ECF Council Meeting 12 April 2014

[NickFaulks]

So is there a definitive/agreed FIDE position or not on whether a licenced arbiter does actually need to be present at a FIDE rated event, or whether it's OK for him/her to be at the end of a telephone?

As Nick says, the answer is yes if it is a norm event, but no otherwise. The ECF have an email from the Ratings and Qualifications Commission which says exactly that.

Therefore events in England can, have been and will continue to be rated with no arbiter physically present.

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.

I have requested that this be put on the agenda for Tromso so that there is clarification for all to see

We don't have to wait for Tromso. Is there any reason why the communication which Scotland has received cannot be made public? Surely this could only help to clear away the confusion about which they complain.

[Mike Truran]

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

Particularly as he is Austrian.

[Carl Hibbard]

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 have a busy job so by the evening lots can change!

iPhone in a beer garden post

[Alex McFarlane]

Andy Howie is having computer trouble.

Firstly, apologies from him for giving the wrong title to Takis. He holds his position on the Arbiters' Commission, not the Qualifications.

It was to him that Chess Scotland were directed by the FIDE Office when we first queried the situation (through our IRO).

For this reason he was contacted yesterday. The reply is given below.

From: "Takis Nikolopoulos" <address removed>
Date: 16 Apr 2014 06:21
Subject: Re: FIDE Rated Events
To: "Andy Howie" <Address removed>
Cc:

Dear Andy,

at the moment the event is a FIDE rated event, always a licensed Arbiter must be present during the whole event (interpretation of art. 6.6 and 6.8 of the regulations for the titles of Arbiters ).
I don't understand why there is a confusion on this.
The regulations say that in events that have possibilities for titles norms for the players, in order the norms to be accepted by the FIDE Qualification Commission, the Chief Arbiter must be a International Arbiter or a FIDE Arbiter (i.e. not a National Arbiter). And he must be present. The term "supervising Arbiter" does not exist any more.
Of course in order to help you we can discuss in Tromso this case you mentioned and include the clarification in the Minutes of the Meeting.
Generally speaking I cannot imagine any FIDE rated event without the presence of a licensed Arbiter during every round.
I know the problem some Federations have with Arbiters ( not so many FAs or IAs ) but the FIDE Arbiters' Commission is ready to help any Federation on this, by organizing FIDE Arbiters' Seminars ( on Internet or common Seminars ) with no cost for the federations, so that they can obtain more FAs.

With best regards
Takis

Perhaps the ECF can publish its different answer for comparison.

[Stewart Reuben]

Surely Takis has exceeded his authority. Ask the question of Werner.
He was probably the one who dreamt up the appalling name, FIDE National Arbiter.
Don't get me wrong. I have a high respect for Takis.

FIDE have got themselves confused. They wanted more money from events for FIDE. Nothing necessarily wrong in that. This lead them to introduce and increase fees for arbiters. Instead they should have increased the cost of playing rated chess. Some people in FIDE think that arbiters make good money from chess. If only they were correct in Britain. I suspect they did not want to put up the rating fees because, a long time ago, David Jarrett said they wouldn't. To put them up would thus be losing face.

[Richard Bates]

Surely Takis has exceeded his authority. Ask the question of Werner.

Well quite. Presumably confusing the head of the Qualifications Commission (the body I presume responsible for the rating regulations) with the head of the Arbiters' Commission (which is not) is not a minor detail. If you are going to set great store by written confirmation from FIDE then it would make sense to get it from the most authoritative source. Even despite this i would think alarm bells should be set ringing by the imperfect nature of his written English which seems ripe for allowing misinterpretation.

[LawrenceCooper]

Surely Takis has exceeded his authority. Ask the question of Werner.
He was probably the one who dreamt up the appalling name, FIDE National Arbiter.
Don't get me wrong. I have a high respect for Takis.

FIDE have got themselves confused. They wanted more money from events for FIDE. Nothing necessarily wrong in that. This lead them to introduce and increase fees for arbiters. Instead they should have increased the cost of playing rated chess. Some people in FIDE think that arbiters make good money from chess. If only they were correct in Britain. I suspect they did not want to put up the rating fees because, a long time ago, David Jarrett said they wouldn't. To put them up would thus be losing face.

They've already increased rating fees for round robin events sufficiently to convince me to stop organising them and scrapping the rule allowing you to have 2 GMs instead of 3 IMs or 2 IMs/WGMs instead of 3 WIMs was the final straw

[Alex McFarlane]

For clarification, the email was not sent to the wrong person in error (Andy only used the wrong title accidentally).

