British Universities 2013

[Alex Holowczak]

I wonder how University clubs meet these fees? I can't imagine they have much in the way of funds/assets. Do the players end up paying their own way entirely (i.e. paying £ 100+ each to participate?)

It varies. I've played for Aston teams that have had either structure.

The vast majority apply to Student Unions to pay the fees for them. I usually have to send invoices or receipts to the people entering on behalf of each University.

[Jonathan Edwards]

I wonder how University clubs meet these fees? I can't imagine they have much in the way of funds/assets. Do the players end up paying their own way entirely (i.e. paying £ 100+ each to participate?)

Edinburgh University receives no funding from the University at all to enter the BUCA team championship. As we are not classified as a sport society in the eyes of the student association it is very difficult to receive funding at all.

Both this year and last year, each student playing for us has had to pay for their own travel and accommodation - with entry and accommodation subsidised through donations and sponsorship.

For example, this year it is costing each member of the team around £120 to play.

The idea that we have to pay an additional £12 each is a kick in the teeth.

[John Townsend]

The B.U.C.A. championship in 1966 was in Oxford. I have found some of my old scores. I played for Wales, losing against A. Whitely (Oxford) and winning against B. Cartman (Manchester), amongst others.

As I recall, it was normal for Welsh teams to compete in those days.

[Roger de Coverly]

The idea that we have to pay an additional £12 each is a kick in the teeth.

I see it's also on the Chess Scotland forum.

http://www.chessscotland.com/forum/view ... ?f=4&t=564

£ 4 of the £ 12 is down to BUCA itself. As pointed out by Alec McF, non-members of the ECF would not have been barred from participation by the ECF, instead BUCA would have been sent a bill for £ 2 per game per non member. So for a five man team each playing four out of five rounds, the cost per individual would have been £ 2 * 4 = £ 8, or £ 40 in total.

Only attendees of last year's BUCA meeting will know whether the financial consequences of BUCA's insistence on ECF membership were spelled out.

[Alex Holowczak]

Only attendees of last year's BUCA meeting will know whether the financial consequences of BUCA's insistence on ECF membership were spelled out.

They were spelled out.

[John Townsend]

Jonathan Edwards wrote:

Edinburgh University receives no funding from the University at all to enter the BUCA team championship. As we are not classified as a sport society in the eyes of the student association it is very difficult to receive funding at all.

Both this year and last year, each student playing for us has had to pay for their own travel and accommodation - with entry and accommodation subsidised through donations and sponsorship.

For example, this year it is costing each member of the team around £120 to play.

The idea that we have to pay an additional £12 each is a kick in the teeth.

It makes one a little sad to read about the financial obstacles faced by Jonathan and his team mates. In my day, we would have been reimbursed travel and accommodation expenses, and I was never aware of any playing fees or charges, so they were probably very moderate. It is a reminder how lucky we were. I do hope something can be done to alleviate the plight of the Edinburgh team.

[James Byrne]

...

[Andrew Zigmond]

How many games are actually involved in this competition? I agree that anything that's creating an apparent bar towards people playing chess in the country, particular younger players, needs looking at. However I don't think there's any unique plight for the Edinburgh team as surely all teams have to pay the same fee. I suppose this is more about the problems caused when a British event has to straddle the England/ Scotland divide.

Personally I think the ECF could do with keeping out of events such as this. Obviously some participants will want their games graded - again for me that's an argument for allowing gold members to have all games graded whether the event is game fee registered or not.

Choosing my words carefully, there is an irony here that due to constitutional divisions English students are at a financial disadvantage to their Scots counterparts in another respect.

[Roger de Coverly]

How many games are actually involved in this competition? I agree that anything that's creating an apparent bar towards people playing chess in the country, particular younger players, needs looking at. However I don't think there's any unique plight for the Edinburgh team as surely all teams have to pay the same fee.

It's a five round Swiss for teams of four. Edinburgh are taking a reserve, so they envisage that each player will play four games. Players at English universities are likely to already have been compelled to become ECF members, by virtue of playing in local leagues, Congresses or the 4NCL. That's why it's a particular issue for Scottish and Welsh teams.

