Capelle La Grande International Open 26th Feb - 5th March

[Alan Walton]

One game, board 3, after 19 moves which would require the arbiters permission according to the rules!!

Even if it is a draw by repetition?

[LozCooper]

Thanks for the good wishes.
We could not get the links to live games to work from the official site yesterday but ok by using http://cappelle-chess.fr/live2011/tfd.htm Mark on a live board again, 2 of the top games already drawn after 1 hour. One game, board 3, after 19 moves which would require the arbiters permission according to the rules!!

Black must have been very happy to escape with a half point in that game. I'm not even sure I can find a move for black after 18 h4 although maybe I'm missing something obvious

[Ian Thompson]

One game, board 3, after 19 moves which would require the arbiters permission according to the rules!!

Even if it is a draw by repetition?

FIDE rules prohibit the players agreeing a draw (Article 9.1) if the event organisers decide to invoke that rule. They don't prevent one of the players claiming a draw under Articles 9.2 (repetition) and 9.3 (50 moves).

[Peter Turner]

Morning

I was refering to the rules for this particular tournament. Quite sensibly (I think) the arbiters have left some discretion:-

The FIDE Laws of Chess (1st july 2009) will apply.
To draw by mutual agreement it must play at least 20 moves or have the consent of the arbiter.
Players arriving 30 minutes or more after the start of a round shall lose, unless the arbiter
decides otherwise.

Peter T

[Peter Turner]

In round 5 wins for Mark, Sarah & Gerald, draw for Lateefah. Sam had a 5 hour + game and lost in a R v R&p ending.
His comment, “I learned a lot from that …”.
Round 6 pairings – Mark on board 5 and goes out live again. R6 start at 1pm UK time.
HARIKA Dronavalli 2520 WGM & IM IND v HEBDEN Mark 2558 ENG (5)
FRANKLIN Samuel 2185 ENG (3) v GUIDARELLI Laurent 2446 IM FRA
HEGARTY Sarah 2096 ENG (3) v BERNARD Christophe 2348 IM FRA
MESSAM ~ SPARKS Lateefah 1904 ENG (2.5) v GASIK Anna 2201 WIM POL
PARFETT Gerald 1647 ENG (3) v MARVEJOLS Claude 2002 FRA

[Ian Thompson]

I was refering to the rules for this particular tournament. Quite sensibly (I think) the arbiters have left some discretion:-

The FIDE Laws of Chess (1st july 2009) will apply.
To draw by mutual agreement it must play at least 20 moves or have the consent of the arbiter.

These are just the standard FIDE rules, which require the organisers to specify the number of moves during which draws by agreement are prohibited (if they wish to have such a prohibition).

As I said above, this rule does not prohibit claims of draws by repetition in fewer than 20 moves.

[Peter Turner]

Round 6 - win for Sam and draws for Mark & Lateefah

[LozCooper]

Round 6 - win for Sam and draws for Mark & Lateefah

Thanks Peter,

A great result for Sam against a 2446 IM and also a very good result for Lateefah against a 2201 WIM

[Jonathan Rogers]

I just hope that Sam's norm prospects have not already been too badly damaged by having to play three players rated under 2000. Can he count two of them as 2150 or something?

Incidentally I drafted a messsge earlier (for the first time) and then saved it. Now I simply can't find it! Nor can I find how to find it. Something to add to the FAQ on using this site?

[Adam Raoof]

Incidentally I drafted a messsge earlier (for the first time) and then saved it. Now I simply can't find it! Nor can I find how to find it. Something to add to the FAQ on using this site?

Go to 'User Control Panel' and then 'Manage Drafts' (both on the left hand side menu).

[LozCooper]

I just hope that Sam's norm prospects have not already been too badly damaged by having to play three players rated under 2000. Can he count two of them as 2150 or something?

Incidentally I drafted a messsge earlier (for the first time) and then saved it. Now I simply can't find it! Nor can I find how to find it. Something to add to the FAQ on using this site?

You can only count one player now, not two. I suspect this is partly to do with the rating floor being so low. Cappelle is always hazardous with the yo-yo effect. However, it's still a great result and even if he doesn't get a norm it's another good day for English junior chess following on from the successes at Brighton. It's good to see so many juniors testing themselves at international level against titled players.

