The Ladder.

Otago Witness, Issue 2161, 25 July 1895, Page 44

The Ladder.

Believing that this system of dealing with the classification of players will be found of general service, we publish the rules in extenso. The invention is not, as stated in last issue, the sole inventio^of Mr EL J. Cleland, but the joint elaborationJpf'Mr R. A. Cleland, ex-president, and Mr W. J.'uleland, hon. secretary, of the Otago Chess Club. Possibly experience may hereafter indicate the need of alterations in the rules. As they stand at present there is only one point that seems to call for a little animadversion. That is, the peculiar privileges given to the champion. In fact we dislike the title of champion and heartily wish that some term that savoura less of the prize ring could be found for the most worthy player in a match or of a club. In the second place, we heartily believe in the democratic maxim that "one man is as pood as another and a deuced deal better." Privileges appertain to a paßt, or at least a decaying, order of things which will ultimately perish. As regards the rules in question, there seems no good reason why the ephemeral championship of a chess club should be specially guarded and sot above all others in this— that it is nece*s»ry to win two matches in order to be ranked in the same class with him and only one match to rise a step in any other class.

EULES OF "THE LADDER." 1. All members of the club shall be classified. 3. The champion of the club shall alone repre>

sent Class I and shall not be displaced during the year ; but any player in Class II who beats him shall be prom6ted to Class I. 3. Once only during the year a member may challenge any player in the class immediately above him ; and if the challenger wins he changes places with the loser. 4. Between Classes I and II the procedure will be a little different. If any player in Class II beats the champion he is promoted to Class I, but is liable to be displaced unless he also wins a second match with the champion, in which case he is fixed for the year, and any player in Class II may score off him in the same way as if he were the champion. 5 The matches shall be the best of three games, draws not to count ; and all games in which the players rank in and above Clasß IV must b9 played with clocks and score sheets.-' 6. All challenges must be handed in to the hon. secretary, who will post them on the club s notice board, such intimation to the challenged party being deemed sufficient, and all game 3 must be played within one calendar month. 7. If the challenged party refuses to play, the result shall be the same as if he had losrt. 8. No player may challenge or accept a challenge while he has a match pandiDg or in progress. 9. The challenger shall have the first move in the first game in every case, except in the return match with the champion or a fixed player in Class I. 10. Any member may have his name removed, from "the ladder," but in such case he is liable td be disqualified for important matches. His name can, however, be reinstated at any timo, though not necessarily in the same position. ■ 11. In the event of any class becoming too small through names being withdrawn, the vacancy will be filled by ballot from the class below. [It might also be necatsary, in the event of a class becoming too large, to ballot one into the class below.— Chess Editor.]

REMARKS. The holder of the championship of the club is placed alone in Class I, because his play is the standard by which the other, players are to be measured. Ihe first classification of the club is made by the Match Committee, or any suitable person, and it is not necessary that it should be very accurate, because in a short time every player will find his proper level. Afterwards it goes on from year to year without any adjustment, except that the champion from time to time forms a new Class I. Ilule 10 provides for those who, from any cause, are unable to piny. They are at liberty to withdraw their names, but can be reinstated at any time. By withdiawal they miy be disqualified for playing in matches — firstly, because they have failed to show that they are capable of maintaining their position, and secondly, because it presupposes a want of practice ; but it is always understood that the Match Committee will take the facts of the case into consideration when selecting a team.