Local Rules for Local People

[Neil Graham]

To misquote the match secretary from the Royston Vasey & District Chess League.

Or actually quote R d C..... It's not really something the ECF or the BCF has ever really had to courage to try and write. Namely a standard set of rules for the conduct of evening league chess matches.

Off hand I can't think of anything worse in English chess than the ECF trying to legislate over evening leagues.

Perhaps board members can add examples of some of their more peculiar local rules to this thread without us getting into too much serious discussion on specifics?

[Roger de Coverly]

Off hand I can't think of anything worse in English chess than the ECF trying to legislate over evening leagues.

What exactly is the problem with having the same standards and rules for a match in Nottinghamshire as for one in Bucks? What I had in mind was that the ECF would draft a set of model rules, which local leagues were free to adopt unchanged or with specific modifications. But I'd agree that it could take several Council meetings to come to any agreement.

[Mike Truran]

I think a framework set of standards and guidelines for local leagues to adopt or not as they see fit sounds like an excellent idea. I wouldn't bother with Council's agreement on the basis that:

1. They wouldn't be mandatory, so why bother with getting agreement?
2. As Roger implies, we could all be in our graves before Council agreed such a framework.

[David Sedgwick]

What I had in mind was that the ECF would draft a set of model rules, which local leagues were free to adopt unchanged or with specific modifications.

The English Bridge Union have a model constitution for bridge clubs. Individual clubs can and do make modifications to suit their own particular needs. But newly established clubs, or those seeking to put their activities on a formal basis, find the model constitution a useful starting point.

[Andrew Zigmond]

To an extent there is already a standardised set of rules in that most clubs and leagues will take the FIDE laws of chess as their starting point and, in larger leagues, disputes would normally be handled by a properly qualified arbiter. It is true that up to date knowledge of the laws might be a bit lacking in the lower echelons but when leagues attract players who play widely across the country and to a high standard, those players will expect a certain professionalism.

In terms of examples, going back to the late nineties in the Harrogate League there was some disagreement over a draw claim when short of time. The controller responded by writing his own rule for future instances. When I pointed out at a later AGM that this was already covered by the laws of chess his response was to add the words `this overrides rule x concerning the FIDE laws of chess`.

When I ran the internal club competition I clashed a few times with my eventual successor over the swiss pairings; I used to pair from the top and work down rather than levelling at both ends of the draw - my response was basically `my competition, my rules`.