PDA

View Full Version : Membership



peter_parr
28-06-2006, 03:46 PM
The 2006 Olympiad requires Captains and players to be members of their respective State Associations but it is not enforced.


Could you please advise the source for this requirement? Thanks.

The first point raised by the Australian Chess Federation in the ACT Supreme Court was the requirement by the ACF that all applicants to represent Australia at the chess Olympiad must be current financial members of their respective State Associations.

Membership of the ACF by the Plaintiff in conjunction with ACF members selection procedures are constantly referred to by his Honour Judge Gray in his detailed 24 numbered paragraphs. Reasons for judgement.

His honour constantly referred to the rights and obligations of the members of the defendant (ACF).

Counsel for the plaintiff D.Galbally QC as well as Barristers Colquhoun (former ACF President), Marcus Pesman, all agreed without question the ACF requirement for membership of the ACF to be selected for the Australian Olympiad chess team.

I was in court, Lawyer Denis Jessop (now ACF President) was in court as was Gary Wastell (now VCA President). Surely in 2006 this is not a matter for dispute as it was the ACF in the Supreme Court who confirmed this most basic ACF requirement.

It is of course also a most basic FIDE requirement that all members of the Australian Olympiad teams be members of their National Chess Federation.

I ask again why were these most basic requirement not enforced by the ACF for the 2006 Turin Olympiad?

MichaelBaron
28-06-2006, 04:16 PM
The first point raised by the Australian Chess Federation in the ACT Supreme Court was the requirement by the ACF that all applicants to represent Australia at the chess Olympiad must be current financial members of their respective State Associations.

Membership of the ACF by the Plaintiff in conjunction with ACF members selection procedures are constantly referred to by his Honour Judge Gray in his detailed 24 numbered paragraphs. Reasons for judgement.

His honour constantly referred to the rights and obligations of the members of the defendant (ACF).

Counsel for the plaintiff D.Galbally QC as well as Barristers Colquhoun (former ACF President), Marcus Pesman, all agreed without question the ACF requirement for membership of the ACF to be selected for the Australian Olympiad chess team.

I was in court, Lawyer Denis Jessop (now ACF President) was in court as was Gary Wastell (now VCA President). Surely in 2006 this is not a matter for dispute as it was the ACF in the Supreme Court who confirmed this most basic ACF requirement.

It is of course also a most basic FIDE requirement that all members of the Australian Olympiad teams be members of their National Chess Federation.

I ask again why were these most basic requirement not enforced by the ACF for the 2006 Turin Olympiad?


Do captains really have to be ACF memebers?
As far as I know some teams went to Turin with coaches/captains from other countries. Internationally, it is quite a common practice

Denis_Jessop
28-06-2006, 06:07 PM
I should like to clarify this matter with reference to what Peter has said and to what was said in the Depasquale Case in the ACT Supreme Court.

I am not aware of, and cannot find, any requirement in the ACF By-laws that Olympiad team members and Captains must be members of their State Associations.

You may note that Peter speaks frequently in his post of "membership of the ACF". There is no individual membership scheme in the ACF Constitution. In the Depasquale case, Chris sought to establish that he was at all relevant times an ACF member by an argument that ran as follows. He was a member of Elwood Chess Club which was affiliated with the Victorian Chess Association which was in turn affiliated with the ACF. Thus it followes that he was a member of the ACF. I believe that the argument was put so as to establish what is known as "standing" on the part of CD, that is, his right to bring the action. The point is not otherwise relevant and was not challenged by the ACF's lawyers, a matter that was mentioned by Gray, J in his judgment. I was always puzzled why the plaintiff put this argument at all as I think he could easily have established standing by reference to his having an ACF rating and the fact that he applied for, and was considered for, selection in the Olympiad team. His lawyers must have thought that they needed to go further.

In any event, the fact that a person needs to be an ACF member was not an issue in the case and was not decided in the case as it was not in contention, as mentioned by Gray, J. Morever, what I am saying is that in my view it was not even necessary for CD to establish membership of the ACF to bring his action. That view is strengthened by there being no relevant constitutional or by-law requirement.

DJ

Duff McKagan
30-06-2006, 04:19 AM
I think Peter is trying to establish some unity and to avoid any freeloaders. It has to be commended. If the ACF were using this point against CD then they should uphold it.


It is of course also a most basic FIDE requirement that all members of the Australian Olympiad teams be members of their National Chess Federation.

Forget the court case for a moment and address this point please. If this is not true then players from anywhere can represent anyone. Let's keep to the straight and narrow in an age of chaos.

Basil
30-06-2006, 05:30 AM
I ask again why were these most basic requirement not enforced by the ACF for the 2006 Turin Olympiad?

Peter

I support the thrust of your post. May I suggest that there are two issues for debate here, and you would be better served by isolating your stronger course.

The two issues appear to be:
1. Your suggestion that membership to state associations is a pre-requisite for representing Australia at Olympiads, and you are questioning Australia's lack of complaince with that prerequisite.
2. Regardless of whether the pre-requisite exists; should such a pre-requisite exist?

