Interesting rating mismatch

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7179
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.

Interesting rating mismatch

Post by John Upham » Fri Nov 26, 2021 9:50 am

This recent London League match has interesting rating mismatches


http://www.londonchess.org.uk/match_car ... n=20212022

I especially like the match comment from the WG captain:
Many thanks to Liam and colleagues for a challenging match.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 7173
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by LawrenceCooper » Fri Nov 26, 2021 9:58 am

John Upham wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 9:50 am
This recent London League match has interesting rating mismatches


http://www.londonchess.org.uk/match_car ... n=20212022

I especially like the match comment from the WG captain:
Many thanks to Liam and colleagues for a challenging match.
An 1800 playing above high 1900s looks a little odd. Are there any rating restrictions for board order?

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7179
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by John Upham » Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:00 am

LawrenceCooper wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 9:58 am
John Upham wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 9:50 am
This recent London League match has interesting rating mismatches


http://www.londonchess.org.uk/match_car ... n=20212022

I especially like the match comment from the WG captain:
Many thanks to Liam and colleagues for a challenging match.
An 1800 playing above high 1900s looks a little odd. Are there any rating restrictions for board order?

That 1800 was a foible of the rating download which I have manually over ridden.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

James Toon
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by James Toon » Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:25 am

I was the 1800 playing on board 1 for Streatham. I queried the rating with the ECF and I understand that 1800 is a default setting for players who have been inactive for a long time. It will correct itself automatically as my OTB results are submitted for rating. My results so far this season suggest that about 2000 would be more accurate.

I exchanged team lists with the WG captain before the match. He said that this was WG's first match and his GMs would be a little out of practice. But not enough to drop any points, as it turned out. The final score was probably a fair reflection of the rating difference. I'm not sure why most of the Streatham 1st team were unavailable.

Andy Stoker
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:23 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by Andy Stoker » Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:44 am

Indeed: "Many thanks to Liam and colleagues for a challenging match." and goes on to say "Fortunately WG had GM Alex playing on bd8." Yes, well done, WG

James Toon
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by James Toon » Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:30 am

I was disappointed to see the WG average rating drop below 2500. Some would see this as a mark of disrespect towards their opponents.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Nov 26, 2021 1:25 pm

"Yes, well done, WG"

I know that was ironic, but why shouldn't they field such a team? I don't get the impression Streatham are complaining.

Back in the 1970s etc, Streatham(!) in the Surrey League had Nigel Povah and then Simon GIllam, both of whom were adept at finding non-Surrey players to boost their team, so we faced Julian Hodgson, Glenn Flear, Mark Hebden, Eric Prie etc. If we avoided 8-0, we celebrated, and if we didn't, we shrugged and thought we got the chance to play someone good. On one occasion, we had a 130 playing a 190 on bottom board, so when the game finished after less than two hours, we assumed we were 1-0 down, but we were leading...

I'm sure James was pleased to get a tough opponent.

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by J T Melsom » Fri Nov 26, 2021 1:57 pm

Of course there will always be mismatches in club matches and strong players shouldn't be prevented from playing,just because the opposition will be weaker ( some clubs don't have weak players to substitute in). But although there is the pleasure of playing a decent opponent and potentially learning from the experience its not everybody's idea of a good use of an evening. If I was in this situation (and I'm currently playing a higher board in Bucks than I'd like) I'd personally find the novelty wearing off after one or two seasons. Playing uncompetitive matches is less satisfactory. I wonder if the prospect of playing Wood Green or similar makes it easier to find a full side or not?

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7179
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by John Upham » Fri Nov 26, 2021 2:33 pm

J T Melsom wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 1:57 pm
Of course there will always be mismatches in club matches and strong players shouldn't be prevented from playing,just because the opposition will be weaker ( some clubs don't have weak players to substitute in). But although there is the pleasure of playing a decent opponent and potentially learning from the experience its not everybody's idea of a good use of an evening. If I was in this situation (and I'm currently playing a higher board in Bucks than I'd like) I'd personally find the novelty wearing off after one or two seasons. Playing uncompetitive matches is less satisfactory. I wonder if the prospect of playing Wood Green or similar makes it easier to find a full side or not?
I believe that some of WGs opposing clubs have fielded obviously not their first team more than once in the past.

It used to be the end of season bank busting Drunken Knights vs Wood Green match that was in some way competitive.

