Should the ECF try to organise more chess?

[Paul Cooksey]

There was an interesting discussion at the ECF AGM about the benefits members get from the ECF. Hok noted £10 for online membership was prohibitive for his players.

Dave Thomas, outgoing as membership Director said it was a problem that he has been struggling with for 8 years, without feeling he had achieved anything. Mike Truran said he was being too modest, both agreed Rob Willmoth had a different set of skills, and was optimistic about new ideas. We discussed how people we willing to pay more to the national body for other hobbies - table tennis, bridge, etc.

In my opinion, the basic difference between the ECF and those other bodies is that the ECF doesn't organise the chess directly. So it is always in the position where its members do not receive a direct benefit to themselves justifying their subscription. People are only really happy with the ECF if they are willing to consider the indirect benefits of a national federation promoting chess.

I am myself sceptical whether the ECF should organise more chess. I would prefer it to focus on supporting the organisations that do organise chess. Alex Holowczak gave a carefully worded but broadly similar opinion, using the ESPCA as an example. But I suppose the restart of chess after COVID19, hopefully in the spring, would be an opportunity for it run more events when OTB chess might benefit from a push.

I've come to the position myself where if the ECF isn't organising chess, I think membership fees should be voluntary. I might argue why later. But I thought the first question was interesting enough for a poll

[IM Jack Rudd]

Interesting question. I suppose you could ask another question: "what chess do we think should be provided that isn't currently being provided by outside operators, and would it be a good idea for the ECF to provide it?".

[Matthew Turner]

I voted yes. Clearly, the current situation is a very strange, but in general, I think the ECF should employ a strong young player to work in the Office. Part of their responsibility would be to organise events and part of their remuneration would be a percentage of sponsorship income they brought in.

[Roger de Coverly]

In my opinion, the basic difference between the ECF and those other bodies is that the ECF doesn't organise the chess directly.

We should bear in mind that having the ECF directly organise more things incurs a financial penalty of up to 20% and possibly higher in the future. The point being that the various organisations which run chess in the UK are with only limited exceptions individually well below the threshold for VAT registration.

This came about mostly as an historic accident rather than a deliberate piece of tax planning. The more centralised Bridge world does incur VAT as witnessed by its unsuccessful campaign to become exempt by being ruled to be a sport for tax purposes.

[Gareth T Ellis]

Post by Matthew Turner » Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:14 pm

I voted yes. Clearly, the current situation is a very strange, but in general, I think the ECF should employ a strong young player to work in the Office. Part of their responsibility would be to organise events and part of their remuneration would be a percentage of sponsorship income they brought in.

So more expenditure at a time when cut backs are unfortunately required, better to save the current employees.
A strong player doesn't necessarily mean a good event organiser and getting sponsorship for chess has never been easy, with the current business climate it'll be even worse.

[Matthew Turner]

A strong player doesn't necessarily mean a good event organiser

Correct, but they will be able answer calls and E-mails relating to chess that non-chessplayers can't, thereby reducing the need to transfer enquirys to Directors and potentially allowing things to run more smoothly.
I am not saying that the ECF should be necessarily doing this now (for the reasons you suggested), but I think this should be an aspiration.

[Michael Farthing]

A strong player doesn't necessarily mean a good event organiser

Correct, but they will be able answer calls and E-mails relating to chess that non-chessplayers can't, thereby reducing the need to transfer enquirys to Directors and potentially allowing things to run more smoothly.
I am not saying that the ECF should be necessarily doing this now (for the reasons you suggested), but I think this should be an aspiration.

Err.. What's wrong with the ability of the current office staff to do that?

[Angus French]

I answered 'no' as I don't think the problem is the availability of competitive chess.

Though certainly I think the ECF should be looking for ways to enhance the membership proposition and provide better support for grassroots chess. I had hoped that the employment of a Development Officer (with a suitable terms of reference) would help with this but that idea seems to have stalled. Also I think it would be a good idea for the ECF to survey players to ask what they want.

[Gareth T Ellis]

I am not saying that the ECF should be necessarily doing this now (for the reasons you suggested), but I think this should be an aspiration.

So aspiring to the WCU method but with a paid position instead of volunteers.

[Matthew Turner]

I am not saying that the ECF should be necessarily doing this now (for the reasons you suggested), but I think this should be an aspiration.

So aspiring to the WCU method but with a paid position instead of volunteers.

There are many great things that the ECF could learn from Welsh Chess, but it is a different scale isn't it. I do think the WCU could do with someone to spruce up the website.

[Roger de Coverly]

I suppose you could ask another question: "what chess do we think should be provided that isn't currently being provided by outside operators, and would it be a good idea for the ECF to provide it?".

The issue has come up before in a manner of speaking. When it became apparent that the e2e4 organisation wouldn't be running any more Congresses, there was a belief that the format was a success and should be continued and that the ECF should run them. In the event the 4NCL was the body that ran a successor series of events using a similar template.

[Nick Grey]

I voted no. I cannot go into the countryside to walk where I want
Online chess is not for everyone. I have reduced paying for books and magasines on chess.
Hope we can play in sept 2021. We have to accept not everyone will have money to play chess.

[Joey Stewart]

I do think this downtime is the perfect opportunity for the ECF to move into the 21st century by investing in the creation of their own online server similar to the fide arena but with the means to play online team chess properly, with all boards active in the same room and no needing to faff about matching each individual player with an opponent (and nobody knowing the team status until after the match has finished) - it would also not be an act of pure charity either as they could stand to recoup significant revenue from such a site in the long run through ongoing membership costs.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Picking up on some of the points raised, it's ludicrous to suggest that the ECF doesn't organise chess. They organise the British and County championships which are two of the flagship events in the calendar and other events ultimately flow into the whole. They also organise a lot of prestige junior events and are ultimately responsible for the national teams. The only way they could realistically do more is a) move into gaps in the market b) take over existing congresses and leagues, either by hostile buy outs or rival events (a scenario nobody wants).

Nobody has commented on how quickly the ECF responded to the pandemic by setting up a program of online events. These may not be for everyone but you can't say they have done nothing.

Regarding Matthew Turner's suggestion of a `chess player in the office` this seems broadly similar to the chess development officer initiative that was so unfortunately derailed last year. It's a shame that the resignation of the then publicity officer meant that the `grandmaster in the pub` initiative from a few years ago went no further.

Are the current office staff non players? The name of the best known office member is taken twice in the database and the most likely candidate has a respectable enough grade of 163.

[Hok Yin Stephen Chiu]

[]