[Stewart Reuben]

Jonathan Rogers >I just hope that Sam's norm prospects have not already been too badly damaged by having to play three players rated under 2000. Can he count two of them as 2150 or something? <

The rule now is that only 1 opponent can have a rating floor 400 points below the norm level. Thus IM being 2450, one opponent (the lowest) can be raised to 2050. 3 opponents below 2000 in a 9 round Swiss mean it is virtually impossible to get an IM norm. For the GM norm it is 2200 by the way. It used to be two players and 350 points, but the Chairman wante it to be more difficult to get the norm. Indeed he even wanted it to be 500 points. Ratings go down to 1200. Play two of those and you won 't get a norm.

With a huge open Swiss like Capelle, the bonus point Acceleration puts a huge premium on a good start to get a title norm. The fractional one used in England puts less of a premium. Gibraltar 2011 used something some way in between and I did not analyse the effect. Unfortunately the Fractional system has never been computerised. Any volunteers? The main difference is that Fractional uses the people who draw to cut down on the lower ranked players who won.

Whatever, Capelle is a wonderful event as are Hastings, Gibraltar and the British.

Stewart Reuben

[IM Jack Rudd]

The main difference is that Fractional uses the people who draw to cut down on the lower ranked players who won.

You can do that with Bonus Point as well; you'd have to divide the tournament into five parts rather than three to start with, though.

[Richard Bates]

Jonathan Rogers >I just hope that Sam's norm prospects have not already been too badly damaged by having to play three players rated under 2000. Can he count two of them as 2150 or something? <

The rule now is that only 1 opponent can have a rating floor 400 points below the norm level. Thus IM being 2450, one opponent (the lowest) can be raised to 2050. 3 opponents below 2000 in a 9 round Swiss mean it is virtually impossible to get an IM norm. For the GM norm it is 2200 by the way. It used to be two players and 350 points, but the Chairman wante it to be more difficult to get the norm. Indeed he even wanted it to be 500 points. Ratings go down to 1200. Play two of those and you won 't get a norm.

With a huge open Swiss like Capelle, the bonus point Acceleration puts a huge premium on a good start to get a title norm. The fractional one used in England puts less of a premium. Gibraltar 2011 used something some way in between and I did not analyse the effect. Unfortunately the Fractional system has never been computerised. Any volunteers? The main difference is that Fractional uses the people who draw to cut down on the lower ranked players who won.

Whatever, Capelle is a wonderful event as are Hastings, Gibraltar and the British.

Stewart Reuben

Is it perhaps true that different pairing systems favour players in different parts of the draw? In so far as they are designed to assist people getting norms i am a strong believer in the priority of favouring those who have shown through their general rating strength that they are genuine regular contenders. For IM norms that means prioritising FMs (2300+) then 2200+ etc. An impression of the 'fractional' system as it is generally applied is that it often doesn't particularly do this with "second quarter players" having to perform significantly above expectations and norm requirements to avoid getting involved in being used to clear out the field of the weaker players. The success of the fractional system also seems very dependent on the "first round losers" actually doing their job and winning in round 2.

Incidentally i think Sam has still got an outside chance of a norm (currently performing at 2370 for norm purposes)- but he'll need a couple of very good results to do it.

Also i think it could be pointed out that Neil Berry of Scotland (2331), but a regular 4NCL player for Barbican, is currently extremely well placed for a norm on the same score - probably strongly vindicating the pairing system under the criteria i use above.

[Peter Turner]

Round 7 - the last round to have accelerated pairings. Mark on a live board again (1pm) and fingers crossed for Sam playing his 4th titled opponent.
GM Manuel Leon Hoyos is leading the 573 strong field. The Mexican GM has collected 5,5/6 points so far and is sole leader. Just half a point behind are GM Alojzije Jankovic and the strongest U18 junior of Spain IM Alexander Ipatov.

HEBDEN Mark 2558 ENG (4.5) v JOJUA Davit 2515 GM GEO
LEJARRE Ludovic 2400 IM FRA v FRANKLIN Samuel 2185 ENG (4)
LEMMEN Raoul 1872 NED v HEGARTY Sarah 2096 ENG (3)
TAKAHASHI Reiji 2099 JAP v MESSAM ~ SPARKS Lateefah 1904 ENG (3)
POUYADE Fabrice 1912 FRA v PARFETT Gerald 1647 ENG (3)