Point 1 will be determined as a matter of fact, one way or the other. I believe Kevin has asked for identification and location of that pre-requisite. I am not able to shed any light on the matter.

I would prefer to address point 2. My position is that on balance, I suggest it should exist. I say 'on balance', because the states operate under separate and differently styled Constitutions. The effect of these disparities go to the heart of whether any pre-prequisite is necessarily met, and also raises other issues which are not germaine here.

I believe those Constitutions, where at all times practical, should be identical. I further believe in greater 'teeth', and governance for the ACF over Australian chess. In these issues, I am curiously an ardent supporter of the agitators for change on this BB and perhaps the chess community at large.

However, I don't believe it is either practical or prudent to divest the states of their role completely, and that they should continue to play a significant role in the admiinistration of chess in Australia, but more as a function of the ACF, instead of an adjunct to it.

I appreciate I may be drifting or broadening this debate off track at first blush, but I believe [if I read you correctly] that my structural observations, while not pre-requisite to achieving your ends, are certainly in the interests of doing so.

Oepty
30-06-2006, 06:29 PM
Peter

I support the thrust of your post. May I suggest that there are two issues for debate here, and you would be better served by isolating your stronger course.

The two issues appear to be:
1. Your suggestion that membership to state associations is a pre-requisite for representing Australia at Olympiads, and you are questioning Australia's lack of complaince with that prerequisite.
2. Regardless of whether the pre-requisite exists; should such a pre-requisite exist?

Point 1 will be determined as a matter of fact, one way or the other. I believe Kevin has asked for identification and location of that pre-requisite. I am not able to shed any light on the matter.

I would prefer to address point 2. My position is that on balance, I suggest it should exist. I say 'on balance', because the states operate under separate and differently styled Constitutions. The effect of these disparities go to the heart of whether any pre-prequisite is necessarily met, and also raises other issues which are not germaine here.

I believe those Constitutions, where at all times practical, should be identical. I further believe in greater 'teeth', and governance for the ACF over Australian chess. In these issues, I am curiously an ardent supporter of the agitators for change on this BB and perhaps the chess community at large.

However, I don't believe it is either practical or prudent to divest the states of their role completely, and that they should continue to play a significant role in the admiinistration of chess in Australia, but more as a function of the ACF, instead of an adjunct to it.

I appreciate I may be drifting or broadening this debate off track at first blush, but I believe [if I read you correctly] that my structural observations, while not pre-requisite to achieving your ends, are certainly in the interests of doing so.

Howard. I agree in large part with your post. One problem though to inforcing the state membership requirement is the different requirements to become a member of a state association. As far as I know in SA the only requirement to be a member of SACA is you play in a tournament, or even I think 1 interclub game. No extra cost is required. Is it really fair then to require someone from a different state to be a member of that association if it requires them to pay for it? It would introduce a bit of a double standard. Having an activity clause may be a better way of ensuring a player is committed to chess in their state, then again it might not be.
Scott

Basil
30-06-2006, 06:41 PM
One problem though to inforcing the state membership requirement is the different requirements to become a member of a state association.
Scott

Integral to my proposal is standardisation of the at present different state requirements. I think the CAQ model works extremely well. However, other models may prove better. I am not so much concerned with which model, but uniformity.

What I propose is of monumental logistic proportions. Not to mention the difficulties of creating the will. And after that, the capacity!

The following is required:
1. The will to adopt a national model [critical mass]
2. The identification of that model
3. The will of the states to change
4. The capacity of the states and ACF to implement that change.

Apart from being a constitutional nightmare, my understanding is that voting blocs and resistance / apathy will be hard to overcome.

Kevin Bonham
30-06-2006, 06:49 PM
I think Peter is trying to establish some unity and to avoid any freeloaders.

I think he is making a claim of fact that, based on his comments and Denis's response, is not in fact true. All the same I thank him for explaining his reasoning.

Once again I shall call on anyone who believes that the ACF requires Olympiad reps to be members of their state association to prove it. Even being Selection Co-Ordinator for adult events I am not aware of such a requirement. That doesn't necessarily mean it isn't there, but I'm very sceptical about any claim that it is. Obviously if it is there I would make sure it was enforced when serving in this role in future.

Whether that should be the rule is another question. I am not sure that it should, because it is perhaps inconsistent with our aim to be represented by the strongest team possible. Some strong players qualified to play for Australia live overseas playing little chess in Australia for years at a time. Not only is there no reason to compel these players to join a state association, but it is quite possible state associations would refuse them as members.


Forget the court case for a moment and address this point please. If this is not true then players from anywhere can represent anyone.

Players can only represent the federation they are registered under at any time. FIDE has rules that determine whether a player is entitled to represent a specific federation or not. See http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=C05

Oepty
30-06-2006, 07:56 PM
Scott

Integral to my proposal is standardisation of the at present different state requirements. I think the CAQ model works extremely well. However, other models may prove better. I am not so much concerned with which model, but uniformity.

