ECF County Championships 2011

[David Sedgwick]

I think in principle this is a good idea, although it has some hurdles (not least the self imposed ECF problem of membership). However, to consider the matter properly we would need to know

1) How many players played this year in the sections that are under consideration for FIDE rating.
2) How many of those players in (1) are already FIDE rated.
3) How many of those players in (1) are already ECF members
4) How many of those players in (1) who are not ECF members are registered to a non ENG federation.

Until we have that information it isn't possible to judge the desirability of the proposal, nor be anything other than subjective rather than objective.

Assuming that the Open, Minor Counties and U180 Sections are to be rated, then the answers are:-

1) 410
2) 190
3) 216
4) 13

Thank you very much for those statistics. You may have saved Alex H a job - he'd been deputed to produce the figures after the British Championships.

I have a supplementary question, if the information is readily available. Of the players in each of the four categories above, how many played in only one match?

[Alex Holowczak]

Thank you very much for those statistics. You may have saved Alex H a job - he'd been deputed to produce the figures after the British Championships.

He certainly has!

If Howard wants to do any more of my jobs, I am happy to supply a list.

[Howard Grist]

I have a supplementary question, if the information is readily available. Of the players in each of the four categories above, how many played in only one match?

That's a tricky question to answer as the results are in two grading files which are not easily amalgamated. I'm not convinced what it would show in any case.

An easier stat to produce is that there were 85 games (out of 320) involving two rated players. The suggestion doesn't really do anything for unrated players as they would need to play at least three games against rated opponents - something which strikes me as pretty unlikely, but again, this is difficult to put an exact figure on. On the other hand, it seems that Alex has some spare time on his hands now...

[Sean Hewitt]

It seems to me that this idea only flies if the union stages and national stages are FIDE rated as one event.

[David Pardoe]

I`ve voted NO to this.....but a pilot using just the Open Sections might be worth a shot...
Firstly, is this FIDE rating really achieving anything for any kind of significant numbers....
Secondly, if it makes county chess more expensive, might it discourage entries from some players. Knowing the difficulty of raising teams, I could see this as another barrier.
Also..you have to be an ECF member...or in an MO..?
Again, the latter seems slightly puzzling...
To join the NMS MO costs about £12 I think, yet to join the ECF costs £24...so, its twice as much for one group than the other....? Cant quite get my head around that.... What are other MO groups charging for membership. And wht are they offering...
On that topic...I really would like to see the MOs standardised, and offered only by each of the Unions....
A standard £15 membership aught to be attractive (£5 to unwaged, over 60`s, and students)......made compulsory...and help to boost chess resources at both Union & BCF/ECF level...
However... Im not against membership schemes..nor completely against FIDE ratings (horses for courses...).
My suggestion is to canvass all Open team county captains (Open & U180 teams)..on this...and also canvass all county associations. (For a quick `indicative` responce, and comments on possible improvements.
I have to say that, of all the possible changes to improve the counties competitions, this (FIDE rating..),probably ranks fairly low in the pecking order...

County regroupings...
Revision of eligibilty rules to create 2-tier eligability...
Some additional county/team mergers....
A jamboree style Finals stages, following a Preliminary round eliminator, to cut the Finals stages down to a two stage event. I think this could be beneficial....and importantly, reduce travel/commitments in the summer stages... Playing May, June & July (and maybe April), is a tad too much, I think. Particularly if your county team(s) has had to play four or five matches in the Qualifier events. Not quite so bad for NCCU teams, where they play almost no qualifier events (at present....hoping for better!!).
For county captains, this can be a long slog...some might even be relieved (not) to have qualified....and enjoy the summer break instead.

Incidentally...it might be interesting to add two new counties..... Wales and Scotland

[Alex Holowczak]

I`ve voted NO to this.....but a pilot using just the Open Sections might be worth a shot...

That's what the proposal is. They have no dreams of doing it for all sections.

Firstly, is this FIDE rating really achieving anything for any kind of significant numbers....
Secondly, if it makes county chess more expensive, might it discourage entries from some players. Knowing the difficulty of raising teams, I could see this as another barrier.
Also..you have to be an ECF member...or in an MO..?

People like FIDE-rated things. Sean's events wouldn't be as successful if they weren't FIDE-rated. They wouldn't attract a national entry. It wouldn't make county chess more expensive, really.

My suggestion is to canvass all Open team county captains (Open & U180 teams)..on this...and also canvass all county associations. (For a quick `indicative` responce, and comments on possible improvements.

They will get their chance to express their opinion should this go to a vote at Council.

I have to say that, of all the possible changes to improve the counties competitions, this (FIDE rating..),probably ranks fairly low in the pecking order...

It's not a change, it's an enhancement!

One point I would make: You wouldn't expect to play in for your club in league matches or the club's internal competition without being a member of it. You wouldn't expect to play in a league without being an individual member of it. So why should you be able to play in the ECF's competitions without being a member of the ECF?

[Richard Bates]

It seems to me that this idea only flies if the union stages and national stages are FIDE rated as one event.

Would that require standardisation of time controls?

I think it's fair to say that many venues used at union stage wouldn't fit FIDE regulations.

People like FIDE-rated things. Sean's events wouldn't be as successful if they weren't FIDE-rated. They wouldn't attract a national entry. It wouldn't make county chess more expensive, really.

Some people like FIDE-rated things, when certain conditions are in place. Some people also like FIDE-rated things, not because they are rated per se, but because such events go hand in hand with norm opportunities, playing strong players etc.

Is this proposal suggested simply because it might be possible, or because it is thought that more people will play as a consequence? I heard (can't vouch for the accuracy) that the London League was once FIDE-rated, but the experiment was abandoned because it put people off playing. Of course that was in the days when FIDE ratings started at 2200, so maybe attitudes are different for different levels of player.

FIDE ratings, where you can very transparently see a change with every single game, also encourage an extra level of individualism which isn't always a desirable thing in a team competition.