Tuesday, November 27, 2007

TPS Report #5

Did another 330 problems on Chess Tempo, pulled my Standard rating up to 1850, and my solving accuracy to 74.3%. I also made it to #2 on the most active in the last 12 hours. The good and the bad are starting to grow on me there, such that I’m getting back that stubbornness that caused me to rack up 10,000 problems on CTS. My longest streak was 27 correct problems. I think the problems on Chess Tempo are sometimes more difficult, not because they’re better problems, but because they’re a little nitpicky as to what is the right move. Some positions are completely winning, but they want you to find the line that mates in 4 instead of 5 moves.

I was going through some old scrap piles and found some old scoresheets. It appears I fibbed about never playing in a CCA event. Back in April, 1993, I played in the Chicago Amateur starting strong with WW, then fading down the stretch with LDD.

Annotated 5th of 6 games from WSO2007. It wasn’t a terribly interesting game, so perhaps I should just skip the quiet games.


drunknknite said...

Nice pic, I hope your work is paying off and you will find it easier to navigate through a tactical game. What I really wanted to comment on was the RCC webpage though. I say disqualify as many people under 1800 as possible before the round robin (I also support sectioned club tournaments though, so there is some bias).

Unknown said...

Hi Ernie, you should take that last comment of Kevin's into consideration...

At the San Diego Chess Club, as far back as I can remember, we always used sections and it raised the level of play for everyone involved and didn't hinder it at all.

The lower rateds had to prove themselves first amongst their own, not just getting lucky here and there where they can get a warped opinion of themselves, as is often the case.

When I was 1175, I pushed harder to reach the next section and so forth. The sections scenario actually makes you work harder and it goes for all sections.

If lower rateds wanted to play the higher rateds, there could be an allowance for that also with a special tournament for that purpose. This is what was done in San Diego, which is now one of the strongest clubs in the country.

In the past, I've heard the argument that we don't have enough players for that, but now we have many more players, and so that counter-argument is kind of weak.

Besides, one can always compromise by grouping the Experts, A's and B's in one section and group the C's, D's, and lower in the second section.

This would, I feel, also bring players back to the club, at least those who left because they couldn't stand being upset occasionally by a much weaker player.

I know lately, I have been a victim of upsets, but only because I continue to play at the club no matter what, taking a page from George Fischer's book, who hardly misses a game and he too has been upset frequently lately, even though he is far stronger than most of his opponents.

I'm actually surprised I still play at the club, since there is nothing in it for me by defeating someone and getting the incredible one point while taking the risk of losing 25 or more if I'm having a rough day concentrating! That's just stupid on my part and the day is coming where I will wise up to that scenario, since it is unacceptable.

Maybe it doesn't matter, since I'm off to Grad school in about 9 months with the promise of a better chess scene, but still, there are a lot of players who feel like I do: David Peterson, Bill Case, Barry Brandt to name just a few.

Grouping by Sections is the answer or failing that, is at very least a good partial solution.

If you fail to take this opportunity, I feel that many of the club's top-rated players will simply play matches and side tournaments amongst themselves and or, in the future may even decide to play their own championship leaving out the lower-rateds completely.

One of the reasons Edwin Straver doesn't return to the club is that it would be ridiculous for him to travel an 40 minutes both ways from Carson City just to defeat some scrub for one point, or in the rare case he loses to them a gigantic loss of points with a long drive also to consider. That's bullshit, plain and simple. The club needs to cut the nonsense and trim the fat!

I well know that some of these lower rateds want a shot at it and the higher rateds, but where they might defeat us in a single game on the rare occasion, they will lose pathetically in a match scenario, since they are nowhere near that level yet.

With Group by Sections, the lower rated will work harder because there is a bigger incentive to work harder: They get to play us, whereas the way it is now, all that have to do is get lucky with the pairings and they get to play us. That's really a poor idea when you think about it and the strongest clubs in the country are not operating like this.

Hopefully, changes will be made, but somehow I doubt it. The club remains weak due to poor decision making on the part of its leaders, who continue as always to have a simpathetic response to those who haven't earned it. Ironically, this is also indicative of our society of late.

Anonymous said...

This is probably against my better judgment, but I think I'll go ahead and run the December tournament as a sectioned swiss, 1800+ and U1800. I'll be bracing myself for a chorus of lamentation from the U1800 players, but we've tried it the current way for long enough that it's probably time for some variation. Get the word out to the 1800+ players to SHOW UP in December, otherwise it might take the legs out of the argument that they aren't showing up because the club tournaments are being run as one open section. I'll be especially bitter if I have to pair a 1800+ section that has only three players.

Unknown said...

Hi Ernie, I'll get the word out and if they don't show up, I'll have to stand in line behind you as being bitter towards them! There's no excuse if you go out on a limb to leave you just hanging there for the branch to eventually break!

I'll make my phone calls tomorrow before the last round. I may be a little late.

Already, you've earned my respect by taking the chance. It's now time for the higher rateds to rally behind you.

The chorus you already hear will be that of the lower rateds and when they finally reach our level, they too will feel like us. Let them earn it. After all, I believe that everyone of us higher rated players had to earn it ourselves. Why should they be any different?

I don't think I'm wrong on this and I certainly hope I'm not, but I believe after this decision, you'll have a bigger army behind you than you originally thought.

drunknknite said...

One consolation for lower rated players is to allow the winner, or two winners, to "play up" the following month. So that if they can prove themselves against their class they can play the big boys next tournament.