Last year BUCA would have paid the same fee to the ECF for all teams, being 58p * 5 * 4 namely £ 11.60 per team. This year the amount of additional revenue to the ECF because this event is taking part is either £ nil or £ 12 per player.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Just playing devil's advocate, what would happen if the event organisers decided that, as ECF fees were becoming a deterrant, it was simpler for the event to become none game fee registered? I can't imagine that many English players would boycott the event simply because five games were not going to get graded. So the big losers would be the ECF who have to go without the revenue.

[Sean Hewitt]

Just playing devil's advocate, what would happen if the event organisers decided that, as ECF fees were becoming a deterrant, it was simpler for the event to become none game fee registered? I can't imagine that many English players would boycott the event simply because five games were not going to get graded. So the big losers would be the ECF who have to go without the revenue.

It would be perfectly possible for the BUCA event to be ungraded. It seems though, from reading Ales's earlier post, that the vast majority of Universities did not want to do that. But, if they did, wouldn't the losers would be all of the players (circa 75) who don't get their games graded. The majority of these players would, I suspect, already be ECF members.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Just playing devil's advocate, what would happen if the event organisers decided that, as ECF fees were becoming a deterrant, it was simpler for the event to become none game fee registered? I can't imagine that many English players would boycott the event simply because five games were not going to get graded. So the big losers would be the ECF who have to go without the revenue.

It would be perfectly possible for the BUCA event to be ungraded. It seems though, from reading Ales's earlier post, that the vast majority of Universities did not want to do that. But, if they did, wouldn't the losers would be all of the players (circa 75) who don't get their games graded. The majority of these players would, I suspect, already be ECF members.

Obviously as a Yorkshire player I am used to some of my games not being graded. However if I was a student and a member of my University Chess Club I would probably be looking forward to this event as not just an opportunity to play in a major event but a chance to enjoy a weekend away with friends and a pleasant time having a few drinks and making new ones. Whether the five games involved get graded would not be my first concern.

[Alex Holowczak]

Unfortunately Nottingham won't be sending a team this year. I was told the committee voted 4 0 against sending a team last Monday. Lack of funding was the reason given.

I find this very odd. Why would a Committee vote against sending a team full stop? Why wouldn't it just vote not to pay for a team, but be happy to send a team on the understanding that there wouldn't be any funding for it?

Just playing devil's advocate, what would happen if the event organisers decided that, as ECF fees were becoming a deterrant, it was simpler for the event to become none game fee registered? I can't imagine that many English players would boycott the event simply because five games were not going to get graded. So the big losers would be the ECF who have to go without the revenue.

The event's organiser is me. I put it to the AGM last year, and I've said before, what we're doing was decided 11-3. If they felt it was a deterrent, 11 people wouldn't have voted for it. If the AGM wants to change its mind this year, then that's up to them.

Obviously as a Yorkshire player I am used to some of my games not being graded.

York University have entered 2 teams, as it happens. 5 players of the 8 currently on their teamsheet are non-members, but they've paid us £60 to make them members.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Are you running the event in your capacity as ECF Home Director or is this a seperate responsibility? If the former, does this suggest a complication with the English Chess Federation running British events? I think the original point was that there's a certain incentive for English players to enrol with the ECF, there's no incentive for Scottish (or Welsh) players to do so.

If you agree that the event becoming non registered is a plausible possibility, surely that shows that the ECF need to strengthen their hand. My point was that grading restrictions would not deter me from playing in an event.

[Alex Holowczak]

Are you running the event in your capacity as ECF Home Director or is this a seperate responsibility?

I'm running this event in my capacity as President of the British Universities' Chess Association, just as I always have. (Well, except for 2010, when BUCA didn't even exist.)

If you agree that the event becoming non registered is a plausible possibility...

I didn't say that, or express any opinion on that subject, at all. I said "If the AGM wants to change its mind this year, then that's up to them."