 |
| Front of the venue |
| Rk. | SNo | FED | Team | Games | + | = | - | TB1 | TB2 | TB3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | SLO | Slovenia | 9 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 16 | 266,5 | 28,5 | |
| 2 | 2 | ENG | England 1 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 254,5 | 28 | |
| 3 | 3 | ITA | Italy | 9 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 241,5 | 26,5 | |
| 4 | 5 | ISR | Israel 1 | 9 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 118,5 | 17 | |
| 5 | 12 | ISR | Maccabi Matnas Kiryat Yam | 9 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 10 | 100,5 | 18 | |
| 6 | 8 | ENG | England 2 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 142 | 18,5 | |
| 7 | 13 | ENG | England 3 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 135,5 | 19,5 | |
| 8 | 7 | SWE | Sweden 1 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 9 | 135 | 17 | |
| 9 | 6 | SUI | Switzerland 1 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 128 | 17,5 | |
| 10 | 9 | SUI | SG Riehen Switzerland | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 118 | 15,5 | |
| 11 | 4 | FIN | Finland | 9 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 146,5 | 17,5 | |
| 12 | 11 | POL | Polish Amateurs | 9 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 8 | 98,5 | 17 | |
| 13 | 14 | SWE | Sweden 2 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 92,5 | 16,5 | |
| 14 | 10 | DEN | Denmark | 9 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 8 | 92 | 16 | |
| 15 | 15 | IRL | Ireland | 9 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 95,5 | 15,5 | |
| 16 | 16 | GRE | Ageless of Crete | 9 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 76,5 | 13 | |
| 17 | 18 | ISR | Israel 2 | 9 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 75 | 11,5 | |
| 18 | 17 | ENG | England 4 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 69 | 11 |
Tie Break1: Matchpoints (2 for wins, 1 for Draws, 0 for Losses)
Tie Break2: Olympiad-Sonneborn-Berger-Tie-Break without lowest result (Chennai)
Tie Break3: points (game-points)
Board Player Score Rating Change
1. Tim R Spanton (2003) +4=2-3* +19.4
2. Jon A Freeman (1950) +0=6-3 -45.6
3. John M Guilfoyle (1921) +3=2-4 -8
4. Edgar Wilson (1903) +6=3-0 +54.2
*Included a win against a player without a Fide rating.
There is some controversy about the SB system used. There is an article here https://www.chess.com/news/view/the-olympiad-tiebreaks-have-to-change-grandmasters-say
ReplyDeleteIt would be simpler just to use game points but Slovenia would still have finished first. However, England 3 would have finished above England 2.
Yes, one or two of us noticed that. I was thinking of speaking to Nigel Povah about the advisability of renaming England 3 and so-called England 2.
DeleteYou did well. Congratulations!
ReplyDeleteThanks v much. As usual, my play was something of a curate's egg - good in parts (I drew with a GM!), but stunningly bad at other moments (too many basic tactical and positional errors). However, overall, I gained elo, so I shouldn't complain.
Delete