PDA

View Full Version : Smerdon in the World Junior



pax
19-11-2004, 08:56 AM
The first round draw is up. Smurf is black against Jayaram (IND, 2160). Smerdon is 19th seed, behind 8 GMs including Berkes, Harikrishna and Alekseev. One would expect the winner to be out of those three, but anything can happen in one of these events.


I notice there is yet another Armenian Tigran Petrosian (GM, 4th seed) playing in this tournament- popular name!

The website looks pretty dodgy at this stage. Some of the player information is incorrect (e.g Petrosian incorrectly listed as 2321 rather than 2539 due to- you guessed it, another Armenian Tigran Petrosian), some of the ratings are missing, ratings not listed on pairings pages. Also curiously on the player cards, the entry "Sex" has a true or false answer :uhoh:

Trent Parker
19-11-2004, 11:25 AM
Hmm any chance of a GM Norm for Smurf in this tourney?

Recherché
19-11-2004, 11:48 AM
Hmm any chance of a GM Norm for Smurf in this tourney?

Yes. All the requirements are there. If Smerdon performs at GM norm level, he'll get a norm. Also, if he takes gold I think he gets the title immediately (1st= only counts for a norm, though).

pax
19-11-2004, 12:02 PM
Yes. All the requirements are there. If Smerdon performs at GM norm level, he'll get a norm. Also, if he takes gold I think he gets the title immediately (1st= only counts for a norm, though).

The top 3 also get the IM title. These regs probably need to be reviewed, since it is now pretty unusual for outright winners not to be already GMs, for equal winners not to have earned a norm in the usual way, or for the top three not to be IMs (this comp has 22 players IM or better).

Ian Rout
19-11-2004, 01:33 PM
I notice there is yet another Armenian Tigran Petrosian (GM, 4th seed) playing in this tournament- popular name!

The website looks pretty dodgy at this stage. Some of the player information is incorrect (e.g Petrosian incorrectly listed as 2321 rather than 2539 due to- you guessed it, another Armenian Tigran Petrosian), some of the ratings are missing, ratings not listed on pairings pages.

I take it that's Tigran S. as opposed to Tigran L. (the real competitor) or Tigran V. (the original). Does anyone with links to that part of the world know if Tigran Petrosian has always been a common name, or has Tigran V's achievements led to Petrosians naming their sons Tigran, or are they all related? (I think I read somewhere that A. Petrosian is not related, or at least not closely).

I notice Australia has nobody in the Girls - is there a qualification process, or just nobody interested?

Recherché
19-11-2004, 01:54 PM
The top 3 also get the IM title. These regs probably need to be reviewed, since it is now pretty unusual for outright winners not to be already GMs, for equal winners not to have earned a norm in the usual way, or for the top three not to be IMs (this comp has 22 players IM or better).

Why is that grounds to change the regs? It doesn't happen much that someone who reaches the last 16 in a world championship isn't a GM either, but that rule still stands.

In fact, if most winners of the world under-20 were not GMs, then that would seem to be more cause for changing the regs - in that case it might be argued that the winner doesn't deserve an auto-GM title.

Trent Parker
19-11-2004, 02:00 PM
so........ does that mean that the world u10s should not receive the FM title? unless the person who normally wins the title already has an fm title??? There is no difference.

pax
19-11-2004, 02:23 PM
Why is that grounds to change the regs? It doesn't happen much that someone who reaches the last 16 in a world championship isn't a GM either, but that rule still stands.

In fact, if most winners of the world under-20 were not GMs, then that would seem to be more cause for changing the regs - in that case it might be argued that the winner doesn't deserve an auto-GM title.

I think they should be more generous with the titles. E.g GM titles for the top three places. They still wouldn't be a hugely common occurrence.

Garvinator
19-11-2004, 02:43 PM
I think they should be more generous with the titles. E.g GM titles for the top three places. They still wouldn't be a hugely common occurrence.
being more generous with handing titles devalues the status of a title, especially if the person does not regularly perform to the title norm standard.

Alan Shore
19-11-2004, 03:02 PM
being more generous with handing titles devalues the status of a title, especially if the person does not regularly perform to the title norm standard.

Exactly right. GM is a title only for top players, not just some johnnies that place in a World Junior. If anything, standards should be stricter.

The FM title has become a complete laughing stock - they hand them out in cereal packets these days.

jenni
19-11-2004, 03:17 PM
I notice Australia has nobody in the Girls - is there a qualification process, or just nobody interested?
I suspect no-one was interested. Our girls are very thin on the ground. However Shannon did announce to me in the few brief hours that she was back in Canberra, before flitting off to Sydney with some Uni friends that she wanted to go next year. I've told her she had been start fund raising!

Our Under 20's from ACF list are

Arianne Caoli - Just been to Olympiad and perhaps not her thing
Giang Nguyen - Not sure if Giang is qulaified to play for Aus?
Catherine Lip - In Japan on schoolies after HSC.
Michelle Lee - bush somewhere on school camp and pretty much concentrating on school work now
Andjelija Zivanovic - was talking about going earlier in year, but I suspect Uni got in the way
Heather Huddleston - just played World Youth
Angela Song - just played world youth and has Asian juniors coming up
Sophie Payne - Seems a strongish girl but has never played any nationals
Sylvia Shields - probably busy with Uni exams and I doubt she would go
Shannon Oliver - just played world youth

Then we start getting into Candy-Cane etc, who probably didn't think of applying and probably need to play world youth first anyway.

