Arbiter levels

[Roger de Coverly]

A new item on the ECF website is about arbiters.

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/arbiters/ecf-arbiters/

This, in its way, challenges FIDE, by setting aside the "pay money to FIDE" method of becoming an arbiter. On Friday evening, the arbiters at the e2e4 Wycombe tournament were announced as being Sean, Alex and Lawrence. It struck me as something of a cabal of ECF Directors, representing 3/8ths of the now reduced board. But checking their arbiter status, Sean is level 3, Alex level 2, whilst Lawrence is at level 0.

[Michael Flatt]

I looked on the Chess Arbiters' Association website (http://www.chessarbitersassociation.co.uk/index.html) and they have no information on this new ECF Arbiter classification system.

It is curious that a much experienced and respected bod, such as Adam Raoof, is listed as a "Trainee Arbiter". Somewhat demeaning!

Why does a properly certificated FIDE Arbiter not automatically get recognition with full ECF Arbiter status or even Senior ECF status?

[Alex Holowczak]

It is curious that an much experienced and respected bod, such as Adam Raoof, is listed as a "Trainee Arbiter".

He hasn't taken and passed the ECF Test, and he hasn't applied to be an ECF Arbiter. He wasn't listed on the ECF website at all until now, which we thought was wrong in lieu of his status.

[Michael Flatt]

From the ECF website: "From 1st September, 2014, tournaments yet to be registered without a Level 1 Arbiter or above will not be registered with FIDE, even if these titleholders are Licensed with FIDE."

Is this an ECF initiative designed to stymie the growth of "FIDE rated" tournaments that seem to have become popular in England?

Will the ECF be adopting the position whereby tournaments will only be accepted for ECF grading if they are supervised by a listed ECF Arbiter?

[David Sedgwick]

From the ECF website: "From 1st September, 2014, tournaments yet to be registered without a Level 1 Arbiter or above will not be registered with FIDE, even if these titleholders are Licensed with FIDE."

Is this an ECF initiative designed to stymie the growth of "FIDE rated" tournaments that seem to have become popular in the England?

Not at all. It's a recognition that FIDE rated tournaments are important and should be controlled by people who have had at least some arbiter training.

There's no requirement that the main controller should be a fully qualified arbiter, only that (s)he should have passed either the ECF Arbiter Examination or the FIDE Arbiter Examination.

I don't think that's an unduly demanding requirement. It's less than would be needed in many European countries.

[Angus French]

It is curious that an much experienced and respected bod, such as Adam Raoof, is listed as a "Trainee Arbiter".

He hasn't taken and passed the ECF Test, and he hasn't applied to be an ECF Arbiter. He wasn't listed on the ECF website at all until now, which we thought was wrong in lieu of his status.

By this logic, Adam oughtn't to be even a (level 1) Trainee Arbiter... But this is silly as Adam has arbited at hundreds of tournaments and was arbiter at the London Candidates last year... So I think the question becomes not what Adam hasn't done but: what can the ECF do to give Adam the appropriate score.

A couple of questions:
1. What triggered the update in the regulation and associated process?
2. Who was consulted about the change? For example, was the CAA consulted?

I think the texts would benefit from a sub edit.

[Alex Holowczak]

By this logic, Adam oughtn't to be even a (level 1) Trainee Arbiter...

From the Level 1 regulation you haven't read:
♦ All FIDE-Licensed holders of the FA and IA titles who are registered with FIDE to England, and are not at a higher level

But this is silly as Adam has arbited at hundreds of tournaments and was arbiter at the London Candidates last year... So I think the question becomes not what Adam hasn't done but: what can the ECF do to give Adam the appropriate score.

We're running courses and tests every year. If Adam goes along to one and passes it - which I'm sure he will - job done.

1. What triggered the update in the regulation and associated process?

(1) The need to have an objective criterion to licence arbiters with FIDE.
(2) A desire to increase the number of arbiters. I know that there are arbiters who have acted as arbiters for years because the qualification was not required. With the "You need one Level 1" requirement, there is an increased motivation for people of that status to take the test.
(3) My desire to make some of the unwritten rules written rules. E.g. How do you become an Arbiter Instructor? Who writes the recommendations for arbiters to progress through the levels?

2. Who was consulted about the change? For example, was the CAA consulted?

Not sure why you care, but:
Chief Arbiter
Manager of Arbiters (Home)
Manager of Arbiters (International)

The CAA were kept informed - it was on the Agenda for their AGM, for example.

[David Sedgwick]

A couple of questions:
1. What triggered the update in the regulation and associated process?
2. Who was consulted about the change? For example, was the CAA consulted?

1. Possibly several things, but one in particular as far as I was concerned.

Hitherto, the ECF has allowed anyone to control a tournament. When the FIDE Arbiters' Licence Fee Scheme was introduced at the end of 2012, this meant that the ECF had little option but to license the people who were running FIDE rated events, even if they had no arbiting qualifications. The alternative would have been to force the organisers of some events to replace their control teams at short notice.

This situation was extensively discussed at the CAA AGM in May 2013 and the changes introduced reflect the wishes of the CAA officers as expressed at that time.

2. The details were discussed extensively by a group comprising Alex Holowczak (Director of Home Chess), David Welch (Chief Arbiter), Matthew Carr (Manager of Arbiters (Home)) and me (Manager of Arbiters (International)).

