Winter (Jan) 2015 SSC Tournament Results

Final Results of the Sarasota Scholastic Chess Tournament, Jan 25, 2015

 

Adult Open

# Name Rtng Post Team Grd Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Tot TBrk[M] TBrk[S] TBrk[O]
1 Leverich, Steve 1940 1924 SVCC A L4 W8 W2 W3 W6 4.0 11.5 14 46
2 Armstrong, Brooks 1408 1509 SVCC A X12 D9 L1 W5 W3 3.5 12 12 38.5
3 Faragalla, Sandy 1540 1566 SVCC A W10 W4 W5 L1 L2 3.0 13 14.5 43.5
4 Romero, Jorge 1500 1573 SVCC A W1 L3 W9 D6 D7 3.0 11.5 13.5 42
5 Basse, Philip 1450 1518 SVCC A W7 W6 L3 L2 W9 3.0 10.5 12.5 41
6 Rubin, Remey 1500 1501 SVCC A W11 L5 W10 D4 L1 2.5 7.5 12.5 37.5
7 Napolillo, John 1722 1664 SVCC A L5 L10 B--- W8 D4 2.5 7 10 31
8 Chesna, Julius 1300 1381 SVCC A D9 L1 W11 L7 W10 2.5 5.5 10.5 29
9 Gantz, Steven 1524 1485 SVCC A D8 D2 L4 W11 L5 2.0 9.5 12.5 38
10 Schleppi, Bob 1380 1368 SVCC A L3 W7 L6 B--- L8 2.0 7 10 32
11 Devore, Harold 1300 1257 SVCC A L6 B--- L8 L9 U--- 1.0 4.5 7 22
                             

K-12 U1200 / Scholastic Open

# Name Rtng Post Team Grd Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Tot TBrk[M] TBrk[S] TBrk[O]
1 Probus, Jaden 1047 1125 NG 4 W4 W5 W7 W2 D3 4.5 13.5 16 48.5
2 Patrick, Chris 961 1034 PVS 7 W9 W6 W5 L1 W7 4.0 13 14.5 47
3 Klinger, Josh 782 852 CAS 8 W12 L7 W4 W9 D1 3.5 11.5 11.5 36.5
4 Tanner, Sebastian 720 738 SE 5 L1 W10 L3 W8 W9 3.0 11.5 13 37.5
5 Bodor, Ellie 887 867 PVS 8 W10 L1 L2 W11 W12 3.0 11.5 11.5 35
6 Sykes, Ethan 768 769 PVS 10 W11 L2 W8 D7 D10 3.0 10 11.5 35.5
7 Ginsberg-Klemmt, Ari 1016 975 PVS 7 W8 W3 L1 D6 L2 2.5 10.5 17 52.5
8 Bodor, Karina 579 564 PVS 6 L7 W12 L6 L4 W11 2.0 7 10 31.5
9 Kanumuri, Nithin 567 540 PVS 8 L2 D11 W10 L3 L4 1.5 9.5 13.5 38
10 Press, James 442 448 HS 8 L5 L4 L9 W12 D6 1.5 7.5 10.5 29.5
11 Soukup, Carmen 233 318 HS 6 L6 D9 W12 L5 L8 1.5 6.5 9.5 27.5
12 Gruttadauria, Garrett 435 339 SSAS 8 L3 L8 L11 L10 L5 0.0 8 11.5 31