Garvinator
19-11-2004, 03:21 PM
Arianne Caoli - Just been to Olympiad and perhaps not her thingI had a discussion with Arianne recently and she expressed a reluctance to play in events where she had a lot of potential to lose rating points, but not a lot to gain in terms of rating points.

jenni
19-11-2004, 03:29 PM
I had a discussion with Arianne recently and she expressed a reluctance to play in events where she had a lot of potential to lose rating points, but not a lot to gain in terms of rating points.

Yes she pretty much told me the same thing when I invited her to play Young Masters earlier in the year. Our list of female players is really depressing - apart from Shannon and Arianne, I am not convinced anyone else on that list will still be playing in 6 years time. Even Shannon might give up depending on future jobs and social commitments.

Garvinator
19-11-2004, 03:34 PM
Yes she pretty much told me the same thing when I invited her to play Young Masters earlier in the year. Our list of female players is really depressing - apart from Shannon and Arianne, I am not convinced anyone else on that list will still be playing in 6 years time. Even Shannon might give up depending on future jobs and social commitments.
Paul says the number one issue for australian chess is a lack of ppl willing to be involved in chess administration. A few others including myself have identified other issues.

I dont think this one has been discussed- the difficulty of retaining juniors when they join the adult chess ranks. time for a new thread i think as I have quite a bit to say on the matter.

pax
19-11-2004, 03:49 PM
I had a discussion with Arianne recently and she expressed a reluctance to play in events where she had a lot of potential to lose rating points, but not a lot to gain in terms of rating points.

Like the Olympiad :hand:

Seriously, though, a rating centred view like that is pretty narrow minded. The better attitude is "will it be good for my chess"?

pax
20-11-2004, 11:26 AM
Smurf now has his work cut out after losing the first round...

pax
20-11-2004, 11:48 AM
He is white against Vaidya Chaitanya (2184) in rd 2.

pax
21-11-2004, 08:27 AM
Swiss gambit seems to be working so far for Smerdon. He beat Chaitanya in rd 2, and Ruijgrok (2255) in round 3. He now has what looks like the best of the round 4 draw, with Raghuram (2043) [considering there are a whole lot of GMs and IMs on 2]..

The downside of course, is that his countback (sum of progressive or Buchholz) is shot.

The website is really terrible. I don't suppose the Austrian server is covering it?

pax
22-11-2004, 08:20 AM
Beat Raghuram in Rd4, faces "super IM" Erwin L'Ami (2516, 2540 projected) with black in Rd 5.

Am I the only one who gives a damn here?

"How's the weather Pax?"

"Not bad Pax, a bit overcast..."

Rincewind
22-11-2004, 08:23 AM
Go Smurf!

Recherché
22-11-2004, 08:54 AM
Go Smurf!

Seconded.

jenni
22-11-2004, 08:56 AM
Beat Raghuram in Rd4, faces "super IM" Erwin L'Ami (2516, 2540 projected) with black in Rd 5.

Am I the only one who gives a damn here?

"How's the weather Pax?"

"Not bad Pax, a bit overcast..."

No we are following......just quietly.

pax
22-11-2004, 11:49 AM
:D

Thunk
22-11-2004, 11:55 AM
Beat Raghuram in Rd4, faces "super IM" Erwin L'Ami (2516, 2540 projected) with black in Rd 5.

Am I the only one who gives a damn here?

"How's the weather Pax?"

"Not bad Pax, a bit overcast..."

mr paxman, you arE invitEd to sEnd a chEquE to thE mEntonE chEss club and by rEturn mail wE will sEnd you our lEaflEt

“10 ways to makE your contribution to chat-rooms morE intErEsting”.

it fEaturEs thE usE of controvErsial words and guarantEEd rEtorts. can’t givE too much away; but it is a must havE. you will not bE overlookEd again.

;) thE hunk ;)

pax
22-11-2004, 01:37 PM
from round 1:

ASWIN JAYARAM, Ind –
DAVID SMERDON, Aus [B01]
(1.19)

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4 Bg4 4.Nf3 Qxd5 5.Be2 Nc6 6.Be3 0–0–0 7.Nbd2 Qf5 8.0–0 Bxf3 9.Nxf3 e5 10.c3 Bd6 11.d5 Bc5 12.c4 Bxe3 13.fxe3 e4 14.Nd4 Qg5 15.Nf5 Ne8 16.Qa4 g6 17.h4 Qf6 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.Rxf6 Nxe2+ 20.Kf2 Nxf6 21.Qxa7 Nf4 22.exf4 Rhe8 23.Qa8+ Kd7 24.Qxb7 Nh5 25.Ke3 Ng3 26.Rd1 Nf5+ 27.Ke2 Rb8 28.Qc6+ Ke7 29.Qxc7+ Kf8 30.b3 Ra8 31.a4 Rac8 32.Qb6 Rb8 33.Qf6 Kg8 34.d6 Re6 35.Qc3 Nxd6 36.c5 Nf5 37.b4 Rc8 38.b5 e3 39.c6 Ng3+ 40.Ke1 Ne4 41.Qd4 e2 42.Qd8+ Re8 43.Qxe8+ Rxe8 44.Rd4 Nc5 45.c7 Ne6 46.Rc4 Nxc7 47.Rxc7 Rb8 48.Rc5 1–0

arosar
22-11-2004, 01:41 PM
This L'Ami bloke is quite strong on ICC too ya know. I reckon he'll beat Mr Smerdon no problem.

AR

Rincewind
22-11-2004, 01:46 PM
This L'Ami bloke is quite strong on ICC too ya know. I reckon he'll beat Mr Smerdon no problem.

He looks to be GM strength on FIDE so I guess it will be difficult. But maybe Smerdon will surprise him - or at least give him some problems.

