ECF Board Meeting, Birmingham 13th March 2010

[Roger de Coverly]

Is there any reason that county chess can't be FIDE rated?

Requiring players to be ECF members is one very good one. County match captains usually have to scrape a few barrels to get a full team - a board fee of 15 or 20 quid for a one-off match isn't likely to be popular.

Lack of a neutral arbiter is probably another.

[Alex Holowczak]

You may have noticed that a number of counties either don't run teams or only run teams in particular eligibility groups. If you have players who are only eligible for a single county and that county doesn't run a team in which they can play, then they are barred from playing in regional Saturday afternoon 4-5 hour team chess. You need usually a pool of at least 24 players to run a 16 player team over a season. If you only have 12 and no legitimate way of doubling that 12, then the team doesn't exist.

So? If the British Virgin Islands can't raise a 4-man Olympiad team, they don't pinch players from Montserrat or something - they can't enter.

It would be a gamble to allow non-county organisations to enter teams. Strict eligibility policing won't promote growth of the competitions though.

No, but it would promote fairness.

there is no need for another team event.

There are some (major) differences between the 4NCL and county chess

non FIDE rated v rated
4/5 hour sessions v 7 hour
one match only v two
"local" v centralised[/quote]

That's not really the point, it'd be another team competition with slightly different time limits in a slightly different format. There wouldn't be a point to it.

[Roger de Coverly]

So? If the British Virgin Islands can't raise a 4-man Olympiad team, they don't pinch players from Montserrat or something - they can't enter.

I don't see the relevance of an international country based event to a domestic English event.

No, but it would promote fairness.

In what sense is pitching a county with perhaps 100 players rated above 150 against one with 10 particularly fair?

[Alex Holowczak]

So? If the British Virgin Islands can't raise a 4-man Olympiad team, they don't pinch players from Montserrat or something - they can't enter.

I don't see the relevance of an international country based event to a domestic English event.

Because a county event is exactly the same concept. Closed boundaries, you can't hire whoever you want to play.

No, but it would promote fairness.

In what sense is pitching a county with perhaps 100 players rated above 150 against one with 10 particularly fair?

Because they would be representative of their county. In sport, China doesn't subdivide into 200000 elements to give San Marino a chance of winning.

[Roger de Coverly]

Because a county event is exactly the same concept. Closed boundaries, you can't hire whoever you want to play.

Many sports have abolished such artificial boundaries including chess in the 4NCL. You potentially get a better (more balanced) competition that way. I'm advocating that regional weekend team chess should go in the same direction.

[LozCooper]

Is there any reason that county chess can't be FIDE rated?

Requiring players to be ECF members is one very good one. County match captains usually have to scrape a few barrels to get a full team - a board fee of 15 or 20 quid for a one-off match isn't likely to be popular.

Lack of a neutral arbiter is probably another.

Roger, yes two fairly obvious points that make it unlikely to happen. I'm glad I didn't have to ask my players to become members when I was captain of Staffordshire

[Adam Raoof]

Is there any reason that county chess can't be FIDE rated?

Requiring players to be ECF members is one very good one. County match captains usually have to scrape a few barrels to get a full team - a board fee of 15 or 20 quid for a one-off match isn't likely to be popular.

Lack of a neutral arbiter is probably another.

Roger, yes two various obvious points that make it unlikely to happen. I'm glad I didn't have to ask my players to become members when I was captain of Staffordshire

If we moved towards a system where there was no game fee, but [inexpensive] ECF membership was compulsory for all graded games, then the option to rate county chess would be more attractive as it wouldn't cost players anything extra.

Lack of an neutral arbiter should be no issue; all arbiters should be neutral

[Roger de Coverly]

If we moved towards a system where there was no game fee, but [inexpensive] ECF membership was compulsory for all graded games, then the option to rate county chess would be more attractive as it wouldn't cost players anything extra.

County match captains can sometimes call on players who have retired from club and congress chess but who can be available for the odd Saturday afternoon. These players are sometimes essential to avoid defaults. However "inexpensive" a compulsory membership was, you would surely still be talking about the 10 to 20 quid range.

Lack of an neutral arbiter should be no issue; all arbiters should be neutral

Ok, lack of an arbiter then. I don't think the "match captains" as arbiter concept works particularly well as regards availability, neutrality and 10.2 claims.

[Sean Hewitt]

Many sports have abolished such artificial boundaries including chess in the 4NCL. You potentially get a better (more balanced) competition that way. I'm advocating that regional weekend team chess should go in the same direction.

As a half way house you could allow other "bodies" to play. The obvious example would be leagues. This would allow greater freedom without having the free for all of the 4NCL (which is not a bad thing, it's just different).

Of course the ECF could FIDE rate the event if it changed or relaxed it's own rules on ECF membership. It already does this to some degree by not charging game fee on the National Stages of the Championships. Alternatively, it could rate the Open / Minor Counties where I suspect membership rates are significantly higher than in the grade limited competitions.

For non-norm FIDE rated events an arbiter can be at the end of a phone and not actually present at the playing venue.

[Phil Neatherway]

Many sports have abolished such artificial boundaries including chess in the 4NCL. You potentially get a better (more balanced) competition that way. I'm advocating that regional weekend team chess go in the same direction.

My suggestion would be that regional weekend team chess would be part of a strucutre similar to the 'pyramid' system in football i.e. regional leagues would feed directly into the 4NCL.

[Sean Hewitt]

Many sports have abolished such artificial boundaries including chess in the 4NCL. You potentially get a better (more balanced) competition that way. I'm advocating that regional weekend team chess go in the same direction.

My suggestion would be that regoional weekend team chess would be part of a strucutre similar to the 'pyramid' system in football i.e. regional leagues would feed directly into the 4NCL.

I presume you mean future regional 4NCL leagues (like 4NCL North) feeding into 4NCL rather than say the Leicestershire league feeding in.

[Phil Neatherway]

yes something like that. It would need as lot of thought, obviously.

[Mike Truran]

As Sean suggests, the new 4NCL Northern League is hopefully the first step towards regional leagues feeding in to the 4NCL structure. The acid test as always will be the level of support it gains. Feedback to date has been reasonably encouraging.

[Alex Holowczak]

Because a county event is exactly the same concept. Closed boundaries, you can't hire whoever you want to play.

Many sports have abolished such artificial boundaries including chess in the 4NCL. You potentially get a better (more balanced) competition that way. I'm advocating that regional weekend team chess should go in the same direction.

Did the 4NCL ever claim to have teams that were based on geographical positions?

If regional weekend chess would go in the same direction, I don't see a future for the County Championship.

[Roger de Coverly]

Did the 4NCL ever claim to have teams that were based on geographical positions?

No - the point was that your team contained whoever you said it did (and allowed wildcards for last minute recruits) . Many teams have some sort of nominal regional identity though - a team calling itself Warwickshire Select might be expected to mostly contain West Midlands players This contrasted with the Counties Championship with its geographical constraints and the National Club which had all sorts of complex rules designed to stop teams recruiting players for the purposes of the competition.

I believe this relaxed attitude towards eligibility contributed to the 4NCL's growth over the past 17 years.