English Chess Forum

They don't play for an MCCU county, that's the point

_________________
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

The key word in what I said was "or". So if they played for an MCCU something, be it league, club, county or whatever, then I don't see any harm in them winning the prize.

If you ban people who play for non-MCCU counties from winning the prize, then it would be advantageous for them to not play county chess at all. So the theoretical Birmingham-based student born in Surrey could win the prize if he didn't play for Surrey, but not win the prize if he did. Makes no sense.

_________________
February 16-17: 2013 BUCA Team Championship
April 20: 2013 British Blitz Championship
July 27-August 10: 100th British Chess Championships

Your hypothetical - and perfectly spherical - Brum student in Surrey is eligible to play during vacation for the MCCU county of residence or to fit a county match in with refeeding/laundry services from the family. Would you not want the MCCU to encourage players to represent its own counties?

How about if his eligibility is for a county that's inactive on the county scene? Take, for example, Alan Papier, who lives in Herefordshire, but who plays for Bristol & Clifton in the Bristol League. He can't play for Herefordshire, because they don't play in the County Championships; if he's going to play county chess, he's got to play for Gloucestershire. Your rule acts as a disincentive for him to play county chess at all.

_________________
http://westcountrychess.blogspot.com

I think you've slightly got this the wrong way around.

Suppose a player was born in Surrey, and lived there all his life. He plays county chess for Surrey. He then attends Birmingham University, for argument's sake. He is active in congress chess around the MCCU. So he is eligible to win the prizes. Then he goes home for Christmas/New Year. Before he returns, he plays a county game for Surrey in the middle of January. Now all of a sudden, he's ineligible. So by playing more chess, he's managed to make himself ineligible for a prize.

I'm quite happy for the MCCU to encourage players to represent its own counties, but not at the expense of converting already existing players from other counties. It'd be like tapping up a good player from another club to come and play for your club. It's all a bit grim, and isn't in the spirit of the competition.

I think as long as they qualify in one way or another (which might include things like residence, work, club or a league they play in), that should be enough.

_________________
February 16-17: 2013 BUCA Team Championship
April 20: 2013 British Blitz Championship
July 27-August 10: 100th British Chess Championships

Let me get this straight.

I'm born in Leicester and live in Stockport (Cheshire) so can play for Leicestershire or Cheshire as I choose. I win the grand prix (hurrah!). If I then play a county game for Leicestershire, no problem, but if I play for Cheshire and I'm booted out of the Grand Prix?

Utterly bonkers!

But then again, this is the MCCU

While not wanting to be condescending to the MCCU, I agree that this particular rule is bonkers and in need of a rethink.

_________________
February 16-17: 2013 BUCA Team Championship
April 20: 2013 British Blitz Championship
July 27-August 10: 100th British Chess Championships

Not surprisingly, I'd never heard of the MCCU RGP until I saw this thread.

However, I can discern the logic. The MCCU doesn't mind if players don't play county chess at all, but it wishes to discourage them from representing counties in other Unions.

When I read through the thread, I recalled for some reason your (Sean's) earlier suggestion that I and others in the SCCU had a somewhat selfish attitude towards the Counties Championships. I couldn't resist a wry smile.

You might have found that difficult this year!

So long as a Hereforshire or Northamptonshire player does not represent another county, the current rules permit participation in the Midlands under-150 RGP.

While logical in that it would help MCCU counties do better, it's illogical in that it is a chess-prevention rule for the people described by Jack.



So the MCCU is actively writing rules that prevent people from playing in the Counties Championship to the advantage of its own counties. The MCCU should be proud. Remind me again of how I can propose a rule change?

_________________
February 16-17: 2013 BUCA Team Championship
April 20: 2013 British Blitz Championship
July 27-August 10: 100th British Chess Championships

Contact your county secretary and ask the county to sponsor a proposal, which would be discussed at the MCCU AGM.

Alternatively you could allow yourself to be nominated for the post of Events Controller who can set up the event's rules within policy agreed by MCCU. If the MCCU were to debate and make a decision on the issue whether players who have represented non-MCCU counties, but are members of MCCU-associated clubs, clearly the event controller would be expected to follow the agreed policy. The term "MCCU-associated club" probably needs a definition to make any decision by a Controller transparent and reduce potential criticism that a controller was inconsistent.

OK, so I could contact the Worcs and Warks people, and I could also get Sean to do it via his connection to Leics (it seems he agrees with me). Will sort it out ASAP...

_________________
February 16-17: 2013 BUCA Team Championship
April 20: 2013 British Blitz Championship
July 27-August 10: 100th British Chess Championships

With two rounds now completed after the Birmingham Rapidplay, the provisional Rapid Grand Prix table is published
http://www.mccu.org.uk/gp/rgp_lead.htm
Clive Pemberton (South Birmingham) is in the lead.

The leaderboard has been updated to include results from the Bolton and the Bury rapidplay events. Steve Crockett (Redditch, Worcs) is the man to beat!