JGB
22-11-2004, 06:09 PM
He looks to be GM strength on FIDE so I guess it will be difficult. But maybe Smerdon will surprise him - or at least give him some problems.

It's not going to be easy, of course, but if Smerdon also wants to get to the GM level he needs to start putting these guys away. ;)

Garvinator
22-11-2004, 06:14 PM
It's not going to be easy, of course, but if Smerdon also wants to get to the GM level he needs to start putting these guys away. ;)
and wouldnt smurfs games from the tournament where he gets a gm norm make a good chapter in someones book ;) :cool:

JGB
22-11-2004, 06:21 PM
and wouldnt smurfs games from the tournament where he gets a gm norm make a good chapter in someones book ;) :cool:

:whistle:

... there is no automatic qualification. Would be nice to find a few new inclusions, but the games themselves have to be special.

Commentator
22-11-2004, 08:55 PM
This PAX chappie asks people to join into his thread and then he does not seem to converse with them when they do.
Wonder what sort of dialogue he wants?

C

JGB
22-11-2004, 08:57 PM
You can't expect people to be online all day (well not everyone anyway ;) )

Rhubarb
22-11-2004, 09:10 PM
keep giving the updates, pax. (just look at the hit count next to the thread; everyone's watching).

boardumb
23-11-2004, 01:18 AM
well it appears smerdon has drawn l'ami and gets IM Quezada Perez Yunieski (CUB) 2513 in round 6

PHAT
23-11-2004, 08:01 AM
The FM title has become a complete laughing stock - they hand them out in cereal packets these days.

Which serial? I'll buy some for my club. BTW, do you get a FM type rating with that title?

PHAT
23-11-2004, 08:04 AM
Official site http://www.worldjunior.chessindia.org/index.asp

pax
23-11-2004, 08:09 AM
well it appears smerdon has drawn l'ami and gets IM Quezada Perez Yunieski (CUB) 2513 in round 6

He drew with Quezada as well it seems. I had a look at the game on the website, but it's riddled with errors (Smerdon seems to have his Queen en prise for about half the game).

He has Paragua (IM 2534) with black in round 7. It doesn't get any easier!!

Incidentally, it doesn't help GM norm aspirations for him to be playing all these GM strength IMs (needs to play 3 GMs to qualify for a norm).

arosar
23-11-2004, 08:49 AM
He has Paragua (IM 2534) with black in round 7. It doesn't get any easier!!

Speaking of cereals, of course our pinoy chap will have this Aussie for brekkie.

Now about those FM titles. This business of handing them out to little boys was the topic of some interesting conversation over a few scotches and coke last Friday night. Thanks to FIDE we really had a few laughs over this disgrace.

Have a good days fellas. Especially to you pax...

AR

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 10:46 AM
Why is that grounds to change the regs? It doesn't happen much that someone who reaches the last 16 in a world championship isn't a GM either, but that rule still stands.
The last 16 rule is only new referring to the FIDE World Championship Knockout events.
The previous rule was the one where you got thje GM title if you qualified for the Candidates matches following the interzonals. Thats how Fischer got his GM title.

Kerry Stead
23-11-2004, 10:53 AM
David is doing very well in India ... as you might expect after his Olympiad.
His chances of getting a GM norm from the tournament (even pre-tournament) were tough - there are only 8 GMs in the field. Its still possible however, but he needs to keep up near the head of the field.
I'm not convinced that Paragua will 'have [Smerdon] for brekkie' as Amiel puts it, however Paragua would have to go in as favourite.
It also can't hurt his chess to be playing all these 2500 players (and getting results against them). How often would he be able to play that calibre field normally?

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 11:05 AM
The top 3 also get the IM title.
Thats not correct. It was however the case prior to 1999 that the 3 medalists got the IM title.
The current regs say:
1) the winner of the gold medal (i.e either clear first or winner via tiebreak) gets the GM title.
2) Any others who came =1st get a 9 game GM norm.
3) Those who got the silver and bronze medals get the IM title.

As such the gold medalist could be a non IM/GM who gains the GM title but not the IM title.


These regs probably need to be reviewed, since it is now pretty unusual for outright winners not to be already GMs, for equal winners not to have earned a norm in the usual way, or for the top three not to be IMs (this comp has 22 players IM or better).
The current regulations have been in place since 1999.
Prior to that the winner of the World Junior only got the GM title if he was the clear winner, otherwise he only got a 9 game GM norm.

jenni
23-11-2004, 11:13 AM
Now about those FM titles. This business of handing them out to little boys was the topic of some interesting conversation over a few scotches and coke last Friday night. Thanks to FIDE we really had a few laughs over this disgrace.
AR

The little boys (and a girl) would probably wipe the floor with you, so why shouldn't they have the title? I though it was about playing ability, not age?

pax
23-11-2004, 11:14 AM
I estimate that he would need to go about 5.5/7 from the last 7 rounds (against about 2500 avg opposition) to get a norm performance. Not impossible, but definitely a tough ask. I suspect if he performed that well, he would probably face his three GMs (and finish in the top three).

pax
23-11-2004, 11:19 AM
Thats not correct. It was however the case prior to 1999 that the 3 medalists got the IM title.
The current regs say:
1) the winner of the gold medal (i.e either clear first or winner via tiebreak) gets the GM title.
2) Any others who came =1st get a 9 game GM norm.
3) Those who got the silver and bronze medals get the IM title.

As such the gold medalist could be a non IM/GM who gains the GM title but not the IM title.


Are the regs on the FIDE website not up to date?



15.

