(Chess) Life Returning To Normal

[Roger de Coverly]

Also Sweden.

How much chess activity continued in Sweden? As is known, they did not have a formal lockdown, nor continually changing regulations about how and where people could meet. I rather think they banned or at least strongly discouraged large gatherings of people where large meant fifty or more (?)

[Nigel White]

Typical! I have been avoiding Hungarian tournaments because Hungary is on our government's unclean list.
Then today I get this from GOV.UK:
"The FCDO* has removed Hungary from the Global Travel Advisory exemption list, based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks."
Hungary seems ahead of most countries in getting (chess) life back to normal, so should be worth checking out for anyone seeking OTB action.

I think you may have got this the wring way round. Hungary has been added to the UK's quarantine list, not removed. However, planning to visit from the UK is virtually impossible as Hungary has closed its borders to all foreigners (with a limited number of specific exceptions).

[Tim Spanton]

Typical! I have been avoiding Hungarian tournaments because Hungary is on our government's unclean list.
Then today I get this from GOV.UK:
"The FCDO* has removed Hungary from the Global Travel Advisory exemption list, based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks."
Hungary seems ahead of most countries in getting (chess) life back to normal, so should be worth checking out for anyone seeking OTB action.

I think you may have got this the wring way round. Hungary has been added to the UK's quarantine list, not removed. However, planning to visit from the UK is virtually impossible as Hungary has closed its borders to all foreigners (with a limited number of specific exceptions).

Whoops! Thanks for correcting me.
Actually, I remember now that the reason I was ignoring Hungarian tournaments was because Hungary would not allow Brits in ...

[Mick Norris]

How much chess activity continued in Sweden? As is known, they did not have a formal lockdown, nor continually changing regulations about how and where people could meet. I rather think they banned or at least strongly discouraged large gatherings of people where large meant fifty or more (?)

According to New Scientist

While it is sometimes implied that Sweden didn’t have a lockdown, it did. It was just largely voluntary, with only a few legal measures such as a ban on gatherings of more than 50 people.

[Tim Spanton]

How much chess activity continued in Sweden? As is known, they did not have a formal lockdown, nor continually changing regulations about how and where people could meet. I rather think they banned or at least strongly discouraged large gatherings of people where large meant fifty or more (?)

According to New Scientist

While it is sometimes implied that Sweden didn’t have a lockdown, it did. It was just largely voluntary, with only a few legal measures such as a ban on gatherings of more than 50 people.

But a "largely voluntary" set of measures is not a "lockdown," at least if one accepts a lockdown by definition includes compulsion.
Some Tory MPs on BBC News were quoted today as calling for a switch to voluntary measures. Presumably the idea is that everyone takes the precautions they deem necessary in their circumstances - a bit like most people's approach to mountaineering or crossing the road.

[Tim Spanton]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

In the document at ...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... distancing In section 2 the exceptions on the "rule of six" are laid out...
There will be exceptions where groups can be larger than 6 people, including:
organised indoor and outdoor sports, physical activity and exercise classes (see the list of recreational team sports, outdoor sport and exercise allowed under the gyms and leisure centre guidance
So it looks like we can continue with numbers up to 30 people

[Wadih Khoury]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

In the document at ...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... distancing In section 2 the exceptions on the "rule of six" are laid out...
There will be exceptions where groups can be larger than 6 people, including:
organised indoor and outdoor sports, physical activity and exercise classes (see the list of recreational team sports, outdoor sport and exercise allowed under the gyms and leisure centre guidance
So it looks like we can continue with numbers up to 30 people

There are also other technicalities.
Per example, you can have as many tables of 6 from multiple households in a restaurant.

So you could organise a tournament in groups of 6, or even argue that each round is an independent event with groups of two.
Would need to be in a secure location though, like a events or hospitality centre or a restaurant.

[John Reyes]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

In the document at ...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... distancing In section 2 the exceptions on the "rule of six" are laid out...
There will be exceptions where groups can be larger than 6 people, including:
organised indoor and outdoor sports, physical activity and exercise classes (see the list of recreational team sports, outdoor sport and exercise allowed under the gyms and leisure centre guidance
So it looks like we can continue with numbers up to 30 people

There are also other technicalities.
Per example, you can have as many tables of 6 from multiple households in a restaurant.

