Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Club Update: Late Fall Swiss, Round Two Results and Round Three Pairings

Rd Bd Scr White Scr Black

03 1. ___ Race, Doran (2.0) ___ Kernighan, Mark D (2.0)
03 2. ___ Pedersen, Roger E (1.5) ___ Zilbermintz, Lev (1.5)
03 3. ___ Boxer, Matthew (1.5) ___ Arias , Fermin (1.5)

03 4. ___ Fortunato, Joseph (1.0) ___ Martinez, Alberto (1.0)
03 5. ___ Pepe, Michael A (1.0) ___ Korn, David Allan (1.0)
03 6. ___ Cohen, Bryan Paul (0.5) ___ Senyatkin, Aleksey (1.0)

03 7. ___ Katz, Harry S (0.5) ___ Garrett, Damon T (0.5)

03 8. ___ Kwok, Man-Chit (0.0) ___ Norris, Anthony (0.0)
03 9. ___ Nayak, Mohan Rao (0.0) ___ Nikitopoulos, Nich (0.0)
03 0.5 Mangion, Ian (2.0) BYE REQUESTED

Very nice interview of WCC Anand after brief, usual requisite advertisement for popular videos.

West Orange CC Late Fall Swiss -- West Orange CC Late Fall Swiss 2011 Wall Chart, Page 1

Name/State ID Group/Team Rate Rnd 1 Rnd 2 Rnd 3
1. Kernighan, Mark D 2260 W 10 --- B 4
NJ 12147190 1.0 X2.0
2. Zilbermintz, Lev 2083 HALF W 18 B 5
NJ 12476202 0.5 1.5
3. Mangion, Ian 2016 B 11 W 20 HALF
NJ 13497907 1.0 2.0 2.5
4. Race, Doran 1959 W 13 B 19 W 1
NY 12183660 1.0 2.0
5. Pedersen, Roger E 1940 B 14 W 24 W 2
NJ 10092990 0.5 1.5
6. Boxer, Matthew 1921 W 15 B 25 W 14 (six out of six in top seeds, currently ahead. Editor)
NJ 12510577 0.5 1.5
7. Hart, Charles M 1919 B 16 --- ZERO
NJ 10004071 1.0 F1.0 1.0 (Withdrew. Editor)
8. Cohen, Bryan Paul 1900 W 19 B 13 W 25
NJ 20020149 0.0 0.5
9. Norris, Anthony 1897 B 20 W 11 B 18
NJ 12758884 0.0 0.0
10. Martinez, Alberto 1890 B 1 W 16 B 20 (Ten 1890 and over. Editor)
NJ 12490535 0.0 1.0
11. Pepe, Michael A 1837 W 3 B 9 W 19
NJ 12565700 0.0 1.0
13. Garrett, Damon T 1824 B 4 W 8 B 15
NJ 12545276 0.0 0.5
14. Arias , Fermin 1739 W 5 B 15 B 6
NJ 12670179 0.5 1.5 (Top result, 1940 =< Congratulations Fermin. Editor)
15. Katz, Harry S 1718 B 6 W 14 W 13
NJ 12052860 0.5 0.5
16. Nayak, Mohan Rao 1696 W 7 B 10 W 22
NJ 12237580 0.0 0.0
18. Kwok, Man-Chit 1607 --- B 2 W 9
NJ 14201547 0.0 0.0
19. Korn, David Allan 1604 B 8 W 4 B 11
NJ 14564164 1.0 1.0
20. Fortunato, Joseph 1553 W 9 B 3 W 10
NJ 12932570 1.0 1.0
22. Nikitopoulos, Nich 1325 --- --- B 16
NJ 14140077 0.0 0.0
24. Rue, John D. 1200 HALF B 5 ZERO
NJ 14761813 0.5 0.5 0.5
25. Senyatkin, Aleksey 1200 BYE W 6 B 8
NJ 14717317 1.0 1.0


Doran said...

Nich did not play round 1 or 2 nor did he get a half point bye for those rounds. Is there a mistake?


22. Nikitopoulos, Nich 1325 --- --- B 16
NJ 14140077 0.0 0.0

West Orange Chess Club said...

I thought the same thing. Do you want to send Roger an email? Editor beyond time budget, this time. There is more than one thing I had a question about.

Todays post:
To be clear, yes, Nick was in Round two, played Mark and lost, but wouldn't he have 0.5 for round one?

Wouldn't Ian have 2* 0.5= 1.0?

Last week's post:
Wouldn't Aleksey have 0.5 for Round One? Unless we need to add a note saying, '1.0 for the next two rounds'.

Anonymous said...

Nick played an extra rated game since Mark won a game on forfeit against Charlie Hart. As to the other issues, I will talk to Roger.

John Hagerty

Anonymous said...

Has John Rue withdrawn from the tournament?

Doran said...

Wouldn't Ian have 2* 0.5= 1.0?
Ian won against Mike Pepe and Joe Jortunato. He has requested a bye for round 3. At the end of round 3 Ian will have 2.5 points.

