Tuesday, 16 March 2010

Somerset Cup

Last night Glastonbury defeated Taunton 4.5-3.5 to win the Somerset Cup. I now have the full results thanks to Mike Richardt. There's a match report by Glastonbury on their website, which you can reach by clicking on the title of this posting, and a match report by Taunton in the comments.

Board 1: Rhys Cummings (Glast.) 0.5-0.5 Mike Redman (Tau.)
Board 2: Harry Streeter (Glast.) 0.5-0.5 Mark Hassall (Tau.)
Board 3: Sharan Soni (Glast.) 0.5-0.5 Mike Richardt (Tau.)
Board 4: Megan Owens (Glast.) 1-0 Nick Wilson (Tau.)
Board 5: Tony Bamford (Glast.) 0.5-0.5 Dave Littlejohns (Tau.)
Board 6: Tim Wallis (Glast.) 1-0 Jorge Pineda- Langford (Tau.)
Board 7: Ian Howe (Glast.) 0.5-0.5 Stan Wojack (Tau.)
Board 8: Paul Moody (Glast.) 0-1 Alex Conway (Tau.)


  1. A Conway 1 v P Moody 0

    Alex was first to finish. From a c3 sicilian, Alex managed to get a commanding rook on the 7th and then forced a pawn through to the 8th, thereby winning a rook and the game! Congratulations! Taunton lead 1 - 0.

    N Wilson 0 v M Owens 1

    Taunton's lead was short lived. I made a big fat ugly mistake and lost a piece in a way even a beginner would be ashamed of. Yuk.

    M Hassal 0.5 v H Streeter 0.5

    Mark played a solid game and always looked like he would be at least drawing.

    S Wojick 0.5 v I Holle 0.5

    Stan played really well to draw here. Ian has had a good season, previously drawing with both me and DaveL, so Stan's was a good result!

    At the halfway point, things were level. The remaining games were too close to call at this point, although Glastonbury had the bottom board advantage - should scores be level, they'd win on board count.

    J Pineda-Langford 0 v T Wallis 1

    Jorge was playing well and looked to have a good position. But suddenly in the late middle game he went astray and was caught in a mating trap.

    M Richardt 0.5 v S Soni 0.5

    I thought Mike might have been able to win this at one time. He, as black, had white cramped with a pawn on e3 stopping white's normal development. But by late middle game, both players were in time trouble, and after some exchanges, the game fizzled out to a drawn.

    D Littlejohns 0.5 v A Bamford 0.5

    Dave was always a bit cramped as black, but was holding solidly. Near the end, Tony offered him a draw, which I ordered, nay commanded, Dave to refuse. He did, but a few moves later a draw was the only option in a simple pawn chained end-game.

    M Redman 0.5 v R Cummings 0.5

    Mike was black in a sicilian and played sharp. But RC is a strong player and won a pawn in the middle game, displacing his queen slightly. Mike tried a flashy attack, but everything was swapped off and although whites pawns were largely isolated, after more swapping, a draw was agreed.

  2. Did A Bamford play any league matches this season? The Glastonbury website talks of him coming out of retirement for the game.

    But if he hadn't played any league matches, he would therefore not be eligible for the Glastonbury Cup team, which would then throw the entire result into confusion.

    Any Glastonbury player able to comment on this internet rumour?

  3. I've forwarded the comments to a few of the Glastonbury players, and invited them to either comment on here, or email me and I'll post them.

  4. Just had an email from Paul Moody: "Tony played for us on 12 November 2009 against Frome (and won)."

  5. 17th Nov. being the date, sorry.

  6. lol,

    If Paul means the first round Cup match Tony played then he is right. Tony did play....BUT I heard that the rules state that a player must have a played a game for the club (in the same season)to be allowed to play in the Cup.

    Mike Ward pointed out to me during the match that Tony should have played either board 3 or 4 as he is 11 points higher rated then Megan.

    I mean I can't really speak for the others but I don't really care where Tony played or if he was allowe to play etc.!!! They beat us on the night fair and square. And I guess if Tony wouldn't have played I think Matthew Turner would have stepped in anyway. So it's a catch 22.

    Also let's say Tony wasn't allowed to play and we would win that board by default we still would have lost the match because of the board count rule.

  7. If Tony's only other game was in the Cup, then he would have been ineligible for that too!

    As for the final - the argument that Glastonbury would have won via board count had TB defaulted is not correct or fair on Taunton as his presence in the team allowed players below him to have slightly easier games which would skew the result (and this is before the rather odd board order is taken into account - TB was rated the same as Glastonbury's board 2, yet he played on board 5).

    What is Glastonbury's final word on this - is he an eligible player or not? And if he is not, what do they say?

  8. The exact text of the Somerset League's rules on eligibility for the Cup is as follows:


    (a) League rules apply apart from the changes specified in (b), (c), (d).
    (b) Fixtures will be played over 8 boards, except by agreement between the captains.
    (d) Eligibility. (i) players have authentic connections with the club they represent, (ii) they have played at least once for the club in the Somerset league or the Bristol league."

    One wonders what the missing (c) is; I suspect it might have been a (now obsolete) rule that quickplay finishes were mandatory, or something like that. Anyway, on to the main point:

    It isn't clear from the wording of (d) whether (i) and (ii) are meant to be linked by an AND or an OR, nor whether (ii) means "within the current season". (It might be interesting to see what the ruling would be if a club's first league fixture is after
    its first cup fixture.)

  9. Based on that (as written), anyone is eligible - just sign up to be a member on the night and there is the authentic connection.

    Again, as written, TB clearly is eligible as (i) is not in doubt, and (ii) is met by games he's played in previous years gone by...

    But equally its clear what the spirit or intention of the rule is - only current club members who've also previously played in the current season are eligible for the Cup team. This is how we understood it and have previously excluded players based on that criteria. Cup fixtures are always at least 4-8 weeks after the league season start, so sometimes a player or two gets caught out by this rule. We never grumbled as we assumed everyone else played by the same rules.

    Out of interest, what do the rules say about putting higher rated players several boards lower than grading order?

  10. Rule 8c (KO Cup) states captains shall toss for colors.
    Rule 3a states in part that players shall be arranged as far as is practicable in known descending order of strength. I suppose one could allow a change in board order if the difference in grades is say 4/5 points subject to the players/captains agreement.