ECF Board Meeting, Birmingham 13th March 2010

[Alex Holowczak]

I don't think eligibility rules contributed to its growth.

I think the FIDE-rated status, higher quality venues, and smaller team sizes made it more appealing.

Historically, I read that there were plenty of foreign players involved (i.e. 2500+ overseas players) - obviously not possible in the County Championship. However, they have been declining in recent years. I think its status as an international event helped it to grow. It never claimed to be a regional event.

[Justin Hadi]

Eligibility rules may not have contributed to its growth directly but they certainly removed a lot of the barriers to competitions allowing teams based around a group of friends, for example having gone to university together. I certainly couldn't play in the same county team as a lot of my teammates. Isn't it possible that eligibility rules and the other factors you mention contributed to the 4NCL's growth?

[Mike Truran]

Roger/Alex/Justin

I think you're all right!

[Roger de Coverly]

I don't think eligibility rules contributed to its growth.

Circumstantial evidence of course - but the National Club Open used to be a major national event attracting over a hundred entries. It was however bedevilled by eligibility disputes and interpretations which required IMs and GMs to make token appearances against 150 players in local leagues. It went into serious decline when the 4NCL emerged as a competitor.

Eligibility rules may not have contributed to its growth directly but they certainly removed a lot of the barriers to competitions allowing teams based around a group of friends, for example having gone to university together.

Exactly - the SCCU Cambridge Universityshire team of the late nineties partly relied on those who had graduated. When the Counties eligibility rules were tightened, they moved sideways to the 4NCL.

[Alex Holowczak]

Well, perhaps they did contribute, but I think the other factors were more important.

The County Championship can't really "grow", once you get to 39 counties, that's it really.

At the end of the day, the County Championship was designed as a closed-border contest between the players who are from that county. If you lost the closed-border element, you'd lose the concept of a "County" Championship. If people prefer the 4NCL to the point where you have to make the County Championship more like the 4NCL, you might as well just get rid of the County Championship.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Well, perhaps they did contribute, but I think the other factors were more important.

The County Championship can't really "grow", once you get to 39 counties, that's it really.

Sure it can. It can contain more or fewer rating bands. The counties can change, as indeed they have twice in the lifetimes of many of the members here (and the county championship can decide whether or not to take any notice of those changes).

Perhaps more to the point, it can shrink. When I started playing county chess, each of the seven counties in WECU had a first team and a second team. Now Wiltshire has no team at all, Dorset only play friendly matches, and neither Cornwall nor Gloucestershire runs a second team.

[Alex Holowczak]

Well, perhaps they did contribute, but I think the other factors were more important.

The County Championship can't really "grow", once you get to 39 counties, that's it really.

Sure it can. It can contain more or fewer rating bands. The counties can change, as indeed they have twice in the lifetimes of many of the members here (and the county championship can decide whether or not to take any notice of those changes).

Perhaps more to the point, it can shrink. When I started playing county chess, each of the seven counties in WECU had a first team and a second team. Now Wiltshire has no team at all, Dorset only play friendly matches, and neither Cornwall nor Gloucestershire runs a second team.

Indeed you're right; Northamptonshire CA has lapsed, apparently, in the last 12 months.

[Adam Raoof]

Am I right in thinking that everyone who plays chess in England is eligible to play for a county team, by virtue of birth, residency, work? In which case there is no shortage of players. Assuming also that there is no problem in finding a captain to organise teams, the future of county chess seems rosy.

So what are we doing wrong?

[Alex Holowczak]

A problem that I know Warwickshire and Worcestershire mutually have, is that there are players who are of a good enough standard to play in the Open team, who simply aren't interested. (They're not involved in the 4NCL either.) They play League chess, and that's about it.

I think anyone who wants to play county chess can - unfortunately, the strongest players don't want to give up their Saturdays.

[Alan Walton]

I think the major problem is the travelling aspect

Normally throughout the season you could play upto 4 matches (NCCU) or 7 matches (MCCU)

Thus accounting for seven weekends, and long distance travelling to the Midlands in the latter stages. This is most probably why counties in the South-West and far North are not entering frequently. I remember last season Yorkshire and Devon played at a neutral venue in Cheltenham just for one game

Agreeing with Alex, that players don't what to give up that many Saturdays

Maybe the structure of the latter stages has to be revamped

One way could be organizing it like the junior jamborees, where all teams play at a central venue over 2 days (2 or 3 rounds), the element of staying over a night like the 4NCL might encourage more players to participate?

[IM Jack Rudd]

I think anyone who wants to play county chess can - unfortunately, the strongest players don't want to give up their Saturdays.

Counterexample: Devon. Devon have plenty of players at all levels. A number of them have no hope of getting into the county team (except possibly for the national stages), because there is nobody for them to play against: the other WECU counties don't have the numbers in depth to form lower teams.

[Adam Raoof]

A problem that I know Warwickshire and Worcestershire mutually have, is that there are players who are of a good enough standard to play in the Open team, who simply aren't interested. (They're not involved in the 4NCL either.) They play League chess, and that's about it.

I think anyone who wants to play county chess can - unfortunately, the strongest players don't want to give up their Saturdays.

Those who just want to play league chess and not county chess (if they have considered it), or haven't time at weekends, there is nothing we can do about.

Obviously there are enough players who don't mind giving up their whole weekend to play the 4NCL

Those who want to play County chess and don't, or are neutral about the idea - what can we do to sell it to them?

I gave up County chess for precisely the reason that Alan suggests - the travelling. And I like the idea of a jamboree format - this is actually how the Bundesliga organises weekends, I believe. Maybe that would work?

To answer Jack's point; maybe a county team with grading limits on boards? So boards 1-4 might be Open, 5-8 might be Under 160 and 9-12 Under 130, for a random example. That worked well in the City of London Rapidplay League: http://citychess.blogspot.com/

[Sean Hewitt]

I think a two round jamboree over one weekend could have merit.

It would be a big undertaking though. If you replaced the whole National Stages you could be talking about involving approximately 800 players.

If you regionalised 1/4 finals that would minimise the travelling and then have a jamboree final involving the 4 semi finalists. That would be 400 players. Hinckley Island could well be a suitable venue for that.

The downside is that some players will object to the concept and / or cost of an overnight stay.

[Alan Walton]

I would have each section (open, u180 etc) playing on different weekends, throughout late may and june

This would help counties who have to draft players eligible in lower sections in more

So the finals would be say 10 teams of 16 players, which the majority of hotels should be able to accommodate this

True though, people might not want to stay overnight, but it is only one weekend a year for the majority of players

Alan

[Adam Raoof]

I would have each section (open, u180 etc) playing on different weekends, throughout late may and june

This would help counties who have to draft players eligible in lower sections in more

So the finals would be say 10 teams of 16 players, which the majority of hotels should be able to accommodate this

True though, people might not want to stay overnight, but it is only one weekend a year for the majority of players

Alan

and if we get (magic word) a sponsor...