K-5 U700

# Name Rtng Post Team Grd Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Tot TBrk[M] TBrk[S] TBrk[O]
1 Yanevich, Ryan 395 603 BDGE 5 W15 W8 W5 L4 W13 4.0 13.5 15.5 45.5
2 Moscicki, Rafal 470 624 ASH 4 W21 W14 W7 W3 L4 4.0 13 14.5 46.5
3 Siwicki, Ricky 515 600 PVS 5 W17 W19 W6 L2 W9 4.0 12.5 14.5 46
4 Gilkey, Banyan 636 653 SE 5 L8 W22 W23 W1 W2 4.0 12.5 13.5 45
5 Oser, Vince 543 607 ASH 2 W23 W13 L1 W14 W7 4.0 11.5 12.5 45
6 Urfer, Joshua 222 482 SE 5 W16 W10 L3 D13 W14 3.5 11.5 13.5 45
7 Klinger, Tyler 677 641 CAS 5 W11 W9 L2 W8 L5 3.0 14 17 51
8 Lopin, Colin 255 498 HS 4 W4 L1 W10 L7 W16 3.0 14 16 49
9 Juckett-Malone, Luca 379 445 SE 5 W18 L7 W15 W16 L3 3.0 11 13 42.5
10 Witherspoon, Robert 411 399 CAS 5 W25 L6 L8 W20 W17 3.0 10.5 11.5 31
11 Powers, Samuel 289 300 SE 5 L7 L15 W24 W21 W18 3.0 8.5 9.5 30
12 Freeman, Wesley 154 226 SE 5 L14 L21 W25 W24 W22 3.0 6 7 20.5
13 Brum, Avery 392 390 PSE 5 W26 L5 W21 D6 L1 2.5 9 14 40.5
14 Swick-Custer, Jayden 365 357 SE 5 W12 L2 W18 L5 L6 2.0 12.5 16.5 49
15 Fuller, Raj 179 213 SE 4 L1 W11 L9 D22 D20 2.0 9.5 13.5 40
16 Fic, Alexander 622 514 SE 5 L6 W24 W19 L9 L8 2.0 9 12.5 39
17 Choy, Timothy 200 203 GGE 4 L3 L18 W26 W19 L10 2.0 8 12 33
18 Flores, David 172 191 SE 4 L9 W17 L14 W23 L11 2.0 8 11 33
19 Hibnick, Erin 299 271 SE 5 W20 L3 L16 L17 W23 2.0 7 11 35
20 Murphy, Conor 126 138 SE 5 L19 W25 D22 L10 D15 2.0 6.5 9.5 24.5
21 Lewis, Jacobi 200 181 CAS 4 L2 W12 L13 L11 D24 1.5 9.5 13.5 38
22 Harris, Grady 290 213 PVS 4 D24 L4 D20 D15 L12 1.5 8 12 30.5
23 Lange, Felix 218 167 SE 5 L5 W26 L4 L18 L19 1.0 9 13 34
24 Gregory, Jackson 100 100 SE 4 D22 L16 L11 L12 D21 1.0 8 11 28.5
25 Spriggs, Joshua 200 104 KE 3 L10 L20 L12 U--- U--- 0.0 5 8 20
26 Hembree, Jace 174 100 SE 3 L13 L23 L17 U--- U--- 0.0 3 5.5 18

K-3 U500

# Name Rtng Post Team Grd Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Tot TBrk[M] TBrk[S] TBrk[O]
1 Banyard, Trey 310 434 SE 3 W12 W10 D3 D4 W8 4.0 11.5 13 40
2 Westover, Zachary 270 390 SE 3 L5 W14 W7 W6 W3 4.0 11.5 12 38
3 Gruttadauria, Weston 243 419 SE 3 W7 W4 D1 W11 L2 3.5 14 16 46
4 Brum, Noah 419 425 PSE 1 W13 L3 W10 D1 W11 3.5 11.5 12.5 42
5 Van Nostrand, Keaton 110 222 NG 2 W2 L6 L13 W12 W10 3.0 10 11 32
6 Brum, Oliver 224 222 PSE 3 W14 W5 L11 L2 D7 2.5 7.5 12 33
7 Quartermaine, Ethan 105 188 SE 3 L3 W13 L2 W14 D6 2.5 7 11.5 36.5
8 Hembree, Jace 174 211 SE 3 H--- H--- H--- W9 L1 2.5 2.5 6.5 19.5
9 Spriggs, Joshua 200 187 KE 4 H--- H--- H--- L8 W14 2.5 0.5 3 9.5
10 Choy, Joshua 150 181 GGE 3 W11 L1 L4 W13 L5 2.0 9.5 13.5 40.5
11 Ginsberg-Klemmt, Maeva 425 335 PVS 3 L10 W12 W6 L3 L4 2.0 9.5 13 41.5
12 Hall, Will 110 100 SE 3 L1 L11 D14 L5 W13 1.5 6.5 10.5 32
13 Lopin, Jared 133 100 HS 2 L4 L7 W5 L10 L12 1.0 9 12.5 34
14 Lopin, Kaylee 100 100 HS 0 L6 L2 D12 L7 L9 0.5 9 13 35.5

