ECF Membership Special Deals

[Roger de Coverly]

I'm pleased to see these are now itemised instead of being almost secret. I wouldn't describe the Corporate Vice President exemption as a concession, rather it was a membership benefit of that class of membership being open to any Club who like Hastings and CCF read the fine print and realised that it resolved the problem of being able to offer unlimited internal graded games at a fixed and cheaper price than demanding Bronze membership for every participant. It was an option not considered by the Farthing paper even to reject it as a future model.
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... -paper.pdf

Doesn't the paper neglect to mention the special deals available to offshore Congresses? Whilst the ECF can deny "Pay to Play" to events rated by itself, it's a concession or a demand to extend this to events FIDE rated by not through the ECF in Ireland or the Channel Isles.

Guernsey, and I'm thinking of the unrated Holiday tournament, had some historic Game Fee exemptions as well. The 2012 tournament entry form suggests that all games would be ECF rated, but with no mention of ECF membership requirements.

The Cheshire and North Wales county are opposing the removal of their concessions. I had supposed this a logical outcome of the membership proposals which had previously been supported by them. They repeat the old assertion that Game Fee was just a grading service rather than a payment for their organisation to be a member of the ECF.

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... -Wales.pdf

[Alex Holowczak]

Doesn't the paper neglect to mention the special deals available to offshore Congresses? Whilst the ECF can deny "Pay to Play" to events rated by itself, it's a concession or a demand to extend this to events FIDE rated by not through the ECF in Ireland or the Channel Isles.

Guernsey, and I'm thinking of the unrated Holiday tournament, had some historic Game Fee exemptions as well. The 2012 tournament entry form suggests that all games would be ECF rated, but with no mention of ECF membership requirements.

Guernsey had this exemption in 2012, but it will not have it in future.

Now, any non-English event (by which I mean, any event outside of ECF territory in its constitution) that wants to be ECF graded can be, so long as it complies with ECF rules regarding membership, and pays any Pay to Play fees that might be owed. So far in 2013, the Jersey International and the e2e4 Dublin Easter International have been fully ECF-graded, because they complied with the above rules. (In future, they'd just need to register, like every other event.)

Guernsey 2013, however, expressed some opposition. I don't know if they're continuing to grade their events.

All of this notwithstanding, ECF members can submit the results of their games played overseas for ECF-grading. Several of the players who travelled to Gambia took advantage of this.

[Roger de Coverly]

All of this notwithstanding, ECF members can submit the results of their games played overseas for ECF-grading. Several of the players who travelled to Gambia took advantage of this.

Can you clarify these means all members as in Bronze and Silver as well?

Is the ECF still removing players from the International list who play in FIDE events without being Gold members, whether in England under a concession or abroad?

You may recall one of the English IMs changing Federations on the grounds that he objected to having to pay the ECF £ 27 a year in perpetuity. Would £12 have been more acceptable and is it on offer?

(edit) Another thought on this. How does the ECF justify offering ECF members one sided grading if they play in the Guernsey Holiday tournament using the Direct members overseas option, but not if they play in Yorkshire or any other tournament not registered with the ECF? (/edit)

[Alex Holowczak]

All of this notwithstanding, ECF members can submit the results of their games played overseas for ECF-grading. Several of the players who travelled to Gambia took advantage of this.

Can you clarify these means all members as in Bronze and Silver as well?

The potential loophole you're referring to has been discussed, but I can't remember (or find) what the conclusion was.

Is the ECF still removing players from the International list who play in FIDE events without being Gold members, whether in England under a concession or abroad?

Yes

[Roger de Coverly]

Is the ECF still removing players from the International list who play in FIDE events without being Gold members, whether in England under a concession or abroad?

Yes

So just to clarify. If a player with an inactive rating takes part in the 4NCL or the Oxford league as a wildcard under the concession and in so doing re-activates their rating, then the ECF will remove it again, not back to inactive status, but will cause it to vanish almost entirely?

That's been the practice in the past, even if denied by those running the leagues in question.

[Alex Holowczak]

Yes

So just to clarify. [...]

[Andrew Zigmond]

(edit) Another thought on this. How does the ECF justify offering ECF members one sided grading if they play in the Guernsey Holiday tournament using the Direct members overseas option, but not if they play in Yorkshire or any other tournament not registered with the ECF? (/edit)

Funnily enough I was just about to post the same question. We've had this discussion a few times and it will boil down to the argument that the Yorkshire Leagues choose not to be part of the ECF game fee system and that Yorkshire (and other non affiliated leagues) should not be treated any differently or allowed to think that they are a special case. However the ECF have never explained why fully paid up members are the ones who end up being penalised as a result. I'm all for denying benefits to people who don't pay their full share but the ECF is quite dismally failing to do that right now.

[Roger de Coverly]

Before posting ill informed comments like this, perhaps you should have read the paper in full.

Which part of my comments do you consider ill-informed? The Cheshire and North Wales association are advocating the continuation of their concessions and as part of the argument, they state that WCU players have no interest in an ECF grade and therefore the CNW association should not need to pay Game Fee on games played by these players, nor insist on Bronze ECF membership.

If an English player or even a Welsh player resident in England said they didn't want an English grade and refused to be an ECF member, that would be tough on the local league as it would have to choose between barring them from playing, having to cough up £ 2 per game for all such players or to withdraw the entire event from ECF grading.

[Roger de Coverly]

I will however repeat that you clearly do not understand the paper presented to the meeting and will leave it there until after the meeting takes place.

You don't want to explain it then for the benefit of those who will be attending and voting at the meeting. On a superficial reading it appeared to be special pleading on behalf of Cheshire and North Wales against the possibility that the meeting might decide to withdraw some or all of the concessions. Why a paper in the first place if this is not the case?

[Andrew Zigmond]

I will however repeat that you clearly do not understand the paper presented to the meeting and will leave it there until after the meeting takes place.

You don't want to explain it then for the benefit of those who will be attending and voting at the meeting. On a superficial reading it appeared to be special pleading on behalf of Cheshire and North Wales against the possibility that the meeting might decide to withdraw some or all of the concessions. Why a paper in the first place if this is not the case?

I very much suspect the author of the paper is willing to do so with ECF Council members but not on an unofficial forum.

On a superficial reading of my own (and it's none of my business anyway) nothing in the paper struck me as unreasonable. England, Wales and Scotland are all landlocked, there are no border controls and it's inevitable players and events will cross over to an extent and therefore allowances and exceptions need to be made. As long as a player is a member of one or the other for grading purposes that must be acceptable - in fact it strikes me as sheer common sense.

[Roger de Coverly]

As long as a player is a member of one or the other for grading purposes that must be acceptable - in fact it strikes me as sheer common sense.

Is it the case than that a member of the WCU should be granted free Bronze membership of the ECF even if resident well within England and only playing for an English club in English leagues? It's always been a useful dodge to become Welsh if possible for 4NCL purposes as WCU membership was cheaper than ECF Gold membership. Does this apply to league players as well?

It's in the nature of compulsory or neo-compulsory schemes that they have to be just that. No exceptions. The President in his manifesto wanted to pursue ideas of a something akin to common UK membership until the voters said no.

(edit) Having just reread the paper, it's quite clear that it's in response to a threat by the DOMM to raise the status of their existing special deal with the ECF Council with a view to it being withdrawn. The paper proposes an alternative of selective grading which the ECF has ruled out for Yorkshire and others, so it's still asking for continued special treatment.

Forcing double membership on Welsh, Scottish and Irish players and potentially other foreigners was always an intrinsic part of the ECF's membership proposals with the only formally documented concessions being in FIDE rated events. Nothing new though, it was always part of Game Fee that the event should have to pay regardless of who took part. Indeed it was the original concession, not mentioned in Shaun's paper, that Congresses were not charged Game Fee on games played by the then handful of BCF members. This was done so that Congresses could be induced to offer discounts to BCF individual members and the BCF had an extra bullet point as a membership benefit. Other concessions in the final years of universal Game Fee were to the Yorkshire local leagues, the Hull congress and one or two other Yorkshire based events. Those concessions were sufficiently well known that they failed to survive into 2012-13 notwithstanding the then CEO seeming to promise their continuation at the Yorks AGM. (/edit)

[David Sedgwick]

All of this notwithstanding, ECF members can submit the results of their games played overseas for ECF-grading. Several of the players who travelled to Gambia took advantage of this.

Can you clarify these means all members as in Bronze and Silver as well?

The potential loophole you're referring to has been discussed, but I can't remember (or find) what the conclusion was.

Is the ECF still removing players from the International list who play in FIDE events without being Gold members, whether in England under a concession or abroad?

Yes

My understanding is that an ECF member, of any Category, who plays in an event abroad, can have his/her results ECF graded by giving prior notice.

Hence an ECF Bronze member who played in an overseas FIDE Rated event could have the results ECF graded but would be removed from the FIDE Rating List if (s)he did not upgrade to Gold.

There are a number of anomalies in the Membership Scheme. This is not the most serious by any means. I think they're an inevitable consequence of having more than one category of membership.

Several of the players who travelled to Gambia took advantage of this.

That's not actually correct. I was the only one who did so.

[Alex Holowczak]

Several of the players who travelled to Gambia took advantage of this.

That's not actually correct. I was the only one who did so.

Oh, fair enough then. I was under the impression there were more...

[Roger de Coverly]

There are a number of anomalies in the Membership Scheme. This is not the most serious by any means.

It may not be the most serious, but it's one of the nastiest. It's no great surprise that the ECF is unable or unwilling to express opposition to FIDE licensing proposals when its own activities are to an extent equivalent to and also the cause of such proposals.

[Andrew Zigmond]

As long as a player is a member of one or the other for grading purposes that must be acceptable - in fact it strikes me as sheer common sense.

Is it the case than that a member of the WCU should be granted free Bronze membership of the ECF even if resident well within England and only playing for an English club in English leagues? It's always been a useful dodge to become Welsh if possible for 4NCL purposes as WCU membership was cheaper than ECF Gold membership. Does this apply to league players as well?

It's in the nature of compulsory or neo-compulsory schemes that they have to be just that. No exceptions. The President in his manifesto wanted to pursue ideas of a something akin to common UK membership until the voters said no.

Surely membership of a national federation should be determined by residence and/ or a certain percentage of their chess activity taking place within their country of membership? Obviously there will be a few players for whom such an exception is reasonable but these should be dealt with on an individual basis.

Another imperfect but logical solution would be an affiliation fee (say £5) for players who do have to straddle two federations. It's still slightly unfair but at least they're not having to pay twice. This could also be applied to Yorkshire players who want their games in non affiliated leagues graded by the ECF no matter what - again it's not entirely fair but it's an olive branch rather than a door simply slammed shut.

Again - it's just common sense to me.