e2e4 Grand Prix

[LozCooper]

I agree about FMs and WFMs. They improve the chance of players getting norms without weakening the quality of the tournament.

The rating threshold for women is 2120 which rules out all of our active women except for Jovanka meaning very few players can compete for the British Women's title.

Nominations are currently limited to the respective federations of Scotland/Wales/Ulster/Ireland/Guerney/Jersey/IoM, the English Chess Unions, the counties that have membership only systems as well as the Home and Junior Directors and the Managers of the British.

[Alan Walton]

I thought It is already simple

Everybody over 2350 is pre-qualified (2120 for females, and various junior levels), and everybody else has to qualify through another route (i.e. tournaments and nominations)

How you do the entry fees is a separate issue all together, personally I would say those rated above said pre-qualification thresholds get free entry, and those below have to pay the full whack with a 50% discount for titled players (GM/IM/FM/WGM/WIM/WFM)

[Adam Raoof]

There should be a criterion that says anyone who played for England in the previous year's Olympiad or European Team Championship has the right to participate. (This covers the women who Sean thinks would need to qualify by rating.)

I'd change the definition of "British". I gather the rules make reference to British subjects, which is all well and good, but no one born after 1983 is a British subject, unless you're considered a "British subject without citizenship". I'm a British citizen because I was born in 1990. I can qualify by residence. Someone born in the UK after 1983, but living abroad, technically wouldn't be eligible to compete under the current rules.

There is the situation where people registered as ENG on the FIDE-rating list can't compete in the British Championship, because they're not British subjects - or citizens for that matter - and don't qualify by residence. If they're good enough to play for England, they should be good enough to play in our National Championship.

I think the host county had a nomination until recently; I don't know if that has been removed. It should cover Sean's host city nomination criterion.

How about only those players who are registered with BICC nations through FIDE should be allowed to compete in the Championships themselves?

I agree that players who represent BICC nations in Olympiads or European Team Championships should be able to participate, as long as they satisfy this and other requirements.

PS we are talking about 2013's British here...

[Alex Holowczak]

How about only those players who are registered with BICC nations through FIDE should be allowed to compete in the Championships themselves?

I wouldn't go that far. This rules out people registered for other nations who are resident here. There should be an either/or way of getting in:
(1) Players who are registered with BICC nations through FIDE
(2) Players who have had permanent residence in a BICC country in the 12 months immediately prior to the start of the tournament

"Permanent residence" would be up to the discretion of the organiser, but should be wide enough to allow overseas students resident in a BICC country to be able to participate.

I agree that players who represent BICC nations in Olympiads or European Team Championships should be able to participate, as long as they satisfy this and other requirements.

OK, yes, extending it to the BICC makes sense. I'd say playing for the National Team should be a criterion in its own right; just by playing for a BICC country means you should qualify. This could replace the existing structure whereby each bit of the BICC has x nominations. You'd effectively give them all 10 nominations; 5 males and 5 females.

[Adam Raoof]

How about only those players who are registered with BICC nations through FIDE should be allowed to compete in the Championships themselves?

I wouldn't go that far. This rules out people registered for other nations who are resident here. There should be an either/or way of getting in:
(1) Players who are registered with BICC nations through FIDE
(2) Players who have had permanent residence in a BICC country in the 12 months immediately prior to the start of the tournament

"Permanent residence" would be up to the discretion of the organiser, but should be wide enough to allow overseas students resident in a BICC country to be able to participate.

Why should people who live here (temporarily, in your example) but choose to affiliate to other FIDE nations have the right to participate in our Championships? It makes more sense to use FIDE affiliation to determine eligibilty first and foremost.

If players choose to then change their affiliation, that would be their personal choice.

[Adam Raoof]

I agree that players who represent BICC nations in Olympiads or European Team Championships should be able to participate, as long as they satisfy this and other requirements.

