Post by admin on Mar 9, 2013 20:23:44 GMT
SLOW-PLAY LADDER TOURNAMENT
FINAL RESULTS 30 June 2013
Roy Webb is the winner both on ladder score 6 and Cumulative Score Times Opponent's Grade (CSTOG) 505.
Second is Ken Lucas on ladder score 4.5 and CSTOG 486.5.
The difference of CSTOG is only 18.5, so if Lucas had played and won one more game or Webb one game less say against grade 35, the award would have gone the other way.
P = games played, W = wins, D = draws, L = losses
S = standard score = W + D/2 = (2W + D)/2
CSTOG = Cumulative Score Times Opponent's Grade
See below for the list of games played
========
Update 24 June 2013
On the basis of the "STOG" (Score Times Opponent's Grade) system the lead is neck-and-neck between R.Webb and K.Lucas, although Webb heads the ladder by 6 to 4.5 on the standard score.
A new season will start on 1 July and end 31 December.
I'm proposing that the number of games any one player can play be restricted to 12 in a season, i.e. two per month. A player can streak ahead by playing weaker players, but will not necessarily win the award because under the STOG system wins against stronger players count for more.
Record of 21 games played (and 11 players)
Notes below as at 6 June:
I've altered the way the results are shown on the Ladder in the club room. Zero is now at the bottom of the ladder, a draw takes you up one step and a win takes you up two steps.
The Committee is proposing to make an award to the "best player" as based on games played up to the end of June (when results are sent for grading). I'm proposing that this be determined by using the TOG factor. This means the players score (0, 1 or 0.5) times opponent's grade. This counts wins against stronger opponents as better than wins against weak opponents. Sounds fair?
======
Update 5 April 2013
I have made the statement of the rules slightly more precise:
RULES
1. The games in this tournament will count for grading.
They are to be played at a standard rate which will normally be
36 moves in 90 minutes, plus 15 minutes to finish.
Each player must keep a record of the moves played.
They are best played in the quiet of the lower club room.
2. To take part, find an opponent who will agree to play.
Enter the result of the game on the sheet on the noticeboard.
Both players are then counted as players in the tournament.
Before playing the same opponent again with the same colour
you must play games with at least three other opponents.
3. Each week on a Thursday the tournament controller will
note the results and calculate each player's position on the ladder.
A win will move you up one rung, a loss will take you down one rung.
A new player may join the tournament at any time, with a zero score.
REPORT:
This tournament began on 1st March. Seven players have taken part so far: G Chandler, G Jelliss, K Lucas, W Penfold, R. Smart, L Steuart, R Webb and Nine games have been played. We need a few more players otherwise it is in danger of becoming an all-play-all tournament. The games can be infrequent (say one a week or month). Contact details for all members are listed in the upper club room.
George Jelliss
5 April 2013
============
PREVIOUS NOTICE:
A new Ladder Tournament for slow-play games (as opposed to rapid-play games) has now been publicised on the noticeboard in the upper club room, with effect from 1st March 2013.
Players are invited to take part. Please note that this competition should be regarded as supplementary to existing club tournaments. If you are entered into the other tournaments, those games should have priority. Below is the statement of rules that appears on the noticeboard:
SLOW-PLAY LADDER TOURNAMENT
RULES
1. The games in this tournament will be sent for grading.
They will be played at a standard rate which will normally be
36 moves in 90 minutes, plus 15 minutes to finish.
Each player must keep a record of the moves played.
2. To take part, find an opponent who will agree to play.
Play the game and record the result on the sheet alongside.
Both players are then counted as players in the tournament.
Try to play games against a wide variety of opponents.
3. Each week on a Thursday the tournament controller will
note the results and calculate each player's position on the ladder. A win will move you up one rung, a loss will take you down one rung. A new player may join the tournament at any time, with a zero score.
Notes:
To get the tournament started I am keeping these rules as simple as possible. Refinements may be needed at later stages but should not disrupt the basic plan.
