Standards at tournaments

[Rob Thompson]

You seem to have a rather damning view of us, which for the vast majority of youths is simply untrue. seeing as we seem to be in the business of making wide sweeping statements with little basis in fact, it seems that all the older people around find most enjoyment from saying that the world is not what it used to be, and this seems unnecessarily downcast. If you could all lighten up then i'm sure it would be far better for everyone. As for Alex, well that's clearly your experience, but I'm not sure that your ideas of parenting are all that true. And if they are, i've been left out

[Alex Holowczak]

As for Alex, well that's clearly your experience, but I'm not sure that your ideas of parenting are all that true. And if they are, i've been left out

Well, I've been left out too. But then, we're playing chess, and discussing the standards of modern parenting. We're not the people that were being complained about. We fall into the "good egg" category I mentioned.

Well, my experience, I was on the bus tonight coming home from chess, which was after the LaTeX-athon. On it, there were some people slouched across the back seats, with music coming out of their phones, speaking in vile language, clearly not giving a monkeys about anyone else on the bus at all. Further along the route, one member of a gang of children kicked a football at the bus. I have absolutely no idea how someone would think was a good idea...

Maybe it's just where I live, I don't know.

[Peter Rhodes]

Arbiters, who get the most basic things wrong

I have said before that one of the most important functions of the ECF is to ensure there is a set of coherent and unambiguous chess rules.

I have asked in the last 2 weeks - "who in the ECF is responsible for ensuring that this is the case". That went unanswered - although I appreciate that I am not in a position to complain as I have not asked this formally - but an answer would have encouraged me.

I have seen - and others have reported - cases of ambiguities within both our rules and the FIDE chess rules.

I would very much like to find out who is reponsible for ensuring that anomalies within the chess laws are dealt with effectively and in a timely manner.

I'll lay my cards on the table now - this is something I think is particularly important and I do not see how we can be talking about "kite marks" while this goes unaddressed.

[Rob Thompson]

I think geography could well be something to do with it, what with you living in Birmingham, and me down Torquay way. Having said that, i think we have the highest rate of teenage pregnancy nationally, so it may not be that true.

[Alex Holowczak]

I have said before that one of the most important functions of the ECF is to ensure there is a set of coherent and unambiguous chess rules.

10.2 is a particular example of this. Ideally, the rules would be quantifiable, rather than open to "arbiter interpretation".

Rob, I don't live in Birmingham, I just commute to and from it every day. Black Country people hate being told they're from Birmingham... I don't think there will be much difference between Birmingham and Torquay if you take ratios. The thing is, Torquay is thought to be a tranquil town by the sea. Birmingham isn't. If you consider that people will probably retire to Torquay after a life of working in the big population bases, I think the average age of a town like Torquay will be higher than somewhere like Birmingham. As a result, there will be fewer youths misbehaving, simply because there are fewer youths in the first place.

[Rob Thompson]

Apologies for getting the location wrong. I didn't realise it was an issue

[Alex Holowczak]

Apologies for getting the location wrong. I didn't realise it was an issue

It's OK, it's just outsiders not understanding the difference between the Black Country and Birmingham. In the same way that internationally, no one can understand the difference between England and the United Kingdom. Or how most of us can't understand the difference between Holland and The Netherlands.

When someone on the radio suggested merging the two unofficial entities to form an official place called "Greater Birmingham", the station received a record number of e-mails, texts, complaints...

[Roger de Coverly]

I have said before that one of the most important functions of the ECF is to ensure there is a set of coherent and unambiguous chess rules.

I have asked in the last 2 weeks - "who in the ECF is responsible for ensuring that this is the case". That went unanswered - although I appreciate that I am not in a position to complain as I have not asked this formally - but an answer would have encouraged me.

I rather think that the ECF have hived this one off to a national body, otherwise known as the Chess Arbiters Association which is a pan-UK body which includes the Scots and Welsh.

This is their website http://chessarbiters.co.uk/default.aspx

I think the directors function within the ECF that has oversight of arbiters is the Home Director - Adam Raoof being newly elected to this role.

[Stewart Reuben]

Roger is substantially correct. But we have a Chief Arbiter - David Welch.
Most formal chess is played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess. Naturally the ECF does not have control over them. However, I have had a substantial input over the years and have been secretary of the FIDE Rules and Tournament Regulations Committee since 1995.
British people (not just arbiters) have had a substantial influence on the codifying of the Laws. I have represented the views of people to the committee, although sometimes disagreeing with their opinions. Richard Haddrell has had a substantial impact on the precise English of the Laws.
The Laws make it clear that they are not expected to cover all eventualities.
Some people don't like 10.2. But it was first introduced by me after I played in a tournament in Yugoslavia in 1970. The codification of that Law came substantially from England. I fought against 10.2d, but lost. Nowadays I try to avoid the whole matter by using the cumulative mode.
12.10 was introduced in July 2009 at my suggestion.
In the case of Article 10.2.d or Appendix D a player may not appeal against the decision of the arbiter.
Otherwise a player may appeal against any decision of the arbiter, unless the rules of the competition specify otherwise.
The David Welch and the late Richard Furness wrote Appendix D, if I remember correctly.
Stewart Reuben