I would agree with that, although there might need to slight differences to accomadate the different geographical propeties of each state. Also the state laws each state association exists under might require their to be some differences, not an area I really know anything about.



What I propose is of monumental logistic proportions. Not to mention the difficulties of creating the will. And after that, the capacity!

The following is required:
1. The will to adopt a national model [critical mass]
2. The identification of that model
3. The will of the states to change
4. The capacity of the states and ACF to implement that change.

Apart from being a constitutional nightmare, my understanding is that voting blocs and resistance / apathy will be hard to overcome.

My personal view is it is going to be at least extremely difficult to get any constitutional change through. It possibly would require a nuclear bomb being released over Sydney and Melbourne to even up the populations of each state. Short of that I really don't know how it could be done. Sorry to be so negative, but that is how I see things, and perhaps how I generally am.
Scott

Basil
30-06-2006, 10:12 PM
It possibly would require a nuclear bomb being released over Sydney and Melbourne to even up the populations of each state.
Why would you want to 'even up' the populations? Are you referring to voting rights at ACF?

Oepty
01-07-2006, 04:47 PM
Why would you want to 'even up' the populations?
I am not saying I want to even up the populations of the states. It is alot different to say it might require something, than to say you want to do that thing

Are you referring to voting rights at ACF?
Yes
Scott

peter_parr
03-07-2006, 10:47 AM
I confirm once again that membership of the respective state associations was a requirement for the 2006 Olympiad and am deeply shocked that any chess official disagrees with this most basic FIDE requirement.

Firstly I must address Lawyer Denis Jessop's comments (item 3) in response to my item 1. Firstly the plaintiff did not bring up the matter of his membership nor did his lawyers. Why would he be raising any query on his own membership?

The case in the ACT Supreme Court was 100% crystal clear that Membership was a 100% requirement. The case was well prepared by the defendants ACF President Gardiner, ACF Deputy President(and former ACF President) Jamieson, Former ACF President Colquhoun a very highly regarded leading Sydney Barrister, Hon Life Member myself 6 times Australian Mens Olympic Captain and selector in this case, Barrister Pesman and strong chess player and Solicitor Chek (another strong chess player), a partner in one of Sydney's Leading law firms.

The documentation for the defendants amounted to about 125 pages including of course the ACF Constitution and its by-laws. In court assisting the plaintiff was a former ACF President(a personal long time friend of the plaintiff),and a 3 person legal team headed by the eminent QC Galbally.

At the commencement of proceedings(Jessop was not in court at this time) Pesman acting under instructions from the defendants advised the court that according to ACF records the plaintiff was not a member and in accordance with the ACF Constitution and its by laws membership was a requirement. The plaintiff and his expert legal team were well prepared and expected this question. There was no question about whether the plaintiff had to be a member(he had to be) by any of the four ACF Presidents or the legal experts on both sides or by His Honour Justice Gray.

Galbally QC advised the court the plaintiff was a member of Elwood Chess Club affiliated with the VCA which was affiliated with the ACF thus he was a member. There is no individual membership in Victoria. Pesman asked what fee had been paid for his membership and Galbally QC advised the club secretary had made him an honorary member(no fee). After further debate
about his membership Justice Gray called a recess of 15 minutes advising the parties that if agreement about his membership was not established the case may have to be adjourned to a future date. Jamieson, Parr, Pesman then spoke to VCA President Wastell who was in court. It was agreed by the four of us that we wanted the case heard today, we did not want to adjourn at great legal cost, and we accepted he was an ACF member in accordance with the constitution.

If lawyer Jessop would like to discuss points of law in this matter I suggest he contacts his learned friend Colquhoun with whom he has numerous legal debates in the past.

The Australian Chess Federation has sent teams to 21 Olympiads and Membership has been required by the ACF for 20 Olympiads(not 2006) Why?

If any player enters any event in NSW run by NSWCA membership of the NSWCA is a requirement of entry. This applies to all NSWCA lightning, rapid-play, weekenders, NSW championship and supporting tournaments, inter-club grade matches. Every player must be a member. Every Australian Championship, Australian Open etc every player from every state must be a member.
NSW has hundreds of members, a requirement for all players from beginners to grandmasters. How can anyone think there is now one exception - the 2006 Olympiad.

The Australian Chess Federation does a lot of work as does the State Associations, Funds are raised in many ways including on the NSWCA membership form. When paying their membership fees the members donate to our teams going to the Olympiad. They would be most upset if they had to pay their fees and they are donating money to non-members. When the ACF or State Association applies for Government Funding the Government would surely only give money to members.

If an Australian player punched a player from another country at an Olympiad and the ACF wanted to take action what happens if the player is not a member.

When you speak to NSW players from both the Mens and Womens Olympiad Teams who were not NSWCA members at the time of the 2006 Turin Olympiad they laugh (I have heard them laugh). Of course they agree to pay their membership fee if someone actually asked them to pay.