The more games you play of course the better chance you have of getting higher up the ladder, or of course falling further down it! There is no limit on the number of games you can play in the tournament other than finding opponents willing and able to play.
If you have difficulty finding a player, contact me and I will try to arrange a pairing.
There may be awards for making advances up the ladder
or for keeping a high level for a long period.
I would be interested to know if there are players who would like to take part in this type of ladder competition but do not want their results sent for grading. If there is a demand this might be possible to organise.
George Jelliss
(slow-play ladder tournament controller)
====================
The first two games were played on Thursday 7 March.
So the ladder position is:
+1 Ken Lucas and Robert Smart
0
-1 Roy Webb and George Jelliss
FINAL RESULTS 30 June 2013
Roy Webb is the winner both on ladder score 6 and Cumulative Score Times Opponent's Grade (CSTOG) 505.
Second is Ken Lucas on ladder score 4.5 and CSTOG 486.5.
The difference of CSTOG is only 18.5, so if Lucas had played and won one more game or Webb one game less say against grade 35, the award would have gone the other way.
| Name Grade | P W D L | S | CSTOG |
| R. Webb 116 | 11 5 2 4 | 6 | 505 = 97 + 99 + 71 + 71 + 35 + 35 + 97 |
| K. Lucas 139 | 5 4 1 0 | 4.5 | 486.5 = 116 + 48.5 + 116 + 107 + 99 |
| W. Penfold 142R | 5 3 2 0 | 4 | 279 = 33 + 33 + 97 + 58 + 58 |
| G. Jelliss 97 | 8 2 2 4 | 3 | 181.5 = 44 + 33 + 69.5 + 35 |
| A. Luaces 175 | 1 1 0 0 | 1 | 116 |
| M. Dean 107 | 2 1 0 1 | 1 | 116 |
| R. Smart 99 | 1 1 0 0 | 1 | 97 |
| G. Chandler 88 | 1 0 1 0 | 0.5 | 48.5 |
| A. Pontonutti 99 | 2 0 0 2 | 0 | 0 |
| H. Stephens 35 | 3 0 0 3 | 0 | 0 |
| L. Steuart 33 | 3 0 0 3 | 0 | 0 |
| 11 players 1130 | 42 17 8 17 | 21 | total: 1829.5 |
P = games played, W = wins, D = draws, L = losses
S = standard score = W + D/2 = (2W + D)/2
CSTOG = Cumulative Score Times Opponent's Grade
See below for the list of games played
========
Update 24 June 2013
On the basis of the "STOG" (Score Times Opponent's Grade) system the lead is neck-and-neck between R.Webb and K.Lucas, although Webb heads the ladder by 6 to 4.5 on the standard score.
A new season will start on 1 July and end 31 December.
I'm proposing that the number of games any one player can play be restricted to 12 in a season, i.e. two per month. A player can streak ahead by playing weaker players, but will not necessarily win the award because under the STOG system wins against stronger players count for more.
Record of 21 games played (and 11 players)
| Date | White | Black | Result |
| 1/3 | R.Webb | K.Lucas | 0-1 |
| 7/3 | R.Smart | G.Jelliss | 1-0 |
| 14/3 | G.Jelliss | R.Webb | 0-1 |
| 15/3 | G.Chandler | G.Jelliss | draw |
| 21?/3 | L.Steuart | W.Penfold | 0-1 |
| 21?/3 | W.Penfold | L.Steuart | 1-0 |
| 28/3 | L.Steuart | G.Jelliss | 0-1 |
| 28/3 | W.Penfold | G.Jelliss | 1-0 |
| 4/4 | G.Jelliss | K.Lucas | draw |
| 11/4 | K.Lucas | R.Webb | 1-0 |
| 16/4 | R.Webb | A.Pontonutti | 1-0 |
| 26/4 | M.Dean | R.Webb | 1-0 |
| 27/4 | R.Webb | W.Penfold | draw |
| 2/5 | M.Dean | K.Lucas | 0-1 |
| 5/5 | W.Penfold | R.Webb | draw |
| 7/5 | A.Pontonutti | K.Lucas | 0-1 |
| 20/5 | R.Webb | H.Stephens | 1-0 |
| 20/5 | H.Stephens | R.Webb | 0-1 |
| 21/5 | H.Stephens | G.Jelliss | 0-1 |
| 30/5 | R.Webb | G.Jelliss | 1-0 |
| 16/6 | R.Webb | A. Luaces | 0-1 |
Notes below as at 6 June:
I've altered the way the results are shown on the Ladder in the club room. Zero is now at the bottom of the ladder, a draw takes you up one step and a win takes you up two steps.
