Rapidplay Grade

General discussions about ratings.
Warren Kingston
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:05 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Warren Kingston » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:52 pm

John Charman wrote:OK let's have some factual statements here in reply to you all.

I offered to grade our players games provided both they and their opponent was a silver member and they both agreed to it, it was a genuine offer to help and made after reading the following in the Help Guide in the online database:

GAME ELIGIBILITY FOR GRADING

Games can only be graded if they are played under acceptable conditions,
with clocks. Lightning and Correspondence games are excluded.

It is required that:
a. The FIDE Laws of Chess are used.
b. One of the following rates of play is complied with:

1. Rapidplay
Either:
i. Each player must have at least 15 minutes but less than 60 minutes
for all of his moves. This includes both the initial time control and
any subsequent time controls or quickplay finish.
ii. When Fischer (cumulative) mode is used then, using the assumption
that the duration of the game is 60 moves, each player must have at
least 15 minutes but less than 60 minutes.

2. Standardplay
Each player has more time than the maximum defined above for Rapidplay.

Whilst that clearly makes the games eligible for grading I obviously made the mistake of not checking with the person who would know for sure and that was Richard Haddrell whom I have now checked with and found there apparently are some other rules that I do not have a copy of anywhere even though I am an official grader.

I have therefore emailed all Norfolk players and apologised for misleading them and have said that if they think I have made a bad mistake then I am willing to resign as Grader, Membership administrator and Competition controller. I have already received many emails of support and one from the organiser of this thread, Mr Warren Kingston, in which he has asked me not to resign and states his thought that all of us involved in Norfolk's administration do a brilliant job and should carry on doing a brilliant job. Maybe this would not have happened had he thought that before he posted a complaint on a public forum and had instead asked me in an email if I was sure what I was offering was legal.

I have even had an email from the ECF CEO telling me I can't offer the service I wanted to, this on the same day that the subject was raised when he hasn't replied to an email I sent him 4 days ago regarding the appalling state of the membership system and offering help to try and sort it out.

So yet again this public forum has been fuelled for those of you who like to populate it and I suspect this message will help to start a lot more ungracious comment.

To Mr de Coverley who stated “Is this some sort of attempt to maintain the numbers renewing through the Norfolk MO? I really don't see why they bother. If the County Association wants £1 per head per player in Norfolk why not just levy it directly?”

I take that as an offensive insult; every single £1 that I make for the county by offering the renewal of their memberships through our MO goes straight back into the county in the form of a discount on our competition entry fees. None is kept in county funds and if it were it would be used for the betterment of our county. Not only that but I am sure that with one or two noteable exceptions every member in our county would willingly pay £1 to the county if we requested it to fund our chess. And the reason I bother is because I like to make the chess playing in Norfolk as easy as possible for all our players, the vast majority of whom appreciate the work I and others do on their behalf.

Also to Mr de Coverley who appears to imply we don't tell our members correct information I assure you that the system has been explained ad infinitum to our members both by myself and by our Chairman John Wickham, and we do not attempt to make any profit from their membership, it is just a service we offer to help them administratively.

So there you now have some facts, it would be nice if instead of constant criticism some constructive comments were posted on this site.
John, I did not come here and complain about what you or the NCCA were doing, if you read the very first post, it says "Or is there another way of getting your game graded?"

I dont take that question as a complaint at all. Just a question really. Also I emailed you asking if this was correct what you proposed and I still to this hour havent had a reply? Hence the question on this forum.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:59 pm

Warren Kingston wrote: I dont take that question as a complaint at all. Just a question really. Also I emailed you asking if this was correct what you proposed and I still to this hour havent had a reply? Hence the question on this forum.

The original query raised the issue as to why it was that a benefit was apparently being offered only to members of the Norfolk MO. It didn't appear to qualify the offer as being only for Silver members either. In previous years, all Norfolk MO members would have been able to play at Thetford, have their games graded and claim a discount. This has been withdrawn.

(edit) There is another difference between framework agreements and MOs. The "Yorkshire" extension has been withdrawn. It used to be the case that all MO members could play in an event such as a local Yorkshire evening league or the Hull Congress and have their games graded even though the local league or Congress was not an ECF member. This concession was withdrawn. It was obviously mostly of benefit to Yorkshire players since leagues and Congresses which refused to sign up for the Game Fee scheme were rare in other parts of the country. (/edit)
Last edited by Roger de Coverly on Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bobjones
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Bobjones » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:06 pm

Roger - please lay off John Charman. He does a fantastic amount of work for Norfolk players (one of whom I used to be). Also you should be aware that the Thetford Rapidplay is organised (by Kevin Moore) outside the auspices of the Norfolk CCA. What Kevin chooses to do (i.e. make this an ungraded event) is his own business and has nothing to do with the county. I agree (with Richard) that entries may suffer when potential entrants realise the event is ungraded.

Richard Bates
Posts: 3338
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Richard Bates » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:12 pm

Bobjones wrote: I agree (with Richard) that entries may suffer when potential entrants realise the event is ungraded.
:) Actually i was provocatively advancing the opinion that it would make no difference, but I accept that some people might actually attach some importance to their rapidplay grade... :oops:

Warren Kingston
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:05 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Warren Kingston » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:19 pm

I would also like to say, that the Thetford Rapidplay is a great event and I have done my little bit by putting the entry form on the Lowestoft Website for Kevin.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2720
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:59 pm

Warren Kingston wrote:I would also like to say, that the Thetford Rapidplay is a great event and I have done my little bit by putting the entry form on the Lowestoft Website for Kevin.
I am sure it will be a great event.