Captains are selected on account of their expertise. Why did neither captain check their memberships in accordance with FIDE regulations? Australia is not a backward country - we are currently ranked 56th in the world with the expertise of fifteen International Arbiters. If I were captain I would advise the players that if they were not members they are breaking FIDE Rules and an Australian resident was stripped of all his points in the 2004 Olympiad for breaking FIDE rules(despite expert legal help). FIDE in enforcing its rules(ignorance is no defence - ask any lawyer)could strip players of their gold medals, double grandmaster norms and all points if they are not members.


It is of course a most basic FIDE requirement that all members of the Australian Olympiad teams be members of their National Chess Federation. I shall quote from the FIDE handbook B 02 par 16. To be included in the FIDE Rating List a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE.

This rule is nothing new and I have mentioned it on numerous occasions in the last twelve months. I have repeatedly told NSWCA officials of this rule in relation to Elo rated events held in NSW clubs, I expressed concern that non members from NSW played in the FIDE rated Doeberl Cup and no-one checked - again a breach of B 02 par 16. Was everyone in Ballarat and all FIDE rated events held in Australia members.

M.Baron asks if captains have to be ACF members. The Mens Captain is not an Australian Resident(maybe he should be for captaining Australia) - he is a full time resident overseas. He is still rated as an Australian but is he a member(B 02 par 16) and like the Australian Womens Captain both have games in the July 2006 rating list.

The FIDE rating list contains 380 Australians. Every player who plays a FIDE rated game must be a member B 02 par 16.
The FIDE rating list will soon go down to 1000 rating from its current 1600 level bringing thousands more players. Everyone must be a member. I have always believed that every person in Australia who has games rated by ACF should be a member of their state association like FIDE for the FIDE ratings.

The last time I spoke to a non member of the ACF 2006 Olympic Team was one hour ago (about the July FIDE ratings).

Bill Gletsos
03-07-2006, 12:36 PM
I confirm once again that membership of the respective state associations was a requirement for the 2006 Olympiad and am deeply shocked that any chess official disagrees with this most basic FIDE requirement.Please quote the relevant FIDE regulation.

Every Australian Championship, Australian Open etc every player from every state must be a member.Please quote the relevant ACF By-law or section of the constitution to support this claim. If you check the ACF By-laws you will find that all that is required is for a players State Association to endorse the player. No mention is made of membership.

If I were captain I would advise the players that if they were not members they are breaking FIDE Rules and an Australian resident was stripped of all his points in the 2004 Olympiad for breaking FIDE rules(despite expert legal help). FIDE in enforcing its rules(ignorance is no defence - ask any lawyer)could strip players of their gold medals, double grandmaster norms and all points if they are not members.Again please state the relevant FIDE regulation that states that players in an Olympiad team must be members of their National Federation.

It is of course a most basic FIDE requirement that all members of the Australian Olympiad teams be members of their National Chess Federation.Please state the relevant FIDE regulation.

I shall quote from the FIDE handbook B 02 par 16. To be included in the FIDE Rating List a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE.That regulation solely is to do with listing on the FIDE rating list. Nothing more, nothing less.
This rule is nothing new and I have mentioned it on numerous occasions in the last twelve months. I have repeatedly told NSWCA officials of this rule in relation to Elo rated events held in NSW clubs, I expressed concern that non members from NSW played in the FIDE rated Doeberl Cup and no-one checked - again a breach of B 02 par 16. Was everyone in Ballarat and all FIDE rated events held in Australia members.The rule you quote has nothing to do with FIDE rating of an event. The section only relates to listing on the FIDE rating list. In fact the very title of the section is Inclusion in the Rating list

The FIDE rating list contains 380 Australians. Every player who plays a FIDE rated game must be a member B 02 par 16.That regulation makes no such claim. The regulation only states that to be listed on the FIDE list they must be a member. It has no bearing on the FIDE rating of an event.

The FIDE rating list will soon go down to 1000 rating from its current 1600 level bringing thousands more players.I think you will find the current rating floor is 1401 and has been since 1st January 2006 rating list.

Ian Rout
03-07-2006, 02:04 PM
I have repeatedly told NSWCA officials of this rule in relation to Elo rated events held in NSW clubs, I expressed concern that non members from NSW played in the FIDE rated Doeberl Cup and no-one checked - again a breach of B 02 par 16.

This is a bit of a side issue, but the Doeberl entry form requires entrants to declare that they are members of a State association or to include an ACTCA membership fee with their entry. The downloadable entry form (the printed version is different but includes the same requirement) is at:

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ianandjan/IansPage/miscellaneous/2006DoeberlCupInfo.pdf

Thus while NSW-resident participants may not be NSWCA members they are members of ACTCA, an ACF affiliate, unless they have signed a false declaration.

The principle advocated by Peter


I have always believed that every person in Australia who has games rated by ACF should be a member of their state association like FIDE for the FIDE ratings.
is in fact in force in the ACT, with any player who plays rated games required to join ACTCA (except that this is waived for the occasional cameo in, say, the North v South match), so the above requirement means that interstate players are not participating under more lenient conditions.