So you could organise a tournament in groups of 6, or even argue that each round is an independent event with groups of two.
Would need to be in a secure location though, like a events or hospitality centre or a restaurant.

But the R rate is above one and at the end of the day, it the government who are keeping us safe and as sky news mention that the rate is 1.28%

[Tim Spanton]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

In the document at ...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... distancing In section 2 the exceptions on the "rule of six" are laid out...
There will be exceptions where groups can be larger than 6 people, including:
organised indoor and outdoor sports, physical activity and exercise classes (see the list of recreational team sports, outdoor sport and exercise allowed under the gyms and leisure centre guidance
So it looks like we can continue with numbers up to 30 people

There are also other technicalities.
Per example, you can have as many tables of 6 from multiple households in a restaurant.

So you could organise a tournament in groups of 6, or even argue that each round is an independent event with groups of two.
Would need to be in a secure location though, like a events or hospitality centre or a restaurant.

But the R rate is above one and at the end of the day, it the government who are keeping us safe and as sky news mention that the rate is 1.28%

The government is not keeping us safe - we are keeping ourselves safe. The government is keeping us restricted.

[NickFaulks]

The government is not keeping us safe - we are keeping ourselves safe. The government is keeping us restricted.

If the Government were keeping us safe we would be dead.

[Roger de Coverly]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

Rambling is however legally a "sport", whereas chess isn't.

Suppose you had a chess club meeting of more than six and one of Boris's COVID wardens wanted to fine the lot of you. Where's the defence? There's no mention of chess (or Bridge or other card games) in the guidance.

[Tim Spanton]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

Rambling is however legally a "sport", whereas chess isn't.

Suppose you had a chess club meeting of more than six and one of Boris's COVID wardens wanted to fine the lot of you. Where's the defence? There's no mention of chess (or Bridge or other card games) in the guidance.

Oh come on - rambling is not a sport.

[Roger de Coverly]

Oh come on - rambling is not a sport.

Check the Sport England list. It's physical exercise, so it counts and is eligible for sports funding, even though there are no competitive elements.

[John Reyes]

Here is The Ramblers' take on the new rule-of-six, at least as conveyed through the website of North East London Ramblers:

Rambling is however legally a "sport", whereas chess isn't.

Suppose you had a chess club meeting of more than six and one of Boris's COVID wardens wanted to fine the lot of you. Where's the defence? There's no mention of chess (or Bridge or other card games) in the guidance.

Oh come on - rambling is not a sport.

the law is the law and at the end of the day if you wanted to break the law, that your choice but the rate of transmission had risen above a critical level that means the infection is growing exponentially and that what official figures show.

Tim the R rate is between above one and you can't say there is not a risk?

[Wadih Khoury]

Rambling is however legally a "sport", whereas chess isn't.

Suppose you had a chess club meeting of more than six and one of Boris's COVID wardens wanted to fine the lot of you. Where's the defence? There's no mention of chess (or Bridge or other card games) in the guidance.

Oh come on - rambling is not a sport.

the law is the law and at the end of the day if you wanted to break the law, that your choice but the rate of transmission had risen above a critical level that means the infection is growing exponentially and that what official figures show.

Tim the R rate is between above one and you can't say there is not a risk?

I think it's a complicated situation.
We have a dangerous virus, that can spread very quickly. Scientific evidence should drive government imposed guidance. Instead, it's all driven by economic interests, hence diluting the confidence about the risk and measures. A simple example:

Why can you have 20 tables of 6 from different households in restaurant, but not 20 table of 6, or 60 tables of 2 in an event facility that has covid measures?
What is the difference between the two?
My personal argument is that if restaurants are allowed, then the risk is indeed acceptable. My fear is that however the risk is not acceptable, but the government's approach has been to keep as many vague or conflicting advice in order to push the blame on citizens who do not have the time nor the skills to do a constant risk assessment for every aspect of their lives.

So yes, until the government decides to lockdown all public gathering spaces (hairdressers, restaurants, supermarkets, etc..), I would keep encouraging organisers to create events that are compatible with the law and safe within existing guidance.