PLAYER OF THE YEAR 2017

[Michael Farthing]

The news item announcing cancellation of the award for this year has disappeared from the ECF website, both in the home page scrolling and listing and in the archive. Curiouser and curiouser!

[Stewart Reuben]

We now have far more people being entitled to vote due to there being far more members. But the number of people actually voting has not increased.
That means a small goup of determined members can get their candidate a relatively large number of votes.

[John Upham]

That means a small group of determined members can get their candidate a relatively large number of votes.

Is this perhaps because those people believe that the player deserves the title of Player of the Year?

If you do not want certain players to win then do not include them on the list of nominations.

[LawrenceCooper]

That means a small group of determined members can get their candidate a relatively large number of votes.

Is this perhaps because those people believe that the player deserves the title of Player of the Year?

If you do not want certain players to win then do not include them on the list of nominations.

In this year's event the shortlist were all voted for so I wouldn't be in favour of the relevant official being able to veto anyone. I guess they could cut off immediately above where that player finished but that should also be frowned on.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Probably worth reminding ourselves what happened when a "small group" led by Stewart Reuben got to choose which candidates could be voted for.


http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... scars.html

[Adam Raoof]

The actions of the ECF in this regard are shameful.

[MatthewParry]

I'm a little confused as to why the award even exists, and the ECF seem to have confused it even more by making the criteria unclear. If it is genuinely an attempt to identify the player who has contributed the most to English chess this year, then that is surely something that an objective criteria can be used to determine? I dread to think who would win the Nobel Peace Prize if it was done by popular vote; probably Kim Jong In after an election coalition with Donald Trump with Trump getting it next year.

If on the other hand it is a popularity contest then by all means open it up to anyone and call it 'Most Popular ECF player of the year'. Or possibly do both, as the BAFTAS have done. The way that the process has been done seems to be a way of embracing democracy by trying to force the preferred choices down everyone's throats.

[JustinHorton]

If it is genuinely an attempt to identify the player who has contributed the most to English chess this year, then that is surely something that an objective criteria can be used to determine?

Go ahead

[LawrenceCooper]

I'm a little confused as to why the award even exists, and the ECF seem to have confused it even more by making the criteria unclear. If it is genuinely an attempt to identify the player who has contributed the most to English chess this year, then that is surely something that an objective criteria can be used to determine? I dread to think who would win the Nobel Peace Prize if it was done by popular vote; probably Kim Jong In after an election coalition with Donald Trump with Trump getting it next year.

If on the other hand it is a popularity contest then by all means open it up to anyone and call it 'Most Popular ECF player of the year'. Or possibly do both, as the BAFTAS have done. The way that the process has been done seems to be a way of embracing democracy by trying to force the preferred choices down everyone's throats.

My own view when I vote is that it's for the best results over the year relative to grade/rating so I could vote for anyone from a top gm down to a local club player whose grade has jumped up 20 points after stagnating for years.

[Kevin Thurlow]

I think it's best if the criteria are fairly loose. My club has a "Meritorious Performance" Award, which has been won by someone getting 95 % in the league, someone getting about 50 % whilst hideously out-graded on top board, someone who stepped in as reserve on board one after 25 minutes and drawing with someone 80 points higher, someone who always made sure new members (those were the days!) had a game even if it meant he didn't play, etc. This year it went to the player who had the best grading improvement and played lots of games, despite saying they didn't want to play much!

And if in doubt, give it to the one who hasn't won it before.

Lawrence's suggestion is sensible of course (that's twice we agreed in a few days!)

You could try to have strict rules on how to decide the winner, but the document could end up huge.

[Angus French]

Like Matthew, I was unclear on the assessment criteria: is the award solely for results/performances or are there other aspects to consider? The email which invited members to vote didn't say but did, for example, describe one nominee as a "role model" - what does that encompass?

Also, the assessment period wasn't defined. I've been told it covered from 1 July 2016 (to, presumably, 30 June 2017). But the closing date for voting was 21 June and the invitation to vote was sent on 24 May... I wonder, how many people voted before the European Championship concluded (or started, even)?

[MatthewParry]

It is, I grant you, impossible to establish one that will meet uniform approval, but then, you will never establish that. Establishing a better criteria would be a good start- 'the player who has contributed the most to English chess during the period x-y'. Then identify how the Committee want it to be determined, what factors the candidates should have and how it will be determined.

Given the difficulty involved, and the controversy that has enveloped, for example, the Oscars, I'd be more inclined to support the popularity contest as at least everyone will know what it is, and even when 'joke candidates' such as Liam and myself have won votes, the 'normal' candidates have still won.

[MatthewParry]

Of course, as Angus points out, everyone will have different ideas of what constitutes chess contribution. When I invoke dictatorial powers to give annual awards in my NCL team, I will happily overlook performance if a player has made excessive contributions by travelling long distances to help the team out; because without them, the team would not be able to function, and it is a team event not an individual one.

[Chris Rice]

I tend to agree with Matthew and Angus. The Player of the Year Award appears to mean different things to different people and you have one award trying to capture all these criteria. If the ECF stumped up a few quid more for some extra trophies you could be more consistent with the Oscars, Baftas etc. For example, something along these lines for each particular year:
Best player: For 2017 would too many argue it was Mickey Adams? Criteria could be done in Elo terms
Most successful player: Players who got the most trophies for example in 2017, such as Jones, Short and Howell or you could split this into most successful GM/IM/FM/non-titled player/online player
Most promising junior: This could be one category or split into different ages etc
Most successful Senior: Keith Arkell?
Most successful female: Jovanka?
Chess Personality of the Year: The player capturing the imagination of ECF members (obviously no criteria for this one and probably would end up being the most popular player)

[LawrenceCooper]

I tend to agree with Matthew and Angus. The Player of the Year Award appears to mean different things to different people and you have one award trying to capture all these criteria. If the ECF stumped up a few quid more for some extra trophies you could be more consistent with the Oscars, Baftas etc. For example, something along these lines for each particular year:
Best player: For 2017 would too many argue it was Mickey Adams? Criteria could be done in Elo terms
Most successful player: Players who got the most trophies for example in 2017, such as Jones, Short and Howell or you could split this into most successful GM/IM/FM/non-titled player/online player
Most promising junior: This could be one category or split into different ages etc
Most successful Senior: Keith Arkell?
Most successful female: Jovanka?
Chess Personality of the Year: The player capturing the imagination of ECF members (obviously no criteria for this one and probably would end up being the most popular player)

The most trophies would almost certainly be someone playing in junior tournaments.