English Chess Forum

Oh dear, only the worst entry since I took over this congress, it has risen steadily every year until now.

I know of several stalwarts who are away, but the numbers are awful - is it the extra £6 on top of last year's entry fee?

Hardly any juniors, maybe that is because Paul Bielby has retired?

Anyone who still wants to play send me an email - no late entry fee.

We now hand over to Roger de Coverly, for a discussion of the merits of Game Fee versus Membership.

A guess, but a congress at the same venue so soon after the British was probably bound to suffer a dip in entries.

Alex Holowczak wrote:We now hand over to Roger de Coverly, for a discussion of the merits of Game Fee versus Membership.

One of the effects of the changed scheme is to increase costs for Congress players in the North to the benefit of club and Congress players in the South. But you know that already. Andrew Farthing boasted of it. Also if you charge the same for the person who plays one Congress a year as plays ten, the one Congress a year person is likely to end up paying more. But you knew that as well.

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:A guess, but a congress at the same venue so soon after the British was probably bound to suffer a dip in entries.

Some of the 'new entries' are people who played at The British and enjoyed the venue, however, I take the point that some of my 'one congress a year locals' have already had it!

Lara Barnes wrote:Oh dear, only the worst entry since I took over this congress, it has risen steadily every year until now.

I know of several stalwarts who are away, but the numbers are awful - is it the extra £6 on top of last year's entry fee?

Hardly any juniors, maybe that is because Paul Bielby has retired?

Anyone who still wants to play send me an email - no late entry fee.

Any Yorkshire entries might be compromised by a clash with the first round of the Yorkshire league taking place on Saturday - I probably would've played other than for that.

And in my case I couldn't get a train back from London in time on Friday - so defected to Adam's event ...

Hope it runs smoothly


Paul

I feared as much....is this the start of another Congress downturn.
And why did our Congress delegates not flag up this obvious risk (very loudly) when the voting took place (or maybe they too didnt get that vote). The main vote going to league based bodies who were being offered chess on the cheap...at £13. So, it was no surprise that this got through with so little challenge.

This glaring imbalance might well be addressed in some part by the introduction of OMOV, along the lines I have previously outlined.

However... considering that £6 one-off Congress charge/per congress, for non members...should this be offset against the old (game-fee element), which, for 5 games would be nearly £3.
These local Congresses especially depend on local entries, particularly in the lower sections, to boost numbers. These are often `fringe players` who may well play very little chess, apart from the odd congress. We need to cater for these fringe groups to ensure they are not ailienated.
Roger also mentioned that the Leek Congress had its lowest entry for 11 years, partly due he suggested, to the costs for FIDE rated section possibly putting players off.
This is why I`ve urged a more flexible Membership structure, and maybe some negotiated schemes for counties with special needs...who might well pay a bulk fee, and administer collection and payment independantly. But I will not pretend that this is easy...and Andrew & his team deserve great credit for at least kicking things off with (Membership..mark 1).
We also cant write off other factors, such as the current economy (outside the deep south), where many families are feeling the squeeze, people probably have less time, and struggling on part time jobs that may not be paying the bills like previous full time work did.
On another tac... I would urge Congress directors and organisors to be very pro-active on publicity, including local Press contacts and any major league/county websites in there region. Active mailshots are another key element, and a good colection of web/email contacts is essential..backed up by suitable reminders.

David Pardoe wrote:I feared as much....is this the start of another Congress downturn.
And why did our Congress delegates not flag up this obvious risk (very loudly) when the voting took place (or maybe they too didnt get that vote). The main vote going to league based bodies who were being offered chess on the cheap...at £13. So, it was no surprise that this got through with so little challenge.

This glaring imbalance might well be addressed in some part by the introduction of OMOV, along the lines I have previously outlined.

It depends which way round you look at it. Congresses resented having to pay a levy to the ECF in exchange for membership and votes. They've got what they wanted in part anyway. Those Congresses that expect non-members to compete, such as Scottish and Welsh players, don't have to compel them to become members at a cost of £ 19 per head, but do have to charge £ 6 more than they charge ECF members to balance their budgets. In areas where MOs had been established, there is an increased cost to local club members, as previously their £ 13 MO cost included discounted entry to the local (or any) Congress whereas they now have to pay £ 19 for the same rights.

The winners on this are those who are already £ 27 members as their clubs benefit from reduced league entry fees. Everyone else, MO members, Juniors , league only players outside MO areas are the losers.

(edit) The general debate is probably better transferred to "Consequences of membership". As others suggest, whilst last year's event gained from being the British venue ( people coming to take a look), this year probably lost out. (/edit)

Sorry to hear that about Northumberland. Interestingly, Leicester Congress runs next weekend. It's not an e2e4 event, though I do take the entries for the County Association. With a week to go, entries are about 10% ahead of where they were last year - despite our increasing the entry fees. If congresses are having an entries downturn, and if that downturn were due to membership, it's odd that Leicester's numbers are up.

e2e4 High Wycombe is two weeks later. Entries there are 20% up year on year.

Difficult to say what the reasons for the lower numbers are.

Some of the one event a year people have already played at the British. Because of the push to get things as well ordered as possible for the British perhaps some organisers' weren't as focussed as usual on 'pushing' this event.

The effect of membership is impossible to say. Many say they are members but because they have joined through an MO this is difficult to verify. There is no doubt that the different levels of membership has confused some of the less active players and even some of the more active. One leading junior (or perhaps the parents of) claimed Silver Membership but it was actually bronze that appears on the ECF list. The said player should have been Gold! There may have to be some players chased up retrospectively who have made similar mistakes but joined through an MO without appreciating the new structure.

The Entry Secretary has probably felt more frustrated this year than in the past (where any financial differences between those claiming to be members but weren't didn't seem to be chased up by the office).

Time will tell.

Bradford's numbers held up fine too, so I'd guess this one was down to some local things.