2010/11 Championship

Discussion about all aspects of the ECF County Championships.
Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7402
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Alex Holowczak » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:07 pm

Neil Graham wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote: There are fewer players in Lancashire and Yorkshire (compared to their southern cousins), yet because of the structure of the competition, they end up having to field more teams in the national stages. So they struggle more.


I don't think this is correct for a minute. Yorkshire can call on players from Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield and Hull not forgetting Halifax, Huddersfield, Doncaster, York etc. etc.


Lancashire have their biggest city taken away from them in Manchester. (Not that I want to open that can of worms; I'm just saying their population is cut dramatically by losing it.)

I was under the impression that Yorkshire only pick ECF members for county games, and thus half of their number can't play.

Mick Norris
Posts: 3374
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Mick Norris » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:15 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:Lancashire have their biggest city taken away from them in Manchester. (Not that I want to open that can of worms; I'm just saying their population is cut dramatically by losing it.)


Rubbish, they have just lost an U100 semi by fielding a Manchester player who was ineligible on grading - Lancs believe that the city of Manchester is in Lancashire and pick players accordingly
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7402
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Alex Holowczak » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:19 pm

Mick Norris wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:Lancashire have their biggest city taken away from them in Manchester. (Not that I want to open that can of worms; I'm just saying their population is cut dramatically by losing it.)


Rubbish, they have just lost an U100 semi by fielding a Manchester player who was ineligible on grading - Lancs believe that the city of Manchester is in Lancashire and pick players accordingly


You miss the point. Lancashire can't pick as many players from Manchester as they would claim they're able to, on account that many will have already played for Greater Manchester in the MCCU stages.

Neil Graham
Posts: 488
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:36 pm

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Neil Graham » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:32 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Neil Graham wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote: There are fewer players in Lancashire and Yorkshire (compared to their southern cousins), yet because of the structure of the competition, they end up having to field more teams in the national stages. So they struggle more.


I don't think this is correct for a minute. Yorkshire can call on players from Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield and Hull not forgetting Halifax, Huddersfield, Doncaster, York etc. etc.


Lancashire have their biggest city taken away from them in Manchester. (Not that I want to open that can of worms; I'm just saying their population is cut dramatically by losing it.)

I was under the impression that Yorkshire only pick ECF members for county games, and thus half of their number can't play.


If Yorkshire used that criteria only a very few percent of their number could play. There is no rule that ECF membership is required for the Counties Championship. I suggest you keep your can of worms firmly closed; many players have qualification for a number of counties.

Chris J Greatorix
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:56 pm

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Chris J Greatorix » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:36 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:Lancashire have their biggest city taken away from them in Manchester. (Not that I want to open that can of worms; I'm just saying their population is cut dramatically by losing it.)


Rubbish, they have just lost an U100 semi by fielding a Manchester player who was ineligible on grading - Lancs believe that the city of Manchester is in Lancashire and pick players accordingly


You miss the point. Lancashire can't pick as many players from Manchester as they would claim they're able to, on account that many will have already played for Greater Manchester in the MCCU stages.


Can you imagine a Lancs open team that could include Gman players-that would be seem to be a fantastic team-190s on the bottom board probably, lets hope both sides can sort out their differences to make it happen.

Mick Norris
Posts: 3374
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Mick Norris » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:40 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:Lancashire have their biggest city taken away from them in Manchester. (Not that I want to open that can of worms; I'm just saying their population is cut dramatically by losing it.)


Rubbish, they have just lost an U100 semi by fielding a Manchester player who was ineligible on grading - Lancs believe that the city of Manchester is in Lancashire and pick players accordingly


You miss the point. Lancashire can't pick as many players from Manchester as they would claim they're able to, on account that many will have already played for Greater Manchester in the MCCU stages.


Lancs have 6 county teams in the ECF stages, we only have 2 playing in the MCCU (Open and U160), and some of our players aren't eligible to play for Lancs - impact, very small - they also pick players from Cheshire, Merseyside and Cumbria - they have lots of players to choose from
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Mick Norris
Posts: 3374
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Mick Norris » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:43 pm

Chris J Greatorix wrote:Can you imagine a Lancs open team that could include Gman players-that would be seem to be a fantastic team-190s on the bottom board probably, lets hope both sides can sort out their differences to make it happen.


The civil war is about G Man and Lancs existing separately, not together under one banner, we have already turned down that "offer"

Why don't Surrey and Middlesex merge, they would be unbeatable then?
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7402
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Alex Holowczak » Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:28 pm

Neil Graham wrote:If Yorkshire used that criteria only a very few percent of their number could play. There is no rule that ECF membership is required for the Counties Championship. I suggest you keep your can of worms firmly closed; many players have qualification for a number of counties.


There have only been two defaults in the national stages of the County Championship this year. Both were by Yorkshire. So what's going wrong?

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7402
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Alex Holowczak » Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:32 pm

Mick Norris wrote:
Chris J Greatorix wrote:Can you imagine a Lancs open team that could include Gman players-that would be seem to be a fantastic team-190s on the bottom board probably, lets hope both sides can sort out their differences to make it happen.


The civil war is about G Man and Lancs existing separately, not together under one banner, we have already turned down that "offer"

Why don't Surrey and Middlesex merge, they would be unbeatable then?


