Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Re : Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

    Aman will have a chance at a norm in the Sponge Towels Quebec Open as he has been invited play in the Invitation section.

    http://www.fqechecs.qc.ca/index.php?...orie=1&id=2924

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Re : Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

      Originally posted by Marc Poulin View Post
      Aman will have a chance at a norm in the Sponge Towels Quebec Open as he has been invited play in the Invitation section.

      http://www.fqechecs.qc.ca/index.php?...orie=1&id=2924
      Awesome! A good move by the Quebec Chess Federation!

      This young man is dressed to kill :)

      Afterall, not only can he impress at the board but he won a total of 4 prizes at the 2010 Canadian Open including...best dressed...as judged by a major sponsor of the event...Mark's Warehouse :)

      No further comment :)

      Larry

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Re : Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

        Originally posted by Felix Dumont View Post
        The Quebec Open is a very good tournament for norms too. There are about 25 players in the first section, and only 6 of them don't have a FIDE title.
        25 players is a bad number. The number must be even. At 25 players, in each round, a player will get a point without playing and will loose his norm chances. 9 players out of 25 would be eliminated from the norms.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Close to a GM norm.

          Originally posted by Stephen Wright View Post
          The changed FIDE title regulations are to blame. Before July 1, 2009 Aman's result would have earned him an IM norm with a point to spare, and a win in the last round would have given him a GM norm. Under the new rules you are only allowed to raise one player to the adjusted rating floor (2050 for IM), and any other unrated opponents are counted the same as the overall rating floor, which FIDE in its infinite wisdom has now dropped to 1200. Hence unfortunately no norm at all for a stellar result.
          At first I thought that he only needed to draw his last game for his IM norm, but that "1200" opponent dropped his average opponent rating to just 2 points below the norm requirement.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

            I think a case can be made to FIDE considering one of his unrateds (Ng) had a FIDE rateable performance.

            I would say compared to Europe where FIDE ratings are commonplace in a lot of countries, for club players, we should be given some slack and let this "1200" be considered at least 1218.

            We'll have to hear from Hal, as he's the man with the "in".

            Comment


            • #21
              Re : Re: Re : Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

              Originally posted by Pierre Denommee View Post
              25 players is a bad number. The number must be even. At 25 players, in each round, a player will get a point without playing and will loose his norm chances. 9 players out of 25 would be eliminated from the norms.
              I said ''about''. The final number of participants will always be even, the FQE is sending invitations on this fact.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Aman Hambleton - IM norm?

                I did a quick calculation and Ng would have a 5 game performance rating of 2023..... just a tad stronger from 1200/1218.

                Also, if the FIDE probability tables were extended to 3 digits, Aman's .72 % would be .722 and this would be worth an extra 2 points. Multiply this by nine games and he hits the nail on the head.

                It's probably a moot point as he's going to have any trouble getting his norms if he keeps this level of play up.

                In any case, I'm still beaming from the fact that I was one of his earliest coaches (during his family's brief "posting" in PEI), and this past week is the closest I'll ever get to a "GM scalp".

                Comment

                Working...
                X