English Chess Forum

I've expressed a personal view as a modestly rated player who is not averse to the odd challenge, but also as a chess administrator and team captain. In that context, a degree of team success eases the burden of captaincy. I think most players accept there will be nights when they will be outclassed but there is less likely to be the same level of acceptance if the competition is distorted by professionals, with no obvious affinity to the local club area. London League is a relatively elite gathering, doing similar things in county competition is less palatable still in my view. Many members play a relatively modest number of games so whilst a range of opponents is inevitable, the fewer outliers one faces the better.

The idea of avoiding mismatches has been applied in fixtures between my club and others. In Bucks some club first teams compete in the second tier because they have a couple of strong players and a long tail. Negotiations between ourselves and Aylesbury meant that we didn't have to bring in eligible players who normally play for our first team and instead a more even contest ensued and the match was drawn. Hard to see how that wasn't a better outcome.

J T Melsom wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 26, 2021 3:42 pm

and its certainly less fun to compete in a league where the title is a foregone conclusion.

That is my only complaint. I suggested at a London League AGM a few years ago that there should be a trophy - perhaps the Brian Smith Trophy - awarded to the team finishing second in Division One.

"Negotiations between ourselves and Aylesbury meant that we didn't have to bring in eligible players who normally play for our first team and instead a more even contest ensued and the match was drawn."

Well, yes - it is supposed to be fun!

Actually, it is more of a problem if teams are super-strong for some matches and weakish for others, as that is unfair to other teams.

Actually, it is more of a problem if teams are super-strong for some matches and weakish for others, as that is unfair to other teams

That has happened more by luck than design - it is after all maiinly amateur competition and work and families can intervene. The introduction of home and away fixtures went some way to alleviating the most obvious disparity in the strength of opposition faced.

Some of the GMs have been playing for Wood Green for many years and could be considered as much 'genuine' members of a club as anyone else. I am less convinced by those who are brought (or should that be bought?) in to play just one game.

There was a time when Wood Green only played a few GMs - in the National Club Championship, for example - and the matches were more competitive. In one London League match we (Ilford) drew 3-3 on the top 6 boards but lost the match on the lower boards.

I think Wood Green's hegemony helped destroy the National Club Open section.

As the years went by Wood Green seemed to get stronger and stronger. When I captained Ilford I always told the team that the match against Wood Green was by far the least important of the season.

I assume a more competitive London League would be welcomed by many. Between 1973-4 and 1982-3 there were 8 different winners of the 1st Division, and that made it a much more interesting team competition.

I don't mind playing a GM. It's an educational experience rather than a contest. But once or twice a season is enough.

Interesting comment about some Wood Green GMs being genuine members of the club through long association. Fair enough. But would they continue to play for WG if they weren't paid to do so?

Who is the "financial benefactor" behind Wood Green or is it TOP SECRET?

Brian Smith is the only person I know who is associated with Wood Green apart from the GMs themselves.

Ironically, their benefactors live, I believe, on the other side of London, in Twickenham, but have never offered financial support to their local chess club (not that we've asked them).

If they offered to stuff our team full of grandmasters, I'm sure we'd politely decline, but if they offered us money to pay for a good venue or provide a programme of community outreach our reply might be different.

James Toon wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 26, 2021 7:39 pm

Brian Smith is the only person I know who is associated with Wood Green apart from the GMs themselves.

Bjørn Tiller?

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:03 pm

Thurlow vs B Lalic.

Draw?

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:10 pm

J T Melsom wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 26, 2021 3:42 pm

and its certainly less fun to compete in a league where the title is a foregone conclusion.

That is my only complaint. I suggested at a London League AGM a few years ago that there should be a trophy - perhaps the Brian Smith Trophy - awarded to the team finishing second in Division One.

Nick,

Strangely enough I proposed a new trophy for both the Berkshire League and the Surrey Border League which was for the highest placed amateur team in the top division.

I don't think it matters who bankrolls Wood Green. The rest of us can have a proper competition for the best amateur team in the League. Once a season we get to test ourselves against the best that money can buy. In the UK at least.

James Toon wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:47 pm

Once a season we get to test ourselves against the best that money can buy. In the UK at least.

4NCL teams can be stronger, although the qualification bar to face them can be higher than the London League.

Guildford have partly disbanded their squad having won it consistently for the past few years.

If the seeding is to be believed, the strongest teams will be Wood Green (!), Manx, Guildford and White Rose.