Not Sure Championship Relevance?
-
- Posts: 393
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
... and junior game fee!!
-
- Posts: 839
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 2:15 pm
- Location: Hampshire
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
Agree with Adam JRT is there for ECF to ask for funds.Adam Raoof wrote:Your point is taken, but the JRT is there for the ECF to ask for funds. Therefore the ECF has funds to support Junior chess - just not the whole amount, but some of the interest on the whole amount in the gift of the trustees.Peter Turner wrote:I repeat, "ECF does not currenty have funds to support junior chess". The £5,000 available is a grant from the JR Trust!!
when you are successful many losers bark at you.
-
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
Do you know whether the JRT is a protective or discretionary trust ?Peter Turner wrote:I repeat, "ECF does not currenty have funds to support junior chess". The £5,000 available is a grant from the JR Trust!!
-
- Posts: 393
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:57 pm
-
- Posts: 2720
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
- Location: NW4 4UY
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
Don't worry, I am also in favour of spending more of the ECF budget on juniors, and protecting income from ideas such as a junior only grading list. However there is something called Council, and you have to carry everyone with you...Paul Sanders wrote:It would be nice to think that a proportion of junior subs could be guaranteed to the junior budget...
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
-
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
This approach is misguided. Extra expenditure on juniors should come from the JRT until the ECF and Junior part is organised in a more tax efficient way utilising tax advantages discussed and agreed by MPs in the charity bills.Adam Raoof wrote:Don't worry, I am also in favour of spending more of the ECF budget on juniors, and protecting income from ideas such as a junior only grading list. However there is something called Council, and you have to carry everyone with you...
-
- Posts: 7218
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
To get rid of "Council" (seems like an Oxymoron but heh!) would "Council" be required to vote for by some crazy margin?
I'm about to re-read a novel by Joseph Heller to prepare myself...
I'm about to re-read a novel by Joseph Heller to prepare myself...
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
I assume it'd be a change to the Articles (as opposed to Bye Laws), and if it were, then it'd need to have a three-quarters majority.John Upham wrote:To get rid of "Council" (seems like an Oxymoron but heh!) would "Council" be required to vote for by some crazy margin?
-
- Posts: 21315
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
I did eventually get a tip off as to what the issue at the London Chess Classic might have been about. Given the general cryptic nature of this thread, I'll just supply a visual clue.
http://union.ic.ac.uk/rcc/chess/wp-cont ... hnAdam.jpg
If the reaction is "Oh no, not again", you have my sympathy.
http://union.ic.ac.uk/rcc/chess/wp-cont ... hnAdam.jpg
If the reaction is "Oh no, not again", you have my sympathy.
-
- Posts: 2720
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
- Location: NW4 4UY
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
Not Sure Classic Relevance?!Roger de Coverly wrote:I did eventually get a tip off as to what the issue at the London Chess Classic might have been about. Given the general cryptic nature of this thread, I'll just supply a visual clue.
http://union.ic.ac.uk/rcc/chess/wp-cont ... hnAdam.jpg
If the reaction is "Oh no, not again", you have my sympathy.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
-
- Posts: 7218
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
Were not similarly witty notices displayed at the London Chess Classic 2011?Adam Raoof wrote: Not Sure Classic Relevance?!
I did not witness them myself but learnt of them subsequently.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 21315
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
That joke is wearing a bit thin now, but I don't see the logic of why the ECF should be involved.John Upham wrote: Were not similarly witty notices displayed at the London Chess Classic 2011?
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
I believe that one person in particular found them upsetting.Roger de Coverly wrote:That joke is wearing a bit thin now, but I don't see the logic of why the ECF should be involved.John Upham wrote: Were not similarly witty notices displayed at the London Chess Classic 2011?
One or two others took exception to them, which led to the ECF involvement.
At the risk of being accused of wanting to shut down the thread, could I make a gentle request for people to move on.
-
- Posts: 21315
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
Personally I would have thought a "complaint" to this forum would have been more effective.David Sedgwick wrote:One or two others took exception to them, which led to the ECF involvement.
What though is the involvement of the ECF in notices which might be considered by some to be in poor taste and by others humorous?
Whilst the main tournaments at the event would have been graded by the ECF and submitted by the ECF to FIDE, I don't see why that gives the ECF intervention rights except in extreme circumstances. Or was the issue, the conduct of an ECF director or officer?
For what it's worth, which is not a lot as I wouldn't have a say, I would be opposed to the notion of an ECF Ethics committee. This is a case in point, that such a body would become a vehicle for triviality and point scoring. We've got the forum for that .
-
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm
Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?
I had hoped to keep out of this but recent postings make that very difficult.
Michael, you do not do yourself or your case any favours by making the comments that you do about David Sedgwick. He is as entitled to his opinion as you are. Could I suggest that you edit your last post.
I certainly agree that the sign "Some Rounds Start Late - Get Over It" was ill advised. It referred to the Blitz event organised by Adam Raoof and not to the FIDE Open but this was not made clear in the sign and certainly further confused by its position next to the result box for the Open.
When the creator of the sign realised that people were taking offence it was removed and he offered to resign.
The length of time the sign was displayed was unfortunate. Humour at events is always to be welcomed. Sometimes that humour can go wrong. When this is the case then a complaint must be taken seriously. There was one player greatly upset by the sign and others thought that it was not in good taste.
I apologise that I did not insist more forceably that the sign be removed immediately it was pointed out to me. Under normal circumstances I would have been more proactive. I have already explained to Michael the unusual circumstances which made that difficult for me at that event.
With regard to Roger's point about an ethics committee. Such a body should only be used as a last resort. It has existed in Scotland for a number of years and I know of no time that it has been called upon, though obviously Chess Scotland is run in a more open manner than the ECF (Eg one member one vote).
Michael, you do not do yourself or your case any favours by making the comments that you do about David Sedgwick. He is as entitled to his opinion as you are. Could I suggest that you edit your last post.
I certainly agree that the sign "Some Rounds Start Late - Get Over It" was ill advised. It referred to the Blitz event organised by Adam Raoof and not to the FIDE Open but this was not made clear in the sign and certainly further confused by its position next to the result box for the Open.
When the creator of the sign realised that people were taking offence it was removed and he offered to resign.
The length of time the sign was displayed was unfortunate. Humour at events is always to be welcomed. Sometimes that humour can go wrong. When this is the case then a complaint must be taken seriously. There was one player greatly upset by the sign and others thought that it was not in good taste.
I apologise that I did not insist more forceably that the sign be removed immediately it was pointed out to me. Under normal circumstances I would have been more proactive. I have already explained to Michael the unusual circumstances which made that difficult for me at that event.
With regard to Roger's point about an ethics committee. Such a body should only be used as a last resort. It has existed in Scotland for a number of years and I know of no time that it has been called upon, though obviously Chess Scotland is run in a more open manner than the ECF (Eg one member one vote).