Rules of the ECF Counties Championships

[David Sedgwick]

At the moment, the rule doesn't specify a default time control if counties disagree about which time control to use.

Yes they do. Rule C5 specifies a default time limit of 40 moves in 2 hours followed by all moves in 30 minutes.

The rules are not well written; hence the debate on this and previous threads as to the extent to which the above can be varied by mutual agreement.

[Mick Norris]

At the moment, the rule doesn't specify a default time control if counties disagree about which time control to use.

Yes they do. Rule C5 specifies a default time limit of 40 moves in 2 hours followed by all moves in 30 minutes.

The rules are not well written; hence the debate on this and previous threads as to the extent to which the above can be varied by mutual agreement.

Good point, so it would appear a complete rewrite would seem needed

[Alex Holowczak]

At the moment, the rule doesn't specify a default time control if counties disagree about which time control to use.

Yes they do. Rule C5 specifies a default time limit of 40 moves in 2 hours followed by all moves in 30 minutes.

I don't read C5 and see where it says the default time control is what you say it is. It says it could be a whole range of things, but it doesn't give one specific time control. But this because ...

The rules are not well written; hence the debate on this and previous threads as to the extent to which the above can be varied by mutual agreement.

[John Philpott]

Alex Holowczak wrote

I don't read C5 and see where it says the default time control is what you say it is.

C5 on the ECF website states

C5. The duration of play shall be a maximum of five hours and all games shall be played with clocks. Each player shall make not less than 40 moves in two hours and then to a conclusion with 30 minutes extra for each player for the remainder of the game. Except in the Finals, the rate of play and duration of the sudden death finish may be varied by mutual agreement between the respective match captains.

That sounds remarakably like a default rate of play to me!

[Alex Holowczak]

Alex Holowczak wrote

I don't read C5 and see where it says the default time control is what you say it is.

C5 on the ECF website states

C5. The duration of play shall be a maximum of five hours and all games shall be played with clocks. Each player shall make not less than 40 moves in two hours and then to a conclusion with 30 minutes extra for each player for the remainder of the game. Except in the Finals, the rate of play and duration of the sudden death finish may be varied by mutual agreement between the respective match captains.

That sounds remarakably like a default rate of play to me!

The way I read them, it just gives a range of parameters that a suitable time control can be.

Option one: Anything "not less than 40 moves in two hours". So 48 in 2 hours is fine, for example.
Option two: Thirty minute quickplay finish is clearly stated. This becomes an option in the next sentence, when it says that the duration of the thirty minute quickplay finish may be varied.
Option three: "the rate of play" can be varied, so your 40/120 or 48/120 can be varied now to 40/100 or 48/100.

So I interpret this that:
(1) There is a thirty-minute quickplay finish, which can be varied by mutual agreement.
(2) Anything you want goes for the first time period, as long as it has at least 40 moves in it. No default though, because there's no specific number quoted as being the default if you don't agree.

On the other hand, "not less than 40 moves" could mean you lose on time if you don't make 40 moves in the first time period. But then this would imply that 40 moves and 40 moves only was the right number of moves for the first time control.

So there's two conflicting interpretations of what the rule means!

[Richard Bates]

Alex Holowczak wrote

I don't read C5 and see where it says the default time control is what you say it is.

C5 on the ECF website states

C5. The duration of play shall be a maximum of five hours and all games shall be played with clocks. Each player shall make not less than 40 moves in two hours and then to a conclusion with 30 minutes extra for each player for the remainder of the game. Except in the Finals, the rate of play and duration of the sudden death finish may be varied by mutual agreement between the respective match captains.

That sounds remarakably like a default rate of play to me!

The way I read them, it just gives a range of parameters that a suitable time control can be.

Option one: Anything "not less than 40 moves in two hours". So 48 in 2 hours is fine, for example.
Option two: Thirty minute quickplay finish is clearly stated. This becomes an option in the next sentence, when it says that the duration of the thirty minute quickplay finish may be varied.
Option three: "the rate of play" can be varied, so your 40/120 or 48/120 can be varied now to 40/100 or 48/100.

So I interpret this that:
(1) There is a thirty-minute quickplay finish, which can be varied by mutual agreement.
(2) Anything you want goes for the first time period, as long as it has at least 40 moves in it. No default though, because there's no specific number quoted as being the default if you don't agree.

On the other hand, "not less than 40 moves" could mean you lose on time if you don't make 40 moves in the first time period. But then this would imply that 40 moves and 40 moves only was the right number of moves for the first time control.

So there's two conflicting interpretations of what the rule means!

The first part of the rule does not in itself read as a "default" (as you say it just reads as a range of options). However when combined with the second part of the rule saying that the rate/QP can be varied it is clear that the implication is that the first part is stating a default. Otherwise you would not be "varying" from anything.

Badly written but clearly meant as a default time control.

[Sean Hewitt]

40/120 + 30 is the default time. Equally, as written you can vary the time to the first time control, or the duration of the quickply finish, but not the number of moves to the first control. I think it's reasonably clear but could be expressed in a better way.

