Scholastic Chess |

Chess for Early Educators |

Scholastic Championships |

2019 Spiegel Cup Invitation |

Spiegel Cup Series Standings |

Spiegel Cup Rules |

Spiegel Cup Statistics |

High School Champions |

Age 14U Champions |

Age 11U Champions |

Age 8U Champions |

High School Team |

Middle School Team |

Elementary School Team |

Primary School Team |

2019 Hurvitz Cup Rules |

LMCF |

Awards from 2004 |

Archives |

LMCF Honored Persons |

LMCF Application |

Local Chess Coach Listing |

Chess Camps and Classes |

Scholastic Chess FAQs |

MACA Home > Scholastic Chess > Scholastic Championships > Spiegel Cup Statistics

MACA State Scholastic Championships

Spiegel Cup / State Singles Championship Statistics

Updated: Dmitry Barash, Feb 05, 2013

Webmaster: Read the original document and the 2013 addition (PDF), including the list of all finalists (2001-2012) sorted by total points. Comments? Join us at MACA Facebook page. For correction of info listed in this document, please e-mail Dmitry Barash directly.

I decided to look at the history of Spiegel Cup finals. Published on the Web (on MACA and USCF) cross tables go back to beginning of 90s (and the history perhaps goes even further), but the number of players varied a lot in 90s, for example at the end of 90s there were mostly 6 players in each age group. Note that in Maryland (where I lived for 7 years prior to moving to MA) the similar finals were called Sweet 16 (and obviously had 16 players per age). Ten seems to me to be the optimal number to exclude random players, and to include all the top ones. Therefore I set the start point in 2001, since then there were constantly 10 players in each group (with couple exceptions during all 12 years) except for HS in 2012, which was open and had 19 players.

HIGH SCHOOL | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Average Rating | 1635 | 1761 | 1816 | 1786 | 1979 | 2008 | 1934 | 1867 | 1871 | 2028 | 2047 | 1745 |

Rating MAX-MIN | 839 | 737 | 1002 | 874 | 479 | 532 | 608 | 658 | 386 | 256 | 267 | 1439 |

# of New Participants | 10 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 |

Winner Point | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3 | 3.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3.5 | 4 | 4 | 3.5 |

Second Place Points | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 3.5 |

Third Place Points | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3 |

14 & U | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Average Rating | 1574 | 1709 | 1729 | 1658 | 1591 | 1708 | 1719 | 1783 | 1839 | 1936 | 1928 | 1980 | 1952 |

Rating MAX-MIN | 991 | 801 | 780 | 534 | 352 | 204 | 250 | 255 | 401 | 231 | 500 | 651 | 507 |

# of New Participants | 10 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 |

Winner Points | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | |

Second Place Points | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | |

Third Place Points | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 |

11 & U | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Average Rating | 1402 | 1411 | 1240 | 1356 | 1383 | 1483 | 1541 | 1555 | 1681 | 1579 | 1492 | 1628 | 1703 |

Rating MAX-MIN | 944 | 468 | 304 | 331 | 549 | 424 | 471 | 548 | 543 | 735 | 529 | 451 | 407 |

# of New Participants | 10 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 |

Winner Points | 3.5 | 3 | 3.5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | |

Second Place Points | 3.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 3 | |

Third Place Points | 2.5 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 |

8 & U | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Average Rating | 918 | 960 | 1089 | 1198 | 1056 | 1159 | 1124 | 963 | 919 | 1056 | 1037 | 907 | 1013 |

Rating MAX-MIN | 402 | 333 | 465 | 557 | 266 | 606 | 587 | 618 | 364 | 460 | 607 | 526 | 242 |

# of New Participants | 10 | 9 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 7 |

Winner Points | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3.5 | 4 | |

Second Place Points | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |

Third Place Points | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2.5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3 | 2.5 |

It’s easy to notice that in all ages except 8&U tournaments became much stronger by the average rating.

Top Players by overall number of points and tournaments

Name | pts | trn |
---|---|---|

JAMES LUNG | 24.5 | 9 |

ANDREW C WANG | 23.5 | 7 |

MIKA ANDREW BRATTAIN | 22 | 7 |

CHRIS WILLIAMS | 21 | 8 |

WINSTON HUANG | 19 | 7 |

REILLY NATHANS | 19 | 8 |

MICHELLE XUEYING CHEN | 18.5 | 7 |

FELIX M YANG | 16.5 | 7 |

Top players by the number of award winnings (only top 3 places count in each final)

Andrew Wang | 7 | 5 wins (!!!) and 2 second places (!) but he skipped two finals in 2007 and 2008. He decided not to play this year. |

James Lung | 7 | Unique achievement: 7 times in a row (!) got trophies (one first, one third and 5 second places), while being second he was twice announced the co-champion. |