Denis_Jessop
04-07-2006, 09:07 PM
I have read Peter's long exposition of what he says went on in the Depasquale case and have no intention of getting involved in a debate with him or anyone else about it further. I quote what was said by Mr Justice Gray on the matter in his judgement, namely:

"The plaintiff is a member of the Elwood Chess Club, an affiliate of the Victorian Chess Association. The Victorian Chess Association is an Affiliated State Association of the defendant. The defendant is an association incorporated pursuant to the Associations Incorporation Act 1991 of the Australian Capital Territory. No point is taken as to the asserted fact of the plaintiff's membership of the defendant." (see p. 1 of the reasons for decision)

I ask Peter to read the last sentence especially and consider whether what he asserts is consistent with it.

As to Peter's assertion that it is a basic FIDE requirement that Olympiad team members be members of their national federation - something that is not to be found as far as I know in the FIDE regulations - I note that in the Open Section of the 2006 Olympiad, Italy A's bd 2 was registered in Argentina, Albania's bd 2 in Italy, Puerto Rico's bd 3 in Colombia, Mauritius' bd 1 in England and Monaco's bd 2 in France. As well there were 3 composite disabled players' teams.

DJ

PS I add with this belated edit that Peter does clarify one matter that I did not put in my first post as it would have been speculation on my part, namely, that the plaintiff's assertion (and it was his assertion for reasons that I put in my first post) that he was an ACF member was not contested by the ACF for tactical reasons. Note that not contesting a matter and conceding the matter are quite different things form a legal procedural viewpoint. I have no need to talk to other lawyers to understand what happened. Perhaps layman Parr :) should do so.

rob
08-07-2006, 03:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter_parr
Every Australian Championship, Australian Open etc every player from every state must be a member.

Please quote the relevant FIDE regulation.
Please quote the relevant ACF By-law or section of the constitution to support this claim. If you check the ACF By-laws you will find that all that is required is for a players State Association to endorse the player. No mention is made of membership.

Bill is correct - for the 2006 Aus Championship, the CAWA endorsed a player even though he was not a member of CAWA.

peter_parr
25-09-2006, 03:30 PM
Gletsos (post 16) confirms that State Associations are required to endorse players in the Australian Open. The ACF should ensure this appears on the entry form for the Australian Open in January 2007 so players are all aware of this.

Jessop (post 15) says he has no need to talk to other lawyers to understand what happened. Perhaps layman Parr should do so.

Reply – I had enough legal opinion from a leading Sydney Barrister, a partner at Allens, and our representing barrister in court. (all former members of my chess centre in the CBD in 1979). Jessop will recall when two ACF Presidents, both well respected lawyers had totally different opinions resulting in unresolved legal argument and a totalstalemate.

Fortunately a laywoman came to the rescue and resolved the matter.

Btw on 27 July 2003 Jessop made a false claim that I had broken a fundamental rule of administrative law. When proven false no apology was received.

Rout (post 14) Rout is correct. The Doeberl Cup form is OK. Every year for 20 years when I was chief arbiter I checked that all NSW players were NSWCA members. Some players (every year in fact) ticked the member box without being members. They all joined when I gave them a NSWCA Membership form.

The NSWCA has not made any check for membership in recent years – the problem is of course with the NSWCA executive and NSWCA registrar.

Parr (post 12) 3 July 2006. I quote again from the FIDE handbook B02 par 16. To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a number of a national chess federation which is a number of FIDE.

When will this FIDE regulation be enforced by Australia.
Australia send teams to the men’s and women’s Olympiads this year yet membership was not required. I have mention this many times.
The FIDE regulation applies to all events sent to FIDE by Australia for rating

Denis_Jessop
25-09-2006, 04:11 PM
This rather cryptic post needs some translation or explanatory notes to make complete sense. To the extent possible my comments are:


Jessop will recall when two ACF Presidents, both well respected lawyers had totally different opinions resulting in unresolved legal argument and a totalstalemate.

I don't recall this and have no idea what you are referring to.


Fortunately a laywoman came to the rescue and resolved the matter.

Women can be rather good at this - you must introduce me to her. Otherwise I've no idea what you are talking about.


Btw on 27 July 2003 Jessop made a false claim that I had broken a fundamental rule of administrative law. When proven false no apology was received.

I assume that this is a reference to the junior selection appeals. If it is, anything I said about administrative law on that occasion was right. If it is not, I don't know what you are talking about.


Parr (post 12) 3 July 2006. I quote again from the FIDE handbook B02 par 16. To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a number (sic) of a national chess federation which is a number (sic) of FIDE.

When will this FIDE regulation be enforced by Australia.

Enforcement of FIDE regulations is a matter for FIDE.

DJ

Kevin Bonham
25-09-2006, 04:46 PM
Parr (post 12) 3 July 2006. I quote again from the FIDE handbook B02 par 16. To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a number[sic] of a national chess federation which is a number[sic] of FIDE.

This is followed by the clarifier:


That is, the Federation must not be temporarily or permanently excluded from membership. (my emphasis)

which makes it clear that the purpose of 16.1 is to enable FIDE to refuse to rate players from federations that have been suspended, eg for non-payment of dues as happens from time to time.