Mick, everyone acknowledges that Surrey and Middlesex are counties in their own right, since they've existed since antiquity. Because Lancashire is a county, and Greater Manchester is a post-1974 creation, those without the knowledge of the 40-years previous think that Greater Manchester is pinching territory from Lancashire. One local player opined that GM is a rebel group of people from Lancashire, and that's what the dispute is about.

People consider Lancashire to be a county, and not Greater Manchester, due to the date of its creation. It's not obvious to me how you change this perception.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 11898
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Roger de Coverly » Tue Jun 21, 2011 11:19 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:People consider Lancashire to be a county, and not Greater Manchester, due to the date of its creation. It's not obvious to me how you change this perception.


Whilst absolutely correct, it does remain the case that the NCCU, Lancs and the BCF allowed the creation of Merseyside and Cleveland ( Cumbria as well if that was a restructuring) whilst objecting to the creation of GMan.

Birmingham, Bristol, parts of Yorkshire could have had similar motivations to form themselves into counties. I don't think there was any great interest in doing so. So there was bad blood between GMan and Lancs before any breakaway.

E Michael White
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:31 pm

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby E Michael White » Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:16 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:....... those without the knowledge of the 40-years previous think......
40 years ? Get real.

The source of the dispute came about 250 years ago in 1761, when the Duke of Bridgewater opened his canal bypassing Liverpool docks and making the small village of Manchester the effective capital of Lancashire. Manchester was however in the wrong place in the bottom right hand corner but became a chess centre attracting players from Lancashire, Cheshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire to the Manchester Chess Club where county captains competed to enrol players. So it was all the Duke of Bridgewater's fault. If Bridgewater had terminated his canal in Preston or Bolton the Chess world would be different now.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7402
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Alex Holowczak » Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:53 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:People consider Lancashire to be a county, and not Greater Manchester, due to the date of its creation. It's not obvious to me how you change this perception.


Whilst absolutely correct, it does remain the case that the NCCU, Lancs and the BCF allowed the creation of Merseyside and Cleveland ( Cumbria as well if that was a restructuring) whilst objecting to the creation of GMan.

Birmingham, Bristol, parts of Yorkshire could have had similar motivations to form themselves into counties. I don't think there was any great interest in doing so. So there was bad blood between GMan and Lancs before any breakaway.


Cumbria is a restructuring; the historic county is Cumberland.

There was a meeting held with the idea of forming a West Midlands Chess Association. No one wanted to create it though. Warwickshire has claimed Worcestershire's bit of the West Midlands, because Worcestershire never bothered to claim to keep hold of it, but Staffordshire defended their southern borders a bit more vigorously, and retain areas like Wolverhampton, Walsall and West Bromwich.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 11898
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Roger de Coverly » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:29 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:Cumbria is a restructuring; the historic county is Cumberland.
.


from http://www.cumbriachess.org.uk/Info.htm

In 1938 Cumberland merged with Westmorland Chess Association. Around 1953, the Furness area joined, after an agreed departure from Lancashire, to form the Cumberland, Westmorland and Furness Chess Association, to be renamed the Cumbria Chess Association in 1974.


The departure of Greater Manchester was disagreed , as we know to this day. What Lancs hoped to gain by preventing this remains unclear. If the players and clubs in 1975 were disaffected with Lancs, they weren't going to turn out for Lancs teams.

Elsewhere, as you suggest in Birmingham, existing county demarcations and loyalties continued unaffected.
In the London area, a Middlesex team could on paper be even stronger if it borrowed players from Surrey, Kent, Essex or Herts. Part of the remit of the SCCU is to run winter Saturday afternoon regional county events, leagues work less well when all the strongest players are in the same team. If the idea of a Greater London county was ever considered, it wasn't promoted.

Mick Norris
Posts: 3374
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Mick Norris » Thu Jun 23, 2011 7:25 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:Cumbria is a restructuring; the historic county is Cumberland.
.


from http://www.cumbriachess.org.uk/Info.htm

In 1938 Cumberland merged with Westmorland Chess Association. Around 1953, the Furness area joined, after an agreed departure from Lancashire, to form the Cumberland, Westmorland and Furness Chess Association, to be renamed the Cumbria Chess Association in 1974.




You can read the history section of the NCCU website for similar info about Merseyside, Cleveland, Cheshire/NWales

http://nccu.org.uk/nccu/history/index.htm

I'll join with Adam on another thread with his Nick Clegg moment

I agree with Roger :lol:
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7402
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: 2010/11 Championship

Postby Alex Holowczak » Sat Jul 02, 2011 5:35 pm

The final scores are published online:

Open: Surrey 9 Kent 7
Minor: Bedfordshire 9 Hertfordshire 7
U180: Devon 7.5 Nottinghamshire 8.5
U160: Lancashire 5.5 Kent 10.5
U140: Kent 7.5 Hampshire 8.5
U120: Warwickshire 6.5 Lancashire 5.5
U100: Essex 8.5 Warwickshire 3.5

Surrey end their 54-year wait to win the County Championship. :)

Devon narrowly lost the U180 last year to Warwickshire, and Hampshire defended the U140 title they won last year.


Return to “County Championships”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests