John Upham wrote:David Pardoe wrote:
Roger Edwards would certainly never have allowed this...
Yes, I can clearly imagine RE asserting his demonstrable authority and bringing the board to book to act in a concerted and business-like manner.
Perhaps you would hope that no members of the board would have any commercial interests in chess, none of them should earn any income from chess and none of them should be involved in any organisations that promote chess. That way they are less likely to have hidden agendas, axes to grind, fueds to settle, personality clashes or indeed hold strong and passionate views about chess.
You will have a board consisting of many safe pairs of hands and I am sure that they would all make light work.
As usual John, your comments widely miss the mark....
Yes, a strong element of commercial clout and action is part of the package of UK chess...but do remember that we portray ourselves as a `not for profit, charitable body`, at least in some quarters....which is a description that does legitimately cover about 99% of players/events in this country. Yes, I agree that the top 1% of professionals merit fair returns for there work in chess.
But the real people driving UK chess are those who actually organise and run the multitude of events up and down the land...not the big wigs, sat in dark corners, trying to plot world domination.
EG..recently we had three quite excellent chess events in the North West..
The Stockport Rapidplay, which attracted over 150 entries, including over 10 rated 200+ & two GMs in the Open section.
The Frodsham Congress which also attracted a good field and had record entries of over 130 players...incidentally, excellently overseen by Roger Edwards and his team of Arbiters and Controllers.
Meanwhile, on the same weekend, the Northern 4NCL league was doing battle at Buxton, not far away, where 14 teams were challenging keenly for honours and the chance of promotion, in what is probably one of the norths strongest top grade regional chess league events .
It would be good if our local/regional Press gave some coverage to such events..but instead they seem to go for Darts, Snooker, and sleaze.
(If chess is to succeed and grow, one of the fundamental needs is better media coverage. This is a `pastime/sport` that has much to offer at all levels to vast numbers of people...many of whom play online to a fairly good standard and dont realise that local clubs in towns near them would love to see them).
These are the kind of bread and butter events which really attract and interest 95% of our players. I`m excluding of course the huge swathes of players who could play. but choose to play `online` and other chess variants.
As regards Roger Edwards...no he did not immerse himself in huge controversy, but instead got on with the business of keeping the wheels turning (and firmly attached to the vehicle). And, under his watch, we had one of the most successful British Championships in recent years, and the Membership scheme did gain street cred and traction.
But for you, it seems that we must have a climate of hysteria and chaos...no doubt that allows you some easy Press stories for your chess rag..
And it wouldn't do to have the Plebs given a `real` voice in all this, would it. Lets just allow the minority 1% moneyspinners (and those with big block votes) to run the show and call the shots...and vote themselves into office, whilst the rest can just remain silent in there boxes on the touchlines.
With a wider base of representation, the whole structure might be a whole lot more stable, make far better and clearly thought through decisions, and carry more weight and credibility.
The question is..how to make these voices count in the current malaise... Also, how do we ensure that British chess goes forward in a sensible and satisfactory manner, to the benefit of the majority. I say one important requirement is much greater consultation and consensus in taking things forward. If that means slow, steady progress, then so be it...Better than chaos and undesirable actions aimed at self fulfilment (greed), at the expense of British Chess.
