Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

General discussions about grading.
Post Reply
Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1821
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:30 pm

I think it's worth remembering that all of the Yorkshire leagues are seperate organisations constituted in their own right and therefore the Yorkshire Chess Association has no authority over them. Also each league will have a different culture and thus need to be seen as individual organisations rather than being lumped in together. Given that the new membership scheme was always going to have teething problems it's probably best to see how each league stands at the end of the season and then consider the options for each one.

Some may argue that the YCA grading list is the problem (providing a service for free that all other county associations choose to pay the ECF to do) but even if the YCA were persuaded to drop their list I think a lot of the leagues would prefer to go ungraded rather than register for game fee.

As a pro ECF Yorkshire player I am prepared to do my bit to promote the ECF within my club and the rest of the county. Dare I say that it would be nice to have something better to sell than minutiae of the grading system? Also I think the ECF needs to realise how weak its own hand is; are they really in a position to dictate terms to the London Chess Classic or the 4NCL for example?

At the risk of opening a can of worms it has tentatively been suggested that Scarborough could host the 2014 British; I believe the Spa Complex expressed an interest, Lara mentioned it in passing to the deputy mayor who in turn announced it to the whole hall. If this was to happen it would be an opportunity for the ECF to promote itself in Yorkshire - but also an opportunity for the YCA to do its bit. Just a thought.
Last edited by Andrew Zigmond on Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Mick Norris
Posts: 8262
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:40 pm

The British was at Scarborough in 1999, 2001 and 2004 and Sheffield in 2011

I can't see that this has helped the ECF within Yorkshire

What about all the areas of the country where the players actually support the ECF?
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19070
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:52 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote: are they really in a position to dictate terms to the London Chess Classic or the 4NCL for example?
By virtue of being the national affiliate of FIDE, they probably are. For example they insist on £ 27 membership as a condition of including Congress and league results on the International rating list.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1821
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:56 pm

Mick Norris wrote:The British was at Scarborough in 1999, 2001 and 2004 and Sheffield in 2011

I can't see that this has helped the ECF within Yorkshire

What about all the areas of the country where the players actually support the ECF?
That's a fair enough comment. I don't know if anybody else is `bidding` for the 2014 British at this stage but I'm not asking for preferential treatment for Yorkshire. That's not my point.

I don't know whether the ECF took full advantage of the previous Scarborough championships as a PR opportunity. My point was that this would be an opportunity for the YCA to show their hand. Also the culture is very different now, in spite of everything Yorkshire did choose to accept the new membership structure as opposed to disaffiliation and it has reconciled a lot of Yorkshire players with the ECF at a stroke. I just think there's an opportunity here.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1821
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed Nov 07, 2012 5:00 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote: are they really in a position to dictate terms to the London Chess Classic or the 4NCL for example?
By virtue of being the national affiliate of FIDE, they probably are. For example they insist on £ 27 membership as a condition of including Congress and league results on the International rating list.
At the moment, yes. I don't want to give anybody ideas but if a new organisation backed by a major sponsor (and we all know a few people who have the connections) decided to encroach on the ECF's territory would the ECF really be able to respond?
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Matthew Turner
Posts: 3016
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Matthew Turner » Wed Nov 07, 2012 5:09 pm

Mick Norris wrote
"What about all the areas of the country where the players actually support the ECF?" (to host the British Championships)

I don't know? Is Mike Truran's house big enough?

Andrew Bak
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Bak » Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:33 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:Some may argue that the YCA grading list is the problem (providing a service for free that all other county associations choose to pay the ECF to do) but even if the YCA were persuaded to drop their list I think a lot of the leagues would prefer to go ungraded rather than register for game fee.
I don't think this would be the case at all. How could the leagues operate effectively if they have no system to judge how strong players are?

I've had very little opposition when I've asked members of my team to become ECF members. Once you explain that there are benefits to them joining and of course the fact that it is cheaper to join rather than play £2/game every time!

Surely people can then understand that players involved in leagues in Yorkshire and Cumbria are very annoyed that they are not receiving on of the key benefits that they signed up when joining the ECF, namely "Free Grading of Results in Leagues"?

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1821
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:33 pm

Andrew Bak wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote:Some may argue that the YCA grading list is the problem (providing a service for free that all other county associations choose to pay the ECF to do) but even if the YCA were persuaded to drop their list I think a lot of the leagues would prefer to go ungraded rather than register for game fee.
I don't think this would be the case at all. How could the leagues operate effectively if they have no system to judge how strong players are?

I've had very little opposition when I've asked members of my team to become ECF members. Once you explain that there are benefits to them joining and of course the fact that it is cheaper to join rather than play £2/game every time!

Surely people can then understand that players involved in leagues in Yorkshire and Cumbria are very annoyed that they are not receiving on of the key benefits that they signed up when joining the ECF, namely "Free Grading of Results in Leagues"?
Assuming the Yorkshire league remains a game fee registered event the majority of Yorkshire satellite league players would still have an ECF grade and ungraded players would fit in around them - you don't need a grade to know the relative strength of a player. If the Yorkshire grading system ceased to exist and local league AGMs had the choice of either paying ECF game fees or becoming an ungraded competition a lot of players would vote for the latter.

