Should the ECF run weekend tournaments?

[Roger de Coverly]

From the Commercial Director's report
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... report.pdf

I would like to see the Federation attempt to run its own weekend residential events. This would provide another service for our members and gain a higher profile for the Federation. It is possible that these events could be sponsored.
This simple idea is fiercely resisted by a number of colleagues on the board. The main reason given is that these events would conflict with the 4NCL

Is that the 4NCL running Congresses or the 4NCL?

Any additional Congresses, unless they increase the number or frequency of participants, can be bad news for events potentially taking place at the same time.

A killer reason to my mind, for the ECF NOT to run tournaments, is that unless it gets the VAT sorted out by Sports Recognition, it's always up to 20% down on an independent event by virtue of having to charge VAT on entry fees.

[MartinCarpenter]

Well it seems a bit confused about the new format for the national club champs Surely that's the sane way to see if ECF run residential events can be made to work?
(Or sort of the British for that matter!).

Doing anything on a major scale would inevitably clash with all sorts of existing events, mostly really quite well established by now. A fight with the 4NCL would be daft. County champs would be the easiest target in some ways, but the current qualifiers do seem rather well liked.

[Andrew Zigmond]

There was something in an earlier set of minutes about the 4NCL approaching the ECF to go into partnership with the recent series of 4NCL congresses, however the board rejected the idea at that time. If this is what the report is referring to would be interesting to know who was for and who was against, particularly as the first 4NCL congress in Birmingham was managed by the Director of Home Chess.

[Paul McKeown]

The ECF provides services (e.g. grading, rating) to those that organise and run events. Competing against your own clients in their core businesses is bad for everyone, unless you wish to run the entire chain of services as a monopoly. Such proposals could be seen as predatory.

[Roger de Coverly]

unless you wish to run the entire chain of services as a monopoly

That might be the ambition. Perhaps they look with envy at the relative size of the EBU in terms of employment. Some years back, it was possible to make a near direct comparison. The Torquay Chess congress was organised as always by a local team independent of the ECF, but had the use of the Riviera Centre. This was out of season (October or November) so cheaper rates were available at nearby hotels. There was a Bridge event, also over a Friday, Saturday, Sunday weekend in the same time period, also at the Riviera. This appeared to be organised by the EBU. Entry fees appeared similar and travel and accommodation costs would have been the same for participants. The difference appeared to be that the Bridge events had no mention of prize money, whilst the chess event had the usual range of prizes. The economic difference was that the EBU event would have been run by paid employees and also because of EBU turnover, subject to VAT.

[Mick Norris]

We aren't short of weekend tournaments in most geographical areas, so there is no point unless something different is being offered (as e2e4 did, and the 4NCL seek to do e.g. FIDE rated events, if there is a demand for them)

We are short of longer events for norm seekers, and the ECF could look to run these - or simply to start with, to alter the British to make it more attractive for norm seekers

[Steve Rooney]

No.

[Stewart Reuben]

I think there may be a misunderstanding.
'I would like to see the Federation attempt to run its own weekend residential events'. Bob Kane.

People have assumed that Bob is referring solely to weekend tournaments. Indeed that is how Roger named the thread.
If that is so, I haven't changed my mind since I was consulted on the subject in 1966 by the BCF. The ECF should leave individuals and organisations to run such events. The drectors do not have the manpower resources
But, for example, I will be arranging an International Organisers' Seminar some time in the next few months. Why not the ECF doing so? It was suggested by Martin Regan, but I never got around to doing anything. I am not sure why the empasis on residential, especialy in London.
Why not adult chess education weekends?
I tried a Christmas chess event with Grad Met. There was a resounding silence from the chess community.
A FIDE Trainers' Seminar would be desirable.
I was once in discussions with Pontin's about masters events at their sites. This was sabotaged by others who said they wouldn't work.

But these matters do come back to the problem that the Board does not have the resources. But the ECF may be able to encourage such initiatives by potential entrepeneurs. e.g. a guarantee against loss could be offered. Even financial support could be offered for such initiiatives.

[Roger de Coverly]

People have assumed that Bob is referring solely to weekend tournaments.

It's the paragraph afterwards which implies that others on the ECF Board are opposed because of not wanting to enter into competition with the 4NCL that leads people to believe that it refers to chess playing events. An arbiter seminar for a dozen or so participants wouldn't be considered 4NCL conflict unless the dates were chosen to clash.

This simple idea is fiercely resisted by a number of colleagues on the board. The main reason given is that these events would conflict with the 4NCL.

Is the Board split? Yes it is. One camp embraces change and wants to help develop English chess in a controlled manner.
The other camp resists all change and wishes to maintain things as they are.

[LawrenceCooper]

This simple idea is fiercely resisted by a number of colleagues on the board. The main reason given is that these events would conflict with the 4NCL.

Is the Board split? Yes it is. One camp embraces change and wants to help develop English chess in a controlled manner.
The other camp resists all change and wishes to maintain things as they are.

[/quote]

The irony to these quotes of course is that one of the people who the vocal/bullying members of the board constantly attack (Alex Holowczak) has implemented and spoken about radical change in lots of areas eg National Club, proposals about changing our grading system

[John Reyes]

We aren't short of weekend tournaments in most geographical areas, so there is no point unless something different is being offered (as e2e4 did, and the 4NCL seek to do e.g. FIDE rated events, if there is a demand for them)

We are short of longer events for norm seekers, and the ECF could look to run these - or simply to start with, to alter the British to make it more attractive for norm seekers

Mick is right there, there players out there who are looking for Norm, but have to travel abroad and why is that, we should be support our players

There was something in an earlier set of minutes about the 4NCL approaching the ECF to go into partnership with the recent series of 4NCL congresses, however the board rejected the idea at that time. If this is what the report is referring to would be interesting to know who was for and who was against, particularly as the first 4NCL congress in Birmingham was managed by the Director of Home Chess.

Maybe the Board should look at this again. that would be best for business!!