Chess Devon editorial on various issues...

[Alex Holowczak]

Well, if you think Sussex has picky rules, Birmingham is more lenient:

4.3 Every player so registered must have, prior to the player's registration, become a full subscribing member of the club requesting the player's registration, and be qualified in 1 of the following ways:
a) resides within 20 miles of Stephenson Place, Birmingham;
b) has a usual place of business of employment within 15 miles of Stephenson Place, Birmingham;
c) is a pupil or teacher at any school, college or University situated within 15 miles of Stephenson Place, Birmingham;
d) has at any time previously played for at least three consecutive seasons for any club affiliated to the League (whether or not such club be currently affiliated) and was registered for such club by reason of any of the qualifications in force at the time;
e) resides or has a usual place of business or employment within 15 miles of the club's club-room.

Allied to other rules for county eligibility, it's possible to have lived about 10 miles west of Stourbridge's clubroom all your life (by which time, you've gone through Worcestershire and into Shropshire), and play for Warwickshire!

[Roger de Coverly]

This topic has been widely discussed in both the Surrey Border League and Berkshire League in dealing with a new phenomenon that has arisen in the last 2-3 years

John what the ..... does this mean exactly.

In the 4NCL it's common for a team to be formed of "players for hire". This is a phenomena which is also spreading to some local leagues, sightings have been made on Merseyside, mid-Sussex ( they banned it), Berkshire and Surrey Border.

[J T Melsom]

I suspect that Roger is on this occasion closest to the mark, in advocating club squads nominated well in advance of fixtures. Thereafter we do rely on the goodwill of match captains. I have a number of players who are away at university, public school or more usually are busy with other commitments, whether business or other hobbies. They are coincidentally some of my strongest players and would not therefore want to play every match against obviously weaker opposition. And I'm not sure the treasurer will necessarily demand subscriptions from them for playing one or two games. Nor in truth would I want them to play; as chair of one of the largest clubs in the county, I am keen to see that reflected in a successful season , but crushing the opposition at smaller clubs, doesn't really help anybody. But I also have a responsibility to my regular club members who were consulted on my proposed selection policy at the outset of the season, as it seemed right to me that we should seek to maintain a side drawn substantially from the existing regular membership.

We amended the rules in Bucks some time ago, but before that I had the dubious experience of playing a match against a team based outside the county and finding myself against a player who just happened to be free that night, was rated considerably higher than me, and has never played another game in the league since. I might have welcomed the stronger opposition, but instead regarded the experience as a waste of an evening.

[Ben Purton]

Roger you say that like a bad thing? Quite frankly Sussex are bad for British chess.
Its terrible to ban/look down upon the hiring of players. Its a poor effort by anyone who is anti the professional game

[Roger de Coverly]

Roger you say that like a bad thing? Quite frankly Sussex are bad for British chess.
Its terrible to ban/look down upon the hiring of players. Its a poor effort by anyone who is anti the professional game

The case against imported players which is that it allows a club to attempt to "buy" victory in what is in essence an amateur event.

The case for, which is the majority view in Berks, is that it gives players who do not normally encounter IMs or GMs the chance to play them at someone else's expense. In Berks some of the IMs/GMs are actually local of course.

[IM Jack Rudd]

With regard to the Bristol League and county eligibility, the clubs south of the river - Bath, Bath University, Clevedon, Keynsham, Nailsea and South Bristol - are in Somerset, while the others are in Gloucestershire.

[Matt Mackenzie]

South Bristol?? In Somerset??? <mumble, grumble>

[Alex Holowczak]

South Bristol?? In Somerset??? <mumble, grumble>

It's true.

This is part of the problem with the counties. Traditional counties are used, but not enough people seem to know where the boundaries actually are. Particularly those who are organising the teams.

[Anthony Higgs]

One complained I wore an "poor choice of headwear" I was wearing a beanie with literally nothing on it.

Another player went further and claimed I was a Right wing racist because I wore a Stone Island Jumper.......A unique statement. Especially as the National Front would probaly beat me for my relgion but don't worry Sussex , Ill wear M & S if I play you again!!

Ben

I sympathise, these 'complaints' are pretty bizarre.

