Arbiters (jobs for) proposal.

[John Swain]

The ECF should trust local leagues (and congresses without FIDE rated sections) to run themselves as they see fit, as they have been doing quite successfully for many years.

I couldn't agree more. The idea that, after 2021, a league which doesn't include the services of an ECF Arbiter for resolution of its disputes should lose the opportunity to have its games ECF graded is completely risible.

[Roger de Coverly]

If the ECF and other British federations believe CAA pairings are superior to FIDE pairings, then they should propose such changes to the Swiss Pairing commission at FIDE.

The CAA rule is that you float the median works for awarding the bye, as it's the middle player who might make use of it when it's the first round or lowest score group . You can hack the FIDE methods to get the same result, by including a dummy player ranked in the pairings.

From the point of view of a minority, I hope, of British arbiters, CAA rules have the merit that pairing programs following these rules are a rarity.

[Roger de Coverly]

The idea that, after 2021, a league which doesn't include the services of an ECF Arbiter for resolution of its disputes should lose the opportunity to have its games ECF graded is completely risible.

I don't know that I've seen clarity on this, but depending on how you read them, the ECF is proposing from 2016-17 to not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket.

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/grading/ ... ion-rules/

The FIDE interpretation is quoted
http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... chess.html
but without a direct statement that it's expected that leagues and Congresses will apply them, even where games are not to be FIDE rated.

[Ian Thompson]

Is there really a need for a separate ECF Arbiter exam now that FIDE seminars are becoming more widely available?

I think there is. I doubt very much if a grassroots arbiter would want to learn about norm tournaments for example. I do think (and have commented to Alex) that success in a FIDChess Arbiters' Association E seminar should negate the need to sit the ECF arbiter exam. Similarly, FIDE pairings are different to Chess Arbiters' Association pairings, which are the official pairing rules in England.

I think that a knowledge of pairing rules should be separated from the arbiter exams. There should be two qualifications with two different tests:

1. Arbiter - who knows the rules of the game and has the personal skills to effectively deal with contentious situations that could arise during a game.
2. Pairer - who knows all the rules relating to pairings and can both do them manually and use a computer to do them.

They are different skills, and, while some people may be competent to do both, there will be others who would only be good at one of them, and would only want to do one of them. We should allow for that.

[Michael Flatt]

The idea that, after 2021, a league which doesn't include the services of an ECF Arbiter for resolution of its disputes should lose the opportunity to have its games ECF graded is completely risible.

I don't know that I've seen clarity on this ...

Other Arbiter-Relevant Regulations
The ECF will continue its policy that at least one Level 1 Arbiter must be present at a Congress in order for it to be ECF-graded.

From 1st September, 2021, for an event to be graded, at least one Listed Level 2 Arbiter or higher must be:
(a) Responsible for making decisions at an individual Congress, whether present or otherwise
(b) Responsible for making decisions in an evening league normally conducted in arbiterless conditions; for example, serving on a Committee of any organisation that handles disputes or appeals

This seems to the most significant item in the proposal.

Reference
1. Changes to Arbiter Regulations: Full Proposal: http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... posal.docx

[Mike Truran]

the ECF is proposing from 2016-17 to not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket.

I'm probably being dense, but where does it say that?

[Nick Grey]

Mike it is in the ECF competition rules but looks like a rather nuclear option & surely all leagues/competitions just need to put their wording on this to Alex. Not least many agreed warnings last season & only then if phone went off loss of game in their rules.

Says wif 1st September 2016. I find that alarmist postings like this not helpful. No mention of it in the arbiters proposal.

Though I also do not remember ECF saying let's look again at this particular rule. Too late to actually go to most leagues AGMs for next season rule changes. And I presume that ECF does not want to lose money from leagues. Nor any mention on grading changes top come.

How a game is actually lost is not one of the items collected on grading or on most LMS unless someone makes a note. Nor how many instances of warnings.

[Mick Norris]

Also, it is not sensible nor practical for leagues who do not have local arbiters (we don't all live in London, Birmingham, Manchester etc) to require someone living outside the area to travel some distance on a weekday night to attend a LMC meeting to resolve some petty little dispute.

Drag, I don't live in Manchester either, I live in Bolton (home of the Arbiter we have at least 3), but to answer more seriously, I'm not aware that the Manchester League Disputes Committee ever physically meets (not least because Harry Lamb, its long time Secretary, is often away)

[Mike Truran]

Nick

the ECF is proposing from 2016-17 to not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket

We all know that the Sage of Bourne End was referring to local league chess when he made his comment. No doubt that is your surmise as well, given the content of your post.

In the absence of any comment from the Sage, perhaps you could point me in the direction of the document that backs up his claim and your own concern?

PS As regards "alarmist postings", presumably you mean the Sage of Bourne End's own post. Alex H has already confirmed to me separately that with regard to local league chess there is absolutely no intention to "not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket".

But perhaps we can hear from the Sage himself.

[John Swain]

Nick

the ECF is proposing from 2016-17 to not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket

We all know that the Sage of Bourne End was referring to local league chess when he made his comment. No doubt that is your surmise as well, given the content of your post.

In the absence of any comment from the Sage, perhaps you could point me in the direction of the document that backs up his claim and your own concern?

PS As regards "alarmist postings", presumably you mean the Sage of Bourne End's own post. Alex H has already confirmed to me separately that with regard to local league chess there is absolutely no intention to "not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket".

