Chess Player Strip Searched

[Stewart Reuben]

Nick try the FIDE Laws of Chess

A necessary condition for a game to be rated by FIDE is that it shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.

These Laws came into action 1 July 2014.

[NickFaulks]

Nick try the FIDE Laws of Chess

A necessary condition for a game to be rated by FIDE is that it shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.

These Laws came into action 1 July 2014.

I don't understand what this refers to.

[Roger de Coverly]

That is nowhere in the FIDE regulations. You have invented it.

I thought Stewart Reuben quoted it a few posts ago.

the current regulations state
0.3 All arbiters of a FIDE rated tournament shall be licensed otherwise the tournament shall not be rated.

Leaving aside the clumsiness of that statement, there is now no doubt that a licensed arbiter has to be present for an event to be FIDE Rated.

I'll leave you and Stewart to fight. If the ECF doesn't agree with Stewart's interpretation, let them say so, as they control access to International rating for English events.

[Graham Borrowdale]

That can only apply when the competition isn't FIDE rated.

That is nowhere in the FIDE regulations. You have invented it. However, you may well have success in persuading the ECF to introduce this restriction for events in their own jurisdiction. They seem content that very few English events are FIDE rated.

Why the constant sideswipes at English chess? The reason most English events are not FIDE-rated is that they are not played under FIDE conditions, the most obvious being the 4-hour session, and no doubt others, plus the fact that players generally do not demand it. Evening leagues are unlikely to ever run 4-hour sessions given the normal British working day and travel times in most areas. I would be interested to know if other countries run evening leagues which are FIDE-rated.

[Stewart Reuben]

Nick, I'm a bit confused by your confusion.
Roger de Coverly wrote:
That can only apply when the competition isn't FIDE rated.
Nick responded That is nowhere in the FIDE regulations. You have invented it. However, you may well have success in persuading the ECF to introduce this restriction for events in their own jurisdiction. They seem content that very few English events are FIDE rated.
So, I posted about the FIDE Laws. Here now in full the relevant section.
PREFACE
The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations which are regulated in the Laws. The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding a solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors. FIDE appeals to all chess players and federations to accept this view.
A necessary condition for a game to be rated by FIDE is that it shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.
It is recommended that competitive games not rated by FIDE be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.

I don't see how you can claim that it isn't in the regulations that, for a game to be FIDE Rated, it must be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.
I suppose you are additionally suggesting that 0.3 of the Rating Regulations only state that all arbiters must be licensed. They don't actually state that there has to be an arbiter, although they do so for Official FIDE events and title ones. I took that to be a typical drafting error. It is very odd. If there is an arbiter, he must be licensed. If there is no arbiter, that's fine. Hmm.
Roger, Nick and I aren't fighting. We discuss matters.
Nick, when I have written rules, if people did not understand them, I regard that as my fault.

[NickFaulks]

Why the constant sideswipes at English chess?

I know, I get bored with it myself. But why is it that the number of rated players and games in Britain are such a tiny fraction of those in the other major European nations? There seem to be influential elements within the home federations that regard this as a matter of national pride.

How could the recent British U14 and U13 not be submitted for rating? In most countries this would be inconceivable.

[Adam Raoof]

Even for a game to be ECF graded it must be played according to the FIDE Laws...

I can see scope for an Under 2200 evening league in London.

[Roger de Coverly]

But why is it that the number of rated players and games in Britain are such a tiny fraction of those in the other major European nations?

Mostly because a lot of our chess is played as evening leagues and weekend tournaments and theirs isn't.

[NickFaulks]

I took that to be a typical drafting error.

Nick, when I have written rules, if people did not understand them, I regard that as my fault.

Finally we have found the nub of the problem. You saw a regulation with which you disagreed, so you decided that it must be a "typical drafting error" ( thanks ) and that it must mean the opposite of what it said. It wasn't, and it didn't.

I don't think anyone failed to understand this wording, which is written in the clearest possible language. You wanted it to mean something else, so you decided to assume that it was drafted wrongly. I don't see what we could have done about that.

[NickFaulks]

But why is it that the number of rated players and games in Britain are such a tiny fraction of those in the other major European nations?

Mostly because a lot of our chess is played as evening leagues and weekend tournaments and theirs isn't.

Evening leagues, agreed. Weekend tournaments should generally be no problem, although I sympathise with those who wish to keep their traditional first time control at, say, 36 moves. I don't think this is the biggest issue.

As I said before, when the federation chooses not to rate its own U13 and U14 championships, I think that says it all.

[Paolo Casaschi]

As I said before, when the federation chooses not to rate its own U13 and U14 championships, I think that says it all.

It might be a pride issue or a general distrust of FIDE; in any case the idea does not seem popular of phasing out the national rating following the downward expansion of the FIDE list, as it happened in many other countries. It might also relate to the ECF grading being perceived as a key value of the ECF for its members while trying to enforce compulsory membership. Personally I find amusing that the ECF constantly complains about shortage of resources while at the same time insists on a parallel grading system that consumes a huge portion of those resources.
Said that, you need to see things in context; I believe there are some English counties that for whatever disagreement with the ECF are still using their own county grading system: there might be a pathological pattern...

[John Upham]

As I said before, when the federation chooses not to rate its own U13 and U14 championships, I think that says it all.

A good question to ask in "the other place".

It is not clear who should be answering it.

[Rob Thompson]

Given how terrible junior fide ratings are in the country, I'm not sure that giving more juniors fide ratings based off games against other juniors is really a good idea.

[Roger de Coverly]

Weekend tournaments should generally be no problem

Tournaments using a four hour session, I could agree. Many tournaments though are run on a two day basis with three rounds on a Saturday and two on a Sunday. Attempts to run these with four hour sessions have long since been abandoned as that sets up early starts, short breaks and late finishes, none of which are popular. In particular if they use increments, problems of short breaks and late finishes are compounded.

Friday night play is accepted in the North and West, rather less so in the South, Midlands and East. Travelling for a 7pm Friday evening round is a potential nightmare in the M25 area.

[Roger de Coverly]

Personally I find amusing that the ECF constantly complains about shortage of resources while at the same time insists on a parallel grading system that consumes a huge portion of those resources.

In what sense do you think that a parallel grading system consumes a huge portion of the ECF's resources? Results would still have to be collected and new players identified whatever the back office process to generate numbers. The current administrator of the database has a reputation for being a stickler for points of detail and as a consequence the process is now running very smoothly as far as everyone is aware. It helps a bit that arbiters have finally noticed that computers might be able to help them run tournaments.