However I don't think "Sussex are bad for British chess" is the case as you stated above, many players in Sussex (myself included) would have jumped at the chance to play GMs in the league no matter where they were from, and several clubs have growing memberships and the progressive attitudes that come with it. Its a case of making sure that the people driving this growth get to the AGMs etc so that the established opinion can be challenged where appropriate.

We took a step in the right direction recently with rules introduced allowing quickplay finishes, and I was White in what was (subject to confirmation) the first ever game in the league to use a QPF last week. Hopefully the strange bona fide rules I posted above can be toned down in future, but it is important to take one step at a time, so as not to alienate players who are quite happy with the way it has always been. The league is for all its members, which includes the entrenched conservatives as well as the modernisers, no matter how much each group may wish otherwise!

[Richard Thursby]

Given the last time I played in a club internal competition was 2001, I wouldn't be able to play for the club I represent in local leagues.

This is part of the problem with the counties. Traditional counties are used, but not enough people seem to know where the boundaries actually are. Particularly those who are organising the teams.

The eligibility criteria to represent a county include the words "in the county" (eg: birth, residence, educational establishment). However, boundaries change over time, counties appear and disappear. For example, Middlesex (SCCU) ceased to exist in 1965 (becoming part of Greater London), despite still appearing on some postal addresses. Greater Manchester (MCCU) and Merseyside (NCCU) were formed in 1974. For an example maybe pertinent to another member of this forum, Slough was moved from Buckinghamshire to Berkshire in 1974. If these counties ever rejoin the county championship then, nothwithstanding the personal quandry I will face, will the eligibility of people born in Slough depend on when they were born?

I have never heard of any cases of county eligibility being questioned. To bring it slightly back to the original point of this thread, I can imagine a team being slightly miffed if for a crunch match the opposing county brought out a GM ringer who hadn't played before and whose eligibility depended on the boundaries used (eg representing county X, the place they were born was in X when they were born but is no longer, or wasn't in X when they were born but is now).

Is there anybody from eg Manchester on this forum who knows how they resolve any Lancashire/Greater Manchester or similar issues?

[Roger de Coverly]

Is there anybody from eg Manchester on this forum who knows how they resolve any Lancashire/Greater Manchester or similar issues?

You don't want to go there. It's probably the longest running feud in British chess.

[William Metcalfe]

Stay away from that 1 richard myself and steve the other cleveland nccu rep tried to broker something between manchester and the nccu lets say we both got out alive but only just.

[Paul Buswell]

Is there anybody from eg Manchester on this forum who knows how they resolve any Lancashire/Greater Manchester or similar issues?

The ad hoc solution applied by the BCF in the early 80s was that a player qualified via a locus in the Greater Manchester metropolitan county which was created in 1974 was qualified for both GM and for the 'traditional' precursor county of that locus.

PB

[J T Melsom]

I am not sure about the effect of the boundary changes in 1974 on eligibility but members of Slough chess club are eligible to play for Bucks because that club is a member of the county chess league. Members of Berkhamstead are also eligible for the same reason, even though Berkhamstead has always been in Hertfordshire. Slough players have been known to swap counties when the match captain swapped counties, whether to follow or to avoid the individual concerned.

Of course multiple eligibility isn't limited to the boundaries of counties, or indeed counties and metropolitan areas. [ I assume members of Welsh clubs might also be eligible throuh club membership of leagues] We might even consider whether unitary authorities which discharge the same local government functions as shire and mets should now compete in their own right. The landtake for Milton Keynes came substantially from within Bucks, but geographically they look for chess activity to neighbouring counties, having flirted for a brief while with playing Bucks league matches at a neutral venue.

As for representing different counties in different events, that's also okay, and not necessarily a bad thing. After all in most cases its simply providing more chess opportunities for people and that's hard to argue with. The other week bona fide members of Aylesbury and Wycombe chess clubs represented Oxfordshire and Hampshire.

[Phil Neatherway]

I have lived in Abingdon (historically Berks until 1974) since 1997 and I have played county chess for Oxfordshire, which seems entirely appropriate to me.

Interestingly, the organiser of the UK Chess Challenge persistently addressed letters to my sons as 'Abingdon, Berks' and listed them as such in the tournament records. That might have jeopardised their chances of playing for Oxfordshire.