Post
by Peter Turner » Wed Oct 16, 2013 6:41 pm
From Peter Turner, some time ago Director of Junior Chess.
Earlier on in this thread Richard Bates made the comment below. Since it has been quoted again I thought it may be of interest for me to make some comments.
Is this definitely true? Not saying it isn't, i don't know exactly what my parents used to have to pay for, but whilst it seems pretty obvious that there is no alternative under current Junior selection policy i thought it might of been different in the days of limited selection (and/or external funding - eg. the Norwood money). Certainly there was a point at which the pay for coaches became more attractive and there was actually a significant uptake in coaches wanting to do the job, which logically might have represented a correlation with a point at which a cash strapped BCF no longer picked up the bill. Of course in times past the often sole coach was also the Head of Delegation and would have had much of their expense covered by the organisers.
BTW does everyone pay the same, regardless of who they get, and do the parents have direct influence on coach selection?
Currently the JD seems to practically have a nil budget compared with, during my tenure, around £15,000 support from the BCF/ECF annual budget. The largest I can remember was £17,500!! I also had the benefit of the Norwood money, BCF Youth Chess Trust, several generous bequests, sponsors such as Saitek, Winton Capital Management, Board of Actuaries and Certificate of Excellence. Richard is quite correct in that teams were quite small because Federations were only allowed to send one representative in each age group (open & girls). Also additional players by personal right if they had finished top 3 the previous year. These factors enabled me to fund the cost of coaching for all the groups I organised.