e2e4 Chester Congress : 18-20 January 2013

[Sean Hewitt]

We visit the lovely Mercure Chester Abbots Well Hotel for the first time. This 4-star hotel is close to the city's main attractions and cosmopolitan buzz. The Mercure Chester Abbots Well Hotel is nestled amid two acres of landscaped gardens just two miles from central Chester and the Cheshire Oaks outlet village. The 126 guest rooms offer internet access and satellite TV. The Brasserie and The Bar offer gourmet cuisine, light snacks and a cosy spot for a nightcap and there's an indoor pool and fitness centre. Of course, there's the small matter of 3 chess sections too, with the Open and Major FIDE rated. So why not treat yourself to a weekend in wonderful Chester?

Full details available here.

[Steve Lloyd]

Here you have stated that the Major will be FIDE Rated. However according to the website now only the Open is FIDE rated. I could have entered the minor but I upgraded my ECF membership from Silver to Gold specifically so I could play in the FIDE Major with a view to ultimately getting a FIDE rating, rather than the Minor which I also qualify for.

I hope I have not wasted my money upgrading to gold.

[Roger de Coverly]

However according to the website now only the Open is FIDE rated.

This looks like a change after the tournament was first announced. (edit) Sean's original announcement does say that both the top two events would be rated. With only four rated players, getting a part rating would have been problematic. Whilst a decision to remove the Major from FIDE rating can be understood, announcing it would have been a sensible idea. (/edit)


I had noticed that e2e4 had modified the grading restrictions to be "under x FIDE" and "under y ECF" where previously they had been "or". This meant that if repeated for the local e2e4 events in Wycombe that I would potentially have to face Keith or Mark etc. instead of exploiting the anomaly of being able to play in an under 2050 event from a grade in excess of 190. I wasn't even the top seed.

[Steve Lloyd]

It doesn't seem right to change the parameters of a tournament after announcing it.

The West Brom Major (which is still FIDE rated) states " English players in the Open or Major must be ECF Gold members." When the Chester Major was FIDE rated, I upgraded my ECF membership to Gold about 5 minutes before entering the Chester Congress, assuming my entry would be rejected if I wasn't a gold member. I don't know how many others who joined early made this assumption.

Meanwhile I have wasted £9 on ECF gold membership that I will probably never use for the rest of this season. To say I am disappointed is a bit of an understatement.

[Nick Burrows]

I sympathize with your predicament Steve - how would you suggest things could have been done differently?

There simply have not been enough fide rated entrants. I was hoping to get a Fide rating after this tournament also but c'est la vie...

[Steve Lloyd]

It was probably a mistake to have a FIDE rated Major in the first place. For an organisation that claims on it's own website "The Best Tournaments in the UK and Ireland", I don't expect these mistakes.

I don't yet know the precise reason why this change was made. Perhaps the forced upgrade to Gold membership was a turn off for some people. I don't know why the number of FIDE rated players in the section matters, but we don't seem to have that many FIDE rated events in the North West for us to get FIDE ratings.

If possible, perhaps their could be an option to pay for our upgrade to gold membership as part of the entry fee. Then we could have an option to ask for the £9 back if the organisers change their mind about making it FIDE rated.

I know that if this event is on next year, and the Major is announced as a FIDE rated tournament, and I DO decide to enter, then I will most likely enter as a Silver membership and upgrade to gold only a few days before the first round, just in case the organisers change their minds again.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I don't know why the number of FIDE rated players in the section matters

Because to get a part-rating from a tournament, you need to play at least three FIDE-rated players during the course of it. If only five out of a field of 25 are rated, that's a very tall order for anyone.

[Steve Lloyd]

Because to get a part-rating from a tournament, you need to play at least three FIDE-rated players during the course of it. If only five out of a field of 25 are rated, that's a very tall order for anyone.

Fair enough. So a mistake was made in thinking their would be enough FIDE rated players to be able to run the section. An idea may be to put a warning on future entry forms that parameters are subject to change and give players the chance to delay upgrading until they know for sure.

[Sean Hewitt]

I am puzzled that anyone can think that, without the benefit of hindsight, the decision to FIDE rate the Major was wrong. Look at the numbers of FIDE rated players in other e2e4 events, including places like Buxton, and tell me that the absence of such players at Chester was predictable. If anyone does know how to predict these things with certainty then I, and I'm sure other organisers, would pay good money for such information in future.

Of course, I could have done nothing and FIDE rated the event regardless. That would, in my opinion, have been disingenuous as players would have upgraded to Gold to play and then get little or no benefit as very few games would actually have been rated (a max of 5 per round as we stand) though it would certainly have been easier for me.

It was better, in my opinion, to be honest and not rate the Major which then allows people the chance to choose to play in the Major (or Minor) as a silver member, or play in the FIDE Open as a Gold member, or not play at all.

[Roger de Coverly]

It was better, in my opinion, to be honest and not rate the Major which then allows people the chance to choose to play in the Major (or Minor) as a silver member, or play in the FIDE Open as a Gold member, or not play at all.

The original complainant will have his own views, but whatever the merits of downgrading the Major, it's wrong to do so without there being an announcement on the website drawing attention to the change, perhaps offering those already entered in the Major, the option of upgrading to the Open or downgrading to the Minor, or offering those in the Minor the option of upgrading to the Major.

[Ray Sayers]

This all leaves a slightly sour taste in the mouth, especially as Steve apparently on the grounds that he is a whingeing chessplayer has now been removed from the congress.
Those of us who know Steve from the work he does for the local leagues know that the one that he isnt is a whingeing chessplayer.
The complaint that he has made above is perfectly reasonable and it seems to me that the mistake made was by Sean in advertising the Major an an ELO rated tournament in the first place.

I hope he has left it voluntarily and not been removed. If he has been removed then that is just plain wrong.

[Sean Hewitt]

I hope he has left it voluntarily and not been removed. If he has been removed then that is just plain wrong.

If any player is unhappy with what we've done with an event we wouldn't want them to be under any obligation to play. We run events for the benefit of players but also because we enjoy doing it and wouldn't want either of these things compromised. We've cancelled or refused players entries in the past and would be prepared to do so again in the future. It's worth remembering that players do not have a right to enter an event.

[Ray Sayers]

Sean, I have a lot of respect for you and what you organise, but he made a valid, factual complaint. I understand that the Major wasn't viable as a FIDE rated event but he did upgrade his membership on that basis. All these are matters of fact. He doesn't even appear to have been rude about it.

When you remove players from an event because they have had the temerity to complain that it has changed, that is a bad precedent to set. Saying that you don't want him to be under any obligation to play is completely different from removing him from the tournament.

[Mick Norris]

I don't know why the number of FIDE rated players in the section matters, but we don't seem to have that many FIDE rated events in the North West for us to get FIDE ratings

Steve

Fair point, as you are referring to Longplay there is only Leyland Open in late August and Leek Open which is in September and therefore after the period covered by your Gold membership

It is a bit chicken and egg, we are FIDE rating the Manchester Rapidplay, and I get criticised because there aren't yet any other FIDE rated Rapidplays in the NW

I think we should FIDE rate the Manchester weekend congress, but Harry will oppose that idea

If your object is to get a FIDE (part) rating, give Leyland a go as most of those playing have FIDE ratings

The other way to take advantage of your Gold membership (and get a part rating) would be to play 4NCL - the next Northern League weekend is at Crewe next month, and it may be that one of the teams would accommodate you - I assume you know Atticus, Aigburth and Holmes Chapel players, so they would be the first port of call

Even if they couldn't accommodate you at Crewe, they may be able o in one of the 2 following Hinckley Island weekends

[Adam Raoof]

If you rate it, they will come...