OK, yes, extending it to the BICC makes sense. I'd say playing for the National Team should be a criterion in its own right; just by playing for a BICC country means you should qualify. This could replace the existing structure whereby each bit of the BICC has x nominations. You'd effectively give them all 10 nominations; 5 males and 5 females.

Any BICC nation could field a very weak team in a particular event due to economic circumstances. Would you be happy to accept literally ANY player who represented their nation, regardless of ability?

[Alex Holowczak]

Why should people who live here but choose to affiliate to other FIDE nations have the right to participate in our Championships? It makes more sense to use FIDE affiliation to determine eligibilty first and foremost.

If players choose to then change their affiliation, that would be their personal choice.

A Polish citizen may choose to be Polish. He then comes to this country to do a degree for 3-7 years. I think someone who plays active chess in the British Isles for a period of 12 months and lives here, should be able to participate in the Championship. They've undoubtedly contributed to the ECF's finances via Game Fee in that time. Going forward, they might need to be members anyway, so it's not as if they're making no contribution to British chess.

[Alan Walton]

I may be wrong about this but if you are resident for 3 years within the UK, and you are a foreign player (registered through FIDE as another country), you are eligible for qualification

[Sean Hewitt]

I may be wrong about this but if you are resident for 3 years within the UK, and you are a foreign player (registered through FIDE as another country), you are eligible for qualification

It's now 12 months based on residency.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Why should people who live here (temporarily, in your example) but choose to affiliate to other FIDE nations have the right to participate in our Championships? It makes more sense to use FIDE affiliation to determine eligibilty first and foremost.

Because unless they're strong enough to challenge for spots in our national teams, we specifically want such players to not transfer to BICC nations. It makes life much easier for Sean Hewitt and Scott Freeman and anyone else who runs norm tournaments in the UK if there are strong UK-based players with non-UK affiliations; given that these players are therefore providing a valuable service to British chess, it would seem reasonable to reciprocate by allowing them into the British Championship.

[Adam Raoof]

Why should people who live here (temporarily, in your example) but choose to affiliate to other FIDE nations have the right to participate in our Championships? It makes more sense to use FIDE affiliation to determine eligibilty first and foremost.

Because unless they're strong enough to challenge for spots in our national teams, we specifically want such players to not transfer to BICC nations. It makes life much easier for Sean Hewitt and Scott Freeman and anyone else who runs norm tournaments in the UK if there are strong UK-based players with non-UK affiliations; given that these players are therefore providing a valuable service to British chess, it would seem reasonable to reciprocate by allowing them into the British Championship.

That is a good point, however I can't think of any examples just now.

[Ian Thompson]

... it would seem reasonable to reciprocate by allowing them into the British Championship.

It seems fundamentally wrong to me that there should be any possibility of the British champion being anything other than British.

[LozCooper]

Why should people who live here (temporarily, in your example) but choose to affiliate to other FIDE nations have the right to participate in our Championships? It makes more sense to use FIDE affiliation to determine eligibilty first and foremost.

Because unless they're strong enough to challenge for spots in our national teams, we specifically want such players to not transfer to BICC nations. It makes life much easier for Sean Hewitt and Scott Freeman and anyone else who runs norm tournaments in the UK if there are strong UK-based players with non-UK affiliations; given that these players are therefore providing a valuable service to British chess, it would seem reasonable to reciprocate by allowing them into the British Championship.

That is a good point, however I can't think of any examples just now.

http://www.britishchess2011.com/2010/ev ... onship.htm

2010 British: Slavin, Tymrakiewicz, Vrubl, Krzyzanowski
2009 British: Eden, Kolbus

[Adam Raoof]

... it would seem reasonable to reciprocate by allowing them into the British Championship.

It seems fundamentally wrong to me that there should be any possibility of the British champion being anything other than British.

A player could win the Championship but not be the British Champion, however. Some nations just hold Open tournaments, with the proviso that only eligible players can win the national title. That still leaves the problem of the destination of the prize money.

[Adam Raoof]

2009 British: Eden, Kolbus

Doh! One's my club mate and I played the other, a rather long game...