Motions

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Mick Norris
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Motions

Post by Mick Norris » Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:35 am

Mick Norris wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote:Firstly regarding the posts by Michael Flatt, the dispute as to whether the NCCU should admit Manchester as a competing county in its own right has been dragging on for forty three years now. Some searching will reveal a lengthy previous thread on this forum devoted to the subject. That is where the bale of legal documents come in and, if the rumours are true, there is a substantial legacy that can be spent on litigation if Manchester were ever admitted
Hi Andrew, is there any actual evidence of this alleged fund? The Will is presumably a matter of public record, so someone can check
Ok, someone has checked and there is no Will; Lancs don't appear to have a fund of money either, so maybe we can get back to reality now :roll:
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

IanCalvert
Posts: 182
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 4:59 pm

Re: Motions: Regional Competitions

Post by IanCalvert » Thu Aug 24, 2017 11:00 am

As a player born in Manchester who played junior chess in Merseyside and for Lancashire 40 years ago, I am amazed about these 21st century regional discussions.

IMHO

Going back to first principles, chess is basically an individual game. We play in representative club, league or regional teams for sundry reasons including fellowship and for some including a notion of what we represent e.g. for some juniors "not X" where X might be all the other regional areas.

I think sensible ECF, player centred policies on national competitions for regional areas should reflect multiple allegiances of players : we play for many teams. It might well be sensible for the ECF to restrict players to one " regional " side per season but after that why constrain the definition of regions to local government boundaries.

I vaguely recall some years ago when "Cambridgeshire" won the county championship it was widely and I believe correctly regarded as a Cambridge University / City team.

If Unions are unable or unwilling to organise , the early stage of such regional competitions on behalf of the ECF then maybe the ECF should organise all stages of the competition.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Motions

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:57 pm

Mick Norris wrote: Ok, someone has checked and there is no Will; Lancs don't appear to have a fund of money either, so maybe we can get back to reality now :roll:
I was actually of the understanding that it was you who told me that in a PM some years ago although I'm struggling to dig it up. To be fair I think the words you (or whoever it was) said that a certain individual had left instructions to ensure that his death did not mark the end of the matter and the `legacy` may have been a leap on my part. If it helps matters I will withdraw the comment.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

David Pardoe
Posts: 1186
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:29 pm
Location: NORTH WEST

Re: Motions

Post by David Pardoe » Thu Aug 24, 2017 11:54 pm

Firstly, can I just say that, as a former county captain, having played county chess for several counties going back a few years, this format of chess is an excellent part of our chess calendar. Our first job is to recognise the place this has and the many aspirations it satisfies.
We play to win, and we play for enjoyment, and , dare I say it, good comradeship. Yes , it is a great chance to meet old friends, make new ones, and enjoy an afternoons chess combat.
So, our first duty is to promote this event throughout our Unions, County and League bodies, and ask that as many players as possible support these competitions. It is most important to remember that these events cater for players at all levels.
Its a great team building experience, and it provides some great chess for those aspiring players of future years, and our top dogs too.
Listening to some folk on here, you`d think it was only about our top players, biting chunks out of each other. So I`d like our county bodies to look at chess on all levels, and if they have no teams entered, then consider entering at least one team (or more).
It might be an U180 and U140 teams.. or an U160, or U120 teams. You just need captains to volunteer to select teams and make arrangements and its fairly straight forward. These 16 board matches do require a certain positive energy to get things moving, so avoid leaving things to the last moment is my advice, and make good contacts with all involved.
Our chess bodies are a tad dysfunctional in some ways. More communication between league, club , county and Union bodies might be helpful. You need the Unions to frame county events and link with league and county bodies to ensure that events are organised.
There is no reason why counties like Durham, Merseyside, Cheshire and Northumberland, Shropshire and others,could not raise teams for various sections... nor why the relevant bodies can`t positively encourage support for such events.
We live in the internet era ... lets use technology to speed things up a bit.
One of the great attractions for me is that playing to the county time controls allows me to play a complete game, without necessarily hitting blitz time control finishes. Yes, you can really play out an endgame without those dire blitz endings that plagues our league chess.
And most of the venues are fine.. with a few refreshments etc...
Certainly for the MCCU, we have some good venues, and its a pleasure to play our fellow players from other leagues. From Manchesters point of view, it is also a bonus not playing Lancs and Yorks in the early Qualifier stages, because it means we get to play them in the later stages if we progress.
BRING BACK THE BCF

Mick Norris
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Motions

Post by Mick Norris » Fri Aug 25, 2017 7:16 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Mick Norris wrote: Ok, someone has checked and there is no Will; Lancs don't appear to have a fund of money either, so maybe we can get back to reality now :roll:
I was actually of the understanding that it was you who told me that in a PM some years ago although I'm struggling to dig it up. To be fair I think the words you (or whoever it was) said that a certain individual had left instructions to ensure that his death did not mark the end of the matter and the `legacy` may have been a leap on my part. If it helps matters I will withdraw the comment.
Andrew, I first heard it from Rupert Jones on Birmingham train station after an ECF meeting; JTS was still alive then, so no way to check; no idea who had told Rupert what turns out to be incorrect information; it didn't seem then a good reason not to do the right thing, and we were pleased that Yorks subsequently supported our application to join the NCCU; we have no argument with Yorks :)
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Alan Walton
Posts: 1165
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Motions

Post by Alan Walton » Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:08 am

David Pardoe wrote:From Manchesters point of view, it is also a bonus not playing Lancs and Yorks in the early Qualifier stages, because it means we get to play them in the later stages if we progress.
Why are you worried about playing them, going into any competitive event you shouldn't be worried about any opponent; in fact I would say it is a benefit playing the strongest opponents this is how you improve your game by finding out your own weaknesses and develop thereafter

Ian Thompson
Posts: 1787
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Fleet, Hampshire

Re: Motions

Post by Ian Thompson » Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:19 am

David Pardoe wrote:You just need captains to volunteer to select teams and make arrangements ...
Fulfilling that 'just' tends to be a problem.
David Pardoe wrote:... and its fairly straight forward.
I'd be interested to hear whether people who are team captains agree with this statement. I suspect not.

Mick Norris
Posts: 6508
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Motions

Post by Mick Norris » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:49 pm

We have captains, just not ones that want to travel for an hour or more to play the MCCU counties, unfortunately
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Post Reply