School Team results: 

  • First place:  Southside Elementary
  • Second Place:  Pine View
  • Third Place:  The Classical Academy of Sarasota

Team scores were computed by totaling the top 4 finishers from each school team, with a bonus point added if a player had to play in a higher section based on his or her rating.  Tie scores in the team section were resolved by comparing additional players' results on each team. 

Notes:

This was our second time with and Open section for adults.  This was primarily comprised of local adult players from the Sarasota/Venice Chess Club.  Conspicuously missing from our tournament was the Venice Christian Chess Club.  We hope they'll return for our next one.  Trophies were awarded to the top six players in each section, including the adults.  Tie scores were resolved by Tiebreak calculations for the trophies. 

We accidentally had to third graders in the K-5 section for the first three rounds.  They were moved to the K-3 section for the last two rounds, receiving a half point for each of the three prior rounds.

Abbreviations:

ASH=Ashton, BDG= BD Gullett Elementary, BMS=Brookside Middle School, CAS=The Classical Academy of Sarasota, CC= Calvary Christian, CE = Cranberry Elementary, CM=Center Montessori, EA=Edison Academics, EAEE=European Academy of Early Education, FE=Fruitville Elementary, GGE=Gulf Gate Elementary, HS=homeschool, ICS = Incarnation Catholic School, ISPR=Imagine School at Palmer Ranch, IV=Island Village Montessori, KE=Kinnan Elementary, ME= McNeal Elementary, NG=NewGate, NMS=Nolan Middle School, PA=Pinnacle Academy, PSE=Phillippi Shores Elementary, PV=Pine View, SA=Suncoast Academy, SB=Sarasota Baptist, SCS=Sarasota Christian School, SE=Southside Elementary, SLA=Student Leadership Academy, SMA=Sarasota Military Academy, SMS=Sarasota Middle School, SSA=Sarasota Suncoast Academy, SSAS=Sarasota School of Arts and Sciences, SSE=St. Stephen’s Episcopal, SVCC=Sarasota Venice Chess Club, VCS=Venice Christian School

W=Win (1pt), L=Loss (0pts), D=Draw (0.5pts), B=Bye (1.0 pts if forced to take due to odd number of players), H=Half-point Bye (0.5 in first round if arranged in advance), U=Unregistered (arrived late, withdrew early, or transferred to different section due to initial error), F=loss by Forfeit, X=win by forfeit. 

Rtng- Starting rating was from current USCF rating (if based on at least 15 games and more recent than the prior SSC tournament), SSC rating obtained at the prior tournament, or an initial rating estimate based on grade level and number of years of experience.  Adult ratings in the Open section were from previous USCF rating, chess.com rating, and/or general estimate.

Post- New rating based on initial rating and this tournament's results.

TBrk- Tiebreak calculations.  Since there are many players with equal total point scores, tiebreak calculations are needed for sorting placements.  Various methods are used for these calculations:  M=Modified Median, S=Solkoff, O=Opposition Cumulative Score.  If players are still tied after comparison of the first method, it goes to the next and so on.  Basically, the main Tiebreak determinant is the combined point total of a player's top four opponents (lowest performing opponent's score is not counted).  Detailed explanations about these methods can be found here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tie-breaking_in_Swiss-system_tournaments . The order we prioritize these is similar to that used by USCF, but our third choice is not Cumulative since it is too dependent on initial ratings, which in our case are frequently rough estimates.

Comments: 

Pairings were made automatically by SwissSys 8 software, based on starting rating.  In the first round this sorts players by rating, then pairs the top half with the bottom half.  In the second round the players with wins in the first round are paired with each other while those that lost the first round are paired with each other.  In successive rounds, those with equal cumulative scores are paired with each other (except where there is an odd number in a score group).