The champion by clear first place shall

receive the (Woman) Grandmaster title. (cf. B.01 Art. 1.15 & 1.44.) Ties for first shall be equivalent to a 9-round

Grandmaster result. (GA `93) (cf. B.01 Art. 1.16 & 1.45.)

The players placed 1-3 in the World Junior (Girls-20) Champion shall be awarded the title of (Woman) International Master. (GA `93) (cf. B.01 Art. 1.23 & 1.54.)

pax
23-11-2004, 11:23 AM
The little boys (and a girl) would probably wipe the floor with you, so why shouldn't they have the title? I though it was about playing ability, not age?

Last time I checked, beating Amiel wasn't a qualifier for the FM title ;)

He has a point though. The FM title standard is nominally 2300 (or at least it was once). It would be pretty difficult to argue that the top three are 2300 strength.

arosar
23-11-2004, 11:24 AM
The little boys (and a girl) would probably wipe the floor with you, so why shouldn't they have the title? I though it was about playing ability, not age?

Well, duh! Cos they don't deserve 'em! George Xie deserved his FM. Canfell did too. A little kid, no matter that he's better than I, who is just a touch over 2000 and competing in a tourn of his peers, doesn't.

(As an aside, your mentality is a bit like that cancer that's plaguing our tertiary education system today. Unis are no more than diploma [or title] mills. We have MAs, MScs, and even the odd PhD handed out to students who can't read or write English; or who plagiarised half their bloody work).

'Nuff said!

AR

arosar
23-11-2004, 11:27 AM
Last time I checked, beating Amiel wasn't a qualifier for the FM title ;)

He has a point though. The FM title standard is nominally 2300 (or at least it was once). It would be pretty difficult to argue that the top three are 2300 strength.

No point talking to jenni. She has a 'mass production mentality'. I present in evidence her attitude to the World Youths. The unmentionable said something right once: better spend the money on local coaches than on some OS trip so some parent can say, "Oh, my kid went to Greece and represented the country". And everyone's eyes are set aflutter, "oohh...ahhhh".

AR

Garvinator
23-11-2004, 11:28 AM
i think alot of the fm title problems would be solved if they also had the three norm standard.

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 11:28 AM
Are the regs on the FIDE website not up to date?


Originally Posted by www.fide.com
15.

The champion by clear first place shall

receive the (Woman) Grandmaster title. (cf. B.01 Art. 1.15 & 1.44.) Ties for first shall be equivalent to a 9-round

Grandmaster result. (GA `93) (cf. B.01 Art. 1.16 & 1.45.)

The players placed 1-3 in the World Junior (Girls-20) Champion shall be awarded the title of (Woman) International Master. (GA `93) (cf. B.01 Art. 1.23 & 1.54.)

That section is out of date and refers to old sections of the regulations.

The correct section is from the handbook on http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=B0101

arosar
23-11-2004, 11:35 AM
i think alot of the fm title problems would be solved if they also had the three norm standard.

There's not even a need for that. FIDE should just quit handing out the FM like their a packet of jelly beans. The situation is laughable and 99% of people you talk to is laughing at FIDE. Period!

AR

pax
23-11-2004, 11:43 AM
That section is out of date and refers to old sections of the regulations.

The correct section is from the handbook on http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=B0101

Yet my quote was from the same handbook:

http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=DD601

So does the website not reflect the whole of the current handbook, or is the handbook itself contradictory?

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 11:43 AM
i think alot of the fm title problems would be solved if they also had the three norm standard.
Not really necessary.
The normal way of getting an FM title is to get yourself a rating of 2300.
The problem occurs when giving out FM titles to players whose rating has never been 2300 and in some cases apparently never will be.

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 11:47 AM
Yet my quote was from the same handbook:

http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=DD601

So does the website not reflect the whole of the current handbook, or is the handbook itself contradictory?
Its contradictory.
The International title regulations were updated in the past 18mths or less. It appears the "Regulations for Specific Competitions" has not been updated to reflect this.

In fact the whole section of specific titles with the junior competition is missing from the draft of the new 2005 FIDE Handbook.

pax
23-11-2004, 11:50 AM
i think alot of the fm title problems would be solved if they also had the three norm standard.

FM is fine with rating qualification. The main problems started when the Zonals were permitted to be open tournaments, and 1600 players start getting titles.

Kerry Stead
23-11-2004, 11:54 AM
FM is fine with rating qualification. The main problems started when the Zonals were permitted to be open tournaments, and 1600 players start getting titles.
Which 1600 player has got the FM title from a zonal? There are a few around the 1900-2000 mark ... but 1600!! I don't think so.

arosar
23-11-2004, 12:00 PM
Which 1600 player has got the FM title from a zonal? There are a few around the 1900-2000 mark ... but 1600!! I don't think so.

pax's point, Mr Stead, is that there is a probability (we could say 'medium' to 'high' chance depending on the field I suppose) that some 1600 could accidentally get the FM in a zonal.

Why not just remove that chance altogether?

AR

Kerry Stead
23-11-2004, 12:32 PM
pax's point, Mr Stead, is that there is a probability (we could say 'medium' to 'high' chance depending on the field I suppose) that some 1600 could accidentally get the FM in a zonal.

Why not just remove that chance altogether?

