Monday, November 17, 2025

Early Winter Swiss is underway - R3 Results, R4 Tentative Pairings - BLITZ QUADS 11/26 THIS EVENT RESUMES 12/3

Hi all - Remember Blitz Quads next week, 11/26 - below are the R3 results and potential R4 pairings for when this event resumes on 12/3.

Also - please do review the recent email and blog post about changes approved by the WCC Board last night. Hoping everyone will agree that these changes will help improve the competitiveness games and make everyone's time at WCC a little more fun. Feedback is welcome (and was solicited ahead of time), but these changes have been adopted, and we'd like to see how they work out over the next several months.

Thanks and see you next Wed.

(Last update: Fri, 21-Nov 8:45AM)

John D

Open Section Crosstable
No. Player Name Rating R1 R2 R3 R4 Total
1 Lilly, Hobart W (7) 1700 W14 W8 W5 3.0
2 Seghers, Evan C (1) 2151 D9 W20 W11 2.5
3 Krause, Aaron Paul (3) 1822 -H- W10 W12 2.5
4 Eszes, Zoltan (4) 1763 W21 D12 W13 2.5
5 Mishra, Ashish Kumar (2) 1906 W22 W7 L1 2.0
6 Grochowski, Robin J (6) 1701 D13 -H- W15 2.0
7 Sloan, Nicholas (8) 1697 W16 L5 W18 2.0
8 Jensen, Alex D (10) 1637 W18 L1 W17 2.0
9 Gendloff, Elie (12) 1600 D2 D15 W19 2.0
10 Coons, James Jay (5) 1725 D15 L3 X20 1.5
11 De Mastri, John (9) 1676 W17 -H- L2 1.5
12 Kerns, Benjamin (11) 1626 W19 D4 L3 1.5
13 Chaveriat, Lee (16) 1359 D6 W22 L4 1.5
14 Ninneman, Adam (17) 1345 L1 -H- W22 1.5
15 Senthil, Aadit (15) 1424 D10 D9 L6 1.0
16 Kopp, Ed (18) 1331 L7 L19 -B- 1.0
17 Everette, Samuel (19) 1040 L11 W21 L8 1.0
18 Waller, Matt (20) 916 L8 -B- L7 1.0
19 Butler, Michael S (21) 893 L12 W16 L9 1.0
20 Sendhilkumar, Shivasanjit (22 811 -B- L2 F10 1.0
21 Lawrence, Michael (14) 1455 L4 L17 -H- 0.5
22 Klandrud, Kevin (13) 1561 L5 L13 L14 0

Open Section Pairings
No. White Black
101. Lilly, Hobart W (3.0,1700) Seghers, Evan C (2.5,2151)
102. Krause, Aaron Paul (2.5,1822) Mishra, Ashish Kumar (2.0,1906)
103. Grochowski, Robin J (2.0,1701) Gendloff, Elie (2.0,1600)
104. Jensen, Alex D (2.0,1637) Sloan, Nicholas (2.0,1697)
105. Coons, James Jay (1.5,1725) Kerns, Benjamin (1.5,1626)
106. De Mastri, John (1.5,1676) Chaveriat, Lee (1.5,1359)
107. Senthil, Aadit (1.0,1424) Ninneman, Adam (1.5,1345)
108. Waller, Matt (1.0,916) Kopp, Ed (1.0,1331)
109. Butler, Michael S (1.0,893) Everette, Samuel (1.0,1040)
110. Klandrud, Kevin (0.0,1561) Lawrence, Michael (0.5,1455)

Reserve Section Crosstable
No. Player Name Rating R1 R2 R3 R4 Total
1 Balachandran, Hrishid (2) 863 W6 X3 W2 3.0
2 Vinith, Pruthvi (1) 884 W4 W7 L1 2.0
3 Mading, James E (6) 600 W8 F1 W10 2.0
4 Slavik, Trinity (4) 773 L2 D6 W8 1.5
5 Landey, Charles N (5) 757 -H- X9 -N- 1.5
6 Yadav, Kush (7) 513 L1 D4 W7 1.5
7 Bucher, Peter (8) 458 W9 L2 L6 1.0
8 Jampani, Aaditya V (9) 194 L3 -B- L4 1.0
9 Stone, Emily (3) 800 L7 F5 -U- 0
10 Kalra, Aarav (10) nnnn -U- -U- L3 0

