill Gletsos
29-10-2004, 05:43 PM
different term, same result. in sp, the dop would tick a box for apply accelerated pairings, put in the number of rounds, so in this case, all of them and then would set where the different groups are.
For the Box Hill events I dont believe thats how they do it.
They use the bonus field on the player information screen to add the points

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 05:52 PM
For the Box Hill events I dont beleieve thats how they do it.
They use the bonus field on the player information screen to add the points.
ok, further clarification from starter required then as i have never played with that feature so far.

Adding more- Starter, does your sp program at BHCC have an acceleration feature?
I know the one that my club has doesnt contain the acceleration feature.

ursogr8
29-10-2004, 08:28 PM
ok, further clarification from starter required then as i have never played with that feature so far.

Adding more- Starter, does your sp program at BHCC have an acceleration feature?
I know the one that my club has doesnt contain the acceleration feature.

1 Yes...it is a bonus not an acceleration feature.
2 Yes, we have acceleration in our SP software.


starter

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 08:34 PM
1 Yes...it is a bonus not an acceleration feature.
2 Yes, we have acceleration in our SP software.


starter
has any testing been done by anyone on what difference there is between the bonus and acceleration features?

ursogr8
29-10-2004, 09:38 PM
has any testing been done by anyone on what difference there is between the bonus and acceleration features?

Good question gg''
Those here tonight are not sure..........but we think the bonus feature is used mainly for display control.
Will get a chance later next week to investigate further.

starter

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 09:41 PM
Good question gg''
Those here tonight are not sure..........but we think the bonus feature is used mainly for display control.
Will get a chance later next week to investigate further.

starter
out of curiousity I will also do some testing between bonus and acceleration. Will report back when finished.

ursogr8
29-10-2004, 10:11 PM
Not to sure to put this under the heading of NEWS or a RESULT.

Board 1 Pecori v Froehlich
> Time elapsed = 135 minutes
> Moves played each = 13

> Classic gambit ...strong player offers draw to lower ranked player
> Spectator interest factor just nose-dived

starter

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 10:22 PM
Not to sure to put this under the heading of NEWS or a RESULT.

Board 1 Pecori v Froehlich
> Time elapsed = 135 minutes
> Moves played each = 13

> Classic gambit ...strong player offers draw to lower ranked player
> Spectator interest factor just nose-dived

starter
would be even better with 90/60 ;)

ursogr8
29-10-2004, 11:08 PM
Not to sure to put this under the heading of NEWS or a RESULT.

Board 1 Pecori v Froehlich
> Time elapsed = 135 minutes
> Moves played each = 13

> Classic gambit ...strong player offers draw to lower ranked player
> Spectator interest factor just nose-dived

starter

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cd 4 Nd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 Qf3 Be7
8 Bc4 Qa5 9 Be3 0-0 10 0-0-0 Bd7 11 g4 b5 12 Bb3 b4
12 Nce2 d5
Draw agreed

And why was Ascaro peeved? Apparently N(d4)-f5 is what he missed.

starter

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 11:12 PM
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qf3 Be7
8. Bc4 Qa5 9. Be3 0-0 10. 0-0-0 Bd7 11. g4 b5 12. Bb3 b4 13. Nce2 d5
Draw agreed

Bill Gletsos
29-10-2004, 11:42 PM
out of curiousity I will also do some testing between bonus and acceleration. Will report back when finished.
The main differences are as follows.
Using the acclerated pairings feature makes it easy to do the Box Hill style events. It also means the cross table/standings displays correctly.
If you use the bonus points they are shown in the players total scire in the crosstable/standings which would be totally confusing for ant sort of acceleration.

Bonus points would mainly be used for some sort of handicap event.

Bill Gletsos
29-10-2004, 11:47 PM
different term, same result. in sp, the dop would tick a box for apply accelerated pairings, put in the number of rounds, so in this case, all of them and then would set where the different groups are.