Mika Brattain | 6 | 7 participations in a row, 6 times was awarded (3 wins, one second place and 2 third places), in 2011 was 4-th. |

5 | 6 participations in a row, and during the last 5 of them he got 2 first places and 3 third | |

Josh Bakker | 4 | 2 wins, one second place and one third, but in the middle he was 5th in 2004 |

Max Enkin | 4 | 4 trophies in 4 participations: third place (2002), 2 second ones (2001, 2003), and a win (2007) |

Reilly Nathans | 4 | 2 wins and 2 third places in 8 finals (2001-2007, 2009) |

Chris Williams | 4 | 2 wins and 2 third places in 8 consecutive tournaments (2001-2008) |

Players, who won finals more than once:

ANDREW WANG | 5 |

MIKA BRATTAIN | 3 |

JOSH BAKKER | 2 |

WINSTON HUANG | 2 |

BARY LISAK | 2 |

REILLY NATHANS | 2 |

JACK STOLERMAN | 2 |

CHRIS WILLIAMS | 2 |

GRANT XU | 2 |

FELIX YANG | 2 |

No one of them played only twice. From interesting decisions the following should be mentioned:

- Bary Lisak played 3 times (2005-2006, 2009): 2 wins, then second place.
- Jack Stolerman played 3 consecutive times (2001-2003): two wins, then 4th place.
- Grant Xu played 4 consecutive times (2009-2012): 10th place, then two next wins(!), then 14th place(!!).

All others from the above list played at least 5 events.

Note 1. I don’t have tie-breaks for 2006 and 2011 (all other tables were published on MACA page with places ordered by tie-breaks). I calculated the tie-breaks myself, hopefully I did it right.

Note 2. Although finalists were determined and pared by rating on February the 1st(usually), I used their last rating before the tournament (the one used by USCF).

Webmaster Note: Below are the new addition for 2013

Rilton Cup points (medal made of pure Gold).

Recently I read interesting info about Rilton Cup – yearly big chess tournament in Sweden (started in 1970) – the organizers made a special award – medal made of pure Gold for a player, who will score 10 accumulated points. The formula is simple: player, who comes first, gets 3 points, the second – 2 points, and the third – 1 point. If there is a tie, then points are divided equally. Amazing that in 42 years no one got 10 points! Polish GM Krasenkov, who solely won this year have 9 points now!

I don’t think here in MA we’ll ever award someone with the medal made of pure gold, but the idea of calculating and accumulating points is interesting. Besides some parents think that tied places should be equally awarded. The only difference is that instead of 10 accumulated points, I’d aim for 20 as there are hundreds (if not thousands) players in Rilton Cup, and only 10 per section in Spiegel Cup. Besides each year we have 4 sets of prize winners.

Before calculating I was sure that one of the “constant” winners (Andrew Wang, James Lung, or Mika Brattain) already got 20 points. To my surprise they didn’t! Perhaps Andrew could get 20 if he wouldn’t skip 3(!) finals being invited to play in them.

Here is the current standing of the top 36:

ANDREW WANG | 15.5 |

MIKA BRATTAIN | 14 |

JAMES LUNG | 13 |

WINSTON HUANG | 9 |

CHRIS WILLIAMS | 8.75 |

JOSH BAKKER | 8.5 |

REILLY NATHANS | 8.5 |

JACK STOLERMAN | 7.5 |

MICHELLE CHEN | 7.5 |

FELIX YANG | 7.33 |

BARY LISAK | 6.5 |

MAX ENKIN | 6.5 |

GRANT XU | 6 |

JASON SPECTOR | 5.5 |

NOAH PANG | 5 |

JACOB WAMALA | 5 |

JASON ALTSCHULER | 5 |

ALEX FAUMAN | 5 |

EVAN MEYER | 4.5 |

WINBER XU | 4 |

CHRISTOPHER POGGI | 4 |

ANDREW LIU | 3.75 |

DANNY ANGERMEIER | 3.7 |

ASHVIN NAIR | 3.5 |

ROZA EYNULLAYEVA 3.5 | |

STEVE CHEN | 3.5 |

GABRIEL FRIEDEN | 3.25 |

CHARLIE FAUMAN | 3.25 |

ZAROUG JALEEL | 3.25 |

DANIEL WITKE | 3 |

EUGENE YANAYT | 3 |

JASON STOLL | 3 |

NITHIN KAVI | 3 |

MICHAEL ISAKOV | 3 |

JASON TANG | 3 |

JIAYING CAI | 3 |

Predictions for the 2013 finals:

I repeat my prediction from the last year that no one from the bottom half by rating will become a champion. Also I predict that two players from the second half will get trophies (in all sections). Based on the past several years I also guess that in two sections winner will get the perfect score of 4 points, and in two sections – less than 4 points.