Reserve Section Pairings
No. White Black
201. Mading, James E (2.0,600) Balachandran, Hrishid (3.0,863)
202. Yadav, Kush (1.5,513) Vinith, Pruthvi (2.0,884)
203. Bucher, Peter (1.0,458) Slavik, Trinity (1.5,773)
204. Jampani, Aaditya V (1.0,194) Kalra, Aarav (0.0,nnnn)
Posted by at

12 comments:

  1. Evan SeghersNovember 3, 2025 at 8:24 AM

    I will be there on wednesday for the board meeting, just want to note I am completely FOR havings g60 quads, and think moving towards a system of maximizing competitiveness for all players will both make things more fun for the current player pool, and also encourage participation for higher rated players as they have guaranteed shots at more rating.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John DNovember 3, 2025 at 8:53 AM

      Are you playing in this event or just coming for the mtg?
      - There's been much (good) feedback about "quads are bad, ppl don't show up", was thinking that we reserve 4 weeks, with the last being a makeup, and blitz (rated??) for the 95% or folks that don't need a makeup.
      - I really do like the idea of a ladder - there should always be someone nearby to play. Maybe it's a signup thing rather than a challenge system, and we randomize the pairings so you play someone within a class or so, but don't directly choose your pairings. don't know :)

      Delete
  2. RobinNovember 3, 2025 at 1:47 PM

    My view on this: A quad will not work unless the players in the quad can assure the TD they can be present for all rounds. A make-up round will not work because the player who did not get a game earlier because his opponent did not show up (say for round 2) might not be able to play on the make-up night. The player who was there for round 2 but had no opponent that night should not be punished because they could not be there on the make-up night. If someone does not show up, it should go down as a forfeit and the other player should receive 1 point. This is not ideal for a quad but I feel it would be unfair for the player who showed up and had no game to be punished if they could not make it for the make-up round. Another idea perhaps: You could have a quad rule where if you say you will show up and do not, you will be fined $10. Or perhaps run quads for players who will definitely show up for all three rounds, but also run a Swiss for players who believe they cannot make all the rounds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John DNovember 4, 2025 at 4:46 AM

      The problem is enforcement. $10 fine doesn't matter to a ghost. I have a bunch of prize envelopes for ppl who only show once twice per year if that. Maybe only eligible for quads if you've got at least 10 games in the last six months and no more than 1 forfeit (sometimes you have a tire pop on the highway...) with some kind of rated ladder play for ppl who want to play but aren't eligible to commit to the quad... (Chris' comments below are good about the ladder, but here it can be ad-hoc and more easily paired)

      Delete
    2. John DNovember 4, 2025 at 4:56 AM

      Running a Swiss at the same time just pulls ppl away from the quads (the "real" event). Offering something that's just that night would push ppl looking for tournament play into the quads. If we're going to offer it once or twice a year we should try to maximize participation.

      Delete
  3. Southwest Chess ClubNovember 3, 2025 at 2:32 PM

    I remember the Ladder system from my first club, back in 1972. But, that was really before ratings were regularly updated. As an up & coming player, it was fun to leapfrog players above me. But, having said that, I don't like a Ladder system now.

    I do like Round Robins. In order to make Quad RRs work well, what we've sometimes done at SWCC is to have Three G/30's in a night. That way, they're dual-rated, it's a complete RR, and it's all done in one night. The downside is that not everyone likes to risk their regular rating. The solution: Have multiple sections... some G/25;d5 (dual-rated), plus some G/24;d5 (quick-only rated).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John DNovember 4, 2025 at 4:50 AM

      All reasonable. If the point is more competitive classical play, jamming 3 x g30 into one night might not be the way to get there :) I think if we can find a way to fix slow quads, people would respond well to it. I know that's a big "if"...

      Delete
  4. SenthilNovember 4, 2025 at 3:32 PM

    Please sign Aadit up for the Open section of the tournament tomorrow. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  5. senthilNovember 12, 2025 at 1:56 PM

    Aadit will be late to the round but will be there

    ReplyDelete
  6. DudeimthebestNovember 21, 2025 at 2:25 AM

    are you playing in week 4 Emily Stone?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nicholas SloanNovember 22, 2025 at 8:02 AM

    Hello John. I emailed you direct but I need a 4th round bye. Thanks. Nick

    ReplyDelete
  8. John DNovember 22, 2025 at 2:51 PM

    got you , Nick, thanks

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)