Nick game Tuesday night was not an assigned game. If you imagine that the results subted to USCF will have an extra games sections this game will be there. In addition to playing an extra game that will not influnce tournament standings Nick can enter the tournament with 2 half point byes for rounds 1&2 and be paired for round 3 with 1 point.

Aleksey was the odd man for round 1. It is irregular that an Unrated got the buy for Round 1. There are 2 reasons why an unrated should not get a buy for round one. First USCF wants new members to get a rating as quickly as possible. Second The unrated could be a very strong player. The goal is to minimize the possibility of the Bye influencing prizes at the end of the tournament. The first is not a big deal since Aleksey needs only 4 games to get a rating and the tournament has 6 rounds. The second will only be an issue if Aleksey plays like an expert. I do not Know if UNR are eligbkle for the under 1500 prize. If so his full point bye might be important. The pairings were done with a program. We have discovered a flaw in the program. It might be difficult to changed the pairings for round 1 and continue to use the program. I did not know this until I took the open book test, and the test provoked me to reread the rule on how to pair the first round. If you will permit ne to brag a bit I only missed one question out of 40 on the test.

Please notice that 2 players won by forfiet in round 2. If I am able to persuade the club that we should pair the next round tuesday at 7:45pm reduction of forfiets will be 80% of my arguement.

Aleksey said...

Hello , I read some of the discussion regarding my bye for the first round. I was unrated when I initially entered the tournament , but after the fish memorial tournament ratings were published I have a 1648 provisional unpublished rating .

David Korn said...

I cannot comment on the details of TD, an area unknown to me.

At the same time, since comments more and more not only are becoming a place to interchange ideas among club members, in written form (think of twitter as a text message not to your buddy or GF but to the entire world), this seems a good time and place to weigh in on a few points, weight in as in NOT suggest what is true or false, or suggested or discouraged, but as Communications Coordinator de fact, to surface a few recent issues constructively.

Indeed, it is not uncommon for blogs to start group repartee’s off topic, sometimes to the great consternation of readers, other times delight. That said, a few items:.

As it were, in bulletin board format:

Doran raised a great point recently in response to David's (me) email about a draft for the WOCC Championship in March. He suggested higher fees and prizes. Not to say this is best, but to put it out for discussion. Damon had ideas about this.

Then Doran had a 180 assertion that much lower fees, without need for large or any real prizes for that matter might open things a bit. The issue from my perspect is not cheaper or more expensive, but expanding roster without lowering quality of players and play unduly or dramatically.

For illustration only, the omega and alpha's among recent TLA's:



Now, that said, 'well to do' does not have to mean snobby. this prior one appears to be very well done. The latter, very, very democratic, it seems very much in the spirit of Doran's idea.

Please forgive misspellings or misconstructions here. I am working, on break, and my IE7 browser has no spell check, as my Google Chrome and Apple Safari both do, but so many emails and blogs and Gmail’s, I need a separate browser for the WOCC. Comments in my view are informal.

Blog posts get spell checked in word or Outlook.

John said Doran can run his own tournament. How about as a dry run, a two round Rapid in January, in lieu of Victors previous Blitz Tourney?

We have a real chunk from late Dec to USATE in late Feb save the annual board meeting is it, or club meeting, not sure, and this affords Doran an area to play in, test his methods and fees, and gives him a dry run as TD without larger risk of a more sustained tourney.

Lastly, in a telephone conversation with John two weeks ago, in addition to table numbers, name plates, door greeter, I suggest a club sheet on the table with Standards, Rules, Conventions, an 8.5" by 11". Can be a draft. Some of what Doran says or others say, about consequences of late or missed rounds can be concretized.

This does not need to be perfect, but a work in progress. More to gain by attempting it, than not.

Very, very lastly, I was wondering similarly. What if someone asks for a bye in R1 and R2, then opts out. What is then defined as an entry? Giving money? But what if, for example, a higher up says, hey John, put me down, does not pay, observes outcomes, then does not like what is given in R3 and opts out?

So an entry is money in hand. But even money in hand totally fails the main rub, which is the need for stability in planning and pairings. This is getting worse.

This is no one’s fault. Work in progress needed.

I so much wish Damon or Jose or Boxer or Joe could add comments, so many others at the club with great wisdom and depth... but the comment line keeps getting more persons. Would love to hear Lev’s comments, Roger, John, Harry, everyone to voice.

Peace, David

Doran said...

When I said I recently passed the local TD test I may have implied I lack TD experiance. I have directed about 40 tournaments. Including 20 since 1991. My experiance includes directing most of the tournaments at the Manhatten Chess for a month when their regular TD, Nick Conticello, was on vacation.

Roger said...

1st Unrated getting bye in the 1st round is an opinion not a rule
2nd a Grand Prix must use the computerized program or the TD can lose his certification

The score and prizea are based on the 6 rounds and not any extra games