AR

Mr Rosario (seeing as we're going for formalities), do you not realise that the probability is far from the 'medium' to high' chance that you claim? Yes, when the first Oceania Zonal was played, there may have been a 'medium' chance that undeserving players could get the FM title (due to the tournament being Open, not particularly strong [apart from a few at the very top end] and FIDE's title regulations giving an automatic FM title to players scoring 50% or more), however since then, the title regulations have been tightened up, limiting the automatic titles to 1 IM title (highest scoring non-IM who gets 66% or more) and 2 FM titles (highest scoring non-FMs who score 50% or more). Have you seen who has recieved the automatic titles in the Oceania zonals since the rule change?? Off the top of my head, the lowest rated of these would be Lee and Brian Jones, who are both in the mid-high 2100s. Where is this 'super-1600' player going to come from that will qualify for the title?? As for any title being an 'accident', I would think that would be highly unlikely - when was the last time you scored say 5.5/9 in a tournament 'by accident', let alone a strong tournament like the zonal? :hmm:

BTW guys, this thread is actually about the world junior ... not another 'lets complain about zonal titles' thread :hand:

pax
23-11-2004, 12:50 PM
Which 1600 player has got the FM title from a zonal? There are a few around the 1900-2000 mark ... but 1600!! I don't think so.

20 out of 26 players scored 50% or higher in the open 1999 Oceania Zonal. One of those players was Narelle Szuveges. Anyone know what her rating was at the time? Not far off 1600 I believe.

Now she either didn't claim the title or wasn't awarded it, but the fact remains she was entitled to it under the regulations.

pax
23-11-2004, 12:52 PM
BTW guys, this thread is actually about the world junior ... not another 'lets complain about zonal titles' thread :hand:

Quite right. This stuff (like the FM title is history)...

jenni
23-11-2004, 12:59 PM
Well, duh! Cos they don't deserve 'em! George Xie deserved his FM. Canfell did too. A little kid, no matter that he's better than I, who is just a touch over 2000 and competing in a tourn of his peers, doesn't.

(As an aside, your mentality is a bit like that cancer that's plaguing our tertiary education system today. Unis are no more than diploma [or title] mills. We have MAs, MScs, and even the odd PhD handed out to students who can't read or write English; or who plagiarised half their bloody work).

'Nuff said!

AR

Oh rubbish - you are drawing a pretty long bow to go from one to the other.

I actually am a bit of a quality person and hate the dumbing down of our unis and schools.

However I think handing out some FM titles to the sort of kids who came =1st is a reasonable thing to do. Maybe it is an affirmation of faith in where their playing ability will be in the next 12 months.

Apart from anything else I thought the feeble master title was a bit of a joke and ends up being handed out to people a lot weaker than the 3 who would have got it out of the under 10?

jenni
23-11-2004, 01:06 PM
No point talking to jenni. She has a 'mass production mentality'. I present in evidence her attitude to the World Youths. The unmentionable said something right once: better spend the money on local coaches than on some OS trip so some parent can say, "Oh, my kid went to Greece and represented the country". And everyone's eyes are set aflutter, "oohh...ahhhh".

AR
No I don't - what I would like to see created in Australia is a large chess community with a significant number of quality juniors leading to more than our pathetic 2 GMs's (the number is pathetic not the people holding the title :) ).

You have no understanding of what is happening in the Junior environment - everything you want is guaranteed to keep it as small as possible.

Have you thought perhaps the unmentionable had a vested interest in wanting money rather spent on coaching in Aus.

In any case both happens - any kid going overseas to play almost invariably spends more money in Aus on coaching before they go. You are incapable of understanding it, but it is not an ego thing, but a desire to improve.

Anyway I am not going to argue anymore on this thread - David's performance shouldn't be hijacked by trolls like you.

Ian Rout
23-11-2004, 01:53 PM
Some useless statistics (source FIDE). I thought there used to be a way to create a table but I can't see it now.

A = range
B = number of FMs
C = FMs excluding inactive
D = cumulative % (all FMS)

Note: I'm not sure how someone who earns both a WIM and an FM is coded so don't rely on these numbers to the decimal.



A B C D
1850-1899 1 1 0.0
1900-1949 1 1 0.0
1950-1999 2 2 0.1
2000-2049 7 5 0.3
2050-2099 25 21 0.9
2100-2149 56 39 2.3
2150-2199 154 133 6.1
2200-2249 528 416 19.1
2250-2299 1161 854 47.8
2300-2349 1394 1017 82.3
2350-2399 530 414 95.4
2400-2449 153 130 99.2
2450-2499 25 23 99.8
2500-2549 6 6 100.0
2550-2599 1 1 100.0
Total 4044 3063

pax
23-11-2004, 02:50 PM
Australian FMs (all, active only)



A B C
2000-2049 1 1
2050-2099 0 0
2100-2149 2 1
2150-2199 2 2
2200-2249 5 4
2250-2299 8 7
2300-2349 9 6
2350-2399 2 1
2400-2449 0 0

arosar
23-11-2004, 05:11 PM
You have no understanding of what is happening in the Junior environment - everything you want is guaranteed to keep it as small as possible.

I realise that you're the Sugar Mama of Aussie junior chess and I defer to your expertise on that front. But this is not about junior chess per se. We're talking about titles.


In any case both happens - any kid going overseas to play almost invariably spends more money in Aus on coaching before they go. You are incapable of understanding it, but it is not an ego thing, but a desire to improve.

I'm not against this notion of 'going OS to improve'. Look, I realise that in the WY, you can have so called 'private entries'. So I guess this is not an argument against junior chess policy, but rather against certain 'private' choices. In the end, it's a free world.

To my mind, it seems a better investment to spend money on a local coach, improve, hit the high rating, then go OS. At least, that way - the player has both ability and credibilty.

AR

arosar
23-11-2004, 05:29 PM
However I think handing out some FM titles to the sort of kids who came =1st is a reasonable thing to do.

No it isn't. But at least you phrased it correctly, 'handing out'!


Maybe it is an affirmation of faith in where their playing ability will be in the next 12 months.