But perhaps we can hear from the Sage himself.

I think Roger was referring to the following http://www.englishchess.org.uk/grading/ ... ion-rules/


I have omitted quite a lot in the interests of brevity.



"ECF Competition Rules

This document will come into force from 1st September, 2016.

These Competition Rules will be used in conjunction with the FIDE Laws of Chess.
.......

Section A: Regulations applying to all events
......

Article 11 of the Laws of Chess governs the conduct of the players. Law 11.3b requires the complete exclusion of electronic devices such as mobile phones, which is rarely possible, so a less onerous version was considered by FIDE, but never passed in to the Laws — see http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... chess.html

This explains the proposed new wording for the Law:

“During a game, a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone, electronic means of communication or any device capable of suggesting chess moves on their person in the playing venue. However, the rules of the competition may allow such devices to be stored in a player’s bag, as long as the device is completely switched off. A player is forbidden to carry a bag holding such a device, without permission of the arbiter. If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty. The arbiter may require the player to allow his/her clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorized by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9. The final decision to make this change to the Laws of Chess shall be made by the 2014 FIDE General Assembly.”

7) Organisers have the freedom to choose any tournament-specific rules they want within the tolerances set out by the FIDE Laws of Chess. Such rules must be published in advance on the tournament entry form and/or website.
......

Section C: ECF Grading

Games submitted for grading to the ECF will be graded in the category defined by the time limits of that game, subject to conforming to these rules and game fee requirements.
......
Section D: All other events

This section gives tournament organisers the option of writing additional rules that they perceive will benefit their tournaments that vary from the Laws of Chess. These must not be used for FIDE rated events.
......

Miscellaneous

Request to use alternative rules not covered above

If a tournament organiser wants to use rule variations not covered above, then the tournament may apply to the Director of Home Chess for a dispensation to use those rules. Reasonable requests will not be rejected, and may find their way into future revisions of this document.

Penalties

Unless the Director of Home Chess decides otherwise, tournaments in breach of the regulations will not be graded........."



This seems to be saying that local leagues need to apply to the Director of Home Chess for a dispensation to use their own rules (e.g you can have your switched-off mobile phone in your pocket). It also says that "reasonable requests will not be rejected".

I do not think the ECF has any business interfering in the often long-established and well-considered rules of local leagues. No league should have to go cap-in-hand to seek permission for its rules. The ECF and its officials would do well to remember that they should aspire to be the servant and not the master of chess-players.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I do not think the ECF has any business interfering in the often long-established and well-considered rules of local leagues. No league should have to go cap-in-hand to seek permission for its rules.

No, but the ECF does have business in deciding what is or isn't eligible for its own grading system.

[LawrenceCooper]

This seems to be saying that local leagues need to apply to the Director of Home Chess for a dispensation to use their own rules (e.g you can have your switched-off mobile phone in your pocket). It also says that "reasonable requests will not be rejected".

I do not think the ECF has any business interfering in the often long-established and well-considered rules of local leagues. No league should have to go cap-in-hand to seek permission for its rules. The ECF and its officials would do well to remember that they should aspire to be the servant and not the master of chess-players.

"7) Organisers have the freedom to choose any tournament-specific rules they want within the tolerances set out by the FIDE Laws of Chess. Such rules must be published in advance on the tournament entry form and/or website." seems clear enough to me or am I missing something?

[John Swain]

This seems to be saying that local leagues need to apply to the Director of Home Chess for a dispensation to use their own rules (e.g you can have your switched-off mobile phone in your pocket). It also says that "reasonable requests will not be rejected".

I do not think the ECF has any business interfering in the often long-established and well-considered rules of local leagues. No league should have to go cap-in-hand to seek permission for its rules. The ECF and its officials would do well to remember that they should aspire to be the servant and not the master of chess-players.

"7) Organisers have the freedom to choose any tournament-specific rules they want within the tolerances set out by the FIDE Laws of Chess. Such rules must be published in advance on the tournament entry form and/or website." seems clear enough to me or am I missing something?

A fair point, but how can a mobile phone, switched-off but in a player's pocket, be "within the tolerances set out by the FIDE Laws of Chess"?

Secondly, if local organisers can determine rules for themselves, why mention the possibility of applying to the ECF for dispensation to deviate from the rules?

[Mike Truran]

I repeat:

the ECF is proposing from 2016-17 to not grade games if phones are allowed switched off in a jacket or pocket.

Where was any of this said?

[LawrenceCooper]

This seems to be saying that local leagues need to apply to the Director of Home Chess for a dispensation to use their own rules (e.g you can have your switched-off mobile phone in your pocket). It also says that "reasonable requests will not be rejected".

I do not think the ECF has any business interfering in the often long-established and well-considered rules of local leagues. No league should have to go cap-in-hand to seek permission for its rules. The ECF and its officials would do well to remember that they should aspire to be the servant and not the master of chess-players.

"7) Organisers have the freedom to choose any tournament-specific rules they want within the tolerances set out by the FIDE Laws of Chess. Such rules must be published in advance on the tournament entry form and/or website." seems clear enough to me or am I missing something?

A fair point, but how can a mobile phone, switched-off but in a player's pocket, be "within the tolerances set out by the FIDE Laws of Chess"?

"The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty."