Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Jul 29, 2021 1:02 pm

I see in the chess.com comments IanDT has linked pictures of the Witney Rapidplay in 2019 which would be moderately well known as one of Mike Truran's local Congresses.
Here's my entry for the free entry to the Northumbria Masters -
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipP ... VwYlJydWlB
It also features a picture of Joseph Conlon as one of the winners.
http://chess-results.com/tnr472779.aspx?lan=1&art=1

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Jul 29, 2021 1:11 pm

John Upham wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:03 pm
Perhaps these elections are inherently flawed and some other means of appointing / electing representatives should be employed?

Obviously, we don't want the wrong candidate to be elected.
What's your point, caller
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Mick Norris
Posts: 10310
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Mick Norris » Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:04 pm

John Upham wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:03 pm
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:51 am
John Upham wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:45 am
Are you explaining TWs election (that nobody wanted to happen apparently) on the basis that not enough people voted?
Compared to the number of Silver members, very few voted. That Tim Wall topped the poll isn't the cause for self congratulation and the mandate for change he makes out.

Perhaps these elections are inherently flawed and some other means of appointing / electing representatives should be employed?

Obviously, we don't want the wrong candidate to be elected.
At least the Silver members got to vote; the rest of us didn't get a choice of candidate

I think the issue may be why more members don't vote; it does undermine the case for OMOV

I wish Tim hadn't been elected because the 2 unelected candidates would have been better in my view, but I'm pleased that John got re-elected, partly because it is important to him, partly because Tim clearly wanted him to be defeated, and mainly because John will do a good job of representing the views of his members rather than pushing his own agenda
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 2073
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Fri Jul 30, 2021 12:34 am

I've stayed out of this particular discussion so far. There are several reasons but one is that I have met Tim Wall on several occasions and, despite having to beg to differ on the odd occasion, have always got on with him well. He is certainly not the "belligerent bully" described upthread. At the same time I have too much respect for Mike Truran to let the personal attack in this article go unchallenged.

It's strange how chess players seem to alternatively have long and short memories with regard to certain things. One case of a short memory appears to be the state of the ECF when Mike Truran became CEO six years ago. Rewind the clock for roughly the same time in the opposite direction and we had three different periods of chaos in quick succession. That culminated in the ousting of the previous CEO after an extremely bitter campaign. This was Mike Truran's inheritance and in the years since he has imposed consistency and competence on an organisation completely without it. There has also been considerable change, not least the introduction of fixed terms for directors and other recommendations required by the Pearce report.

One of Tim's criticisms is that Mike Truran should be more visible at events up and down the country, a reasoning I find flawed for several reasons. Leaving aside the fact that it makes no allowance for any family or professional commitments Mike might have (the ECF CEO is a volunteer), one of Mike's recent predecessors was (for a time) a congress regular but towards the end of his tenure frequently had to pull out of events to avoid urgent ECF matters bottlenecking with him (as an aside another two recent CEOs were not active players at all). It also overlooks Mike Truran's role in the 4NCL, one of English chess' flagship events, where he is regularly in attendance and can be approached by players.

Speaking from personal experience, a few years ago I contacted Mike to see if somebody from the ECF wished to address the YCA AGM, expecting him to field one of the directors then based in the Midlands. Mike not only gave up his Saturday to travel a considerable distance but, while previous ECF guests spoke early then left, he remained for the second half of the meeting and contributed throughout.

It goes without saying that Tim Wall also does impressive work for English chess. From an ECF point of view there is still much work to be done, not least reform of council (which is ultimately not within the CEO's gift - council must reform itself). However "inept" and "divisive" may well describe the ECF of 2015 and the cumbersome structure all ECF directors have to work within but they do not describe the professionalism and competence Mike Truran has brought to the ECF.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:15 am

I disagree with Andrew of course. I think describing the ECF as inept in 2015 reinforces a culture where the right way to campaign is to play the man not the ball.