Faith? Faith? This isn't betting on the horses on Cup Day mate. What ever happened to players having to prove themselves?

AR

Ian_Rogers
23-11-2004, 09:55 PM
I hate to interrupt the FM title debate, but has anyone noticed that David S. just beat Paragua, with one of the best games of the tournament so far, and is now only a point behind first place?

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 10:04 PM
I hate to interrupt the FM title debate, but has anyone noticed that David S. just beat Paragua, with one of the best games of the tournament so far, and is now only half a point behind first place?
Yes.
It was a very good game by the Smurf.

JGB
23-11-2004, 10:10 PM
Yes.
It was a very good game by the Smurf.

so, you going to post it here? :D

Bill Gletsos
23-11-2004, 10:18 PM
[Event "World Junior Chess 2004"]
[White "Paragua Mark (PHI)"]
[Black "Smerdon David (AUS)"]
[Result "0-1"]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Bg4 4. f3 Bf5 5. Bb5+ Nbd7 6. c4 e6 7. dxe6 Bxe6 8. Nc3 Bb4 9. d5 Bf5 10. Nge2 O-O 11. O-O Ne5 12. Ng3 Bd3 13. f4 Nfg4 14. Nce4 Qh4 15. h3 Bc5+ 16. Nxc5 Qxg3 17. hxg4 Bxf1 18. Qxf1 Nxg4 19. Qf3 Qe1+ 20. Qf1 Qg3 21. Qf3 Qe1+ 22. Qf1 Qh4 23. Qf3 c6 24. g3 Qh2+ 25. Kf1 Rae8 26. Ne6 cxb5 27. Qxg4 fxe6 28. d6 bxc4 29. Be3 Qh1+ 30. Bg1 e5 31. d7 Rd8 32. Re1 exf4 33. gxf4
h5 0-1

Trent Parker
23-11-2004, 10:30 PM
This game takes my interest........ I beat Angela song on the weekend using this line :)

Rincewind
23-11-2004, 10:52 PM
This L'Ami bloke is quite strong on ICC too ya know. I reckon he'll beat Mr Smerdon no problem.


Speaking of cereals, of course our pinoy chap will have this Aussie for brekkie.

Hey, Amiel! Is that 0 from 2? Perhaps you should stick with the starter's punter club. :D

Kerry Stead
23-11-2004, 11:55 PM
Outstanding win by David! Well done!

Kerry Stead
24-11-2004, 12:06 AM
20 out of 26 players scored 50% or higher in the open 1999 Oceania Zonal. One of those players was Narelle Szuveges. Anyone know what her rating was at the time? Not far off 1600 I believe.

Now she either didn't claim the title or wasn't awarded it, but the fact remains she was entitled to it under the regulations.

I think you'll find that the Szuveges in the Zonal event (who is an FM) is GRANT Szuveges (Narelle's brother). His rating is somewhere in the 2000-2200 vicinity (he's been inactive for the last 3 or so years however). Narelle played in the women's zonal, and gained the WFM title as a result (which she has been awraded and is noted as having at tournaments).

Candy-Cane
24-11-2004, 06:02 AM
I suspect no-one was interested. Our girls are very thin on the ground. However Shannon did announce to me in the few brief hours that she was back in Canberra, before flitting off to Sydney with some Uni friends that she wanted to go next year. I've told her she had been start fund raising!

Our Under 20's from ACF list are

Arianne Caoli - Just been to Olympiad and perhaps not her thing
Giang Nguyen - Not sure if Giang is qulaified to play for Aus?
Catherine Lip - In Japan on schoolies after HSC.
Michelle Lee - bush somewhere on school camp and pretty much concentrating on school work now
Andjelija Zivanovic - was talking about going earlier in year, but I suspect Uni got in the way
Heather Huddleston - just played World Youth
Angela Song - just played world youth and has Asian juniors coming up
Sophie Payne - Seems a strongish girl but has never played any nationals
Sylvia Shields - probably busy with Uni exams and I doubt she would go
Shannon Oliver - just played world youth

Then we start getting into Candy-Cane etc, who probably didn't think of applying and probably need to play world youth first anyway.


Just wondering why did you use my internet name?

JGB
24-11-2004, 06:17 AM
Was just checking out the official site and found something a bit amusing. In Player Information, Where sex is normally described as male or female, it is published as 'True' for boys and 'False' for girls. Talk about sexism! :lol:

Rincewind
24-11-2004, 06:42 AM
Was just checking out the official site and found something a bit amusing. In Player Information, Where sex is normally described as male or female, it is published as 'True' for boys and 'False' for girls. Talk about sexism! :lol:

I think you should have read the very first post of this thread where pax said


The website looks pretty dodgy at this stage. Some of the player information is incorrect (e.g Petrosian incorrectly listed as 2321 rather than 2539 due to- you guessed it, another Armenian Tigran Petrosian), some of the ratings are missing, ratings not listed on pairings pages. Also curiously on the player cards, the entry "Sex" has a true or false answer

:D

JGB
24-11-2004, 06:53 AM
So you got me! I really don't read every post. :(
:D

ursogr8
24-11-2004, 07:21 AM
Hey, Amiel! Is that 0 from 2? Perhaps you should stick with the starter's punter club. :D

Oi Baz. You should stick to song-writing instead of getting at odds with the Punter's Club. There are plenty of punters who do better than 0 for 2.

(Took me a few days to work out how you drifted off to song-writing. The delta for differential is not the same as the Goodrem variety, mate).

starter

arosar
24-11-2004, 07:59 AM
Hey, Amiel! Is that 0 from 2? Perhaps you should stick with the starter's punter club. :D

Dang! I forgot to pray for Paragua last night!!!