16.2 however gives national federations the right to ask FIDE not to rate an individual player.

Also this still does not help with the initial question. We were not talking about inclusion in the FIDE rating list but about whether membership of a national federation is required for the Olympiad.

peter_parr
26-09-2006, 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by peter Parr
Btw on 27 July 2003 Jessop made a false claim that I had broken a fundamental rule of administrative law. When proven false no apology was received.

I assume that this is a reference to the junior selection appeals. If it is, anything I said about administrative law on that occasion was right. If it is not, I don't know what you are talking about.

To refresh your memory I refer to your email Denis Jessop of 10.20pm on 27th July 2003.
I replied to you by email at 12:15am on 31st July 2003 proving that your accusations were false.
You claimed that my consideration of FIDE regulations in the tribunal decision process broke a fundamental rule of administrative law.

I confirmed in my email to you on 31st July 2003 that the ACF tribunal ruling was made on July 10th 2003 and at no time did I even look up any FIDE regulations until 24th July 2003 a full two weeks after the tribunal ruling. I did refer to the FIDE regulations in my email of 24 July 2003 but this was irrelevant to the tribunal ruling made two weeks earlier.

Your claim was false and no apology was received from you.
Your claim that you are right is wrong.

FIDE regulation B02 par 16 is very clear.
How can the ACF support the principle that you do not have to be a member of anything to represent the ACF at the chess Olympiad or you do not have to be a member of anything to have a FIDE rating when FIDE regulations say the opposite.

Jessop confirms the FIDE regulations in post 18 but refuses to abide by them.

The two Presidents (post 18) were Colquhoun and Jessop (recall now?) both well respected lawyers had a totally different opinion resulting in unresolved legal argument and a total stalemate in the junior selection appeals process. As an ACF tribunal member I received numerous pages of legal argument between Jessop and Colquhoun. This led to a total stalemate (check your July 2003 numerous pages of emails between yourself and Colquhoun). The laywoman who resolved the entire issue was Jenni Oliver.
I do not need to introduce you to her. You know her – she lives in Canberra.

The issue was resolved by Jenni on 14th July 2003 in a lengthy email you received from her on that date.

You will recall that although Jenni had resolved the matter it was another 13 days later that the ACF tribunal was advised during which you were continuing your lengthy email legal argument with Colquhoun. Needless to say Gletsos was contacting other lawyers to back up you against Colquhoun resulting in Colquhoun’s demands that Gletsos should be expelled from the Chess Association.

If you had a problem with the ACF tribunal’s legal advise a telephone call would have solved the problem either to (Gardiner, Colquhoun or myself) the tribunal.

Jessop should note that although he disagreed with the tribunal that I did receive an email from IM Jamieson ACF President which says in part and I quote “I agree with the verdict of the tribunal” in a lengthy email to me.

Sadly chess has lost two of it’s best ever ACF Presidents Jamieson and Colquhoun who have pursued other interests – largely due to Gletsos and others.

Denis each year over 20 years I met you at the annual Doeberl Cup – you were such a good bloke – always polite, friendly – what happened?

Junior chess in Australia is great. I have donated 25 clocks to the Juniors in Canberra at Christmas but the bottom line is adult chess in Australia is in a bad way.

The ACF needs new young blood who make positive contributions not constant controversy on its council.

Brian_Jones
26-09-2006, 05:08 PM
Sadly chess has lost many of it’s best administrators (including some who have pursued other interests) largely due to the selfishness of Jamieson, Parr and others.

Jamieson was a strong player with a reputation as a good chess trainer, but he was hopeless as a leader dealing with people.

Parr may have made lots of money from his chess shop but has done very little for chess in recent years.

MichaelBaron
26-09-2006, 05:54 PM
Sadly chess has lost many of it’s best administrators (including some who have pursued other interests) largely due to the selfishness of Jamieson, Parr and others.

Jamieson was a strong player with a reputation as a good chess trainer, but he was hopeless as a leader dealing with people.

Parr may have made lots of money from his chess shop but has done very little for chess in recent years.


I have known Robert Jamieson for many years, and he has always been an extremely helpful and friendly person. He used to donate a lot of time towards chess administration without asking for anything in return. I always found him fairly well-spoken and a good organiser.

peter_parr
27-09-2006, 12:18 PM
Sadly chess has lost many of it’s best administrators (including some who have pursued other interests) largely due to the selfishness of Jamieson, Parr and others.

Jamieson was a strong player with a reputation as a good chess trainer, but he was hopeless as a leader dealing with people.

Parr may have made lots of money from his chess shop but has done very little for chess in recent years.

Jamieson was in my opinion the best ACF president in my 38 years experience. He was very efficient in all matters and wasted no time on trivial matters and argumentative people – as Brian should recall.

You would have no idea how much money I have made from my chess shop during the last 33 years – I assure you absolutely no idea.

A tip for you Brian – location, location, location, CBD, CBD, CBD.

