County teams 2011-12

A forum for the Midland Counties Chess Union.
Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Alex Holowczak » Fri Aug 26, 2011 11:05 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:
michele clack wrote: I suspect that Alex H is also down as a rapidly improving younger player with a lot expected of him. :D
Worcestershire are b****red then :lol:
:cry:

Sean Hewitt

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Aug 27, 2011 10:14 am

Carl Hibbard wrote:I could be persuaded to turn up for a laugh with a little arm twisting?
That's ll be £13 please :lol: :lol: :lol:

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sat Aug 27, 2011 10:32 am

Sean Hewitt wrote:
Carl Hibbard wrote:I could be persuaded to turn up for a laugh with a little arm twisting?
That'll be £13 please :lol: :lol: :lol:
No it won't. He's ungraded, and we won't go over the 3 game threshold. (We'll have 2 games in the MCCU stage, and probably lose our first in the National Stage...)

Also, it's a year early. :wink:

Sean Hewitt

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:16 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:
Carl Hibbard wrote:I could be persuaded to turn up for a laugh with a little arm twisting?
That'll be £13 please :lol: :lol: :lol:
No it won't. He's ungraded, and we won't go over the 3 game threshold. (We'll have 2 games in the MCCU stage, and probably lose our first in the National Stage...)

Also, it's a year early. :wink:
It's sad when this and this need to be explained!

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:51 am

Sean Hewitt wrote:It's sad when this and this need to be explained!
Well, I got it. I was just fearful that others wouldn't, and they'd then start the membership versus game fee debate in yet another thread...

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 8781
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:56 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:It's sad when this and this need to be explained!
Well, I got it. I was just fearful that others wouldn't, and they'd then start the membership versus game fee debate in yet another thread...
Well, I don't even intend to try and read that 19-page (soon to be more, no doubt) thread that sprung up recently...

Michele Clack
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:38 pm
Location: Worcestershire

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Michele Clack » Sat Aug 27, 2011 3:29 pm

Carl's not ungraded. He's down in the ECF list as 181, having played the odd game for Stratford.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:34 pm

michele clack wrote:Carl's not ungraded. He's down in the ECF list as 181, having played the odd game for Stratford.
Oh right, I knew he was ungraded last season, and didn't realise he played a game again. :oops:

raycollett
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:54 pm

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by raycollett » Mon Aug 29, 2011 9:58 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:OK, so suppose only two teams enter Division One.
I assume the competition controller, Julie would consult counties to propose a format that is acceptable to competing teams.

Sean Hewitt

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Sean Hewitt » Mon Aug 29, 2011 10:02 am

raycollett wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:OK, so suppose only two teams enter Division One.
I assume the competition controller, Julie would consult counties to propose a format that is acceptable to competing teams.
No need. The rules are clear - it's a match. It's happened a few times at U175/U180 level.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10310
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Mick Norris » Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:39 pm

michele clack wrote:I think the top board is the Latvian player who won the Worcestershire Open and has moved to Worcester. The juniors include the Friar brothers and Kyle Reed I believe. I suspect that Alex H is also down as a rapidly improving younger player with a lot expected of him. :D
Thanks
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Mick Norris
Posts: 10310
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Mick Norris » Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:43 pm

raycollett wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:OK, so suppose only two teams enter Division One.
I assume the competition controller, Julie would consult counties to propose a format that is acceptable to competing teams.
Ray

I assume we follow the MCCU rules :)

If it is just Staffs and Warks they play a match for the title and M1 nomination for the nationals - you might offer M3, if we get it, to the Div 2 teams, but they can surely just say no?

Div 2 first and second get the Minor nominations under MCCU Rules I think
Any postings on here represent my personal views

raycollett
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:54 pm

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by raycollett » Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:44 pm

[quote="Mick Norris]I assume we follow the MCCU rules :) [/quote]
I believe this is Julie's view. Votes re Open or Minor for Worcs are balanced on a knife edge today. Result late tonight.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:51 pm

Mick Norris wrote:If it is just Staffs and Warks they play a match for the title and M1 nomination for the nationals - you might offer M3, if we get it, to the Div 2 teams, but they can surely just say no?

Div 2 first and second get the Minor nominations under MCCU Rules I think
M1 and M2 will be decided by the Open. If we get 5 entries in Division One and Division Two, we're entitled to an M3 spots in the Open regardless of how many of those play in Division One. Whether a subsequent MCCU rule prevents this from being awarded due to only having two teams in Division One, I don't know.

If the Minor were a "normal" division, we could run our Division Two to the Minor rules and hope for three nominations. We can't though, because D4 of the ECF rules say we can only have two nominations regardless. Is there any reason for this? (There's usually a reason dating back to something that happened in 1965 which is the reason we have it today...)

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Post by David Sedgwick » Tue Aug 30, 2011 5:49 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:If the Minor were a "normal" division, we could run our Division Two to the Minor rules and hope for three nominations. We can't though, because D4 of the ECF rules say we can only have two nominations regardless. Is there any reason for this? (There's usually a reason dating back to something that happened in 1965 which is the reason we have it today...)
You're correct that the situation has arisen largely for historical reasons.

However, the presumption is that, if a Union has five or more teams in its Open Division, the top three qualify for the Open Division of the National Stages and the next two for the Minor Counties Championship.

If the MCCU were allowed two teams in the Open and three in the Minor, the other Unions could reasonably ask why the MCCU were being given special treatment.

It's not too late for the MCCU to submit a propsed rule change for consideration at the October Council Meeting, if they consider that appropriate.

Post Reply