New Qualifying rules for The British 2013

[James Pratt]

Is this Lara's decision alone, the board, some special steering group?

Not happy.

[J T Melsom]

James

With respect, your post is a classic example of why ECF officers find it so difficult to make any positive progress. There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking questions and scrutinising proposals but perhaps if instead of just stamping your foot, you articulated your concerns it might be a bit easier for Lara to react, if she wishes to do so.

[Graham Borrowdale]

The new rules are really only confirming something which has been apparent for a number of years. The British Championships is effectively just (an expensive) open.

Possibly true from the perspective of a GM, but not really true for a 180-ish player who might conceivably like to play in the British, just once! If I want to play in an expensive open there are several around, but if I want to play in the British I can't, at least without winning a qualifying open first - I'm not complaining, but its not an open.

[Sean Hewitt]

It's too late now of course, as the regulations have been published and this is the first chance I've had to see them. But critiquing the new rules I have the following observations:-

Pre-qualifying titled players makes alot of sense. I would have given FMs are larger discount but there it is.

I don't understand the logic of excluding FIDE rated events from those who get the 6 places for the largest events.

I don't understand the logic of having the same number of places for events between 20 and 99 players. I would have thought a 2nd place should have been afforded to events with 50 or 60 players, with events with 100+ players getting 3.

Perhaps there should be some factor of strength ; a strong 50 player event is presumably better than a weaker 100 player event for yielding qualifiers.

I speak as a relatively disinterested observer as I know that the BCQ place has little or no effect on our events, or people's decisions to enter them.

[Matthew Turner]

Graham,
If you are 180ish then you will have come close to qualifying for the British, simply list where you have done this and send it to Lara Barnes. At one of these events the qualified player will have declined the nomination or something will have happened. Surprise, surprise you will suddenly find you should have been qualified all along. Just send the £200 by return of post.
Alternatively, go to the FIDE calendar, find an event somewhere you want to have a holiday and enjoy. It is up to you.

[Lara Barnes]

As I put on the 1st post this is the DRAFT programme /qualifying rules. It is not my decision. The ECF Home Director has the last word.

Several people have been consulting about the regulations: Adam Raoff, Alex Holowczak, David Welch, David Sedgewick, Alex McFarlane, Phil Ehr, Neville Belinfante etc. for several weeks /months. Alex H has done a lot of grafting trying to get everyone's hap'th in.

I personally have never believed that FMs and WFMs should have automatic qualification due to the point made about 'winning' the title (one I know is only 1500 for example).

As there have been many comments (and quite a few agree with me) I will do another draft and re-publish!

[E Michael White]

There needs to be a major rethink about how the British Championships are run.

The ECF is essentially a badly managed charity in that it stays alive due to voluntary contributions but does not minimise tax by registering as a charity.

Then we allow those who provide the money to be dictated to by a small minority of the chess community, ie arbiters. The active arbiters number about 100 together with 15000 players and so form less than 1 percent. This unelected group seem to think they know best for the championships and impose all kinds of increment chess, accelerated pairings and loosely drafted rules and conditions and often flout the FIDE rules.

The group that Lara mentions has 7 members, 6 out of whom are arbiters and most of them have never played in the top section of the British. I know you need to consider the other events particularly juniors but this cant be the best way. I would like to see a championship committee with at most 1 arbiter; including the championship manager, the ECF International Director, the Junior Director and 4 players, 3 of whom who have played in the top section plus 1 arbiter, if the championship manager is not an arbiter. They should be responsible for determining the rules, conditions of entry and other fundamentals well in advance. Once it is done the organisation should be left to the championship manager without interference from ECF board members.

It seems to me that small charities function well by separating off the fund raising and financial side from the operations side whereas the ECF board seem to think a corporate governance style is going to work best. In this respect I think Andrew Farthing has been barking up the wrong tree and is right to resign.

I think Lara has done the right thing in openly showing the draft at this stage and I support automatic entry to FM and above titles although Lara now says she is not a fan.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I would like to see a championship committee with at most 1 arbiter; including the championship manager, the ECF International Director, the Junior Director and 4 players, 3 of whom who have played in the top section plus 1 arbiter, if the championship manager is not an arbiter.

This is not an internally consistent position: it's entirely possible that at least two of the championship manager, the ECF International Director and the Junior Director will be arbiters.

[E Michael White]

I realised that and others too, thats why I said 4 players to maintain a majority participant focus. Surplus dualfunctional arbiters would need to leave the arbiting hat at home. I expect you see what I was getting at; those who should have some say dont have.

[Alex McFarlane]

I'm glad the forum has echoed most of the concerns I made about the changes. I have also suggested that both ECF grading lists for the season should count if 6 (or 12) FIDE rating lists count!!

I too am opposed to FM/WFM getting automatic qualification, in the main due to getting titles from FIDE events. I agree with reduced entry fees for them however.

[LawrenceCooper]

I'm glad the forum has echoed most of the concerns I made about the changes. I have also suggested that both ECF grading lists for the season should count if 6 (or 12) FIDE rating lists count!!

I too am opposed to FM/WFM getting automatic qualification, in the main due to getting titles from FIDE events. I agree with reduced entry fees for them however.

More FMs and WFMs could be good news for norms and would also increase the number of women in the championship as we have a lot of women rated between 2000-2100. Although I rarely play the British it's also nice to know I won't have to qualify if I ever get the urge to play

I'm also pleased that the International Director may have some say in the future of the British albeit it will be my successor and not me.

[Paul Cooksey]

I too am opposed to FM/WFM getting automatic qualification, in the main due to getting titles from FIDE events.

Is this a significant issue for British qualified players? I ask more out of curiosity than concern.

[Sean Hewitt]

I too am opposed to FM/WFM getting automatic qualification, in the main due to getting titles from FIDE events.

Alex - Could you explain what you mean by this as I'm not sure that I understand!

[Paul Cooksey]

I too am opposed to FM/WFM getting automatic qualification, in the main due to getting titles from FIDE events.

Alex - Could you explain what you mean by this as I'm not sure that I understand!

I assumed Alex meant this sort of thing. I know there are lots of these. But I thought plastic titles were mostly given out to players in less strong Olympiad teams, so not such an issue in the British Isles. I'm guessing though.

I wonder why people take these titles. I'd love to be a GM. But I mean I'd love to have the title because I could play as well as a GM (er, ideally without putting in any significant effort ). If FIDE offered me the GM title for best board 1 score in the Berks League or similar, I'd turn it down rather than be a laughing stock.

[Roger de Coverly]

Just as another thought, is there still the rule that says you cannot play in the Major Open if qualified for the British? That permanently excludes British FMs from the Major Open, where there are usually two or three. Even more to the point, it would exclude WFMs as well.