Suffolk League Team Strengths (Part 1)

Dave Wild, the Suffolk Grading Officer, has submitted the following statistics from the league season that has just ended.

The tables below show the average grade of the player on each board of a team and the final league positions.   The grades used are the January 2014 grades or a player’s current estimated grade.

For each division two extra columns have been added to the final league table.   The columns headed BACL and EACU show the points which would have been scored if the leagues had been run using that body’s rules.   In the Bury Area Chess League an extra point is given to a team which wins a match.   In the East Anglian Chess Union two points are awarded for a won match and one for a drawn match.

Division 2 was odd as the two strongest teams were in the last two places.   In Divisions 1 and 2 the top and bottom teams remain the same under the SCCA, BACL and EACU rules.   In Division 3 under the EACU rules then Clacton would be champions and Felixstowe would be awarded the wooden spoon.

Division 1 is shown below.   Divisions 2 and 3 will follow in the next couple of days.

DIVISION 1 Board 1 Board 2 Board 3 Board 4
Team Grade Score Grade Score Grade Score Grade Score Average Grade
Bury St Edmunds A 195.6 75.0 164.3 40.0 160.5 40.0 141.8 45.0 165.6
Bury St Edmunds B 175.7 25.0 174.8 65.0 161.9 35.0 149.6 70.0 165.5
Ipswich A 189.0 60.0 175.0 55.0 161.0 40.0 131.2 35.0 164.1
Ipswich B 176.0 20.0 177.0 55.0 149.7 35.0 134.4 65.0 159.3
Ipswich C 171.3 50.0 171.7 30.0 167.8 75.0 141.3 45.0 163.0
Manningtree A 196.0 70.0 158.6 55.0 159.4 75.0 148.3 40.0 165.6
Team Played Won Drawn Lost Points BACL EACU
Manningtree A 10 6 3 1 24 30 15
Ipswich C 10 4 3 4 20 24 11
Bury St Edmunds A 10 3 3 4 20 23 9
Bury St Edmunds B 10 2 6 2 19½ 21½ 10
Ipswich A 10 2 4 4 19 21 8
Ipswich B 10 2 3 5 17½ 19½ 7
4 thoughts on “Suffolk League Team Strengths (Part 1)
  1. Bob / Dave
    Just a nerdish statistician's comment. Wouldn't the average grades used in this exercise be more valid if the August 2013 grades were used. The January 2014 grades have already been contaminated with half the league results!

  2. That's one view, Anonymous (whoever you are). But you could look at it the other way and say that using August grades would be inaccurate for the second half of the season. Perhaps Dave should have averaged the two grades for everyone – a Herculean task!

  3. Lies, damn lies and statistics!
    The only accurate grade is the August one, as mine mysteriously always goes down in January…
    However Dave's painstaking analysis does seem to show that with the exception of the Ipswich C team which 'over performed' the rest of the division ended according to the average grade of the teams

    1. Hi All,

      Ian is right about the good performance of the Ipswich C team as they would have been runners up if they had not suffered a 1.5 point penalty for playing out of grade order.

      By the end of the season and with a revised estimated grade for the offending player this penalty would not have applied but the Competition Secretary has to work with the grades he sees at the time and so the penalty was correct.

      Roger Holt and Alonso Paez-Ramirez in particular had very good seasons. Well done Ipswich C.

      However with such an odd result, highest average graded team relegated, lowest average graded team potentially the runners up one wonders if such tables are actually connected very well with reality.

      David Green

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *