HOMEPAGE

400/500 Forum

 

Dave Jaundrell(Penketh): Re the 400 League - We (Penketh) are just about to discuss that very issue in our next club-newsletter.
The members I have spoken to thus far are certainly in favour of increasing it from the current 400.
If the grades go up by about 25% (which seems likely) then perhaps the 400 League should do the same.
500 seems about right to me.

 

Richard Hughes(Central): I would go for 500 League.

 

Judy Brown(St. Helens): Looking at the grading conversions on the ECF website :-

 

Standard
Adult New Grade = 0.79 x Old Grade + 45
Junior New Grade = 0.76 x Old Grade + 64

http://grading.bcfservices.org.uk/newgrades.php

  

A 100 graded adult should convert to 124, and a 100-graded junior to about 140.

So I'd say 500 (4 x 125)  seems reasonable.

 

Paul Talbot(Wigan): Going off the new grades Wigan couldn't field a team this year under 400.  If we use 4 of our lowest 5 graded players we just make it to 450, but that doesn't give us much leeway if someone is unavailable.  I think the grade will have to rise to 500 or many teams will struggle and end up having to default boards simply because they don't have enough low graded players.

 

Steve Potter(St Helens): Here's my personal opinion, not authorised St Helens Chess Club.

 

Richard originally set up the 400 League to give lower graded players the chance to play ECF graded games, but they can now do that in the WDCL.  So the reasoning for the 400 League's existence is served by the WDCL.

When the 400 League started, there were very few division 2 players playing in it.  Now division one players are regularly seen.  I don't see this as a bad thing as it by default creates teams of first and fourth division players allowing a social mix of players that would rarely happen in the WDCL games.  (I had a particularly pleasant evening at Padgate last month, a venue I don't normally visit as a division 1 player.)   If the grades were to remain at 400 then this would cease to happen, but I think some clubs (Winwick?) would see this as a good thing.

 

If the grading limit was upped to 500, then I think there would be less chances for middle graded players to find 400 League games as the players at the higher end of the grading scales are increasing at a lower rate than those below them.  If the statistics are correct and the grades will be equivalent to 10 years ago, then the league would have the same standard of players as 10 years ago which as you say Runcorn would struggle to find.

Perhaps if the grading limit is increased there needs to be a rule forcing and/or preventing players of a certain grade from playing, IE (off the top of my head with no statistical back-up) no players over 150, and a minimum of 2 players under 100.  Or maybe scrap the total grading limit and just restrict it to all players graded below say 120?.

 

I think before a grading limit can be set it first needs to be understood what clubs' require from the 400 League.

 

Clinton Halsall(St. Helens): I like the mix of players. Like Ste said , with the current Grade limit and current grades we do get more of a mix in Teams.
I thought the primary reason for the 400 league was to allow lower graded players to get a BCF/ECF grade as only division 1 of the WDCL was graded.
Now that all of the WDCL is graded, then allowing only the lower graded players isn't necessary to achieve the old priorities.

I have noticed that the last 2 seasons have been very close but many of the previous seasons have been dominated by 1 or 2 teams.
This makes me believe that the current mix is good for the competition.

My expected "altered/new" grade is expected to rise to approx 120, that’s a 30% (ish rise but for no real rise in skill. if the 400 league rose by the same percentage then we would be looking at a 520 league!!
So if we lifted the limit to 450 or even 500 then I think it would still have the effect of lowering the "real" grade average per player. i.e. favours lower grades more.

 

Damian McCarthy(Padgate): Just to bring it to your attention a few people have posted about the 400 league next season in our club forum. which can be found here

http://padgatechess.freeforums.org/400-league-t11.html

 

Stephen Harrison(Northwich): I agree it should be 500.

 

Paul Talbot(Wigan): Some more thoughts on the grade rise.

 

My ECF grade this year is 108, but my new ECF grade is 134, an increase of roughly 25%. But, because of the way that the new ECF grades are calculated people with lower grades are getting a higher increase than those with higher grades; eg: Ian Bradbury at our club is grade 58 but his new ECF grade is 94, and increase of about 62%. Another example from our club is Dave Williams, current ECF 59, new grade 95 (an increase of 60%). And there's Joe Williams grade 67, new grade 94 (an increase of 40%) Those are our 3 lowest graded players, but they have an average rise of 54%. If that is carried out across all clubs then to just keep the 400 league at the same standard as it is now we are looking to increase it to 616, so increasing it to 500 is really lowering the standard by quite a lot. I originally thought we should increase it to 500 because I looked at my own grade and thought 25% increase, but perhaps we should be considering more?

 

Tom Vout(Culcheth/Lymm):
Based on this conversion from the ECF website:-

 Adult New Grade = 0.79 x Old Grade + 45

Any four players whose grades add to 400 would, on average, increase to 496 total. So it would seem natural to go for 500 as the new limit.

 

Jonathan Smith(Culcheth/Lymm:
Around 500 should be the limit. I would suggest is that the top board for a side should be capped to say (on the new grades) 150.

 

Nick Cooke(Culcheth/Lymm): From the two posts above, consensus at Culcheth-Lymm seems to be for 500.

 

Paul Talbot(Wigan): I had an hour spare this morning so I went through the 400 league scorecards up to 1st Jan 09 to see by what percentage the grades have risen. 

 

The were 58 different players played up to that date; and, if I just add their grades together we reach a total of 5308 which under the new grades rises to 6627, an increase of 25%  This calculation is skewed down somewhat though by the fact that some quite high graded players have turned out just the once for some clubs (ie Mark Ellis).

 

To get a more accurate picture we must add together the grades for every time a person has played.  Doing this we have a grade total of 12032 using the old grades and 15838 under the new.  This is an increase of 32% so to keep the 400 league to the same standard as it is now it should really become the 525 or 530 League.

 

Bernard Bedworth(Winwick): I was unaware of the new  E.C.F. grading structure when I replied to your first e.mail, It seems reasonable to change the 400 league to the 500 league.