Game fee to be abolished?

[IM Jack Rudd]

One member of Barnstaple CC racked up 20.

[Mike Truran]

Five non-member players in another ODCL club racked up 46 games between them in 2015/2016.

[David Sedgwick]

Junior Only Congresses: Silver ECF members or higher: FREE or Others: Game Fee per result (half-game) of 60p Standard Play and 30p Rapid Play

So Game Fee is not being abolished.

[Mike Truran]

I just knew someone was going to say that......

[Ian Thompson]

One member of Barnstaple CC racked up 20.

... which is beaten by a player in the Surrey Border League who played 22 games.

[Nick Grey]

Maybe I'm reading too much into this especially with proposals on for governance reforms from current organisations that perform a lot of the work.
Yes we may have the odd member that forgot to renew membership, but we got charged the game fee and passed on.

Looks like a penalty system & they are generally a bad way to try to enforce.

Some people make too much fuss of grading. It is bad enough when your opponent does not turn up - perhaps that ought to count for grading - or at least player gets recompensed for his wasted time and expenses.

What the system does not cope with is the player who has registered before but is only going to play a few games a season because of a young family, or for example will be working abroad apart from a few weeks in the season.

No point in registering for ECF but I can do this for a few years may help. That is game fee.

[Neill Cooper]

My main concern with the proposals is that there is no distinction between rapidplay and standard play. Various county leagues have some divisions of two rapidplay games in an evening instead of one long play game. Examples include Berkshire Division Four, Surrey Stoneleigh Trophy and Briant Poulter (Surrey Schools) Div 4 and 5. If someone plays in just two such rapidplay fixtures then they play 4 (rapidplay) games and will be subject to the membership charge. However, if they play standard play then it is only on their fourth fixture that this is applied. It would be sensible, therefore, if a single rapidplay game counted as half a standard play game, as is at present the place with game fee. Then the charge would apply on the fourth fixture, whether in a rapidplay or standard play league.

[Michael Farthing]

Attempted to delete this but Nick got in before I managed it.
So you're all left with this (self-)censored version!

[Nick Grey]

In terms of administration of grading inputs two rapidplay games ought to equal one standard but it doesn't & it is really up to the organisers to set their fees. Looks confusing for schools leagues too not that the Briant Poulter league had anything like rapidplay when I was at school.
Personally trying to put into context of new internal club tournament aimed at getting new players a grading.

Mixing up the systems is an issue & if Neill is concerned with all the tournaments he is involved with then something seems amiss.

[Neil Graham]

Perhaps whilst not wishing to disturb the discussion on Berkshire Division Four someone might like to address what the Federation proposals are in relation to Yorkshire.

I have just logged into the entertaining webpage on the Yorkshire site mentioned previously http://www.chessnuts.org.uk/ny5/ecfgame ... ?eventid=2 which lists games played in the County and how much would be due in respect of Game Fee for non ECF members. To save everyone looking up the current figures I append them below

Bradford & District - 29% ECF Members; 71% non members Game Fee for non members £3255
Calderdale 20% ECF Members; 80% non members Game Fee for non members £1720
Doncaster & District 18% ECF Members; 82% non members Game Fee for non members £1287.50
Harrogate 71% ECF Members; 29% non members Game Fee for non members £35
Huddersfield 29% ECF Members; 71% non members Game Fee for non members £860
Hull 20% ECF Members; 80% non members Game Fee for non members £3582
Leeds 75% ECF Members; 25% non members Game Fee for non members £1017
Sheffield 21% ECF Members; 79% non members Game Fee for non members £7625
York 29% ECF Members; 71% non members Game Fee for non members £1867
Yorkshire League 49% ECF Members; 51% non members Game Fee for non members £1925

Grand total of Game Fee payable (to date) for non members - £23,173 not forgetting the 50p. The figures are updated on a daily basis.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Wow.

Looking on the bright side for ECF, we have had members who have eagerly joined the ECF and then not played all season!

Not enough to pay for Yorkshire though.

[Mike Truran]

Perhaps whilst not wishing to disturb the discussion on Berkshire Division Four someone might like to address what the Federation proposals are in relation to Yorkshire.

