SO WHO'S GOING TO SHEFFIELD? I AM!

[Mark Howitt]

You can remove 'logically' from my post if you like- use your moderating powers!!!

[Alex Holowczak]

It's interesting that plenty of people are happy to slag me off, but few are actually engaging in the argument of whether it's positive for non British players to play in the British Championship.

OK then; here goes - I don't think it makes any difference whatsoever whether they're allowed to compete or not.

Advantages of having them in: More appealing to sponsors (in theory), (more) stronger opposition for players to test themselves against, norm requirements easier to make (via having potentially more titled players available; countries not important)
Advantages of having them out: British-born junior players get to win, players registered to BICC nations get to win a Championship that it's their responsibility to organise, modernises the definition of "British", there's already a Commonwealth Championship they can play in if they want

I can see both sides of the argument from a chess point of view.

I guess the problem only really arose because they had the cheek to start winning things all the time.

[Mark Howitt]

I think that 'cheek' was helped by the fact that they got a big subsidy from their federation to play, whereas it wasn't worth the top British players time in terms of money or elo to play- because the BCF/ECF gave them little. Quite ironic.

[Alex Holowczak]

I think that 'cheek' was helped by the fact that they got a big subsidy from their federation to play, whereas it wasn't worth the top British players time in terms of money or elo to play- because the BCF/ECF gave them little. Quite ironic.

I think an Indian would settle for far less in conditions relative to the equivalently rated British player. The reason being that in relative terms, the cost of living in India is so much lower than the cost of living in Britain. It's not really a fair comparison.

[Mark Howitt]

They'd settle for relatively less in conditions yes. But it's quite sad that many Indian players were offered worthwhile conditions from their point of view to play in a foreign tournament, but the British players weren't for their own national championship.

[Alex Holowczak]

They'd settle for relatively less in conditions yes. But it's quite sad that many Indian players were offered worthwhile conditions from their point of view to play in a foreign tournament, but the British players weren't for their own national championship.

I guess the ECF could have afforded this if the players in the country were prepared to pay more for Membership or Game Fee.

This is where this conversation gets a bit awkward. You can't really complain about the ECF's lack of funds and come from Yorkshire, without campaigning for change to their current "arrangements" with the ECF. So I'm not sure where we go from here.

[Roger de Coverly]

I guess the problem only really arose because they had the cheek to start winning things all the time.

The problem was that they exploited the rule which says that players rated over 2360 have automatic qualification, to send an entire squad of players. If the rule had been changed to say that each Commonwealth country could have one nominee, that wouldn't (in my view) have been a problem. The bulk entry of Indian juniors to the age restricted events would have remained a problem. This is why I presume BICC acted to exclude Commonwealth players completely ( unless UK resident).

[Mark Howitt]

As a tax payer I believe that a £100,000 grant should be made available to the ECF- even a small portion of the aid budget or 'defence' budget could easily be removed to obtain this. I'm saying that even as a 'none chessplayer' too.

[Alex Holowczak]

As a tax payer I believe that a £100,000 grant should be made available to the ECF- even a small portion of the aid budget or 'defence' budget could easily be removed to obtain this. I'm saying that even as a 'none chessplayer' too.

... but it isn't, nor is it likely to be in the immediate future. So you have to be practical about your alternative.

[Mick Norris]

I guess the ECF could have afforded this if the players in the country were prepared to pay more for Membership or Game Fee.

This is where this conversation gets a bit awkward. You can't really complain about the ECF's lack of funds and come from Yorkshire, without campaigning for change to their current "arrangements" with the ECF. So I'm not sure where we go from here.

Ironic having the best British in the refusnik county - hopefully Yorkshire will now see that he ECF is worth supporting - presumably the ECF board has taken the opportunity of the location to discuss this with the Yorkshire hierarchy?

[Mark Howitt]

The only effect that the ECF trying to tax members will have in Yorkshire is that the ECF will recieve less game fees. The YCA league was ECF graded, but I doubt many if any new members will join to get these games graded.

I wouldn't be surprised if some other counties or organisations try a similar thing in the future.

[Mark Howitt]

And btw I am being very practical about the alternative like many other 'twenty somethings' who could play chess. I've come to the pragmatic decision it's not worth my time or money to play at the moment- but I'll spend a bit of time highlighting what a stupid decision it is by the government to waste money in certain areas and deny chess money.

[Alex Holowczak]

The YCA league was ECF graded, but I doubt many if any new members will join to get these games graded.

I was speaking to some local players at the British Championship in Sheffield, who had just become members of the ECF in order to play in it. They thought the whole situation was ridiculous. One told me that his local club couldn't come to a unanimous decision on whether to keep subscriptions at £3 or raise them to £5 in lieu of uncertainty over their venue.

So the views taken by the administrators in Yorkshire are certainly not uniform across the county.

[Roger de Coverly]

I wouldn't be surprised if some other counties or organisations try a similar thing in the future.

The ECF and the BCF before it is a federation of chess organisations, the membership fee for which was, historically, calculated on the number of games played under the auspices of the organisation. The current CEO is on record as saying that he wishes the ECF to remain a federal body.

Outside of the North of England, most chess leagues had and have little difficulty with becoming or remaining ECF members under those conditions. The league in the host city of Sheffield has not been a member of the ECF for many years, if ever. Presumably the price is too high or they see little need to support a national chess body.

[Mark Howitt]

There will be a few hardcore players who, on the back of a bit of good publicity from the British Champs, might sign up. But most of the keen chess players in Yorkshire will already be ECF members... I guess that's narrowing down 'keen' a bit! But overall the ECF will certainly lose out overall as hundreds of players play in the Yorkshire league and the vast majority won't become members- and the majority won't even be aware of the ECF's new tax! That means lost revenue.