For the Box Hill events I dont believe thats how they do it.
They use the bonus field on the player information screen to add the points.
I totally screwed that up and put "dont" in the wrong place. Will teach me to post whilst distracted.

It should have said:

For the Box Hill events I believe thats how they do it.
They dont use the bonus field on the player information screen to add the points.

Garvinator
29-10-2004, 11:48 PM
The main differences are as follows.
Using the acclerated pairings feature makes it easy to do the Box Hill style events. It also means the cross table/standings displays correctly.
If you use the bonus points they are shown in the players total scire in the crosstable/standings which would be totally confusing for ant sort of acceleration.

Bonus points would mainly be used for some sort of handicap event.
so i take it that either way makes no difference to the pairings given?

Bill Gletsos
29-10-2004, 11:49 PM
so i take it that either way makes no difference to the pairings given?
I dont see why it should.

Recherché
30-10-2004, 10:55 AM
If you use the bonus points they are shown in the players total scire in the crosstable/standings which would be totally confusing for ant sort of acceleration.

Actually, they're not shown. The bonus points are used at Box Hill, but they don't show on the crosstable/standings. They're hidden somehow, I guess.

Garvinator
30-10-2004, 12:42 PM
Actually, they're not shown. The bonus points are used at Box Hill, but they don't show on the crosstable/standings. They're hidden somehow, I guess.
so they might use the acceleration settings, just that its not mentioned as acceleration cause of player misgivings or something, so it is referred to as bonus points :eh:

Starter, can you please answer?

ursogr8
30-10-2004, 03:22 PM
so they might use the acceleration settings, just that its not mentioned as acceleration cause of player misgivings or something, so it is referred to as bonus points :eh:

Starter, can you please answer?

I have to ask the webiimeister...will be Tuesdy night.

Bill Gletsos
30-10-2004, 05:58 PM
Actually, they're not shown. The bonus points are used at Box Hill, but they don't show on the crosstable/standings. They're hidden somehow, I guess.
As far as I am aware the only way Swiss Perfect bonus points are not shown is if you remove them prior to exporting the crosstable and then re-insert them again before pairing the next round.

I know for a fact that they use the accelerated pairings feature of SP because I receive the SP files for rating. Of course although it appears they did not use the bonus point feature of SP as well I cannot tell because they would need to remove them to get the final results correct.

Garvinator
30-10-2004, 06:12 PM
I know for a fact that they use the accelerated pairings feature of SP because I receive the SP files for rating.
ok mystery solved then ;)

Bill Gletsos
30-10-2004, 06:22 PM
I have to ask the webiimeister...will be Tuesdy night.
Can you ask your arbiter to explicitly explain how he sets up Swiss Perfect for the Box Hill events.

Bill Gletsos
30-10-2004, 06:23 PM
ok mystery solved then ;)
It doesnt mean they are not also using the bonus point scheme in some way as well.
Thats why I have ask starter to find out.

Garvinator
30-10-2004, 06:24 PM
Can you ask your arbiter to explicitly explain how he sets up Swiss Perfect for the Box Hill events.
can we speculate in the mean time until Tuesday night?

Bill Gletsos
30-10-2004, 06:37 PM
can we speculate in the mean time until Tuesday night?
Lets try not to. :hand:

ursogr8
30-10-2004, 08:46 PM
Lets try not to. :hand:

Err...actually........Tuesday is Melbourne Cup Day and the Club will be closed. So, will get delayed until next Friday

starter

Recherché
30-10-2004, 10:09 PM
I know for a fact that they use the accelerated pairings feature of SP because I receive the SP files for rating. Of course although it appears they did not use the bonus point feature of SP as well I cannot tell because they would need to remove them to get the final results correct.

