English Chess Forum

"While I don't wish to make a big point about this, can anyone explain why in addition to the separate 50+ and 65+ British Championships, there are (rather good) prizes for competition among 50+ players who prefer to enter the 'main' Championships yet no prizes for 65+ players who do the same? "

I was wondering that as well, not that my play merited much thought about it.

I was also thinking along the same lines as Ian, but then Alex explained it!

Sorry, Kevin. Alex hasn't explained it, at least not fully. Why womens', u-21, u-18, 50+ and sundry other rating prizes, but no 65+ prize, although this is a major FIDE senior age classification, in which continental and world championships are held annually?

Ian's point is interesting and maybe there shouldn't be either 50+ or 65+ prizes in the main championship at all, as there are indeed separate championships for these age-groups. But that misses the obvious point that most 50+ players (certainly) and 65+ players who are actually still strong enough to qualify to play in the main championships are unsurprisingly likely to wish to play in the strongest event possible. It's hardly their fault that they can't simultaneously play in the age-group championships as well!!

I also, perhaps rather naively thought that attracting strong / qualified 65+ players to play in the main championships is good for the game. How many times have individuals and various national chess orgs made the claim to sponsors, government, the media and others that chess is worthy of support not least because of its inter-generational appeal and the advantages to the older citizen in competing in such mind games for as long and at as high a level as possible.

Tim is right. Get rid of this ridiculous ageism. There should certainly be at least one 65+ prize and attempts by organisers to encourage as many of the best qualified 65+ players to play in the main championships.

Craig Pritchett wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:34 pm

There should certainly be at least one 65+ prize and attempts by organisers to encourage as many of the best qualified 65+ players to play in the main championships.

It's only quite recently that there have been any active British titled players over 65. But as the 1950s years of birth become eligible, there will be increasing numbers. If he was still an active player, Michael Stean would have been eligible this year.

Craig Pritchett wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:34 pm

Get rid of this ridiculous ageism.

While we're at it, get rid of ridiculous sloganising.

There should certainly be at least one 65+ prize and attempts by organisers to encourage as many of the best qualified 65+ players to play in the main championships.

I might consider playing in the 65+ championship, but would be unlikely to do so if the organisers themselves were encouraging decent players to boycott it. Sorry, but 65+ / U2050 somehow doesn't sound like a prestige event.

Craig Pritchett wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:34 pm

Sorry, Kevin. Alex hasn't explained it, at least not fully. Why womens', u-21, u-18, 50+ and sundry other rating prizes, but no 65+ prize, although this is a major FIDE senior age classification, in which continental and world championships are held annually?

I think I have. We never had a 50+ prize before in the main Championship, but it was only added when the sponsor wanted us to add it. The same is true of some of the rating prizes; you will see the older rating prizes remain at their pre-sponsorship level.

By the way, there is no U18 prize, other than the trophy. The financial prizes are now all U21.

I decided, rightly or wrongly, that 65+ Seniors prizes in the Championship weren't an issue worth going to the barricades over when being offered a sponsorship package in excess of £30,000. Particularly when the 65+ players are eligible to win the 50+ prizes.

Thanks, Alex. I think that this provides a much fuller picture.

For all the reasons I gave in my previous post, however, not least the fact that the existing qualification bars are set in a way that (quite rightly) encourages those 65+ players who meet them to play in the strongest possible competition in the Congress that they can enter (the main Championship), I think that thought might in future be given to including some sort of recognition to these seniors, who are only likely to increase in strength and number as the years progress.

It needn't be a financial prize, though that would be nice, of course. It might be a trophy alone, as for the u-18s, say something like a J.H. Blackburne Veterans Cup, in honour of one of the British greats who performed at high level to a great age and whose last British was, I believe, in 1914 Glasgow, when aged 72. Don't put an age on the trophy. Simply set the condition annually in the entry form; say for 65+ players, I'd suggest in Year 1, at any rate, to correspond with the relevant FIDE-recognised international competition 65+ Category, set currently (it might change).

It needn't even by financed one whit by any 'main' sponsor. Perhaps some other sponsor might appear for this only!?

Craig Pritchett wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:02 pm

It needn't be a financial prize, though that would be nice, of course. It might be a trophy alone, as for the u-18s, say something like a J.H. Blackburne Veterans Cup, in honour of one of the British greats who performed at high level to a great age and whose last British was, I believe, in 1914 Glasgow, when aged 72

Where he tied for first with F D Yates, but conceded the playoff (and title) due to illness.