Years ago when Sandhurst used a tranche of paid professionals to win the Berkshire and Border League I had a hand in selecting our third / fourth team players to play for the A team whilst we spent the evening having a jolly good time in the adjacent William IVth tavern (now a Co-Operative)

It was a pleasure to see the expression on their financial benefactors face as he realised he had shelled out 6 x £50 for no reason at all.
Last edited by John Upham on Fri Nov 26, 2021 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by J T Melsom » Fri Nov 26, 2021 2:49 pm

I suppose this sort of thing does serve some purpose and is easier where there are central venues , but its not really my idea of fun, and I think similar strategies in shire areas would annoy me. Most clubs are essentially drawn from the locality, few players opt to play for anybody other than their nearest team. Don't really see what paying for a team to win is all about in those circumstances. I could speculate that its about something other than chess. And there is to the best of my knowledge no Wood Green club, so it doesn't support chess in the community from which it takes its name.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Nov 26, 2021 3:26 pm

J T Melsom wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 2:49 pm
And there is to the best of my knowledge no Wood Green club, so it doesn't support chess in the community from which it takes its name.
Historically there was a Wood Green club which competed in the Middlesex League and the North Circular League. Their name pops up several times in the honours board of the North circular.
http://www.northcircularchess.co.uk/champions.html

Richard Bates
Posts: 3338
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by Richard Bates » Fri Nov 26, 2021 3:34 pm

John Upham wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 2:33 pm
J T Melsom wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 1:57 pm
Of course there will always be mismatches in club matches and strong players shouldn't be prevented from playing,just because the opposition will be weaker ( some clubs don't have weak players to substitute in). But although there is the pleasure of playing a decent opponent and potentially learning from the experience its not everybody's idea of a good use of an evening. If I was in this situation (and I'm currently playing a higher board in Bucks than I'd like) I'd personally find the novelty wearing off after one or two seasons. Playing uncompetitive matches is less satisfactory. I wonder if the prospect of playing Wood Green or similar makes it easier to find a full side or not?
I believe that some of WGs opposing clubs have fielded obviously not their first team more than once in the past.

It used to be the end of season bank busting Drunken Knights vs Wood Green match that was in some way competitive.

Years ago when Sandhurst used a tranche of paid professionals to win the Berkshire and Border League I had a hand in selecting our third / fourth team players to play for the A team whilst we spent the evening having a jolly good time in the adjacent William IVth tavern (now a Co-Operative)

It was a pleasure to see the expression on their financial benefactors face as he realised he had shelled out 6 x £50 for no reason at all.
Some benefactors see part of what they do as supporting the incomes of professional players.

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by J T Melsom » Fri Nov 26, 2021 3:42 pm

Roger, Yes I was aware of the historic club. In a sense although by no means unique in the London League in this respect, it does make the club a rather artificial construct. Fine up to a point, but these sort of initiatives aren't necessarily as attractive to others. I've done captaincy of a club when it has been competitive albeit mainly finishing second and also when its struggled. Plodding through a season with limited chances requires a different temperament or outlook altogether.

Richard, that is one of the claims used to justify such benevolence. Does this benefit chess as a whole or just a small number of people? Once a season it may spoil an evening for others, and its certainly less fun to compete in a league where the title is a foregone conclusion. Less fun again to be a team captain under those circumstances. Its not my money - but I don't see this sort of patronage as self evidently a good thing as some in the chess community do.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:03 pm

"Does this benefit chess as a whole or just a small number of people?"

Yes or no, I guess.

I have played in open tournaments, where some GM has got free entry and maybe "conditions" to play. At Guernsey, I was pleased to play people like Kurajica, Tiviakov, Hillarp-Persson etc. Others groan when they get paired with them. Tiger commented when I played him in round 1, that I was the only lower-rated player on the top boards to try and do something (not that it worked, unfortunately). But for me, it was part of the appeal of the tournament. I was slightly annoyed to play John Emms at Hastings some time ago,but only because I missed Bronstein by one board!

You may regard leagues differently. Redhill II vs Wallington Board 1 a few years ago was Thurlow vs B Lalic. I was pleased - some of my colleagues were doubtless pleased they weren't on board 1!

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Interesting rating mismatch

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:16 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:03 pm
Yes or no, I guess.
There was a snooker professional recently having a whinge about the presence of amateur players in "his" tournament.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/59392405

it can be a problem for lower ranking professionals when top amateurs are better than them.