I'm not sure I understand the problem. For the (few) Yorkshire leagues that are ECF graded they will move over from the existing arrangements to the new arrangements. For the (many) Yorkshire leagues that are not ECF graded, both the existing arrangements and the new arrangements are irrelevant.

The Chessnuts statistics are somewhat academic in the sense that no Yorkshire league in its right mind would sign up for ECF grading unless the vast majority of its members were ECF members. The question as to how the Yorkshire leagues and the ECF can work better together to encourage ECF membership is a very valid one, but is separate to the present discussion. The new game fee proposals do nothing to either encourage or discourage Yorkshire leagues in this regard. That was never their intention.

[Nick Grey]

The proposal is silent on whether this is to come into effect after running the July 2017 grading. if that is the intention then there are a troubles with the proposals not least because leagues pass on to clubs. And not what we agreed to at the beginning of the season and when setting our budgets.

There are certain anomalies with foreign students playing over here for a year particularly if fide registered. For instance signed up & expectation is club picks up the game. One instance in club this season where to get 2 £25 penalties or junior penalties after the person leaves the country is wrong. Let alone a penalty to London League/his club there & also to the 4NCL. No real incentive to get an English Chess Federation grade.

We are also aware that sometimes players want to take a year or more out but may play the odd game. Are you really suggesting they should maintain their ECF membership in these circumstances as not really clear when we got them to first sign up.

Some issues with foreign university students - generally.

Queries of course on junior charges.

Of course the penalty charges seem just that. So is there going to be a case by case appeal system? I do not think clubs will accept them. Cannot charge VAT on a penalty either.

I must admit that generally we are getting members for a short period in time that are leaving because they just want to play some casual chess at the club but been difficult because of competitive chess, & those that want to progress we have got signed up and playing. But this does not compensate for those that want to play and have left the game.

[Alex Holowczak]

There are certain anomalies with foreign students playing over here for a year particularly if fide registered. For instance signed up & expectation is club picks up the game. One instance in club this season where to get 2 £25 penalties or junior penalties after the person leaves the country is wrong. Let alone a penalty to London League/his club there & also to the 4NCL. No real incentive to get an English Chess Federation grade.

Some issues with foreign university students - generally.

The British Universities' Chess Association held its AGM last Sunday morning. I explained this proposal.

Any player at an English university that enters our event is either a bronze member, or pays £12.50 to pay the Game Fee. So if they play 1 league game, they might as well become a member - the cost is the same.

All that changes for BUCA is that we have to insist on bronze membership rather than £12.50, which is only a difference of £2.50. Out of the total outlay that students spend on the weekend, that's not a big deal.

On the flip side, those that play in evening league chess will benefit from being able to play 3 league games without being levied any charge at all. In the Birmingham League, 18 players have played for Birmingham University in Division Four (6-player team), and only 4 of them have played more than 3 games. They've played 9 of their 11 matches so far this season, a total of 54 boards. 39 of those boards would be charged nothing if the proposal goes through, but many of those will incur £2.50 at the moment. So that's £15 x 3 if the regular players remember to become members, and that's it. £45. That's actually a much cheaper deal than they get at the moment.

It turns out that around the country, Universities playing in leagues have a similar pattern - lots of players playing not many games. So they actually support the proposal, and said I should vote accordingly.

[Roger de Coverly]

We are also aware that sometimes players want to take a year or more out but may play the odd game. Are you really suggesting they should maintain their ECF membership in these circumstances as not really clear when we got them to first sign up.

What is now the ECF establishment is convinced that the only way for the ECF to raise money to support its activities is to make a per head per year charge. They are really not interested in the anomalies this causes between people who play 4 games and those who play 40 or more. There's a concession that up to 3 games can be played without the ECF levying a charge, but that seems about as far as they will go and the question as to whether 3 rapid games should be the equivalent of 3 standard ones is still hanging. It remains my view that universal/compulsory membership on a per head per year basis is incompatible with league chess as we know it, particularly in areas with a floating population of participants.