Fair enough. I'm basing my statements on conversations with the person who usually does the draws at Box Hill, but I may have misunderstood.

ursogr8
31-10-2004, 08:17 AM
any results please

Two tied for first place...Peter Froehlich and Sam Chow...they receive $325 each.
Other winners will be posted here during the week.

starter

ursogr8
31-10-2004, 08:23 AM
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qf3 Be7
8. Bc4 Qa5 9. Be3 0-0 10. 0-0-0 Bd7 11. g4 b5 12. Bb3 b4 13. Nce2 d5
Draw agreed

Thanks gg'' for loading the viewer.

Ascaro was peeved when he later found 14 ed Nd5 15 N(d4)f5 Bf6 16 Rd5 ed 17 Nh6+

Bill Gletsos
31-10-2004, 08:07 PM
Thanks gg'' for loading the viewer.

Ascaro was peeved when he later found 14 ed Nd5 15 N(d4)f5 Bf6 16 Rd5 ed 17 Nh6+
I think he would be more peeved if he saw 15. Nxe6 which is better.

e.g.
15. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Bxa8 Rxa8) 16. Rxd5 exd5 17. Qxd5+ Qxd5 18. Bxd5+ Kh8 19. Bxa8
or
15... Bxe6 16. Rxd5 Bxd5 17. Qxd5 Qxd5 18. Bxd5 Nd7 19. Bxa8 Rxa8

ursogr8
31-10-2004, 08:22 PM
I think he would be more peeved if he saw 15. Nxe6 which is better.

e.g.
15. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Bxa8 Rxa8) 16. Rxd5 exd5 17. Qxd5+ Qxd5 18. Bxd5+ Kh8 19. Bxa8
or
15... Bxe6 16. Rxd5 Bxd5 17. Qxd5 Qxd5 18. Bxd5 Nd7 19. Bxa8 Rxa8

Bill

I expect that you will be correct. Btw, I was just reporting the Ascaro and Hacche after game look-see. Nf5 was not mine.
And if you are correct Ascaro will be even more peeved.

starter

ursogr8
31-10-2004, 08:25 PM
Two tied for first place...Peter Froehlich and Sam Chow...they receive $325 each.

starter

U2000-1800 Christopher Wallis $70
U1800-1700 Tom Narenthran $60
U1700-1550 Rukman Vijayakumar
Devrim van Dijk
Edward Rice $20 ea.
U1550 (A) Trevor Chong $60
B 1st Douglas Stones $150
U1400-1300 Kingsley Feng
Anton Nincevic $35 ea
U1300-1100 Jason Tang $60
U1100-950 Paul Qian $60
U950 Andrew Snooks $60

Bill Gletsos
31-10-2004, 08:30 PM
Bill

I expect that you will be correct. Btw, I was just reporting the Ascaro and Hacche after game look-see. Nf5 was not mine.
And if you are correct Ascaro will be even more peeved.

starter
I guess we will just have to wait for Ascaro to post here. ;)

ursogr8
01-11-2004, 07:47 AM
I guess we will just have to wait for Ascaro to post here. ;)

Better still, Bill, I will PM him right now that you are looking for comment on your suggested 15 Ne6. :uhoh: ;)

starter

bobby1972
01-11-2004, 09:11 AM
my opponent missed it too,as Nf5 was all he said after the game.yes its amazing what we miss in our games compared to fritz,very hard turny no third prize i was mistakenly thinking there was one at the time of the game.

ursogr8
03-11-2004, 07:15 AM
U2000-1800 Christopher Wallis $70
U1800-1700 Tom Narenthran $60
U1700-1550 Rukman Vijayakumar
Devrim van Dijk
Edward Rice $20 ea.
U1550 (A) Trevor Chong $60
B 1st Douglas Stones $150
U1400-1300 Kingsley Feng
Anton Nincevic $35 ea
U1300-1100 Jason Tang $60
U1100-950 Paul Qian $60
U950 Andrew Snooks $60

Short bulletins of proceedings at the 2004 Box Hill OPEN are available
here (http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/e2004/e0409fop/bulletin.htm)