Discuss revised England teams for 2010 Olympiad

[IM Jack Rudd]

It would be perfectly legitimate in my proposed Olympiad format. Of course, most of them would have to be in the B Olympiad throughout.

[Alex Holowczak]

If you want to gainsay it, lobby to get the criteria changed, but don't criticise the individuals involved.

Hear, hear.

[Carl Hibbard]

I don't like the way all of this is heading so please keep to the point people!

[Michael Jones]

I think you missed Maria's point on that one slightly. It's very hard to prove/define "Englishness" when we're all only categorised as citizens of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

In most cases it would be reasonably clear-cut: take whatever criterion under which you qualify for a UK passport, and substitute "England" for "UK" in the wording. If you have a UK passport because you were born in the UK, was that birthplace in England/Wales/Scotland/NI? If by your parents' birthplaces, where were they? If by residence, where was the place of residence? (I'm just using these as examples here, since I qualify for UK citizenship by birth I've never bothered finding out what the other criteria are). The only 'problem' cases would then be someone who, for instance, was born in England to Scottish parents but lives in Wales and is married to a Northern Irish spouse.

[Maxim Devereaux]

The only 'problem' cases would then be someone who, for instance, was born in England to Scottish parents but lives in Wales and is married to a Northern Irish spouse.

"Only" That's quite a high percentage of people (mainly considering the "lives in" comment), population migration being as widespread it is nowadays... which is where we came in, I think.

[Alex Holowczak]

As far as chess is concerned, if your nation is "ENG" on the FIDE rating list, you're entitled to play for England. Since you have to be a member of the ECF to play FIDE-rated chess, then by extension, you have to be a member of the ECF to play chess for England. So everyone playing for England in Khanty-Mansiysk is a member of the ECF. I don't think there's a restriction on who can play for England by citizenship or any other criteria. Whether there should be is open for debate, but Loz has to pick the best players available, in my opinion.

For the World Universities' Chess Championship, there were all sorts of restrictions:
1) BUCS - you must be a British citizen, and go to a HEI which is a member of BUCS - reasonable because they're doing the admin, and are supposed to be supporting British sport
2) BUCA - you must go to a University which is affiliated to BUCA - reasonable since I was doing all the work
3) ECF - you must be a member of the ECF (there were no non-English players, so it didn't really matter about extending it to the other nations) - reasonable because they were providing some of the funding

All are perfectly sensible restrictions, it's just a matter of taste as to which ones should be imposed on certain events.

[Michael Jones]

The only 'problem' cases would then be someone who, for instance, was born in England to Scottish parents but lives in Wales and is married to a Northern Irish spouse.

"Only" That's quite a high percentage of people (mainly considering the "lives in" comment), population migration being as widespread it is nowadays... which is where we came in, I think.

I think qualification by residence (for citizenship purposes) is usually at least five years - you'd have to be pretty dedicated to go and live somewhere for that long solely because you want to play chess for them. Maybe if I wanted to play in an Olympiad I could camp out in St Peter's Square for 5 years, qualify to represent the Vatican and then rope in the Pope and a couple of Swiss Guards to make up the rest of the team?

[Alex Holowczak]

I think qualification by residence (for citizenship purposes) is usually at least five years - you'd have to be pretty dedicated to go and live somewhere for that long solely because you want to play chess for them. Maybe if I wanted to play in an Olympiad I could camp out in St Peter's Square for 5 years, qualify to represent the Vatican and then rope in the Pope and a couple of Swiss Guards to make up the rest of the team?

You'd probably have to found the Vatican Chess Federation too; I don't think they're a member of FIDE.

[LozCooper]

[quote="Alex Holowczak"]As far as chess is concerned, if your nation is "ENG" on the FIDE rating list, you're entitled to play for England. Since you have to be a member of the ECF to play FIDE-rated chess, then by extension, you have to be a member of the ECF to play chess for England. So everyone playing for England in Khanty-Mansiysk is a member of the ECF. I don't think there's a restriction on who can play for England by citizenship or any other criteria. Whether there should be is open for debate, but Loz has to pick the best players available, in my opinion. quote]

Loz = the selectors in this case

[Sean Hewitt]

Eligibility should not be personalised, but it seems reasonable to have a criteria for selection. That could be simply FIDE registration, or it could be something else. For example (a starter for 10 if you like)

1. Born in England ; or
2. Parent born in England ; or
3. Living now, and for the last x years in England.

I think that would be a reasonable criteria, although it could be added to of course.

[Alex Holowczak]

As far as chess is concerned, if your nation is "ENG" on the FIDE rating list, you're entitled to play for England. Since you have to be a member of the ECF to play FIDE-rated chess, then by extension, you have to be a member of the ECF to play chess for England. So everyone playing for England in Khanty-Mansiysk is a member of the ECF. I don't think there's a restriction on who can play for England by citizenship or any other criteria. Whether there should be is open for debate, but Loz has to pick the best players available, in my opinion.

Loz = the selectors in this case

Oops, sorry. Yes, the selectors.

[Ben Purton]

Someone just sent me a bloody text asking why I am not in this thread.

2 Years ago i kept on harping on just to be controversial, I now think the topic is basic boring and null and void. We are currently questioning someones personal relationship with another, which is disgraceful and I hardly have a high set moral line, so someones seriously gone wrong.

If you want to point fingers , I think the best thing is to write to FIDE and do it after the thread, its their fault 110%, took me(and im stupid) about ayear to figure that one out. You are nearly all smarter than me so should not take you too long, Mark Howitt not included in the smarter than me comment- he is a fool.

as for the moment, go England(I have soft spot for Israel to) and **** this thread.

Ben

[Mark Howitt]

Right, I was actually tempted to just forget about the whole matter, but since everyone is saying the same thing as everyone always says, I'll say now that I'll make a full statement on this, but only after the Olympiad is finished.

One quick tip though for improving a certain someone's argument. It might be better for your writing ability to be better than a ten year old's before you start making personal criticisms.

[Stewart Reuben]

There are 5 Russian team in the Open Olympiad. This did not prevent there being a bye in round 1! I think it is quite wrong for a federation to win more than one of the gold, silver, bronze medals in one competition. A Russian team could come first and second, but the second one should not get the silver medal. Russia 2 edged out England in 1994, but that aggravation is not why I hold that opinion.
I think it was quite wrong to pair Israel with Yemen in round 1. Predicably that resulted in a 4-0 win by deafult for Israel. Every team in the competition was thus disadvantaged. It was said that 'they didn't apply in advance for this exception and did not appeal.' But it has been an unwritten rule for over 25 years that most Arabic fderations and now Iran cannot play against Israel.
The Belgium Ratings were messed up for round 1 and their seeding number was incorect.
Apart from the glitches all is well.
Stewart Reuben

[Michael Jones]

I think it was quite wrong to pair Israel with Yemen in round 1. Predicably that resulted in a 4-0 win by deafult for Israel. Every team in the competition was thus disadvantaged. It was said that 'they didn't apply in advance for this exception and did not appeal.' But it has been an unwritten rule for over 25 years that most Arabic fderations and now Iran cannot play against Israel.

I disagree; teams should not be allowed to dictate who they should or should not be drawn against. Suppose a country claimed to have some political or moral objection to playing any current or former communist country; since that includes most of the top teams in the competition, if a team were granted its wish not to have to play them, that team would then have a huge advantage over the rest of the field. Pair teams however the system you're using says they should be paired, and if that results in defaults that's the fault of politics, not of chess.