What I have done for chess is..

a) I directed the ACF Grand Prix for free, Jones charges a high fee (thus reducing prizes).

b) When I organised a number of Australian Championships/Opens I did so without any fee (directly or indirectly). Each event was running well and I increased the prize funds to make the balance $00

When you organised the Australian Open at Penrith Brian Jones received a management fee $1500 as the organiser in addition to sharing the $3616 profit for the event.

The Pratt Foundation donated $5000 most of which was shared by Brian Jones and the administration.

Has the Pratt Foundation been advised of how the money was spent? – It should be.
Half the entry fees were returned as prizes (figures supplied by B.Jones).

Do not accuse me of doing little – I do a lot for no fee – you are the one and only administrator who takes substantial fees from players and sponsors.

peter_parr
19-10-2006, 02:18 PM
Reader – please re-read post 20 – no response so far.

When will Australia abide by FIDE regulations?

Handbook B02 par 16. “To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE”

The ACF allowed some players from NSW to compete in the men’s and women’s 2006 Olympiad teams who were not members of anything?

This is a clear breach of FIDE regulations as I explained to ACF vice-President Gletsos. NSWCA President Gletsos should have sent NSWCA membership forms to the NSW players well before the Olympiad.

The 2006/2007 Australian Open entry form makes no mention of membership of State Association endorsement for all entries. (required by ACF)

Why does the ACF continue to process results in the FIDE rating list for Australian players who are not council members of anything.

It is the responsibility of the ACF to abide by FIDE regulations as I keep repeating.

The 2007 Fiji zonal makes no mention of membership – (it must to be FIDE rated).

In 2006 NSW players competed in the Doeberl Cup without being a NSWCA member (NSW no longer checks the membership).

All players who compete in the ACF Grand Prix should be members of their state association. The ACF should ensure this happens.

The official NSWCA country championship no membership of NSWCA is required.
Why not?

NSWCA rates all games played by players in NSW on the ACF rating that with non-members being treated the same as members. NSWCA pays all rating fees to ACF but non NSW members are a financial liability.

All non-members pay nothing to NSWCA who do work processing numerous results for these non-members for free?? Why??

If is not surprising that the 2005 and 2006 NSW State Championships have very low entries – the few events where membership is required.

The NSWCA would double its number of members in 12 months under good administration.
A $10 compulsory introduction first time NSWCA membership fee for all NSW players was to be introduced at the last AGM but Gletsos totally changed the motation.

Kevin Bonham
19-10-2006, 04:53 PM
Reader – please re-read post 20 – no response so far.

No response from me to the small portion of post 20 that is relevant to membership, because you were repeating a claim that I had already countered in my post 19 and you had made no attempt to defeat my counter-argument there about the correct interpretation of par 16.

eclectic
19-10-2006, 05:52 PM
from the FIDE Handbook Section D

1.1.7.2 Players

The national teams of federations affiliated to FIDE.

.....

There is nothing here which specifically requires that the players be members of the federation only that the federations be affiliated with FIDE (if I am reading this correctly).

.....

ok

.....

So does that mean that for the Olympiad just past Matthew Sweeney could have been selected were he talented enough even though he is presently banned from competing in ACF events?

You can't have it both ways and say being a member is not a requisite then turn around and say he would not have been eligible because he is a banned member.

.....

Anyone?

:whistle:

.....

Kevin Bonham
19-10-2006, 06:22 PM
So does that mean that for the Olympiad just past Matthew Sweeney could have been selected were he talented enough even though he is presently banned from competing in ACF events?

Without access to the by-laws (website down) I can't remember for sure if bans include bans on representing the country, but even if they don't Council would be free to extend the ban to cover that irrespective of the by-laws. A player serving a ban from playing shouldn't be entitled to represent the country because the sanction imposed on them goes further than them simply not being a member.

Rhubarb
19-10-2006, 06:31 PM
To stop the issue being confused, let me make it simple:

http://fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=B0216

"16.1 To be included in the FRL or FIDE Rapidplay Rating list, a player must be a member of a national chess Federation which is a member of FIDE. That is, the Federation must not be temporarily or permanently excluded from membership."

This means that I will continue to instruct the organisers of Australian FIDE-rated events that all Australian players must be members of their state associations and all OS players must be members of their own federation.

Bur from now on, if it comes to my attention that players are not members of their association, then under 16.2:

"It is the responsibility of national Federations to inform FIDE if players should not be included in the FRL, FRRL."

I will be obliged to instruct FIDE to remove such players from the FIDE rating list.

Greg Canfell
FIDE Ratings Officer

LONGINES
19-10-2006, 11:08 PM
I will be obliged to instruct FIDE to remove such players from the FIDE rating list.

Dearest Greg :D

1.) My state membership lapsed this year. If I have not renewed before playing in another FIDE rated game would my games still be FIDE rated? :eek:

2.) If in a FIDE rated game I was a state member and my opponent was not and I lost :( could I tell you he was not a member and you would not be able to have my losing game rated. :owned:

Thanking you muchly in advancely :D

Brian_Jones
20-10-2006, 08:24 AM
This means that I will continue to instruct the organisers of Australian FIDE-rated events that all Australian players must be members of their state associations and all OS players must be members of their own federation.
Greg Canfell
FIDE Ratings Officer

Well Greg, now you open a real can of worms that affects chess organisers and sponsors, none of which are really interested in the ACF, state chess administration and chess politics.

