English Chess Forum

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:19 pm

If this is the way 'forward', a lot of us will be dropping out of chess for ever.

Ian Thompson wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:34 pm

I doubt it. In the one event I've played in with similar coronavirus restrictions in place, I didn't find it unduly onerous to have to take my drink outside the playing area before removing my mask to consume it. The important thing is that there is somewhere close to the playing area to do this so it won't take long.

I just highlighted a few key points in my original post. You need to read the Regulations carefully to appreciate the full effect of them.

Put yourself in the position of an arbiter with a duty to ensure that the Regulations are observed. I think that you will then realise why I didn't fancy that role either.

Regulations also state

"B2.3 A player is ineligible to play in any particular match if at the time of the match
the player:
(i) is required to self-isolate
(ii) has tested positive for covid-19
..."

(ii) actually fails to state when the positive test was. So if you have EVER had a positive covid test you're ineligible. Did they mean that?

I got bored shortly after that, so there may be more like that.

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 8:04 am

Regulations also state

"B2.3 A player is ineligible to play in any particular match if at the time of the match
the player:
(i) is required to self-isolate
(ii) has tested positive for covid-19
..."

(ii) actually fails to state when the positive test was. So if you have EVER had a positive covid test you're ineligible. Did they mean that?

I got bored shortly after that, so there may be more like that.

Other rules include:

B2.5 It is a condition of entry and participation that a player must wear a face covering
at all times in the Playing Area unless medically exempt. A player exercising a medical
exemption shall play socially distanced chess using two boards in accordance with
Section E of the ECF Tournament Rules, unless the opponent is willing to accept the
increased risk of playing opposite a player without a face covering on a single board.
B2.6 In the event that a player facing an unmasked opponent chooses not to play on
two boards the board shall be declared void (but shall continue to count for the
purposes of average team rating) and scored 0 – 0.

F2.2 For any game played using two boards with one or more player unmasked the
two boards should be arranged so that the players are not facing each other and to
provide at least 2m distance between an unmasked player and any other players.

F3.2 Players should not spectate at any board or linger in the Playing Area. This
includes whilst their game is in progress.

Is this the event where teams can play hybrid i.e. all their players at 1 venue supervised by an arbiter?

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:19 pm

David Sedgwick wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 22, 2021 12:58 pm

These Regulations stipulate

Also

D7.1 During play, a player must not have any access to mobile phones, electronic
means of communication or devices capable of suggesting chess moves. Such
devices, if brought into the playing venue, must be completely switched off and placed
in a bag on or under the player’s table before play starts.

That used to be a totally normal condition. However, if as indicated by the nature of some of the other regulations, the matches are to be played under conditions of paranoia, should not the mobile phones remain switched on? The point being that they cannot bluetooth one another to establish mutual presence if totally powered off and thus are unable to support the attempt to impose lockdowns by forcing self isolation.

Given the current/predicted infection rates, and the ~20 people involved all qualifying as roughly close contact, you could probably save time/effort and treat everyone at the match as having been pinged.

I have huge sympathy for anyone trying to organise anything right now. We've been notionally freed but told to be really careful, and the next month or two really won't be a great time to run a lot of things.

MartinCarpenter wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:30 am

Given the current/predicted infection rates, and the ~20 people involved all qualifying as roughly close contact, you could probably save time/effort and treat everyone at the match as having been pinged.

Isn't the plan still for that to expire in four weeks? I accept that one would expect several U-turns before then.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:48 am

MartinCarpenter wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:30 am

Given the current/predicted infection rates, and the ~20 people involved all qualifying as roughly close contact, you could probably save time/effort and treat everyone at the match as having been pinged.

Isn't the plan still for that to expire in four weeks? I accept that one would expect several U-turns before then.

I think I read that for double vaccinated people, but I haven't checked carefully for the reason you give! It would obviously have been very much saner to coordinate the two dates, even if that meant delaying the formal unlocking.

MartinCarpenter wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 10:02 am

I think I read that for double vaccinated people

That is the promise. Anything else is equivalent to an admission that vaccines don't work very well. If arranging a chess match, the respective match captains should between them know their players contact details. That wouldn't include spectators and those acting as unpaid taxi drivers.

The ECF may have to decide whether it on the side of enabling OTB chess to take place, or opposed to it. The longer the list of requirements it imposes on players and potential organisers, particularly ones that are "just in case", the more it becomes a body hostile to chess activity.

At the recent 4NCL Congress, there was no explicit requirement to check in with contact details, whether phone based or otherwise. The 4NCL organisers and the hotel would have these details anyway. Spectators were however banned. I don't know whether this was restrictions on room capacity placed by the hotel or lack of contact detail. Both perhaps. But then that event could have fallen under strict "rule of six" interpretations and been illegal anyway. The hotel was offering buffet food as well, which I think had not been allowed under one of the many sets of lockdown rules.

"F3.2 Players should not spectate at any board or linger in the Playing Area. This includes whilst their game is in progress."

I didn't get that far - brilliant. Play a move, run from the room, observe carefully through binoculars, or fly a drone over your board, as soon as it's your move, run into the room and think. Repeat.

Maybe drones are banned - if everyone does it, they'll collide. The Armed Forces team will have better drones of course...

Kevin Thurlow (quoting ECF Guidance) wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 11:28 am

"F3.2 Players should not spectate at any board or linger in the Playing Area. This includes whilst their game is in progress."

I suppose what it is trying to say is that players shouldn't leave their own boards whilst in play, even when not their move.

Is it known who drafted these regulations?

I don't see the ECF as imposing any requirements on events that it is not organizing. Indeed, I'm not sure that it can; it doesn't have that level of power. It's making recommendations, sure, but that's not at all the same thing.

IM Jack Rudd wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:12 pm

I don't see the ECF as imposing any requirements on events that it is not organizing.

It doesn't really organise county matches, outside of the finals weekend. Pairings yes, but details like when, where, who pays, what refreshments etc. are in the hands of the county organisations.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:20 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:12 pm

I don't see the ECF as imposing any requirements on events that it is not organizing.

It doesn't really organise county matches, outside of the finals weekend. Pairings yes, but details like when, where, who pays, what refreshments etc. are in the hands of the county organisations.

Yes, but the ECF stipulates the Regulations for the National Stages, as it has done for this summer competition.

Mick Norris wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 8:25 am

Is this the event where teams can play hybrid i.e. all their players at 1 venue supervised by an arbiter?

Matches can be played as Hybrids, but the standard format is an OTB match.

David Sedgwick wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:30 pm

Mick Norris wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 8:25 am

Is this the event where teams can play hybrid i.e. all their players at 1 venue supervised by an arbiter?

Matches can be played as Hybrids, but the standard format is an OTB match.

Thanks David; do your objections apply to Hybrid matches too?

If I have it right, it is 8 boards per team, so including the Arbiter, only 9 people in a room, presumably socially distanced, and not sitting directly opposite someone; it sounds safer than an OTB match

I'm not playing, so I realise my view isn't relevant