The problem is that the key benefit should read `Free grading of results in leagues providing that league is an ECF game fee event`.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Andrew Bak
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Bak » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:18 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote: The problem is that the key benefit should read `Free grading of results in leagues providing that league is an ECF game fee event`.
But it doesn't. Anyone who becomes a member of the ECF and reads that can't be expected to think their games would not be graded as they are in a non-ECF affiliated league, particularly when the ECF has previously been grading these games.
Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Assuming the Yorkshire league remains a game fee registered event the majority of Yorkshire satellite league players would still have an ECF grade and ungraded players would fit in around them - you don't need a grade to know the relative strength of a player. If the Yorkshire grading system ceased to exist and local league AGMs had the choice of either paying ECF game fees or becoming an ungraded competition a lot of players would vote for the latter.
How else can you reliably figure out the strength of a player other than a grade?

How many leagues around the country are run without being graded? Judging by the the ECF post, outside Yorkshire the answer is at most 1, the Cumbrian league.

Paul Buswell
Posts: 401
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:56 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Paul Buswell » Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:37 am

Andrew Bak wrote:
I've had very little opposition when I've asked members of my team to become ECF members. Once you explain that there are benefits to them joining and of course the fact that it is cheaper to join rather than play £2/game every time!
Not the best thread for it but it would really have helped if the ECF had put out some literature promoting itself - fliers, leaflets etc. - as part of its drive to membership. It shouldn't be for Mr Bak and other captains to be the intermediaries of explaining the benefits. Andrew Farthing told me back in the spring that this was a priority but it didn't happen. A wodge of fliers leaflets by post to every club in the land would have been pricey but very useful bread and butter PR. As it is my Club has heard nothing direct from the ECF selling itself; a couple of Club stalwarts have withdrawn from League chess in protest at the new scheme and I've been given no ammunition to help me dissuade them.

PB

Alan Burke

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Alan Burke » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:03 am

Ihor Lewyk ... "The agreement we signed in June stated that they would continue to grade games from non registered leagues such as Bradford and Andrew Farthing was specifically asked this question at the YCA AGM and he clearly stated that he didn’t know of any moves within the ECF Board to change this."

If such an agreement was signed in June, then I will repeat my comment from another thread in which I suggested that most chess players just go out to enjoy a game without knowing of the internal politics of their local league nor even of the ECF and most will probably be totally unaware of this dispute until they receive their next ECF grading in January.

Therefore, could not a compromise and some leeway from the ECF be given for Andrew Farthing seemingly giving out false information on the scheme and allow all games to be graded for the current season whilst the matter is fully discussed and to give all players a chance to become more aware of the possible outcome should they not join the ECF next season ?

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2576
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Adam Raoof » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:10 am

Alan Burke wrote:Ihor Lewyk ... "The agreement we signed in June stated that they would continue to grade games from non registered leagues such as Bradford and Andrew Farthing was specifically asked this question at the YCA AGM and he clearly stated that he didn’t know of any moves within the ECF Board to change this."

If such an agreement was signed in June, then I will repeat my comment from another thread in which I suggested that most chess players just go out to enjoy a game without knowing of the internal politics of their local league nor even of the ECF and most will probably be totally unaware of this dispute until they receive their next ECF grading in January.

Therefore, could not a compromise and some leeway from the ECF be given for Andrew Farthing seemingly giving out false information on the scheme and allow all games to be graded for the current season whilst the matter is fully discussed and to give all players a chance to become more aware of the possible outcome should they not join the ECF next season ?
"It was confirmed that ECF members’ games would be graded even if they played in a league or event which was not ECF-affiliated. Whilst all games played in non-affiliated leagues are sent for grading only those of ECF members would be counted."

http://yorkshirechess.org/yorkshire-agm-minutes/
Adam Raoof IA, IO
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Tornelo - https://tornelo.com/chess/orgs/chess-england
Simon Williams "The Ginger GM" - https://gingergm.com/ref/106.html
Don’t stop playing chess!

David Gilbert
Posts: 766
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:03 am

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by David Gilbert » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:13 am

Paul Buswell wrote: It shouldn't be for Mr Bak and other captains to be the intermediaries of explaining the benefits. Andrew Farthing told me back in the spring that this was a priority but it didn't happen.

PB
But this did happen didn't it? There's loads of stuff on the ECF Website http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=18690 on this, including an extensive Q&A. It just needs Clubs to draw it to their members' attention or to print it off for anyone without an internet connection.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19070
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:24 am


It's known what was said in the Yorkshire minutes. If the archives of this forum are consulted, the ex-CEO was almost immediately asked to clarify his remarks, since they ran contrary to previous statements about the ECF's intentions and for that matter the proposed budget. Other leagues potentially could have adopted a Yorkshire local solution, the non-county leagues in London and surrounding counties being obvious examples.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2576
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Adam Raoof » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:27 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:

It's known what was said in the Yorkshire minutes. If the archives of this forum are consulted, the ex-CEO was almost immediately asked to clarify his remarks, since they ran contrary to previous statements about the ECF's intentions and for that matter the proposed budget. Other leagues potentially could have adopted a Yorkshire local solution, the non-county leagues in London and surrounding counties being obvious examples.
Thanks Roger. Can you quote his clarification, to save me trying to find it?
Adam Raoof IA, IO
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Tornelo - https://tornelo.com/chess/orgs/chess-england
Simon Williams "The Ginger GM" - https://gingergm.com/ref/106.html
Don’t stop playing chess!

Post Reply