ECF Council Meeting 12 April 2014

[Roger de Coverly]

people are moaning that things aren't being done

People are moaning that things are being done, unwelcome things.

It was FIDE, or those within FIDE, who decreed that every event had to only have "licensed persons" in charge as a condition of being rated. This "license" only being available from FIDE at a cost. So the question came as to whether it's part of the job description of the ECF's Delegate to FIDE to protest about such impositions.

Players can be lukewarm about extending rating to evening league games, county matches and more Congresses. Additional FIDE and ECF requirements just make it easier for organisers to side with the sceptics and keep events outside of International rating.

[David Sedgwick]

You seem to be saying that when a point arises, an arbiter/organiser can say at any Norm event that a particular rule does not apply. I have yet to see any event where a modified FIDE Tournament Ruleset is prepared in advance to show which of those rules apply and which don't.

Please see Stewart Reuben's useful post above.

On previous occasions you have said these rules don't apply in ENG

I don't think I've ever claimed an exemption for England which wouldn't apply equally to any other Federation. If I have, I'm happy to stand corrected on that particular point.

[Alistair Campbell]

I believe this related to their national league or cup competitions which I suppose are played under traditional British club conditions, rather than at central venues like the 4NCL.

This relates to the Richardson Cup, which, since 1899, has been the premier club event in Scotland. It has traditionally (although not always) been played as a 16 team, 8 board, knock-out event.

Matches up to and including the semi-finals are played at a venue of the home club's choosing, typically their own premises. Time controls are 40/120 + 30.

The final, together with the finals of the Spens Cup (the cup for teams that didn't qualify for the Richardson), and the Jack Campbell Rosebowl (the consolation "plate" for the latter event) are normally held simultaneously at a central venue, usually the Stadio Comunale in Grangemouth, with at least one suitably qualified arbiter present.

The SNCL corresponds to the 4NCL - played at a central venue over 4 Sundays (usually October, November, February and March). I think the top division of this is FIDE rated. Every year there is an argument over whether this shall be continued. I forget what happened this year. I was confused at us having a vote on who was allowed to vote, but not a vote on who was to vote in the vote on voting. Possibly the final vote is yet to be conducted...

[Andrew Zigmond]

people are moaning that things aren't being done

People are moaning that things are being done, unwelcome things.

It was FIDE, or those within FIDE, who decreed that every event had to only have "licensed persons" in charge as a condition of being rated. This "license" only being available from FIDE at a cost. So the question came as to whether it's part of the job description of the ECF's Delegate to FIDE to protest about such impositions.

I meant moaning specifically that things aren't being done by the ECF.

I asked above whether those people who feel the impositions should be protested against have contacted the FIDE delegate directly about this. Have they spoken to their contacts within Council (I'm sorry but we all have a few) about escalating it within the internal agenda? ECF directors (I include the FIDE delegate here) have to do what amounts to a full time job in their spare time - are they offering to help? It's a straightforward enough question.

[NickFaulks]

I contacted the Chair of the QC last night on this. His reply (and I have it in writing) is that in order for an event to be FIDE rated then a licensed arbiter must be present, not on the phone or just a name.

Werner Stubenvoll said that? I am astonished, to the point of not believing it.

[NickFaulks]

It was FIDE, or those within FIDE, who decreed that every event had to only have "licensed persons" in charge as a condition of being rated. This "license" only being available from FIDE at a cost. So the question came as to whether it's part of the job description of the ECF's Delegate to FIDE to protest about such impositions.

If it comes to asking a question at the GA in Tromso, which would be a good thing, then yes, it is his job. However, it would be a pointless gesture without preliminary work. When a few federations made disorganised complaints in Tallinn ( the ECF wasn't there, of course ) they didn't get far. The arbiters' lobby is very powerful.

[NickFaulks]

I just saw an offensive post mentioning my name, and now it's gone. What happened?

[David Sedgwick]

I just saw an offensive post mentioning my name, and now it's gone. What happened?