AR

Ian Rout
24-11-2004, 08:23 AM
Hey, Amiel! Is that 0 from 2? Perhaps you should stick with the starter's punter club. :D
In fairness to AR, he is probably right about something, namely the U/10s and FM titles - for instance the top three in the 2002 U/10s are still listed as well under 2300 (maybe retired?). So it is more a carrot to attract players to the event.

Anyway, what is the status of the game against Paragua for GM norm purposes? On the FIDE site a couple of days ago (I can't find the link on a quick scan now) his GM title was listed as HELD. Any further episodes of this saga known?

pax
24-11-2004, 08:39 AM
I think you'll find that the Szuveges in the Zonal event (who is an FM) is GRANT Szuveges (Narelle's brother). His rating is somewhere in the 2000-2200 vicinity (he's been inactive for the last 3 or so years however). Narelle played in the women's zonal, and gained the WFM title as a result (which she has been awraded and is noted as having at tournaments).

If that's true I apologise. My source was TWIC, which definitely says Narelle.
http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic233.html



17 Reeves, Tristan AUS 2245 - 5 +25 = 8 +22 - 4 =13 =11 -10 +24 4.5 2232
18 Szuveges, Narelle AUS ---- +16 - 7 -12 +19 -10 +24 =13 - 8 +25 4.5 2214
19 Dwyer, Daniel AUS 2186 - 8 +26 - 4 -18 +22 +23 -15 +25 =12 4.5 2201


Anyway, i'll stop diverting this thread from Smerdon's fine performance!

pax
24-11-2004, 08:56 AM
Anyway, what is the status of the game against Paragua for GM norm purposes? On the FIDE site a couple of days ago (I can't find the link on a quick scan now) his GM title was listed as HELD. Any further episodes of this saga known?

I think officially it's still IM. Having said that, if David did achieve PR of 2600 it might be possible to argue the point with FIDE if necessary.

Next up he has white against GM Yuri Drozdovskij (2510). Lets hope he is able to push for a win.

Interesting other results: Petrosian beat Alexeev to rejoin the lead, and Humpy Koneru beat Berkes. Berkes must be nearly out of contention now, which is a surprise.

Garvinator
24-11-2004, 08:59 AM
I think officially it's still IM. Having said that, if David did achieve PR of 2600 it might be possible to argue the point with FIDE if necessary. yes it might be possible to make an argument for the gm norm if David fulfills all the other requirement and the game against Paragua is the only thing he needs. Might want to throw in that we only have two gms, so a third would be good
;)

pax
24-11-2004, 09:19 AM
yes it might be possible to make an argument for the gm norm if David fulfills all the other requirement and the game against Paragua is the only thing he needs. Might want to throw in that we only have two gms, so a third would be good
;)

It might help that if Paragua isn't awarded the GM title on the next list, it looks like he will be the second highest rated non-GM on the FIDE list (unless he loses a bunch of points from this event).

arosar
24-11-2004, 09:48 AM
No! RP demands anther GM. At the rate our boys are going, we could have an all-GM oufit in Turin.

AR

auriga
24-11-2004, 03:21 PM
[Event "World Junior Chess 2004"]
[White "Paragua Mark (PHI)"]
[Black "Smerdon David (AUS)"]
[Result "0-1"]


excellent win!
bit of a mash though.

can't understand why paragua would play into this line after some preparation.
the game seems to transpose to one of those swedish gambit positions
which smerdon seems to always win with.

arosar
24-11-2004, 03:34 PM
excellent win!
bit of a mash though.

You are insulting the entire nation of the Republic of the Philippines.

I understand that Cardinal Sin (yes, that really is the Cardinal's name) forgot to say prayer or two. Hence, Mark lost.

Actually, I was just talking to Brian about Mark the other day. At least BJ has some real appreciation, unlike you Lee!

AR

auriga
24-11-2004, 03:51 PM
You are insulting the entire nation of the Republic of the Philippines.

I understand that Cardinal Sin (yes, that really is the Cardinal's name) forgot to say prayer or two. Hence, Mark lost.

Actually, I was just talking to Brian about Mark the other day. At least BJ has some real appreciation, unlike you Lee!

AR

maybe he just played a dodgy opening...
i'm sure the entire nation will forgive him for weaking his kingside.

Garvinator
25-11-2004, 12:05 AM
Unfortunately a loss in Round 8 for David Smerdon.

[Event "World Junior Chess 2004"]
[Site "Kochi"]
[Date "2004/11/24"]
[Round "Round 8"]
[White "Smerdan David (AUS)"]
[Black "Drodzovsky Yuri (UKR)"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Board "4"]
[Input "DGT3186"]
[Owner "All India Chess Federation"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 Nf6 4. Bxc4 e6 5. Nf3 a6 6. O-O b5 7. Bb3 Bb7 8. Nc3 Nbd7 9. a3 c5 10. Qe2 Qc7 11. Rd1 Bd6 12. d5 c4 13. Bc2 exd5 14. e4 O-O 15. exd5 Rfe8 16. Be3 h6 17. h3 Nb6 18. Qd2 Nbxd5 19. Bxh6 Bf4 20. Nxd5 Nxd5 21. Bxf4 Nxf4 22. Ng5 Bxg2 23. Bh7+ Kh8 24. Bf5 Bd5 25. Re1 f6 26. Rxe8+ Rxe8 27. Re1 Rxe1+ 28. Qxe1 fxg5 0-1

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 12:33 AM
That looked kind of ugly.

pax
25-11-2004, 08:51 AM
That looked kind of ugly.

