English Chess Forum

England have the bye today.
***
I have never spoken to Jim Plaskett or to Terry Chapman about this so I don''t know whether Jim prefers to play top board for England II in the World Teams (as he has done with success each year) or was just not invited to play on the England I team.
Terry and Nigel didn't play in 2015 so that could have been an opportunity to include Jim. That year Glenn Flear was captain and reserve with Mark Hebden on the team.
Presumably there is no money for an England entry in the EU senior teams; the event just doesn't have the same status. If the EU and Worlds were played in alternate years, maybe that could change.

England play Norway today. The top four will be in action. Ratings are close and it's a potentially winnable match. Then tomorrow it's the must-win match against the Finns.

Russia have the bye today. Belgium must beat the Serbs to guarantee silver but if they lose will possibly slip to fourth.
Belgium play Russia tomorrow and could in theory still win the tournament with two heavy wins.
In last year's World Teams Jan Rooze actually won against Russia - but he wasn't playing Sveshnikov.

In the Belgium-Serbia match in the over 65s, the Serbian board 3 (rated 2092) played 1 e4 e5 2 Bc4 Be7 as Black and the Belgian after some thought produced 3 Nc3 - shouldn't be too difficult to spot 3 Qh5, surely.

The Serbian Board 3 is, incidentally, the guy who beat Russian GM Pushkov yesterday. To go from that to playing 2 .. Be7 is, to say the least, startling.

John Moore wrote:In the Belgium-Serbia match in the over 65s, the Serbian board 3 (rated 2092) played 1 e4 e5 2 Bc4 Be7 as Black and the Belgian after some thought produced 3 Nc3 - shouldn't be too difficult to spot 3 Qh5, surely.

This happened to me in a league game nearly 20 years ago. 3 Qh5 does win a pawn and I played it, the reply being 3...g6. Somehow I messed up in time trouble and only drew.
The Belgian preferred to stay in a normal Bishop's Opening line with his opponent's bishop on a passive square, and it was 1-0 in 26.

It was a nice finish by the Belgian but 12 o-o-o by Milosavac was a horrible move which led to an automatic attack for White. The Serb continued to play very fast right to the end presumably not having seen the idea of Qc4 followed by Qc6.

Belgium won the match to secure silver medals at least.
England lost 1.5-2.5 to Norway (win on board 1, draw on board 3) but should win tomorrow to avoid the wooden spoon.

The last round starts in a few minutes. Belgium v Russia (65+) and Italy v Sweden (50+) will be shown online.
England, who have rested Majid, need to at least draw their match to avoid bottom placing.

The Russians are probably so far ahead on game points that they can afford to lose their match 0-4 unless head-to-head is first tiebreak.
Belgium may lose out to Denmark for the silver if the latter do well today.

The latter will decide silver and bronze in the 50+ since the leading Serbia team is playing another bunch of lower-rated Serbs so the outcome is hardly in doubt: they will either crush them or take a quick 2-2 draw to clinch gold.

Tim Harding wrote:Belgium won the match to secure silver medals at least.
England lost 1.5-2.5 to Norway (win on board 1, draw on board 3) but should win tomorrow to avoid the wooden spoon.

4-0 to England.

http://ruchess.ru/en/news/report/vetera ... er_control_/

Not a reply.
England did play in Serbia 65+.I never reported on our results as I was too despondent. We came 8th. That might seem fine, but there were only 9 teams competing. There were also 9 in the 50+, but 5 of those were Serbian.
Basically the European STCC cannot compete with the World STCC. One per year is enough for most players.
Sveshnikov asks where the money goes. Of course, the fewer players, the more the cost per player.
They are run to make money. I expect next year there will be a large number of teams, many of the German and England ghe second largest contingent, in the WSTCC in Radebeul. That will be a fine event. But it will be very Euro-centric. When I started the WSTCC in the IOM in 2004, part of the budget was reserved for the rest of the world. Australia and South Africa played. But that wouldn't attract more paying customers. So ther attitude is, why bother?

Sveshnikov's piece is quite interesting, and he is certainly right that Belgian IM Jan Rooze has been campaigning hard for FIDE seniors events to be run more for the benefit of the players and recognising the special needs of some 65+ players.
But if Sveshnikov thinks that prize money for 65+ championships should be uplifted for the benefit of the few people in our age category who, like him, are still full-time professionals, I think he will not get great support from the rank-and-file entrants who are mostly in the 1700-2250 rating range.

Tournaments in which top notch professionals play, seldom work on the concept that the ordinary players will pay for their participation with high entry fees. It works with Hastings, British, London Chess Classic with sponsorship or philanthropy. Russia sweeping the board at 65+ is not an interesting media story.
But, if the organisers put up the entry fees, it is likely the 'amateur' players will pay.

I'm not sure what point you are making here. The combined entry fee/FIDE fee for the World Seniors Individual this year and in the two previous years is 150 Euro, which is considerably higher than Reykjavik which has a high entry fee for amateurs (dependent on rating) but with a generous discount for seniors 65+, or Gibraltar (free entry if you stay at the Caleta).
So if this was increased above 150 Euro they would need to have additional prizes for rating bands and age bands. There is a 75+ prize which Vasiukov usually wins, but arguably they should have more.
Yes Russia wins the 65+ team events, and probably would even if other countries entered their strongest possible teams, but Russia (as opposed to Russian emigres) has not won the individual world championship for some years. Vaisser and Okhotnik represent France, Jens Kristensen is Danish.
Sveshnikov will probably be favourite this year, but he didn't win last year (his first as a 65+ player). See separate thread on the World Individuals.

TIM

Often organisers are reluctant to increase entry fees, particularly in Britain. They think there is a moral imperative to minimise the fees. Instead there should be a moral imperative to give value for money. Reykjavik is not comparing like with like.
If the organisers believed the partiipation of stronger players, and/or players from a wider range of countries, would lead to a better event, then they should act accordingly. So Sveshnikov's beef is not with the amateur players, but with the organisers or FIDE. Mine with the World Senior Teams, that it is almost totally Euro-centric, is again with the organisers or FIDE, not the players. I don't know how much effort goes into trying to secure publicity for these events. Possibly that is an impossible task. Why then, should there be fresh sponsors? I know of no senior based chess charity.
The ECF puts no money into senior chess. Possibly that is my fault for never having asked for any.