The Committee is proposing to make an award to the "best player" as based on games played up to the end of June (when results are sent for grading). I'm proposing that this be determined by using the TOG factor. This means the players score (0, 1 or 0.5) times opponent's grade. This counts wins against stronger opponents as better than wins against weak opponents. Sounds fair?
======
Update 5 April 2013
I have made the statement of the rules slightly more precise:
RULES
1. The games in this tournament will count for grading.
They are to be played at a standard rate which will normally be
36 moves in 90 minutes, plus 15 minutes to finish.
Each player must keep a record of the moves played.
They are best played in the quiet of the lower club room.
2. To take part, find an opponent who will agree to play.
Enter the result of the game on the sheet on the noticeboard.
Both players are then counted as players in the tournament.
Before playing the same opponent again with the same colour
you must play games with at least three other opponents.
3. Each week on a Thursday the tournament controller will
note the results and calculate each player's position on the ladder.
A win will move you up one rung, a loss will take you down one rung.
A new player may join the tournament at any time, with a zero score.
REPORT:
This tournament began on 1st March. Seven players have taken part so far: G Chandler, G Jelliss, K Lucas, W Penfold, R. Smart, L Steuart, R Webb and Nine games have been played. We need a few more players otherwise it is in danger of becoming an all-play-all tournament. The games can be infrequent (say one a week or month). Contact details for all members are listed in the upper club room.
George Jelliss
5 April 2013
============
PREVIOUS NOTICE:
A new Ladder Tournament for slow-play games (as opposed to rapid-play games) has now been publicised on the noticeboard in the upper club room, with effect from 1st March 2013.
Players are invited to take part. Please note that this competition should be regarded as supplementary to existing club tournaments. If you are entered into the other tournaments, those games should have priority. Below is the statement of rules that appears on the noticeboard:
SLOW-PLAY LADDER TOURNAMENT
RULES
1. The games in this tournament will be sent for grading.
They will be played at a standard rate which will normally be
36 moves in 90 minutes, plus 15 minutes to finish.
Each player must keep a record of the moves played.
2. To take part, find an opponent who will agree to play.
Play the game and record the result on the sheet alongside.
Both players are then counted as players in the tournament.
Try to play games against a wide variety of opponents.
3. Each week on a Thursday the tournament controller will
note the results and calculate each player's position on the ladder. A win will move you up one rung, a loss will take you down one rung. A new player may join the tournament at any time, with a zero score.
Notes:
To get the tournament started I am keeping these rules as simple as possible. Refinements may be needed at later stages but should not disrupt the basic plan.
The more games you play of course the better chance you have of getting higher up the ladder, or of course falling further down it! There is no limit on the number of games you can play in the tournament other than finding opponents willing and able to play.
If you have difficulty finding a player, contact me and I will try to arrange a pairing.
There may be awards for making advances up the ladder
or for keeping a high level for a long period.
I would be interested to know if there are players who would like to take part in this type of ladder competition but do not want their results sent for grading. If there is a demand this might be possible to organise.
George Jelliss
(slow-play ladder tournament controller)
====================
The first two games were played on Thursday 7 March.
So the ladder position is:
+1 Ken Lucas and Robert Smart
0
-1 Roy Webb and George Jelliss