[David Sedgwick]

40/120 + 30 is the default time. Equally, as written you can vary the time to the first time control, or the duration of the quickply finish, but not the number of moves to the first control. I think it's reasonably clear but could be expressed in a better way.

As I've previously stated, I consider that allowing you to vary the "rate of play" means that you can vary the number of moves to the first time control.

Regardless of the arguments as to the correct interpretation, I'm pretty sure that the intention was to allow you to do so and in practice teams have done so for years. I hope that this will be reflected in the redraft.

[David Pardoe]

Firstly, if a new set of draft rules are to be published, I`d suggest that all county secretaries are sent a copy for comment.
I`ve heard noises that various counties are struggling to raise teams in the Qualifying stages...or have been. I see that the Leicestershire U160 team has withdrawn from this years event...they`ve been present for at least the last 10 years to my knowledge. Maybe this year they have struggled to find a captain, I dont know.
My experience is that county teams really need to have a deputy/vice captain to help with team selection/arrangements/support, etc. Its a big task getting out teams of 16 players and I think some captains might underestimate this, so its important to get started promptly and start picking teams at least 3 or 4 weeks ahead of a match. Good communications and transport arrangments are key.
Also, captains need to make full use of the websites for club/player contact information, and also contact local congress organisers, who might be able to offer support/publicity.
Anyway, as regards changes... I`d favour reverting back to the previous grading boundaries.. ie, U175, U150 etc..to create a bit more breating space for captains, and reduce problems of `overlap`.
My other suggestion would be to steamline the Finals stages down to two rounds...maybe by combining the Semi-finals & Finals into a single, more prestigeous`jamboree style` event. Maybe hold this at the Barcelo Hinckley Island Hotel over a weekend...one round one Saturday & one on the Sunday.
If they could do a deal along the lines of those for 4NCL, that would be good. It would also be good to hold the Finals at a premier location...and Hinckley is both central and has very good access off the M1.
I guess it would be useful to consult all counties to guage opinions.
I`d also like to see those teams that play almost no qualifying matches pitched into any Preliminary rounds. It strikes me a fundamentally wrong that some teams can reach the finals and have played very few matches, whereas other teams/counties might have played a good number.

[Sean Hewitt]

I see that the Leicestershire U160 team has withdrawn from this years event...they`ve been present for at least the last 10 years to my knowledge. Maybe this year they have struggled to find a captain, I dont know.

Let me clear that up. Leicestershire U160 have a captain and a vice captain. The problem was that they didn't have enough players to raise a side. In fact, looking at the grading database we only have 38 eligible players graded between 140 and 159.

I`d favour reverting back to the previous grading boundaries.. ie, U175, U150 etc..to create a bit more breating space for captains, and reduce problems of `overlap`.

Well, of course I agree with that. In fact, I suggested it when the re-grading exercise was undertaken and I was the MCCU controller. Unfortunately, despite MCCU captains voting unanimously to support keeping the bands the same, some county delegates ignored their wishes and voted for the change. If delegates don't listen to the wishes of those directly affected by change, there's no hope.

[David Pardoe]

Sean,
My comments werent intended as a criticism of the Leicester team and I agree your points.
Your observation about the player numbers available within the grade categories is interesting, and probably reflects the limitations of many counties.

Manchester has similar problems, but tends to use quite a broad spread of players across a wider grade range to build its teams. This means that we are often fielding players at a hefty grade disadvantage in order to turn out a full team...producing some challenging matches. Its not easy to defy the grading odds, but many players give creditable performances.

Your point about the grading bands is also well made. The fact that the voices of county captains in the MCCU went unheaded or unheard by Union/County delegates on this issue is not a surprise. It marks the disfunctionality in our chess structure, and the concern that many delegates at all levels appear to operate in a world of there own when it comes to various decisions and membership concerns
.
If we had some form of direct Membership voting at various levels, the whole body might function more sensibly or democratically, and the Membership might start to take a more active interest.
(It sometimes appears that these bodies and there delegates almost specialise in ignoring the views of `members`....turning the proverbial `bind eye`, so to speak).

Certainly it would offer the chance to add some valuable checks & balances. Add in the opportunity for the membership (individuals) to directly put forward points of interest and concern (via an online process through websites/forums/emails) to these various League, County, Union & National bodies and things might improve.

Meanwhile, lets hope those in charge take heed of the constructive points raised, and maybe act more boldly and help drive through some valuable changes...to the `county` rules/structure, and other areas.

Maybe we need to take a leaf out of the Bridge Community and try for more paid officials in certain areas....its very challenging for many officials to achieve things purely on a voluntary basis, when heavy demands are made on there spare time...but thats another matter.

PS Maybe the grade bands should be widened to 30 points.. ie, Open, U180, U150, U120, U90...
This might create more breathing space for hard pressed captains, and maybe stop the bussing in of `outsiders` and other `dodges` to make up numbers in some cases...