English Chess Forum

I thought I was answering your question, which appeared to be how current ECF guidance should be interpreted. I can see only one way.

You may prefer them to be more prescriptive. Personally, I would be very sorry if the ECF were to say that even though the Government had declared chess to be safe, they disagreed.

I think it would be incredible "if the ECF were to say that even though the Government had declared chess to be safe, they disagreed." I'll look out for the Government saying that.

Andy Stoker wrote: ↑

Thu May 13, 2021 11:49 am

I think it would be incredible "if the ECF were to say that even though the Government had declared chess to be safe, they disagreed." I'll look out for the Government saying that.

You don't think "back to normal" covers that?

Andy Stoker wrote: ↑

Thu May 13, 2021 11:49 am

I'll look out for the Government saying that.

The "rule of six" banned chess competitions in their usual format for most practical purposes. To unban chess requires its removal, which hopefully will be seen in June and take masks, paranoia about surfaces and screens with it.

One longer term has occurred to me. It is that Leagues and Congresses need rules that are more tolerant of players who pull out of playing at short notice by virtue of suffering colds or flu. The obvious point is to prevent spread by not putting disincentives in the way of players unfit to play.

I actually think that most congresses are (pleasingly) incredibly tolerant about withdrawals already, with often 100% refund of entrance fees right up to the last moment. Is that not good enough?

You mean - what we are thinking might happen after 21st June? Yes indeed - would just say:
(a) there are current informal suggestions that the date of this event may slip - we'll see how the infection rate develops ... variants etc
(b) there are also suggestions that there will still be regulations and guidance after that data - so only back to a new normal, as it were
(c) Some adult clubs are planning to reopen next week, as we've seen on this forum

OK, I've wittered enough on this. I'm a cautious body and recognise others see this differently. If I venture into a restaurant next week, I'll expect they have followed government guidance and regulations - but, fair enough, I would also form a view on whether I felt safe

Andy Stoker wrote: ↑

Thu May 13, 2021 12:09 pm

You mean - what we are thinking might happen after 21st June?

That is the basis of this thread. It also explicitly assumes there will be no U-turn on restrictions.

Michael Farthing wrote: ↑

Thu May 13, 2021 12:06 pm

I actually think that most congresses are (pleasingly) incredibly tolerant about withdrawals already, with often 100% refund of entrance fees right up to the last moment. Is that not good enough?

I was rather more thinking about FIDE pairing rules, which are very sniffy about repairing the opponents of people who declare that they are unable to play after the pairings have been published.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Thu May 13, 2021 12:23 pm

I was rather more thinking about FIDE pairing rules, which are very sniffy about repairing the opponents of people who declare that they are unable to play after the pairings have been published.

That only affects title events, and we don't have too many of them.

Just in case anyone is still in any doubt:

This poll to which this thread relates is about ECF Guidance for events on or after Monday 21st June, the date on which all restrictions are scheduled to be officially lifted, and on the assumption that things proceed on schedule.

The poll is not about anything which may or may not happen on or after Monday 17th May, although posters are of course free to comment about that.

Andy Stoker wrote: ↑

Thu May 13, 2021 11:15 am

Another way - and I don't claim it is necessarily better - is for greater central guidance... this is how (for example) Scouts, Guides, Pilates groups, dancing schools, churches (eg CofE, Methodist....) work.

At my CofE church, while we are of course mindful of guidance from our Bishop, all decisions as to what we do or don't do are being taken by our own Parochial Church Council. Since the start of the third lockdown in January, practice amongst CofE churches in Croydon has varied considerably.

That is in marked contract to the first lockdown, when all CofE churches were obliged to follow the instructions of the Archbishop of Canterbury and of their Diocesan Bishop.

I was thinking about casting a vote in the poll but I'm unsure or uncomfortable about what it is that's being asked. Is the poll effectively asking: do I trust an event organiser to come to the right decisions in weighing up the numerous considerations listed in the guidelines? Have I got that right? If I have then I think my answer would have to be a resounding No: this is a matter of importance and, since I can, I'd really rather take the decision myself... But also, as others have said, why make a decision now when you can make it much closer to 21 June, in better knowledge of what the circumstances might be?

With apologies to David.

Last minute alert:

If you have not voted, but wish to do so, the poll closes in 1 hour, at 1054.

Angus would a monthly poll help make a decision?

what about risk assessment and insurance ?

I just had my venue telling us that we need insurance before we can do anything at the flixton con club? has anyone heard about this?