However it may be possible that competitors are not aware that none of the games will be graded - if that is the case - since the default position for events is that they will be graded, and increasingly frequently FIDE rated as well. Are you sure the position is clearly explained on the entry form?

I am not sure that running an ungraded (as opposed to a graded) event is a selling point. Why not just require membership and grade the event?
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!

Bobjones
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Bobjones » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:13 pm

The entry form makes no mention of ECF membership or whether or not the event will be graded. I emailed Kevin Moore who confirmed that it will NOT be graded.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:19 pm

Adam Raoof wrote:
I am not sure that running an ungraded (as opposed to a graded) event is a selling point. Why not just require membership and grade the event?
If you require membership and are hoping to attract newcomers, you are asking them to pay a (silver entry fee) PLUS £ 18 or £ 19. Even if you just grade the event under "pay to play", you are asking for (silver entry fee) PLUS £ 6.

The hypothesis is that some?/many? players are disinterested in their rapid play grade and newcomers wouldn't know what it was about anyway.

The problem of having to ask for membership on top of the entry fee for what might be a one-off activity is what caused the "revolt" by junior chess organisations at the April Council meeting.

Bobjones
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Bobjones » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:46 pm

In Norfolk, where compulsory ECF membership has been the accepted norm for several years, regular players may be unenthusiastic about competing in an ungraded event. Their league games will be graded and they would expect to get their full money's worth by having their tournament games graded too. I think the organiser has made a faux pas by not making the Thetford Rapidplay a graded event. Perhaps he just didn't want the hassle involved, especially at such an early stage of the season.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2720
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:21 pm

Bobjones wrote:The entry form makes no mention of ECF membership or whether or not the event will be graded. I emailed Kevin Moore who confirmed that it will NOT be graded.
The only major difference, bar the change of date, between previous entry forms and the current version seems to be the deletion of the sentence "Thetford Rapidplay chess games will be sent for grading following the tournament." This, I would argue, is not enough to warn people that the event will not be graded.

I am sure it might not make a lot of difference to the organisers, except of course saving them some work getting the event graded, but it will make a difference to players. The effect on entries of obliging some level of membership would be negligible, looking at past turnouts. Not getting the event graded is a retrograde step for an otherwise successful event.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:26 pm

Bobjones wrote: Perhaps he just didn't want the hassle involved, especially at such an early stage of the season.
The problems of early season Congresses have been a past discussion point on this forum. If any sort of solution emerged, it was that it was expedient to short circuit MOs out of the system by telling prospective entrants to join the ECF directly as Silver members. You then use the ECF's own membership list to determine to whom you should be giving a £ 6 entry fee discount.

Under the older system, Norfolk players would have had "free grading", rather than for £ 6 it would now cost if they were only bronze members.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:33 pm

John Charman wrote: an email I sent him 4 days ago regarding the appalling state of the membership system and offering help to try and sort it out.
If there are problems with the membership system, why not raise them here?

Richard Bates
Posts: 3338
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Richard Bates » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:42 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
John Charman wrote: an email I sent him 4 days ago regarding the appalling state of the membership system and offering help to try and sort it out.
If there are problems with the membership system, why not raise them here?
Very kind of you to offer to devote some of your valuable posting time to help out Roger, but surely this question makes no sense whatsoever until after you have been elected membership secretary? Maybe John's motivation was actually getting problems solved, not arguing about them?

John Charman
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:28 am

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by John Charman » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:15 am

I have received messages from Andrrew and am quite satisfied it is the level f his workload hat led to an oversight.

As far as raising problems on here goes, why would anybody apart from peopel who are against he system do that. Certainly the person who asked the question is a well known opponent of the membership system and I for one will not add fuel to his arguments as I accept the system. In any sport or game you wish to play it is certainly acceptable to have to be a member of your parent organisation to me.

I have offered any help I am able to give to the ECF to get the sytem running properly and effectively just as the Norfolk Membesrhip Organisation did for five years.

There is a tremendous amount of energy expended on here being against various things, maybe if that energy were redirected to helping the ECF we wouldn't have any of the supposed problems.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Rapidplay Grade

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:41 am

John Charman wrote: In any sport or game you wish to play it is certainly acceptable to have to be a member of your parent organisation to me.
That is the nub of the question. Why? Does it not just discourage participation? The Council meeting saw that Junior Organisations were concerned about this.

You make the local organisation the member and the ECF have not changed this. The local organisation charges for participation, as it still does and then pays a fee to the ECF for membership. Some league organisations can then charge for participation by head if they must, but don't impose per head collection on areas and organisations that don't want it.

There are any number of potential problems with the membership scheme. If the advocates don't want to talk about them, then fine, they won't be solved.
John Charman wrote:There is a tremendous amount of energy expended on here being against various things, maybe if that energy were redirected to helping the ECF we wouldn't have any of the supposed problems.
The ECF dirctors were under no compulsion to introduce the scheme they did. Personally I think they should have looked carefully at the EBU scheme and Chess Scotland scheme rather than rejecting them without debate. For that matter, as Game Fee is and remains Corporate membership, they could have looked at a much better integration of voting rights, grading data, invoicing and collection. These issues remain of course.

Post Reply