English Chess Forum

A request for comment from someone more au courant than I am....

I've noticed a couple of congress entry forms recently where date of birth is demanded from all entrants - very politely, but nonetheless demanded rather than requested.

Assuming that the congress will be recording this information electronically, and assuming also that the congress is not offering prizes or concessions determined by age, is this not a violation of data protection principles, in that it is demanding information which is not strictly necessary for the congress's purposes?

And even if a prize or concession determined by age is on offer, would it not be better to ask entrants to volunteer the information if they claim eligibility, rather than demand it of everyone?

I admit to being familiar only with the 1984 Act rather than the 1998 one, but am I right?

PB

I've been asked for similar information when registering players for leagues, and I only provide it for players who are under 18 and not presently on the grading database. The congress organisers (more precisely, their grader) probably want ample identification information. If a player has a grading reference, that's enough to identify you, so there's really no need for anything else.

Paul Buswell wrote:A request for comment from someone more au courant than I am....

I've noticed a couple of congress entry forms recently where date of birth is demanded from all entrants - very politely, but nonetheless demanded rather than requested.

Assuming that the congress will be recording this information electronically, and assuming also that the congress is not offering prizes or concessions determined by age, is this not a violation of data protection principles, in that it is demanding information which is not strictly necessary for the congress's purposes?

And even if a prize or concession determined by age is on offer, would it not be better to ask entrants to volunteer the information if they claim eligibility, rather than demand it of everyone?

I admit to being familiar only with the 1984 Act rather than the 1998 one, but am I right?

PB

No, you're not correct. There is no violation of the DPA.

Congresses need DOB to identify players with similar names within the ECF grading list. Some congresses don't obtain DOB's (and some players refuse to give it) which is why we end up with some players obtaining multiple grading records. For FIDE rated events, FIDE won't allow a player record to be created without a DOB.

Sean Hewitt wrote:Congresses need DOB to identify players with similar names within the ECF grading list

If you just use the published list (ie the grading list website) ,the grading code reference works much better, not least because the date of birth isn't published. It isn't difficult for players to identify themselves.

Actually it would be a worthwhile enhancement to add "ungraded" players to the grading website. This would be players who had been given a grading code but hadn't yet qualified for a published grade.

But the point at issue is that the congresses are not qualifying their request: there is no "unless a grading code is given, or "if you wish to obtain an age-specific entry fee or prize". The request is a blanket one and I believe that to be improper.

PB

It would appear that congresses are doing a good job of attempting to uniquely identify players. This is a commendable thing and to be encouraged. We do this for all of our local leagues.

I really think some people need to get a life. It's not like the congress organiser is posting your details on the net. Being careful is one thing, distrusting the organiser of a chess event is just plain paranoia.

A former colleague in chess organising quite clearly has breached the DPA, so it does happen. (He took a copy of our database and then used it to advertise his events.) The simple thing to do with a request for date of birth is to just ignore it. If they pursue the matter, ask why they need it.

I've just remembered - the ECF Championships demanded dates of birth for entrants, but still managed to put over age players into Junior events. I did ask if this had happened on the other thread, but nobody answered for some reason. So, obviously it did.

You do wonder why the info is needed if it is not used for the obvious reason.

For as long as I've been playing local league chess, at the start of each season the league grading secretary has requested team captains to inform him of the DOBs of all new players, and I've never known any player object to giving the information.

Kevin Thurlow wrote:I've just remembered - the ECF Championships demanded dates of birth for entrants, but still managed to put over age players into Junior events. I did ask if this had happened on the other thread, but nobody answered for some reason.

A junior event at the British Championships had someone who played under the old dates of birth. Another entrant was spotted late on and his event changed.
Mistakes happen. Sorry I didn't notice your query or I would have replied.

Kevin Thurlow wrote:I've just remembered - the ECF Championships demanded dates of birth for entrants.....

Has the age definition not been changed as described

here by Stewart Reuben when he wrote:The ECF and FIDE now coincide with age eligibility. Peter Purland and I arranged for this to be so for the British Championships quite recently. It would have been perverse to remain with an age qualification system for the British Championships based on 1 September when Peter had introduced the events qualification system for 1 January eligibility.

Entrants should only need to supply their year of birth to determine their tournament age.

E Michael White wrote:Entrants should only need to supply their year of birth to determine their tournament age.

Is grading age still determined at 1st September (or some other mid year date) ?