An initial question was sent to the FIDE office a reply was given copying in Takis who made an additional comment on it. Under those circumstances it is not surprising that Andy Howie contacted him.

Some people in FIDE think that arbiters make good money from chess.

In Istanbul at the Arbiters Commission it was met with disbelief by many that arbiters in some countries do not get paid. The idea that some arbiters were actually out of pocket at some events was met by disbelief. The idea that arbiters would effectively subsidise an event to ensure its existence was incomprehensible!!

This feeling was held not just by some on the Commission but also by many arbiters who were attending.

[NickFaulks]

Many thanks for making the note public, Alex. It helps a lot.

"(interpretation of art. 6.6 and 6.8 of the regulations for the titles of Arbiters )." So what?? The Rating Regulations are not found in some other commissions' title regulations. In any case, what he says isn't even true. "6.6 all arbiters of FIDE rated tournaments shall be licensed" does NOT imply that an arbiter must be at the site. It doesn't even address the point. This is an 11+ logic question.

"Generally speaking I cannot imagine any FIDE rated event without the presence of a licensed Arbiter during every round." This is the real point, and I'm sure he can't. Again, so what??

I have asked Takis the same question regarding a (genuine) Bermuda tournament. I have not received the same quick response.

[PeterFarr]

France seems to have a lot of FIDE rated team tournaments. Looking at their registered tournaments for March 2014, there are a large number of events called "Team 2014" followed by the name of a region. And they all have the same (and only) arbiter. I presume that these regional championships are not played at a single massive central venue, so it appears the required licensed arbiter is either not physically present, or is a magician. Or am I making some fundamental error?

[NickFaulks]

They've already increased rating fees for round robin events sufficiently to convince me to stop organising them and scrapping the rule allowing you to have 2 GMs instead of 3 IMs or 2 IMs/WGMs instead of 3 WIMs was the final straw

I don't think we've increased rating fees for round robins, but they have been unreasonably high for some time and we have not reduced them as promised. In Istanbul this was derailed by QC chaos, then I really thought it was going to happen in Tallinn, but it turns out that you can't change financial regulations in the year before an election because it looks bad. I can only say sorry.

I take some responsibilty for your second complaint. I have seen an awful lot of title norms featuring only two players with higher titles, and too many of them are seriously sub-par. I realise they made organising norm events a lot easier, but at some point you have to maintain standards.

[NickFaulks]

France seems to have a lot of FIDE rated team tournaments. Looking at their registered tournaments for March 2014, there are a large number of events called "Team 2014" followed by the name of a region. And they all have the same (and only) arbiter. I presume that these regional championships are not played at a single massive central venue, so it appears the required licensed arbiter is either not physically present, or is a magician. Or am I making some fundamental error?

You don't have to mention every arbiter on the registration form, so it's possible that there is an arbiter at every venue. The point is that, for rating purposes, we don't know and we don't care.

[Roger de Coverly]

The idea that arbiters would effectively subsidise an event to ensure its existence was incomprehensible!!

The irony is that developments have made many of the specialist arbiter skills redundant. You no longer need an arbiter to do the pairings as anyone with sufficient computer skills can use a standard program. If you set the move rate to include increments, there is no need for 10.2 judgements.

[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.

After I wrote this post someone subjected me to a very nasty piece of personal abuse. I did not notice it for a while, and then it was gone.

Of course, I knew beyond any doubt that Andy's post was wrong, as is now admitted. If the QC Chairman had sent such an important email, he would certainly have copied his Secretary, so that it was on the record. That is how we do things. The complainant might not have known this, but ignorance is no excuse for gratuitous unpleasantness. I hope he will think twice in future. It would be a nice gesture if he were to identify himself, and apologise.

[Ian Thompson]

France seems to have a lot of FIDE rated team tournaments. Looking at their registered tournaments for March 2014, there are a large number of events called "Team 2014" followed by the name of a region. And they all have the same (and only) arbiter. I presume that these regional championships are not played at a single massive central venue, so it appears the required licensed arbiter is either not physically present, or is a magician. Or am I making some fundamental error?

When I played in the French League, Division 2, for two seasons about 15 years ago matches were played at the home club's venue. There was always an arbiter present, and I believe it was the home club's responsibility to arrange this.

My guess is that the FFE would probably check after the match, from the details on the match card, that the arbiter provided was suitably qualified and there would be penalties for the home team if that wasn't the case.