The most likely explanation is that the author thought better of it and deleted it.

[David Sedgwick]

It was FIDE, or those within FIDE, who decreed that every event had to only have "licensed persons" in charge as a condition of being rated. This "license" only being available from FIDE at a cost. So the question came as to whether it's part of the job description of the ECF's Delegate to FIDE to protest about such impositions.

If it comes to asking a question at the GA in Tromso, which would be a good thing, then yes, it is his job. However, it would be a pointless gesture without preliminary work. When a few federations made disorganised complaints in Tallinn ( the ECF wasn't there, of course ) they didn't get far. The arbiters' lobby is very powerful.

The ECF, through Nigel Short and others, did seek to object to the scheme at Istanbul Congress 2012.

The points raised at Tallinn Congress 2013 were more in the nature of seeking amendments to the scheme. The ECF submitted a letter in support of the Austrian proposal and I discussed it with you beforehand. If you weren't able to get anywhere, it's unlikely that any ECF representative would have done.

I don't know about Bermuda, but in England money doesn't grow on trees. The ECF doesn't have the funds to send people to FIDE Congresses, a point which I've reiterated up thread. Nor are we likely to have, unless and until there is a change in the FIDE leadership.

[NickFaulks]

I just saw an offensive post mentioning my name, and now it's gone. What happened?

The most likely explanation is that the author thought better of it and deleted it.

Is that hit-and-run tactic acceptable on this forum? I assume I wasn't the only person to see it.

[Adam Raoof]

I just saw an offensive post mentioning my name, and now it's gone. What happened?

The most likely explanation is that the author thought better of it and deleted it.

Is that hit-and-run tactic acceptable on this forum? I assume I wasn't the only person to see it.

I also saw it, but to be fair I often see hasty posts from well known forum personalities appear and then disappear, or reappear in edited form. I can forgive them, at least they saw the error of their ways. I'm more worried by some of the posts that remain!

[Paolo Casaschi]

I don't know about Bermuda, but in England money doesn't grow on trees. The ECF doesn't have the funds to send people to FIDE Congresses, a point which I've reiterated up thread. Nor are we likely to have, unless and until there is a change in the FIDE leadership.

Do you mean that in case of a win for Kasparov then money would actually start growing on trees in England? Not even Berlusconi ever promised that before an election!

[NickFaulks]

The points raised at Tallinn Congress 2013 were more in the nature of seeking amendments to the scheme. The ECF submitted a letter in support of the Austrian proposal and I discussed it with you beforehand. If you weren't able to get anywhere, it's unlikely that any ECF representative would have done.

I don't know about Bermuda, but in England money doesn't grow on trees. The ECF doesn't have the funds to send people to FIDE Congresses, a point which I've reiterated up thread. Nor are we likely to have, unless and until there is a change in the FIDE leadership.

The reason why Leong was able to throw your proposal out without discussion was that there was nobody from either federation there to speak for it. Werner Stubenvoll was present, but strangely had not been briefed. I'm not saying it would have passed, but it deserved a hearing.

I don't think it is too much to expect a big federation with major international ambitions to send one person to the annual get-together. It was even in your own continent.

[NickFaulks]

I have asked several times why so many of the top players in the Euro >65 individual in Portugal defaulted in round 2. Any idea?

The clocks going forward would seem to be a good bet.

It's worse that that. I have been told that the players had been given a piece of paper stating that the round started at 3pm. The correct version was online. I suggest that people over 65 are likely to trust pieces of paper.

[David Sedgwick]

The reason why Leong was able to throw your proposal out without discussion was that there was nobody from either federation there to speak for it. Werner Stubenvoll was present, but strangely had not been briefed. I'm not saying it would have passed, but it deserved a hearing.

I don't think it is too much to expect a big federation with major international ambitions to send one person to the annual get-together. It was even in your own continent.

It wasn't an ECF proposal. It was a proposal by the Austrian Chess Federation which we supported.

I too find it strange that the ACF did not brief Werner Stubenvoll.