Chess Recognition

[LawrenceCooper]

There's certainly a case for a body representing titled players in this country. It's a surprise nobody has sought to form one before.

Although I can't find any trace of it online I thought there had been an "Association of British Chessplayers" (ABC) maybe in the 80s.

[Mick Norris]

The fact is, and you won't find this on Google, the ECF is invited to send representative teams to many, many events. In my time we turned down team invitations for matches with Norway, Holland and Georgia, an invitation to a multi nation tournament in Australasia and a team event to celebrate some event in South America. Jog on.

Sadly I received no adult team invitations between 2009-2012 whilst International Director

Maybe because we kept saying no? I wouldn't take it personally

Is this the last match?
UK v China

[Mick Norris]

There wouldn't be enough players to qualify for a 'players' organization as there are so few titled players who derive most of their income from fees and prizes (less than 10 I would say). But I agree in general that there should be an alternative self-governing body for titled players who also make a living from chess. It could then seek to secure sponsorship in its own right.

Indeed, but no need to restrict to the 10, include professional and "semi-professional" players and you should get critical mass

The problem would be in finding people who were knowledgeable enough on such matters to pitch in and organize it. I would certainly be willing to help and I imagine there could be quite a few others would too once they no longer had to interface with amateur chess and an entirely different set of goals. And the International Directorship should certainly be transferred to such a body.

Well, I imagine lots of us would find it easy to do, so surely clever titled players would find it easy too?

[Michael Farthing]

There is an elephant in this thread. I surely can't be the only person to have seen it?

[JustinHorton]

What size elephant?

[Nigel_Davies]

Well, I imagine lots of us would find it easy to do, so surely clever titled players would find it easy too?

They tend to be too focused elsewhere... But OK, on mature reflection there would need to be at least one or two capable organizers who are sympathetic to the goal of international excellence. Perhaps Bob Kane would consider a role and also Phil Ehr, especially as they were willing to put time in but the amateur branch removed them. The international director, Malcolm Pein, is both titled and very capable. And meanwhile there would definitely be a case for bringing Ray Keene in somehow, given his track record in finding sponsorship.

I've heard frequent complaints that 'amateurs are funding professionals' and it should be a given that not one penny of the membership fees from the amateur branch should go towards funding the professional one (financial independence all round).

[JustinHorton]

And meanwhile there would definitely be a case for bringing Ray Keene in somehow, given his track record in finding sponsorship.

Not to mention his track record when it comes to expenses.

[Nigel_Davies]

And meanwhile there would definitely be a case for bringing Ray Keene in somehow, given his track record in finding sponsorship.

Not to mention his track record when it comes to expenses.

Independent branches would mean that amateurs could concern themselves with their own interests and organization. I for one would no longer feel such a need to put my oar in on amateur chess matters and how many individuals seem to want to devote themselves to undermining the game, its benefits and key figures within it. I could simple say that I'm a member of the UK's professional chess body, and that we have our own very different views and perspectives.

[Roger de Coverly]

There's certainly a case for a body representing titled players in this country. It's a surprise nobody has sought to form one before.

Malcolm Pein set one up around thirty years ago. It was called ABC or similar, being Association of British Chess-players. I don't know what happened to it, but it was around that time Malcolm became heavily involved in commercial activities, such as promoting ChessBase as its UK distributor.

[Roger de Coverly]

It's long been my view that the three key directorships of International, Home and Junior need to be devolved and given more autonomy

It contributed to Phil Ehr's removal that he held the opposite view.

[Roger de Coverly]

I've heard frequent complaints that 'amateurs are funding professionals' and it should be a given that not one penny of the membership fees from the amateur branch should go towards funding the professional one (financial independence all round).

The ECF did seriously consider this when it investigated trying to obtain charitable status for itself. It rejected the idea because it could see no continuity of funding for the professional body, with the consequent risk that two of the new body's major activities, namely sending teams to Olympiads and European Teams along with a British Championship might not take place at all. The other problem with a devolved professional body in parallel to the amateur one is which one is the FIDE affiliate?

[Nigel_Davies]

I've heard frequent complaints that 'amateurs are funding professionals' and it should be a given that not one penny of the membership fees from the amateur branch should go towards funding the professional one (financial independence all round).

The ECF did seriously consider this when it investigated trying to obtain charitable status for itself. It rejected the idea because it could see no continuity of funding for the professional body, with the consequent risk that two of the new body's major activities, namely sending teams to Olympiads and European Teams along with a British Championship might not take place at all. The other problem with a devolved professional body in parallel to the amateur one is which one is the FIDE affiliate?

I think the time may now be right for independence because matters have become so critical. There is great resentment about membership fees being used for this funding and the very different goals of people within the existing set-up are a major source of friction.

Independence of different branches could still mean a single ECF, which would solve the FIDE affiliation issue. But the professional branch should also be free to seek affiliations and alliances elsewhere.

[benedgell]

At what level should one consider becoming a professional chess player, and what level in an ideal world should one have the opportunity to become a professional chess player?

Also, what do professional chess players provide in return for their fees?

I think there are a number of different, and entirely reasonable, answers one could provide for some of our top players, the likes of Adams, Short, Howell, Jones etc, but what about players around the 2450- 2550 range?

[IM Jack Rudd]

Well, from my point of view, one of the principal pieces of value that 2450-2550 players provide is the opportunity for players to get GM and IM norms. (Somewhat ironically, this means that the ECF should value players like Lalic, Cherniaev, Davies etc. more highly than they value ENG-registered players in that rating range - the foreigner requirements for title norms make England-based non-English players very valuable.)

[Roger de Coverly]

Independence of different branches could still mean a single ECF, which would solve the FIDE affiliation issue. But the professional branch should also be free to seek affiliations and alliances elsewhere.

I'm not sure how the teams were financed in the Penrose era, but the players wouldn't have expected appearance fees. From the 1970s onwards, they were financed both by Duncan Lawrie as sponsor and the UK Government with part of the support for chess being designated for support of international teams. Duncan Lawrie ceased sponsorship around fifteen years ago and the government support to the ECF ceased in 2010. Support for the teams since then has been through patronage and a levy on amateur players.

If there was no financial support, presumably the ECF would have to do what the Scots and Welsh do, especially for the European Teams, namely to drop down the rating list until you find players sufficiently well off and with sufficient holiday time that they can finance themselves over a two week or longer competition. That's parallel to what the ECF does for junior competitions.