You still haven't answered the question. What would you have had the ECF do under the circumstances?Roger de Coverly wrote:That figures. Of the people of influence in FIDE, he's perhaps the most chess hostile of the lot. He's already tried to sneak through a harder line version of Licensing and Registration.Sean Hewitt wrote:The notification of the decision came from Ignatius Leong in his role as Chairman of the FIDE Qualifications Commission (which is responsible for FIDE rating).
But the practical position, that the ECF haven't indicated that they will reject or seek to modify is this:-
For all players not English, the organiser tries to establish a FIDE ID. That's best practice even if they only have a part rating.
If they don't have that ID, the tournament organiser has to take one of three actions
(a) decline the entry until such time as the player produces a FIDE Id
or
(b) accept the entry and undertake to do all the necessary chasing to get an IRO somewhere in the world to set up an Id.
or
(c) set them up as ENG warning them that the ECF will want £ 27 a year for life to keep the rating active or FIDE €250 to change it from ENG.
If rating is marginal rather than essential, the simple solution is to abandon it.
REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
-
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
Am I alone in thinking: never mind what Roger thinks (no disrespect to Roger) but what is the ECF actually doing? All I can see is a statement on the ECF website with advice about implementation of FIDE's edict and nothing about a response from the ECF to FIDE.Sean Hewitt wrote:You [Roger] still haven't answered the question. What would you have had the ECF do under the circumstances?
-
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
It's of course right that the ECF should promulgate the latest FIDE edict, regardless of what the ECF's own intentions are as regards challenging the edict. But I too would be interested in hearing what action the ECF has in hand.
But a real life example if I may. Two years ago at our annual Witney Rapidplay an Oxford University player brought along with him - with no prior warning - a Romanian friend who was certainly not a member of his own national chess federation (I remember asking him the question when he paid his entry fee) but who happened to be on holiday in the UK and just wanted a day out playing chess in deepest Oxfordshire. Had we been a FIDE rated event I suspect we would have had a bit of a problem.
But a real life example if I may. Two years ago at our annual Witney Rapidplay an Oxford University player brought along with him - with no prior warning - a Romanian friend who was certainly not a member of his own national chess federation (I remember asking him the question when he paid his entry fee) but who happened to be on holiday in the UK and just wanted a day out playing chess in deepest Oxfordshire. Had we been a FIDE rated event I suspect we would have had a bit of a problem.
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
If the ECF and other Federations intend to challenge FIDE on this, some sort of hint to that effect wouldn't come amiss. Otherwise you just add it to the increasingly lengthy list of excuses for not running FIDE rated events if you don't do so already.Angus French wrote:All I can see is a statement on the ECF website with advice about implementation of FIDE's edict and nothing about a response from the ECF to FIDE.
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
Warn that FIDE had introduced measures which would have an adverse effect on the organisers of FIDE rated tournaments and announce that the ECF would be challenging the measures, if indeed it intends to do so.Sean Hewitt wrote:You still haven't answered the question. What would you have had the ECF do under the circumstances?
-
- Posts: 4542
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
Dragoljub Sudar wrote:
There's a very distinctive 3rd set of player: Those, probably the majority of us, who don't give a stuff about FIDE ratings.
You may possibly have overlooked a fourth big group. Those people who are interested in neither their FIDE Rating, nor their English grade.
I understand the QC is seriously considering substantial changes to the FIDE Rating System which will make ratings more responsive to volatile swings. They also favour rating results based on as few as 5 games, as against the current 9. I presume this will be a Glicko typ system where a player has a rating plus a stability factor. The more stable the rating, the bigger effect it has o n the opponent's rating.
I haven't looked to see whether these have been announced in the Agenda for Tallinn. I am here in Tromso for meetings about the Laws of Chess, prior to Tallinn.
There's a very distinctive 3rd set of player: Those, probably the majority of us, who don't give a stuff about FIDE ratings.
You may possibly have overlooked a fourth big group. Those people who are interested in neither their FIDE Rating, nor their English grade.
I understand the QC is seriously considering substantial changes to the FIDE Rating System which will make ratings more responsive to volatile swings. They also favour rating results based on as few as 5 games, as against the current 9. I presume this will be a Glicko typ system where a player has a rating plus a stability factor. The more stable the rating, the bigger effect it has o n the opponent's rating.
I haven't looked to see whether these have been announced in the Agenda for Tallinn. I am here in Tromso for meetings about the Laws of Chess, prior to Tallinn.
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
With grades so engrained in the system for board orders and seeded pairings, at least some notice has to be taken. But I take the point, once the hierarchy has been established, the actual grading numbers are not of so much interest.Stewart Reuben wrote: You may possibly have overlooked a fourth big group. Those people who are interested in neither their FIDE Rating, nor their English grade.
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
The Australian experience is that it's also the other way round. Convince the system that you have become inactive. The first tournament after this is critical. A good tournament will gain a load of points rocketing you up the rating list whilst a bad tournament will send you down to the basement. Even if justified, the second tournament doesn't enable the points to be given up or regained because the inactivity factor has been removed.Stewart Reuben wrote: I presume this will be a Glicko typ system where a player has a rating plus a stability factor. The more stable the rating, the bigger effect it has o n the opponent's rating.