168 votes out of 2300 silver member is a low turnout of course. But it also isn't a particularly high profile position. If, say, 20% of members were willing to vote in elections for Directors I'd think that was preferable to Council.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:07 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 12:34 am
. He is certainly not the "belligerent bully" described upthread.
He writes and acts the way he writes and acts regardless of how you personally may have interacted with him.
Paul Cooksey wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:15 am
I think describing the ECF as inept in 2015 reinforces a culture where the right way to campaign is to play the man not the ball.
It's true though, isn't it? The few years before that were distinguished by a whole series of scandals and disasters, exacerbated by the inability of English chess ever to spot a wrong 'un. And it might be as well not to reinforce the culture of refusing to see what is there right in front of our faces.
Last edited by JustinHorton on Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

NickFaulks
Posts: 8452
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:13 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:15 am
168 votes out of 2300 silver member is a low turnout of course.
Not forgetting that they had two votes each.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10310
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Mick Norris » Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:45 am

Michael has said 90 members voted, so out of 2300 that's a very low turnout
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:21 am

90 indeed a better number for comparison. 2300 isn't a validated number from the election, just from the finances xls which I had to hand.

Nick Ivell
Posts: 1138
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Nick Ivell » Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:53 am

Let me reject outright the notion that any orchestration is going on here. We are independent.

I ventured the opinion that Mike is doing an excellent job. I stick to that.

No one pressed me to offer an opinion; and I don't get involved with discussions behind the scenes.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5802
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:58 am

"Michael has said 90 members voted, so out of 2300 that's a very low turnout"

If only 4 % bother to vote, that's scarcely a ringing endorsement. On the other hand, most of the 2300 probably have no idea who any of the candidates is.

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Michael Farthing » Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:16 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:58 am
"Michael has said 90 members voted, so out of 2300 that's a very low turnout"

If only 4 % bother to vote, that's scarcely a ringing endorsement. On the other hand, most of the 2300 probably have no idea who any of the candidates is.
All silver members received a notification of the election by email with the election addresses attached.
(EDIT: Obviously there may be errors and I believe a very small number where we do not have an email contact)

John Swain
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 10:35 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by John Swain » Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:47 am

Michael Farthing wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:16 am
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:58 am
"Michael has said 90 members voted, so out of 2300 that's a very low turnout"

If only 4 % bother to vote, that's scarcely a ringing endorsement. On the other hand, most of the 2300 probably have no idea who any of the candidates is.
All silver members received a notification of the election by email with the election addresses attached.
(EDIT: Obviously there may be errors and I believe a very small number where we do not have an email contact)
Despite the risk of an accusation of being a professional nit-picker (a former occupational hazard - I'm a retired teacher!) there were 3,076 silver members on 24 February 2021, so 90 members voting equates to less than 3%. The 2,300 figure doesn't include 772 Junior Free Silver Members. Of course, the figure for silver members in July is presumably greater than 3,076, so the percentage voting is lower still.

There is a pattern here. Only 7.8% of members responded to the Grading Consultation in 2019 which led to the introduction of monthly four-figure grades.

Most chess players don't care about ECF politics or policies. I know few at my club who look at the ECF website or this Forum. They are no less worthy or important for the future of English chess than those who are "activists". When we resume club meetings - we haven't as yet - it'll be interesting to see what they make of their four-digit grades.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1906
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Roger Lancaster » Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:59 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:15 am
I disagree with Andrew of course. I think describing the ECF as inept in 2015 reinforces a culture where the right way to campaign is to play the man not the ball.

168 votes out of 2300 silver member is a low turnout of course. But it also isn't a particularly high profile position. If, say, 20% of members were willing to vote in elections for Directors I'd think that was preferable to Council.
I don't want to "play the man not the ball" but my sole experience of the 2015 ECF CEO was having to go to FIDE in connection with a decision made at the previous year's British championships. The then CEO publicly claimed to have looked into the matter and to have decided everything was in order. When the matter came before FIDE, FIDE promptly amended the Laws of Chess so that no such decision could be made [whether by the ECF or anyone else] in future. I'm not in a position to assess whether the then CEO was a liar or simply lacked the intellect to realise he was being misled but, either way, the incident convinced me that he was not the man to lead the ECF. People are entitled to hold different views on the present CEO but I wouldn't expect a similar debacle to be allowed to happen under his tenure.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:22 am

Roger Lancaster wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:59 am
The then CEO publicly claimed to have looked into the matter and to have decided everything was in order. When the matter came before FIDE, FIDE promptly amended the Laws of Chess so that no such decision could be made [whether by the ECF or anyone else] in future.
If that's about whether it's possible to award players one and half points for a single game, a precedent had already been set at the 2010 British in the Major Open and it was regarded as an acceptable practice by British arbiters. The rules for qualification for the British the following year had already been changed to be based on absolute score rather than relative position. Had they still been based on position, anyone squeezed out by the award of extra points would have had valid cause for complaint.

Post Reply