Proposed British Chess Championship Qualifying Regulations

[Jonathan Bryant]

I suspect the only way the ECF can go is make it totally open and have tiered entry fees and conditions only to British players, unless they find significant funds and move to the other structure

I must admit that I’ve thought for several years that the financial issue would mean that limiting the British Championship to a more appropriate field wasn’t ever going to be a practical possibility.

Seems either

(a) i was wrong about that
(b) the ECF think it is/may be but they are wrong.


If it’s not, I had also concluded that an open with increasing fees as ratings of entrants gets lower would be the least bad option.


Whatever the outcome, I do think the ECF deserve credit for making change and the consultation process they are attempting. It would be much easier to avoid making difficult decisions, leave things as they are and just let the championship drift forever more.

[Andrew Zigmond]

I must admit that I’ve thought for several years that the financial issue would mean that limiting the British Championship to a more appropriate field wasn’t ever going to be a practical possibility.

Choosing my words carefully, a major sponsor would negate the financial issue and it is the tail that makes the event less attractive to sponsors.

[Chris Rice]

I suspect the only way the ECF can go is make it totally open and have tiered entry fees and conditions only to British players, unless they find significant funds and move to the other structure

I had also concluded that an open with increasing fees as ratings of entrants gets lower would be the least bad option. Whatever the outcome, I do think the ECF deserve credit for making change and the consultation process they are attempting. It would be much easier to avoid making difficult decisions, leave things as they are and just let the championship drift forever more.

That's well said Jon. The ECF deserve credit for at least making the effort to address the 'tail end' complaints even though the proposals do not seem to be as thoroughly thought through as I initially thought. So I had a few extra comments:

1. Seems to be that if money was not an issue you could invite the best 12 British players for an APA. However, the only way I could see that to be financially viable is for it to be made part of the London Classic. Whether the ECF and the GCT would want that is unknown. Of course it could vary to say 24 players, 12 highest Elo, 8 best juniors plus 4 qualifiers etc.

2. Alternatively as Alan says you can have it as a truly Open tournament with tiered fees for the lower rated players. I'm not talking about a few quid to enter, I'm saying if you are say 2000-2200 its say eg £300 1800-2000 £500 1600-1800 £1000 which would put most tailenders off from entering but you would still get a few and the extra money could be used for conditions for the GMs or added to the prize money.

3. In relation to 1 above what would replace the top section if you moved it to be part of another tournament? Well it appears to me that the British Open Championships is not a really accurate description of this event anyway. More accurate would be the British Isles Championship. That event could definitely be open to all and have tiered fees as well.

4. What is this obsession with norm seeking tournaments? From my experience obtaining IM and GM titles has been counterproductive for British players in general. How many have we seen pretty much give up the game as soon as they have achieved these titles?

[Kevin Thurlow]

It is of course a good point that ECF is asking the members what they think. Doubtless, there will be a bewildering array of replies. I have sent my response, but it now occurs to me that I also don't like the idea of including other championships in the main event. Selecting a "winner" from the middle of a Swiss doesn't work. I guess nobody was asking that, but it should be considered.

I favour an all-play-all with the highest-rated players available, then make the Major Open a Swiss with a sliding scale of entry fees and rating prizes. If you go with a British Championship Swiss, I think having a rating floor is a good idea and it should apply to everybody, regardless of age or gender.

[Michael Flatt]

I do like the idea of club players having the opportunity of playing in the British Championships should they be having a good season and able to qualify from a tournament.

There are perhaps too many qualification places on offer and it would be possible to reduce their number by allowing tournaments to compete in a lottery for the privilege of offering a limited number of places. A tournament gaining a place one year would be excluded the next year. Also, to ensure a good geographic spread the lotteries might be held separately in four or five regions or even by the Unions. Tournaments would not need to be FIDE rated events so as to not discriminate against other popular and well run events.

There used to a certain amount of prestige for tournaments in being able to offer qualifying places. Where tournament currently gain a right to places simply by being FIDE rated, particularly with the increased frequency of them, that prestige has long since disappeared.

The existing proposal to offer places to the top players in a qualifying Grand Prix suffers from the actual winners not being known and,therefore, not be able to plan their holidays until immediately before the British itself. If qualification was determined at the end of the previous season the players may suffer a loss of form over the next year.

The quality of any consultation can only be determined on the basis as to whether it had any influence on shaping the final proposal and the quality of the feedback on the range of suggestions and the criteria upon which they were judged. Certainly, inviting contributions from the whole chess community is a good start and is to be applauded.

[Roger de Coverly]

The existing proposal to offer places to the top players in a qualifying Grand Prix suffers from the actual winners not being known

I don't think it's that bad as presumably the names of the leaders would be published from time to time. It's only the players at the margins of the qualification group who won't know whether they are playing. There's nothing to stop them booking travel and accommodation provided they are willing to play in the Major Open or other parallel tournaments.

The problem with an email based consultation is that those responding will have little idea whether their views are the mainstream opinion or a minority of one. That enables the ECF, should it so desire, to do what it wants to do, regardless.

[Dewi Jones]

As I will never be at that level, I haven't read the paper. But it is the British Chess Championship and though the "E"CF do the organising, I do hope they are consulting the other national unions on a basis of equality about these proposed changes.

[Mike Truran]

Of course we are.

[Andrew Zigmond]

As I will never be at that level, I haven't read the paper. But it is the British Chess Championship and though the "E"CF do the organising, I do hope they are consulting the other national unions on a basis of equality about these proposed changes.

Dare I point out that if you'd read the paper (even in a quick scan) you'd have seen that explicitly stated?

[Mike Truran]

I did think about saying that it's stated within the first few lines of the paper......

[Michael Flatt]

Organizer(s) English Chess Federation
Federation England ( ENG )
Location Bournemouth Pavilions, Bournemouth
Date 2016/07/25 to 2016/08/05

Federation statistics
No. Federation Count
1 Australia 1
2 England 77
3 Germany 1
4 Greece 1
5 Hungary 1
6 Ireland 1
7 Scotland 1
8 Wales 3
Total 86

Reference
[1]chess-results.com: http://chess-results.com/tnr231040.aspx ... =30&wi=821

[Dewi Jones]

I couldnt open it on my phone. And I didn't care enough to turn on the PC to check. I thought i'd soon be told, and I have been. So great.

[Mike Truran]

But you did care enough to post on the forum and waste other people's time rather than put in a small amount of effort yourself.

More fool us, I suppose.

[Dewi Jones]

Exactly. Thanks.

[Matthew Turner]

Basically this has to be the way ahead, there may be alterations to the finer details but these really aren't that important in the overall scheme of things. The changes involve a big financial hit to the Championships (in the short term?), everyone is aware of that, so I assume that contingencies are in place for dealing with it. There seemed to be money around at the British last year so at the very least I would be extremely hopeful that finances were available to ease the transition to a much more sponsorship friendly event.
One very minor query I would have is whether qualifiers for 2017 can carry over their place to 2018. It is only a minor point, but it affects the mentality of whether 2018 is a transition to a new streamlined stronger event or whether the aim is to have 2018 as the finished product.