-
- Posts: 4542
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
I looked and don't see the material in the Annexes for the FIDE Congress. That doesn't mean to say they aren't there, but I didn't notice them.
When I was on the QC we had a plan to create a new system and to run it in parallel with the existing system for some years. The new system would never be the official rating until after due notice had been given.
It is interesting, at least to me, that I am an example of an inactive player coming back. I didn't play in the US from 1965 - 1991. When I played I alerted the organiser to the fact that I had a USCF Rating. My USCF rating went up with every event I played in until it again stabilised. I was a one man demonstration that they had had inflation in the USCF System. Of course my reappearance was deflationary for my opponents.
Had they used a Glicko type system, my rating would have soared. Indeed this would have happened to Matthew Sadler had that system been in place. So FIDE are aware of this problem.
Returning to the original subject. FIDE perceive there is a problem about identifying players. They are trying a new system. If that doesn't work, they'll either revert or try a third way. This new system will work better in Europe and North America than in the developing countries.
When I was on the QC we had a plan to create a new system and to run it in parallel with the existing system for some years. The new system would never be the official rating until after due notice had been given.
It is interesting, at least to me, that I am an example of an inactive player coming back. I didn't play in the US from 1965 - 1991. When I played I alerted the organiser to the fact that I had a USCF Rating. My USCF rating went up with every event I played in until it again stabilised. I was a one man demonstration that they had had inflation in the USCF System. Of course my reappearance was deflationary for my opponents.
Had they used a Glicko type system, my rating would have soared. Indeed this would have happened to Matthew Sadler had that system been in place. So FIDE are aware of this problem.
Returning to the original subject. FIDE perceive there is a problem about identifying players. They are trying a new system. If that doesn't work, they'll either revert or try a third way. This new system will work better in Europe and North America than in the developing countries.
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
Well, the ECF have already done the first, and we'll be discussing the second at next week's board meeting.Roger de Coverly wrote:Warn that FIDE had introduced measures which would have an adverse effect on the organisers of FIDE rated tournaments and announce that the ECF would be challenging the measures, if indeed it intends to do so.Sean Hewitt wrote:You still haven't answered the question. What would you have had the ECF do under the circumstances?
So, thank you for acknowledging that your usual knee jerk criticism of anything the ECF does was premature and wrong.
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
The ECF have told organisers what is happening, and what they need to do here and now to ensure that their events continue to be rated. The ECF response will be discussed at next week's board meeting.Angus French wrote:Am I alone in thinking: never mind what Roger thinks (no disrespect to Roger) but what is the ECF actually doing? All I can see is a statement on the ECF website with advice about implementation of FIDE's edict and nothing about a response from the ECF to FIDE.Sean Hewitt wrote:You [Roger] still haven't answered the question. What would you have had the ECF do under the circumstances?
-
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
My point - not yet acknowledged - was that I think it would have been a good idea for the ECF statement to have included text such as "The ECF response will be discussed at next week's board meeting"; something to tell readers of the statement that the ECF wasn't just acquiesing in following FIDE's instruction.Sean Hewitt wrote:The ECF have told organisers what is happening, and what they need to do here and now to ensure that their events continue to be rated. The ECF response will be discussed at next week's board meeting.Angus French wrote:Am I alone in thinking: never mind what Roger thinks (no disrespect to Roger) but what is the ECF actually doing? All I can see is a statement on the ECF website with advice about implementation of FIDE's edict and nothing about a response from the ECF to FIDE.Sean Hewitt wrote:You [Roger] still haven't answered the question. What would you have had the ECF do under the circumstances?
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
It has announced the measure. It doesn't seem to have acknowledged the likely consequences and the possibility of challenging it. I'm reminded that many years ago the then BCF was keen to demand that all players with FIDE ratings had to become BCF members in order to continue to play in rated events and also that all foreign players had to be members of a Federation. A challenge to FIDE as to exactly what they meant might well have established that FIDE were really just looking to establish that every player had a home Federation that was a paid up member of FIDE.Sean Hewitt wrote:Well, the ECF have already done the first
-
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
If the ECF Board has still to formulate its reply why did it wait almost a fortnight to inform organisers of the situation. The communication from FIDE was sent on 12th August. Surely organisers should have been told as soon as possible? I had assumed the delay was caused by the matter being discussed at Board level. From Sean's statement, this possible reason for the delay is not applicable, so what did cause the delay?
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: REGULATIONS ON REGISTRATION & LICENSING OF PLAYERS
Sorry to disappoint you, but the ECF didn't wait a fortnight. The ECF contacted organisers of imminent events straight away. Simultaneously, it sought additional information from FIDE which, once received, allowed wider communication to all organisers and licensed arbiters.Alex McFarlane wrote:If the ECF Board has still to formulate its reply why did it wait almost a fortnight to inform organisers of the situation. The communication from FIDE was sent on 12th August.