Unanswered letter

[Sean Hewitt]

Just stating the man in charge is beyond this is in my opinion not good enough.

I think that's unreasonable.

He is not beyond this as you put it, he simply does not agree with your point of view. To put that in perspective did you know that

If you've reached a FIDE grade of nearly 2200 when you are 15 then any objective person or selection process would clearly decide that you'd done enough to represent your country.

this actually would put you 92nd in Europe for your age, and 133rd in the world. You would be unlikely to win a World or European Championships so I'm not sure that such a rating does mean that "you'd done enough to represent your country."

For what it's worth I don't agree with the Junior Director's policy either but I can understand his logic and it is at least a clear and coherent policy. Everyone knows where they stand.

I also don't agree with the ECF's policy on this. They believe that the director should set the policy. That means that if you change the director you change the policy. I think that's wrong. The ECF should set the key policies such as this collectively and the respective directors should work to deliver their objectives as set. If a director wishes to see a change in policy he or she should lobby to achieve it. But it should not change with every change of director.

Companies would go bust if they acted like this.

[John Upham]

The ECF should set the key policies such as this collectively and the respective directors should work to deliver their objectives as set. If a director wishes to see a change in policy he or she should lobby to achieve it. But it should not change with every change of director.

I assumed that the above would be the default position and it must be the correct one. I was surprised to learn that Directors are enable to make-up their own policy as they see fit : does this apply to all posts?

[Roger de Coverly]

I was surprised to learn that Directors are enable to make-up their own policy as they see fit : does this apply to all posts?

The relevant document would seem to be this one

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... lities.txt

from which

Director of Junior Chess & Education:
Offers advice and promotes all kinds of suitable activity, particularly education, training and practice, for all players under the age of 21, liaising with the Manager of Women’s Chess. Co-operates with other ECF Directors, ECF organisation members, and other organisations, whether or not specifically identified with junior chess. Co-operates with other bodies, as appropriate, to organise the participation by the Federation or its nominees in international events for players under 21.
Is responsible for the National Counties Under-18 Championships and the ECF Schools Teams Championship. Promotes links between junior players and organised adult chess and is responsible for liaison with the British Universities Chess Association.
Is responsible for the work of the Manager of Coaching, the Manager of Chess For Schools and any other junior managers which may be appointed.

As worded, it does give a lot a scope for the means of selection for international junior events to vary with the incumbent.

I agree with others that the ECF directors as a whole should endeavour to hammer out a consistent and generally accepted policy.

I would have thought the BUCA responsibility was better handled under Home Chess.

The International Director's role is

Director of International Chess:
Organises the participation by the Federation or its nominees in international events (other than events open only to players under the age of 21 (the responsibility of the Director of Junior Chess & Education). Makes grants to events, teams, players and coaches in accordance with the Annual Business Plan and Budget.
Arranges such other international events as the Federation may authorise from time to time. Ensures, in co-operation with the Director of Junior Chess & Education and the Manager of Women’s Chess, that the continuing development of our leading juniors is fostered as they emerge into adulthood.

Although the same wording as the Junior role, International Directors have consistently worked on the basis that their role was to help select the best teams available and that selection tournaments or automatic qualification processes had no part in this. Obviously ratings, activity and recent results play a part in the selection process, but the end result is subjective, as is the case for many British national sporting teams.

[Angus McDonald]

Just a couple of points as by now surely the logic of the issue at hand has stacked up in favour of sending your best players to at least one of the Euroyouth or World's.

1. It's not unreasonable to say that the JID shouldn't be beyond explaining inconsitencies in selection. Why can't 3 or 4 England players represent their country at the Euroyouth or World Youth if it's a good idea to take 6 or more to Latvia or wherever for a tournament?

2. Stating that being 2200 fide grade isn't a significant enough achievement to represent your country at under 16 level is easily said and it's not a good sign it's only about 100th ranked in Europe but still the honour of presenting your country should be an honour not easily brushed aside. Is it really better that a qualifier from 1 weekend tournament represent England. What if a player has the flu? Should Andy Murray play a qualifier to play at Wimbledon? Anybody can mess up 1 weekend qualifier but again it's the consistency of performance over a year that should be rewarded. I truly can't understand the current policy other than explaining it by other remarks which might be deemed unreasonable. I'll just state the current policy is unreasonable.

That's all for now.

regards,
Angus

[Alex Holowczak]

Should Andy Murray play a qualifier to play at Wimbledon? Anybody can mess up 1 weekend qualifier but again it's the consistency of performance over a year that should be rewarded.

That's a very poor example. Andy Murray doesn't have to qualify to play at Wimbledon because he's ranked in the top 10 in the world. We don't have any junior chess players with such a lofty ranking. Indeed, I think the top 96 qualify by ranking at Wimbledon, with the rest as qualifiers. Of course, because he's British he would get a wildcard to play at Wimbledon if he suddenly didn't qualify by ranking. Goran Ivanisevic won in 2001 as a wildcard, even though he wasn't British.

[Alan Burke]

Angus ... My point was not about the actual selection process, it was concerning your comment about a certain parent supporting the status quo when you say their child is not good enough to make the team. I am not particularly bothered which process is used, just that I feel it should be made by an unbiased independent body and NOT the parents of those children involved.