It was looking pretty unpleasant inside the first ten moves really. Was it out of book pretty early?

pax
25-11-2004, 12:36 PM
David has black against GM Jan Smeets (2510) in round 9. Smeets has been vulnerable with white, losing to Tikkanen and Perdomo, drawing with Rohit (all ~2300), so hopefully David can get something out of that game.

auriga
25-11-2004, 03:25 PM
It was looking pretty unpleasant inside the first ten moves really. Was it out of book pretty early?

a book mentions qe2 instead of nc3
as sometimes the knight goes to d2 (even more so after possible a4).
when you click it into fritzy, it doesn't like d5 (and prefers dxc5)

pax
26-11-2004, 08:00 AM
Lost again. Due to the messed up website, you can't view it in the "live games" section (they have duplicated round 8). Here is the pgn.

Top seed Ferenc Berkes is having a bit of a shocker.. He lost again, and is also on 5.

Smerdon has white vs Stanislav Cifka (2310) in rd 10.


[Round "Round 9"]
[White "Smeets Jan (Ned)"]
[Black "Smerdon David (Aus)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Board "9"]
[Input "DGT3172"]
[Owner "All India Chess Federation"]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Bg4 4. f3 Bf5 5. Bb5+ Nbd7 6. c4 e6 7. dxe6 Bxe6 8.
d5 Bf5 9. Nc3 Bb4 10. Nge2 O-O 11. Bxd7 Nxd7 12. O-O Qh4 13. Ng3 Bg6 14. Nce4
h6 15. Bd2 Bc5+ 16. Kh1 Bd4 17. Nf5 Bxf5 18. Be1 Qe7 19. Qxd4 Bxe4 20. fxe4 Qe5
21. Bc3 Rae8 22. Qxa7 Qh5 23. Qxb7 Nc5 24. Qxc7 Nxe4 25. Bb4 Re5 26. Rf3 Rfe8
27. d6 Ng5 28. Rff1 Ne4 29. Kg1 Qe2 30. Rae1 Qxb2 31. Qxf7+ Kh7 32. d7 Qd4+ 33.
Kh1 Rd8 34. Rd1 Qb6 35. a3 Rg5 36. Be7 Rxd7 37. Rxd7 Rg6 38. Bh4 Qb2 39. Qf3
Qc2 40. Rd4 1-0

arosar
26-11-2004, 08:44 AM
Can we blame the opening?

I was talking to a highly prominent chess player the other day and he informed me that this 1...d5 business is close to irresponsible particularly at that level. What's this opening called again?

There's another bloke from Mexico who plays it quite a bit, whatshisname, that fella who sponsors one of the big masters tourns down there, he lost to Solo on this down in Adelaide this year. Good game that.

AR

Rincewind
26-11-2004, 08:57 AM
I was talking to a highly prominent chess player the other day and he informed me that this 1...d5 business is close to irresponsible particularly at that level. What's this opening called again?

I think it's generally called the Scandinavian or Centre-Counter Gambit. Opinions vary on its playability. I don't believe it is outright cold refuted but would probably be considered provocative. You can't blame the open that also wins too quickly just because he happens to lose a game or two against quality opposition.

pax
26-11-2004, 10:06 AM
Can we blame the opening?

I was talking to a highly prominent chess player the other day and he informed me that this 1...d5 business is close to irresponsible particularly at that level. What's this opening called again?

There's another bloke from Mexico who plays it quite a bit, whatshisname, that fella who sponsors one of the big masters tourns down there, he lost to Solo on this down in Adelaide this year. Good game that.

AR

It's the same opening that took down your man Paragua, so if you want to blame it for this loss you have to blame it for that win too ;)

pax
26-11-2004, 10:17 AM
Rogers plays 1... d5 reasonably often, albeit not the gambit variation usually. He even played it against Kasparov in 2001. You might want to take it up with him, Amiel!

arosar
26-11-2004, 10:20 AM
Hhhmmm....yes, I recall that game. That was ROW vs Russia or some such tourn, right? He played some move Qd6 instead of Qa5 . . .

AR

pax
27-11-2004, 07:51 AM
Smerdon beat Cifka in Rd 10, but now has top seed Berkes (GM 2630) with black. Yikes!

Rincewind
27-11-2004, 08:57 AM
Smerdon beat Cifka in Rd 10, but now has top seed Berkes (GM 2630) with black. Yikes!

Gadzooks! (If he wins can I be the first one to say Huzza!)? :D

Kerry Stead
28-11-2004, 02:16 AM
There's another bloke from Mexico who plays it quite a bit, whatshisname, that fella who sponsors one of the big masters tourns down there, he lost to Solo on this down in Adelaide this year. Good game that.
You mean Eddy Levi. Yes, it was an interesting game.
The gambit line that David plays is known as the Portuguese variation, and I think a lot of the theory of the opening has actually come from Australian players if memory serves correctly.
Rogers tends to play the more 'standard' Qxd5 lines, with either Qa5 or Qd6 to follow.

Trent Parker
29-11-2004, 09:55 AM
...... and I think a lot of the theory of the opening has actually come from Australian players if memory serves correctly.


Really????? Cool!!!!!!

pax
01-12-2004, 08:03 AM
David won his final game to finish on 7/13. It's a tough tournament for sure, but I suspect he would be a bit disappointed after being up there in the thick of things at the half way stage.

David's score matches Zhao's score from the 2001 event.

arosar
01-12-2004, 10:01 AM
Paragua finished on 7.5 and so did this other pinoy bloke, Barbosa (who is untitled). Very happy news for the NCFP.

AR