Membership Renewal

[Mick Norris]

The Manchester League and our Congresses need (reliable) gradings, so if the ECF disappears, that's a problem; we play in ECF competitions too

Maybe stop being relentlessly negative and short-term, and have a long-term view, and pay ECF membership if you can afford it

[JustinHorton]

Yes, this. Some people ae going to be finding things tight, and I appreciate that because I'm one of them: but if you can pay, please pay.

[Chris Goodall]

The Manchester League and our Congresses need (reliable) gradings, so if the ECF disappears, that's a problem; we play in ECF competitions too

Maybe stop being relentlessly negative and short-term, and have a long-term view, and pay ECF membership if you can afford it

Why?

It's not unreasonable to ask people to renew as a member today to ensure that there is an organisation to come back to...

Why?

That chess24 article is a masterpiece of circular logic. We need to give the ECF money otherwise the ECF will have less money, and that will be a problem for the ECF's operation because it will cause operational problems.

No. Let us be under no illusions. "Operational problems" is code for the International gravy train coming off the rails. Good! England is the 26th most populous federation; those vain enough to expect perennial top 10 finishes at the Olympiad can set up a public subscription fund for the purpose. Here is my long-term view: that there is a net flow of money in English chess from the grassroots to the elite, is rock stupid. No-one ever decided that or voted on it. That the grading tax happens to be collected and spent by the body that runs the national teams, rather than the bodies that run the 4NCL or the UK Chess Challenge, is nothing but historical accident.

("Professional" chess is a Malthusian Trap anyway: support five grandmasters comfortably, and you will get ten grandmasters chasing a piece of the pie. Expand your operation to support ten, and you will get twenty. If your performance isn't good enough to attract a paying audience, you are an amateur. Not having a job doesn't make you a professional.)

The biggest expense aside from International is the expense of getting money out of people. The complete disappearance of that expense, would not be an operational problem.

Reliable grading is not going to stop happening if the ECF disappears. The formulas are in the public domain and so are the results. 150,000 rows of data is peanuts to modern computers. You could run the whole back end from an Excel spreadsheet with plain text input and plain text output (and I plan to do exactly that at chessgra.de).

Local leagues and clubs can continue to exist and be revived, or not, regardless of the existence of a national body.

What Roger said.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Here is my long-term view: that there is a net flow of money in English chess from the grassroots to the elite, is rock stupid. No-one ever decided that or voted on it.

What exactly do you think an ECF Council Meeting is?

[Angus French]

Here is my long-term view: that there is a net flow of money in English chess from the grassroots to the elite, is rock stupid. No-one ever decided that or voted on it.

What exactly do you think an ECF Council Meeting is?

I don't believe ECF Council represents ordinary players of graded (rated) chess.

[Chris Goodall]

Here is my long-term view: that there is a net flow of money in English chess from the grassroots to the elite, is rock stupid. No-one ever decided that or voted on it.

What exactly do you think an ECF Council Meeting is?

A forum for deciding whether, given that the elite being funded by the grassroots is inevitable, they should be given all the money they've asked for or just most of it.

(I was actually going to mention Malcolm Pein's infamous "who wants to know?" exchange with Angus French, but I see Angus French is here )

[Andrew Zigmond]

It's not unreasonable to ask people to renew as a member today to ensure that there is an organisation to come back to when OTB chess does resume, whether or not that resumption occurs before the end of the current season.

Local leagues and clubs can continue to exist and be revived, or not, regardless of the existence of a national body.

And yet a week or so ago you were complaining that the ECF was not doing enough to encourage clubs and leagues to work around the rule of six legislation.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Here is my long-term view: that there is a net flow of money in English chess from the grassroots to the elite, is rock stupid. No-one ever decided that or voted on it.

What exactly do you think an ECF Council Meeting is?

I don't believe ECF Council represents ordinary players of graded (rated) chess.

Surely the bulk of council votes come from leagues and congresses. If these don't represent `ordinary players of graded chess` I don't know what would.

[Chris Goodall]

What exactly do you think an ECF Council Meeting is?

I don't believe ECF Council represents ordinary players of graded (rated) chess.

Surely the bulk of council votes come from leagues and congresses. If these don't represent `ordinary players of graded chess` I don't know what would.

OMOV *ducks*

[Paul Cooksey]

No. Let us be under no illusions. "Operational problems" is code for the International gravy train coming off the rails.

Either Chris hasn't looked at the ECF finances or he hasn't understood them. I don't know which is worse.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Surely the bulk of council votes come from leagues and congresses. If these don't represent `ordinary players of graded chess` I don't know what would."

I suspect mainly those votes represent one or two individuals running the leagues and congresses. (Given they do all the work, that could seem fair enough.) I know Surrey CCA invites clubs to invite members to comment on ECF agendas. I don't know how many clubs ask their members, I don't know how many respond, and then how many clubs talk to SCCA, and then what happens. For the most part, even the Club officials don't know anything about people standing for election to ECF posts. If you read this forum, you might well feel able to decide who not to vote for.

If we ever have congress or league chess again, try asking a random sample of players to name ECF post holders. Most ordinary players are aware they have to pay subscriptions, and most of those are aware they get a grading out of it and I suspect that's where the interest ends.

If you really want a shock, ask a normal club player who played in the last world champion match...

[Tim Spanton]

"Surely the bulk of council votes come from leagues and congresses. If these don't represent `ordinary players of graded chess` I don't know what would."

I suspect mainly those votes represent one or two individuals running the leagues and congresses. (Given they do all the work, that could seem fair enough.) I know Surrey CCA invites clubs to invite members to comment on ECF agendas. I don't know how many clubs ask their members, I don't know how many respond, and then how many clubs talk to SCCA, and then what happens. For the most part, even the Club officials don't know anything about people standing for election to ECF posts. If you read this forum, you might well feel able to decide who not to vote for.

If we ever have congress or league chess again, try asking a random sample of players to name ECF post holders. Most ordinary players are aware they have to pay subscriptions, and most of those are aware they get a grading out of it and I suspect that's where the interest ends.

If you really want a shock, ask a normal club player who played in the last world champion match...

Clue: check the pic at the top of my blog to ID one of the participants

[JustinHorton]

Most ordinary players are aware they have to pay subscriptions, and most of those are aware they get a grading out of it and I suspect that's where the interest ends.

I also suspect there's some interest in how representative national teams perform, and there would be some surprise and consternation if, say, Olympiads were held and there was no England team taking part.

[Roger de Coverly]

I suspect mainly those votes represent one or two individuals running the leagues and congresses.

Not even necessarily the people who run events, but those who attend meetings on their behalf. Hence the pile of proxies at ECF meetings.

If an individual club member or Congress player thought a particular ECF Director or ECF policy was unsuitable for the task, it's a long chain to get that voice heard.

[JustinHorton]

Although it's a short task to, say, log on to this forum and say so.