By the way, Andy Murray could equally have a bad day in Round 1 at Wimbledon and be beaten by a qualifier - or do you advocate he should just be allowed to be given an automatic place in the final because of his ranking ?

[Andrew Farthing]

I agree with others that the ECF directors as a whole should endeavour to hammer out a consistent and generally accepted policy.

At the risk of provoking a repetition of the arguments already made on this forum, I feel that I should point out (again) that the ECF Board as a whole did debate the junior selection policy and voted to support the Junior Director's preferred solution.

I can see both sides of the argument over whether the individual director should set policies in his/her area of responsibility. There is a value in longer-term consistency (although in practice most ECF directors seem to serve for several years). On the other hand, not least in the area of Junior Chess, the forum has previously stressed the value and importance of candidates' issuing a manifesto (in effect) stating their intended policies when standing for election to a directorship. If someone were to be elected on this basis only to find that the rest of the Board - who may well have not mentioned anything about the specific issues in their own election statements, because they were outside their remit - voted to overturn the policies on which the individual was elected, there might be a feeling that the democratic process was being ignored.

[Sean Hewitt]

What if a player has the flu? Should Andy Murray play a qualifier to play at Wimbledon? Anybody can mess up 1 weekend qualifier but again it's the consistency of performance over a year that should be rewarded. I truly can't understand the current policy.

Not a good example as Mr Murray is pre-qualified for Wimbledon.

Perhaps a better example might be the Olympics where no one is pre-qualified. And guess what, they have trials for those seeking selection. In fact the only differences I can see between that policy and the ECF's are

i) To compete in the trial you must have performed to a certain qualifying standard in a prior periods and ;
ii) For some (not all) events, more than one qualifier is selected

In your example - if you have flu and perform badly at the trial you miss out.

As I said, I don't agree with this policy personally. But to suggest that it is anything other than a fair, open and easy to understand policy is wrong. Which doesn't make it right of course!!

[David Shepherd]

No I don't think that is the policy for athletics at least, there is one place through selection subject to minimum standard http://www.uka.org.uk/media/news/april- ... 12-policy/, I have a feeling the US just have trials.

[LozCooper]

Under the current policy, in order to be able to play in the trials you have to be a member of the National Junior Squad and in order to be part of that you have to qualify through results in junior tournaments so I have heard it said that it is not open to everyone. With this year's World Youth being in Brazil players were also asked to only play if they were available and could afford to go to Brazil which did mean that not all the possible candidates attended the trial.

It has also been mentioned that at present it is possible to qualify for the European or World Youth without ever playing rated chess or using increment or in fact playing any other chess throughout the year so there are grounds for looking at other results including internationally rated events such as e2e4, British, Hastings, 4NCL while having the current qualifying events as an alternative means of qualifying or as a last chance tournament.

[Peter Turner]

Hi Laurence

Is it really true that a youngster has to be a member of the National Junior Squad (NJS) in order to be invited to the Trials. The NJS is a separate entity to the ECF an an independant body. Entry to the NJS is limited and not open, are you meaning to say that a youngster has to be a member of the ECF as used to be the policy.

Peter T

[Angus McDonald]

OK I'm pursuaded!!


The Andy Murray example wasn't a good one.

See! admitting you were wrong isn't that difficult

[Adam Raoof]

Hi Laurence

Is it really true that a youngster has to be a member of the National Junior Squad (NJS) in order to be invited to the Trials. The NJS is a separate entity to the ECF an an independant body. Entry to the NJS is limited and not open, are meaning to say that a youngster has to be a member of the ECF as used to be the policy.

Peter T

The problem is that the expression 'junior squad' and 'Junior Squad' are often used interchangeably. I know parents who have joined the JS (the charity) under the impression that it has an official standing with the ECF.

http://www.junior.staffordshirechess.or ... rials.html

[Roger de Coverly]

Is it really true that a youngster has to be a member of the National Junior Squad (NJS) in order to be invited to the Trials. The NJS is a separate entity to the ECF an an independant body. Entry to the NJS is limited and not open, are meaning to say that a youngster has to be a member of the ECF as used to be the policy.

This is from http://www.junior.staffordshirechess.org.uk/ncjs.html

Players in the national team are selected from the National Chess Junior Squad

.

How do I show the selectors that I'm good enough?
To show that you are good enough to join the squad, you have to achieve what is called a full norm. This will usually mean competing in at least two qualifying tournaments.

Which tournaments count towards selection?
The tournaments that include qualification for the National Chess Junior Squad are:

Millfield Young Masters (Somerset)
British Championships (The location changes each year)
British Rapidplay (Halifax, West Yorkshire)
London Junior Championships (London)
South of England (Camberley, Surrey)
West of England (Swindon, Wiltshire)
Junior Squad (The location changes each year)

So a player could put in FM standard performances in the London Classic, Hastings, 4NCL, e2e4 etc. without being invited to join the squad. If you don't join the squad, you don't get selected to represent the ECF.

I think the reference to the British is probably only the junior events.

So why has the ECF sub-contracted its selection rights for World and Euro events to the National Chess Junior Squad, which is an independent body?

[LozCooper]

I also looked here: http://ncjs.web.officelive.com/Qualification.aspx and this is consistent with what I've been told. I have to confess until around a year ago I barely knew what the NCJS and EPSCA did so I've had to do a lot of catching up since I started to have a lot of contact with juniors and parents.