The value of the ECF Calendar

[Alex McFarlane]

Sean,

Your link to the calendar works but try entering from the front page of the ECF website and you get "pending". This is the way that most people try to access the calendar I would assume.
I think that is what the original poster was trying to say.

For clarification there will be a calendar for rated events and one where events cannot be rated. Into which one would an unrated event which pays the £50 be entered or will there be a third calendar?

There are events like Frodsham which have rated and unrated events. Will they be on a fourth calendar?

I get the impression that we are experiencing ECF policy on the hoof here.

A suggestion has been made to Leagues that the unrated ones could come into the fold in stages by having the top division rated and so on. You have said that this idea was not considered for congresses. Shouldn't the ECF now abandon its multiple calendar idea and instead think this whole thing through and come up with a properly thought out strategy to be presented to Council?

Depriving members of easy access to information on chess events, in my opinion, is not the way forward. Similarly making it harder for organisers to know of rival events cannot be good for the promotion of chess.

[Roger de Coverly]

I`d like to see a series of `novice tournaments` specifically organised for players with either no grade, or graded below say, ECF 100 to encourage take-up, and perhaps include publiciry for local leagues and clubs, mentioning that they welcome new players of all standards.

Bear in mind the ECF rules on this. If the novice tournament isn't graded, the ECF will want £ 50 to include it in the calendar. If it is graded, the ECF will either require all the new players to become members at £ 19 a head or £ 6 per event.

As far as new club players are concerned, the local league may not allow them to participate without becoming ECF members at a cost of £ 13 or will require the club to pay £ 2 per game. You have the same problem if you want them to take part in your internal graded club events.

It's my view that universal membership by its very nature is unwelcoming to new players. The ECF Directors appear to differ from this view, which is why they are going to find themselves at odds with junior organisers as indeed happened at the April 2012 Finance meeting and for that matter on this calendar issue.

I don't know quite how far back in time the BCF/ECF calendar goes. There's one in the 1981-82 year book where it describes itself as a calendar of principal events. This was before the days of rapidplay grading but after the establishment of rapidplay events, so no particular significance would have been attached to whether an event was graded.

Richard's suggestion of amalgamating the calendars is obviously sensible and gets the ECF out of the hole it has dug for itself. ECF boards are frequently accused of being remote and incapable of listening to feedback. The latest Board has fallen into this trap on this issue. It didn't need to consult any further than its own officials to notice the problems with its new policy.

[Alan Burke]

I note that although the ECF are so intent on not grading unregistered events in Yorkshire, they have still included photographs of such a competition on their website.

Have they paid a fee to those organising the tournament for use of such photos or to the players themselves who are not members of the ECF for using them for publicity purposes ? Perhaps an amount of £50 per event might be appropriate - ie: the same fee they are charging any unregistered event to be included on their online calendar - or £19 per player (equivalent of Silver membership) for making use of them even though they won't recognise them for grading purposes ?

With regard to the above; in no way am I complaining about anyone taking photos at the event, but it appears the ECF won't give credence to an event by grading it unless it is paid, yet it is willing to use the free publicity of it.

[Brendan O'Gorman]

Alan,
I think you might be referring to the randomly selected photos from my collection that are displayed on the ECF home page. What gets depicted there is purely a function of which events I attend.

[Alan Burke]

Brendan, you, as always, do a great job. My complaint is not with yourself; it just seems unfair that the ECF won't recognise some events for grading and/or calendar purposes without receiving an appropriate fee yet are quite happy to exploit the same tournaments by publishing photos from them on their own website for free.

If they want to be paid for grading/advertising such events, then why shouldn't they similarly be charged for using these tournaments for their own publicity purposes ?

It seems they want everything both ways. However, I suspect that some self-appointed spokesperson for the ECF will come up with some excuse as to why the ECF are totally correct in doing so and won't ever admit that anything they do can ever be wrong.

[Sean Hewitt]

I note that although the ECF are so intent on not grading unregistered events in Yorkshire, they have still included photographs of such a competition on their website.

Have they paid a fee to those organising the tournament for use of such photos or to the players themselves who are not members of the ECF for using them for publicity purposes ? Perhaps an amount of £50 per event might be appropriate - ie: the same fee they are charging any unregistered event to be included on their online calendar - or £19 per player (equivalent of Silver membership) for making use of them even though they won't recognise them for grading purposes ?

The photographs that you mention are published by Brendan O'Gorman rather than the ECF. As he took the photos, he owns the copyright to them.

I suspect that some self-appointed spokesperson for the ECF will come up with some excuse as to why the ECF are totally correct in doing so and won't ever admit that anything they do can ever be wrong.

Cue me (though I was appointed by the board)
The ECF can get things wrong. But not on this occasion, and not as often as some posters on here, it seems.

[Sean Hewitt]

Your link to the calendar works but try entering from the front page of the ECF website and you get "pending". This is the way that most people try to access the calendar I would assume.
I think that is what the original poster was trying to say.

Could you post a link so that I can investigate? I can't get that from this end. Thanks.

For clarification there will be a calendar for rated events and one where events cannot be rated. Into which one would an unrated event which pays the £50 be entered or will there be a third calendar?

Three calendars. One for domestic tournaments (graded and ungraded). Listing here is free for game fee events. Ungraded events will pay a fee, and be clearly marked as ungraded. A second for International events (i.e. not held in England (which for this purpose includes territories administered by the ECF for chess purposes). A third calendar will include non tournament information such as meetings, county dates etc.

There are events like Frodsham which have rated and unrated events. Will they be on a fourth calendar?.

No

A suggestion has been made to Leagues that the unrated ones could come into the fold in stages by having the top division rated and so on.

If you're talking about Yorkshire leagues, it Yorkshire CA which suggested this approach. Personally, I'm sympathetic to this idea, which seems consistent with congresses which must grade sections whole or not at all, and helps to deliver more opportunities to play graded games for ECF members in Yorkshire.

You have said that this idea was not considered for congresses. Shouldn't the ECF now abandon its multiple calendar idea and instead think this whole thing through and come up with a properly thought out strategy to be presented to Council?

I don't believe that I have said that. I also don't believe that the ECF should abandon it's policy of offering reciprocal support to events which support the ECF. Nor do I believe it is helpful or the role of Council to micromanage the board.

[Alan Burke]

Whoever owns the copyright to the photos, the ECF are still allowing them to be published on their own website, of which they surely they have editorial control and can prevent such inclusions. However, as usual, the ECF is never wrong.

Regarding posters on here getting things wrong; in another thread, Sean Hewitt said in a reply to one of my posts, "You often tell anyone who bothers to read your posts that this is an internet forum and you are free to post and ask questions."

I therefore challenge Sean Hewitt to post those "often" comments of mine and if he can back up his claim I will refrain from posting on here, but if he can't then ask him to step down for ever from the ECF board for making false accusations.

[Sean Hewitt]

Whoever owns the copyright to the photos, the ECF are still allowing them to be published on their own website, of which they surely they have editorial control and can prevent such inclusions. However, as usual, the ECF is never wrong.

The copyright holder controls which photos are displayed. If he wants to remove them fine; if not, that's fine too. However, there is absolutely no reason why they should be taken down and you're right that the ECF are not wrong on this matter. The clue is in the caption
"The chess image above comes courtesy of Brendan O'Gorman - click on the image to visit his Picasa web galleries"
I'll leave this non issue there.

I therefore challenge Sean Hewitt to post those "often" comments of mine and if he can back up his claim I will refrain from posting on here, but if he can't then ask him to step down for ever from the ECF board for making false accusations.

If you think that I have the time or inclination to search your inane ramblings just to prove a point you're crazy. I only removed you from my foe list and replied here because someone at the Classic asked if I had read "Alan Burke's latest nonsense on the calendar thread"! I admit that this was a terrible mistake, humbly apologise, and have added you back to the foe list.

If you want to remove a Director from office mid term, there are mechanisms to do so. Alternatively, there are annual elections. Go for it.

[Alex McFarlane]

Sean,
It was the dates for your diary which gave the message but now appears to be fixed. I admit that I waas confused by the drop down menu (and obviously wasn't alone).

You have not stated where events like Frodsham will appear. Will these hybrid events appear on the main calendar or will they be expected to pay?

I am not in the habit of quoting from private emails but you did set an example in that repect. I will however just give the one line to show that you did say that such events had not been considered.

The board didn't consider events which are partially graded because we were not aware of any such events.

I would also have thought that such events are much more likely to occur now. A full congress with an unrated novice or junior event attached is a realistic type of event surely.

To discuss what is listed for each event would indeed be micromanagement but I do not accept that something as important to the image of the ECF as the Calendar should be dismissed in this way is appropriate. Many people go onto the ECF site to see the Calendar. If rival Calendars are set up they may take 'custom' away from the ECF one. That is a matter for concern.

I think that this is a matter for Council. Indeed I could argue that a motion which you proposed and was passed at the AGM denies you the right to change the Calendar in the proposed way. The motion stated that membership was not to be revisited. The Calendar is listed as a benefit of membership. The idea of removing events which refuse to pay a 'tax' does alter the condiions of membership.

