Team 45 45 League

Team 45 45 League

Serious Chess and Team Spirit on the ICC
Steering Committee members:
      Permanent Members:
  DaveTheRook (chair), BosqueVerde, chesskix, rgadoury
      General Members:  A-Ru, bmw2002, f5, Gomer, Kingofknights

Standing Subcommittee (Rules):
      rgadoury (chair), BosqueVerde, chesskix, f5/fpawn

Standing Subcommittee (Technology):
     bmw2002 (chair), AlPearson, BosqueVerde, chesskix, DaveTheRook, fledermaus, Gomer, rgadoury

The role and purpose of the Steering Committee is to manage the affairs of the league, to set its direction and expansion, see to its advertisement and management, writing the Constitution, Statutes and Handbooks, and reviewing the rulings of the previous Oversight Committee. This is the ultimate governing body of Team 45 45 League with all rights and responsibilities. (Article III of the League Constitution)

League Members may stay informed of potential rules changes by watching this page. Prior to voting results being displayed here, members may make their comments known by notifying any Steering Committee member, who may choose to forward your comments to the Steering Committee. The Committee members will not disclose any details of the Committee discussions.

Item 1 - T35 Tournament Parameters - Approved
Item 2 - Editorial Clarification in 13.F

Item 1.  T35 tournament parameters
Submitted by the Chief TD; September 14th, 2007.

Time Control: 45 45
Sections: 5 (U2200, U2000, U1800, U1600, U1300)
Rounds: 6 - (possibly 7) followed by Playoffs

Team entries accepted: September 25th, 2007 - October 9th, 2007.
Team Entry Deadline: October 9th, 2007.
Ratings "fixed" starting September 4th, 2007.
(Some ratings may be adjusted by the Entry Clerk)

Round 1 Posted: 22:00 October 16th, 2007.
Three rounds of playoffs will end January 1st, 2008 (P3 extended one week).

Count of team RR reductions (if any) precede board removal tie-breaks.
Tiebreak board removal rules start with board 1 this tournament.

Approved - 8 yes, 1 abstain; 16 Sept, 2007

Item 2. Editorial revision of Section 13.F to reflect changes per Item 8 of SC33-34.
Posted 29 Nov, 2007

The tie-break rule passed in SC33-34, Item 8. was not inserted in all necessary places in Section 13. It was just recently realized that it had not been included in 13.F, tiebreaks of 2-2 playoff matches before board removal. As the playoffs are due to start Dec. 4, and documentation indicates that such matches were to be included, the following editorial change has been made to the statute. SC members are asked to make any desired comments by 22:00 Dec. 2, 2007.

Section 13.F. is edited to read, in accordance with the vote on SC33-34 agenda Item 8 and as already amended to 13.B.ii.a.4 and 13. H. Supporting documentation follows.

  1. See also 13.I When it is necessary to specify a winner in a single match that ends as a 2 game to 2 game draw, the following procedure shall be used to determine that winner:
    1. (new) Fewest number of Reliability Rating Reductions (forfeits) ¶ SC33-34
    2. ii. The results are modified by removing the results of the Board 4 game,
    3. iii. The results are modified by removing the results of the Board 3 and 4 games,
    4. iv. The results are modified by removing the results of the Board 2, 3 and 4 games, then:
    5. v. A coin toss

From letter sent to all SC members on Sept. 4, 2007. There were no letters of objection following this summation.

“I don’t understand the problem. It is well defined that Head to Head comes first so why complicate the Tie-Breaking process … just follow the order listed. As far as playoffs go this tie-breaker has much more merit that a Coin-Toss. It rewards teams with good stewardship and Captains who do their job well. Yes, a Captain RR deduction should count like any other and yes this method is valid in the playoffs.

“I have seen numerous Playoff matches decided by a forfeit so hopefully this will help reverse that trend. In individual play this may not seem the best method but this is Team Chess so the best team should win. I also don’t see how the floor rating has any affect on this rule. We voted this in … let’s not second guess it before it has even been tried.”

Previous SC Agendas:










Sponsors: Prizes donated by ICC