I would add that one major change, not so far mentioned on this thread, is that CRB / DBS checks will now only be required for arbiters officiating at Junior events. This is something for which the CAA has been campaigning since at least 2006.

Edit: I've just seen Alex Holowczak's post. I've decided to let mine stand.

[Angus French]

By this logic, Adam oughtn't to be even a (level 1) Trainee Arbiter...

From the Level 1 regulation you haven't read:
♦ All FIDE-Licensed holders of the FA and IA titles who are registered with FIDE to England, and are not at a higher level

I did read that. And I saw the bullet point immediately before:
"Achieve the pass mark either in the ECF Arbiters’ Course Test or the FIDE Arbiters’ Seminar Test, and".
... I noted the "and" at the end.

Thank you for providing the reasons for the update. These look like very good reasons and I think it would be useful to state them up front.

Not sure why you care...

Because I think due process is important and I like things to be done well.

The CAA were kept informed - it was on the Agenda for their AGM, for example.

It seems a shame the CAA didn't provide feedback.

I think you're missing the point on Adam. In my view, the end result makes the ECF look a bit silly and I imagine it doesn't impress Adam either... It's an issue about the management of change and seeking to get the best outcome.

[Alex Holowczak]

By this logic, Adam oughtn't to be even a (level 1) Trainee Arbiter...

From the Level 1 regulation you haven't read:
♦ All FIDE-Licensed holders of the FA and IA titles who are registered with FIDE to England, and are not at a higher level

I did read that. And I saw the bullet point immediately before:
"Achieve the pass mark either in the ECF Arbiters’ Course Test or the FIDE Arbiters’ Seminar Test, and".
... I noted the "and" at the end.

Level 1 lists the various things you can do to become Level 1. There are three bullet points there, but one in the other sections. This explains the "and" at the end of the first and second bullet points. If you think it should be something else, or not there at all, then that's fine.

Not sure why you care...

Because I think due process is important and I like things to be done well.

I'd like to think you can trust me to do that by now without asking for everything that I've ever changed.

The CAA were kept informed - it was on the Agenda for their AGM, for example.

It seems a shame the CAA didn't provide feedback.

I don't know what gives you that impression, but I have nothing to add to David's comment on this point:

This situation was extensively discussed at the CAA AGM in May 2013 and the changes introduced reflect the wishes of the CAA officers as expressed at that time.

I think you're missing the point on Adam. In my view, the end result makes the ECF look a bit silly and I imagine it doesn't impress Adam either... It's an issue about the management of change and seeking to get the best outcome.

It may be true that it doesn't impress Adam. I don't know. He became a FA and IA without ever being an ECF Arbiter. He has, in effect, been appointed to this new status by virtue of his FA/IA status.

[Michael Flatt]

It does seem rather anomalous that FIDE IA status only equates to ECF Trainee Arbiter (level 1).

Level 1 Trainee Arbiter
♦ Achieve the pass mark either in the ECF Arbiters’ Course Test or the FIDE Arbiters’ Seminar Test, and
♦ All FIDE-Licensed holders of the FA and IA titles who are registered with FIDE to England, and are not at a higher level, and
♦ By application only, any holder of a non-English domestic Arbiter title who is an ECF member.
Arbiters at this level will be offered a mentor by the Manager of Arbiters (Home), and this mentor will assist with progressing the arbiter to the next level. Arbiters at this level will be able to acquire a FIDE Arbiters License.

Edited: Quote added from new ECF Arbiter regulations.

[John Upham]

It does seem rather anomalous that FIDE IA status only equates to ECF Trainee Arbiter (level 1).

Does it even do that?

I assume IA Albert Vasse would be level 0 since he has presumably not applied to become an ECF Arbiter. Of course, there is no reason that he would.

[Alex Holowczak]

It does seem rather anomalous that FIDE IA status only equates to ECF Trainee Arbiter (level 1).

If Adam were to take and pass the ECF Test, presumably the people who wrote Adam's FA/IA norms would be prepared to write recommendations for his Level 2 title status.

Adam's case is completely anomalous - he's the only IA in the country who hasn't acquired the domestic qualification. If you're running FIDE norm tournaments, as Adam has done over the years, he needed the FA/IA title in order to sign norms. He didn't need the ECF Arbiter title. So why would he bother to acquire it?

[John Upham]

What are the circumstances when a FIDE arbiter qualification would be insufficient for domestic competitions?

For example, would a FIDE IA be insufficiently qualified to run any kind of domestic event?

[Alex McFarlane]

What appears on the ECF is broadly what the CAA have campaigned for. As David says there were concerns expressed at the AGM about non-qualified English people being put forward by the ECF for FIDE NA status without a requirement to at least attempt to qualify as an arbiter.

This is now being done and brings England into line with Scotland and Wales.

I am not 100% per cent certain on the following statements but I (a) believe that Adam actually failed the ECF (or more likely BCF) Arbiter exam (as you can see it was some time ago) and (b) he is not the only IA registered to England who does not have an ECF (or BCF) qualification though he is the only person licensed by FIDE.

If I am right that he failed the exam then that makes it extremely difficult to award him the title. He was also a FIDE arbiter before it became necessary to sit an exam for that. This would therefore prevent that from counting instead.