I think Brendan's suggestion was perfectly sensible and urge the Board to adopt it. A single Calendar listing everything known with a restricted listing for events refusing to take out membership is a much better alternative.

If a non-rated event is listed it would allow members to know of it and to lobby the organiser to get it graded in future. That surely is the the outcome that you want! That would promote both chess and the membership scheme.

[Roger de Coverly]

Nor do I believe it is helpful or the role of Council to micromanage the board.

There are a couple of questions of policy which in my view should have been ratified by the voting membership. The principle being that if a change of policy has an effect on a wide range of the participants in British or English chess, then support should come from more than a handful of ECF Directors. In the case of changes in policy regarding the calendar, it's apparent that the policy doesn't have the support of volunteers appointed to ECF offices.

The questions of policy being
(a) whether the calendar should contain events organised by non-members of the ECF.
(b) whether the calendar should be an integrated one or split over several different listings.

It's clear enough to me what has happened. The ECF Board made a decision to "punish" Congresses unwilling to sign for £ 6 payments for every non Silver member. However the actual implementation forgot that there are events on the calendar which aren't graded because they cannot be, such as training, or for reasons of policy, such as being aimed at inexperienced players. Hence post decision rationalisation such as deeming the calendar to be graded events only and the creation of additional calendars for other events.

There's an International Calendar at
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=21604

This contains two events which are ECF graded, presumably, by virtue of being run by ECF members, namely Gibraltar and Isle of Man. There's a third event, namely Guernsey, which has always been graded in the past. Two other events, namely Jersey and South Wales, should have a warning attached if the only way that ECF members will get games graded is being using the "Foreign tournaments" process.

Dates for your Diary at
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=22666

contains meetings and national stage county match dates.

The main calendar can be difficult to get at. Unusually for what look like the headers to drop downs on the main ECF page, the link at the top of the page has to be clicked to get at the main calendar, From there you have to click individual months rather than see the whole year on one scrollable sheet.

So the master is
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=27
which is an index, and individual months are at
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=11570 etc

[Brendan O'Gorman]

-- text omitted--

I think Brendan's suggestion was perfectly sensible and urge the Board to adopt it. A single Calendar listing everything known with a restricted listing for events refusing to take out membership is a much better alternative.

-- text omitted --

I think the credit for this suggestion belongs to Mick Norris - I was merely supporting his idea.

[Alex McFarlane]

Sorry to you both.

[Sean Hewitt]

You have not stated where events like Frodsham will appear. Will these hybrid events appear on the main calendar or will they be expected to pay?

I am not in the habit of quoting from private emails but you did set an example in that repect. I will however just give the one line to show that you did say that such events had not been considered.

The board didn't consider events which are partially graded because we were not aware of any such events.

I'm trying to find the time to automate online entries for the British for Lara, and have come into Olympia early to do so. Instead, I find you asking me the a question on the forum which you have already asked and been answered by email. I'm not sure what this achieves apart from wasting everyones time. But, for the record, I'll cut and paste what I said previously

On Thursday, 29 November 2012, Sean Hewitt wrote:
It's not a scenario the board discussed. If such an event appears with a request for the calendar we'll take it under advisement.

The Calendar is listed as a benefit of membership.

Can you tell me where as I can't find that. I don't see how the calendar can be considered to be a a benefit of membership as you don't have to be a member to view it.

If a non-rated event is listed it would allow members to know of it and to lobby the organiser to get it graded in future. That surely is the the outcome that you want! That would promote both chess and the membership scheme.

Here's a better idea. Tell the organiser that he won't be able to advertise his event for free until he does get the event graded.

We've come full circle, so that's probably a convenient moment to get off.

[Sean Hewitt]

There are a couple of questions of policy which in my view should have been ratified by the voting membership. The principle being that if a change of policy has an effect on a wide range of the participants in British or English chess, then support should come from more than a handful of ECF Directors.

Then you would need to change the operating structure of the ECF. In my opinion, such a system would render the ECF impotent.

There's an International Calendar at
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=21604

This contains two events which are ECF graded, presumably, by virtue of being run by ECF members, namely Gibraltar and Isle of Man. There's a third event, namely Guernsey, which has always been graded in the past.

IoM and Gibraltar are considered ENG for chess purposes. I think these should be listed in both Domestic and International calendars.

Two other events, namely Jersey and South Wales, should have a warning attached if the only way that ECF members will get games graded is being using the "Foreign tournaments" process..

I think that's a good idea and will get onto that now.

The main calendar can be difficult to get at. Unusually for what look like the headers to drop downs on the main ECF page, the link at the top of the page has to be clicked to get at the main calendar, From there you have to click individual months rather than see the whole year on one scrollable sheet.

I also agree with that and will wsee what we can do. Thanks.