Grassroots chess in Papua New Guinea is really taking off at the moment. The visit by GM Nigel Short last year was the impetus for the formation of a number of clubs in Port Moresby, and the involvement of new administrators and organisers has seen a real boom in the number of events and players.
Here is a short news story covering recent developments
I normally avoid talking about my QC work on this blog, mainly because this is not the forum for official discussions or press releases. However, there are times when internal discussions are of a less 'classified; nature, and are of sufficient interest to share.
At the moment a discussion concerning the 'farming' of rating points from events (blitz and rapid mainly) is ongoing. As part of this, I've proposed a definition of 'farming'
It is when a player does the following
(1) Plays a minimum of 5 games in an event
(2) Plays 66% of opponents who are rated 400 points below them
(3) Scores 100% against these opponents
(4) and does not lose any games against the remaining players (wins or draws are OK)
Forfeit wins, byes and default losses do not count
Does this make sense, or is there a better definition?
During a tournament game, spectators are not allowed to interfere. They cannot point out illegal moves, alert players to flag-fall, or remind players to press their clocks. If they notice an illegality, they instead can inform the tournament arbiter of what they have seen, and allow the arbiter to take the appropriate action.
So what happens if a spectator sees an illegal move played by a "playing" arbiter, and the illegality isn't noticed/claimed by the opponent?
I've only been back two and a half days, and I have already been the arbiter at 2 events. Yesterday was my normal Street Chess event, while today was the ACTJCL Spring Rapid.
As it was a junior event (with some new players), I was trying to keep a close eye on the games, in case anything weird happened. So when I wandered past a game where it was still in the opening, and the White King was on f1 and the White Rook was on e1, I began to suspect something had gone wrong. However the two players seemed unconcerned (despite the rook on e1 pinning a piece to the Black King) so I waited until the end of the game to check what had happened.
It turned out I as right not to involve myself, as the game actually began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nxe5 Qd4 6.Nf3 Qxe4+ 7.Qe2 Qxe2+ 8.Kxe2 Nf6 9.Re1 Be7 10.Kf1 , which matched the position I saw
I am now back in Canberra, and looking forward to running Street Chess tomorrow. The 3 months away certainly had a number of highlights, but to spend the next 3 weeks writing them on this blog would be a little boring. Nonetheless, if you run across me in person, I'm always happy to share a story or two.
Topics may or may not include:
After 3 months away from Australia, it is time to head home. Most of my chess activity was related to being an arbiter, as I worked on or ran 5 events over the last 3 months. However I did squeeze in some actual games, playing both tournament and casual chess as I went.
If my memory hasn't failed me I played 18 tournament games during my time away. I managed to win 8, draw 7, and lose 3. I probably played another 10 or so casual games, where I think I won 5 and drew 5. So while not on the same scale as Capablanca's first tour of Europe, I was happy with the results I achieved.
Overall I spent around 30 of the 90 days away engaged chess activities, most of them as a tournament arbiter. While working at the Olympiad was the centerpiece of the trip, playing in the event at Appletreewick was definitely the highlight as a player.
After I get back, I will be straight back into arbiting and playing, with Street Chess this coming Saturday the first event on the calendar.
As I am coming to end of 3 months away from Australia, I thought I would get a little bit more chess in.
Today's event was the Stroud Rapid, played in of all places, Stroud (UK). It was a single section event played with a time limit of 15m+5s. There were around 56 players taking part, and it was a 6 round tournament.
I was seeded 11th in the event, and played to about my seeding, at list in terms of finishing position. In terms of opponents, it was a slightly different story, as all my opponents were rated below me. I started off with a draw and a win, but 3 more draws followed, as I was unable to grind out wins from pretty equal positions. A final round win in a dynamic position lifted me to 4/6. which was enough for a tie for 7th.
The tournament was well run, and played in a pretty relaxed manner. The time control meant there was around and hour between rounds, and with a lunch break thrown in, went for around six and a half hours. Interestingly, the prize structure was pretty flat, with 90 pounds for first, but a lot of 30 pound rating prizes.
If you want to see the final standings you can do so at https://chess-results.com/tnr986767.aspx?lan=1