Here are some intitial questions for you:

1. How are the organisers to know who are members and who are not?

2. Can we look membership status up on an Australian player database?

3. Can we just assume that everybody on the FIDE rating list is a member?

4. Should we get rid of all the inactive players from the FIDE list?

5. Do we tell our sponsors that there are very few real chess players as most are retired, inactive or just unfinancial?

Please let me know the new system when you have solved all the problems! :)

Brian_Jones
20-10-2006, 08:44 AM
None of these questions are for me, Brian. If you actually read the thread you would understand that.

Sorry mate. You are just too clever, devious, sarcastic or whatever .
Are you supporting what PP said or not? Why not just use plain English?

pax
20-10-2006, 08:49 AM
Bur from now on, if it comes to my attention that players are not members of their association, then under 16.2:

"It is the responsibility of national Federations to inform FIDE if players should not be included in the FRL, FRRL."

You're making a hell of a lot of work for yourself.

Brian_Jones
20-10-2006, 09:53 AM
Well derrr. Retard.

Sounds like you're still on the turps this morning Greg!

Bill Gletsos
21-10-2006, 12:49 AM
Reader – please re-read post 20 – no response so far.

When will Australia abide by FIDE regulations?

Handbook B02 par 16. “To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE”

The ACF allowed some players from NSW to compete in the men’s and women’s 2006 Olympiad teams who were not members of anything?

This is a clear breach of FIDE regulations as I explained to ACF vice-President Gletsos. NSWCA President Gletsos should have sent NSWCA membership forms to the NSW players well before the Olympiad.You made the claim, unfortunately you couldnt back it up by refering to an actual FIDE regulation.
Please quote the relevant FIDE regulation that states that members of Olympiad teams must be members of their National Federation.

The 2006/2007 Australian Open entry form makes no mention of membership of State Association endorsement for all entries. (required by ACF)There is no bylaw requiring it on the entry form.

Why does the ACF continue to process results in the FIDE rating list for Australian players who are not council members of anything.In that sentence council members makes no sense. Perhaps you meant assume you mean "State Association members".
Even so there is no requirement for that under any by-law.

It is the responsibility of the ACF to abide by FIDE regulations as I keep repeating.There is no FIDE regulation requiring players to be members of their Federation to be able to play in the Olympiad.

The 2007 Fiji zonal makes no mention of membership – (it must to be FIDE rated).There is no such FIDE regulation.

In 2006 NSW players competed in the Doeberl Cup without being a NSWCA member (NSW no longer checks the membership).Not required under the GP rules.

All players who compete in the ACF Grand Prix should be members of their state association. The ACF should ensure this happens.I dont believe this was the practice in the past.

The official NSWCA country championship no membership of NSWCA is required.
Why not?To be eligible for the Country Champion the player must be a NSWCA member prior to the start of the first round.

NSWCA rates all games played by players in NSW on the ACF rating that with non-members being treated the same as members. NSWCA pays all rating fees to ACF but non NSW members are a financial liability.Incorrect. ACF admin fees for non NSWCA events are paid for by the organiser. As such there is no financial impact to the NSWCA. Virtually all NSWCA events require NSWCA or NSWJCL membership. The only exceptions that come to mind are the NSW Team Challenge Rapid events which the NSWCA considers fun events.

All non-members pay nothing to NSWCA who do work processing numerous results for these non-members for free?? Why??The amount of work required by State Ratings Officers is greatly reduced from in the past because since december 2000 the rating system has directly read the SP files for events.
Also there has been no support at past AGM's for a state Rating fee nor even a non member rating fee.

If is not surprising that the 2005 and 2006 NSW State Championships have very low entries – the few events where membership is required.Incorrect.
Membership is required in all of the following NSWCA events.
The 4 weekenders (Januaru, may, July and November)
The 2 long weekend events (NSW Open and the Ryde-Eastwood Open)
The CJS Purdy Centenary
The Fischerbooks Over 40's event
The City of Sydney
The City of Sydney Rapid
The City of Sydney Lightning
The NSW Championship
The NSW RApid
The NSW Lightning

Thats 14 events not just the 1 (State Championship) you mention.
Membership is also required for all players who play more than 2 games ibn the NSWCA Grade Matches.

The NSWCA would double its number of members in 12 months under good administration.That would require membership numbers to reach around 770. I dont recall the membership being near that when you were NSW President.
NSW membership numbers last year were the highest since Shaun Press stopped producing his magazine.

A $10 compulsory introduction first time NSWCA membership fee for all NSW players was to be introduced at the last AGM but Gletsos totally changed the motation.A $10 membership fee for all players who had never been members of the NSWCA was introduced at last years AGM.

eclectic
21-10-2006, 01:13 AM
Is the non prerequisite of player "membership" of a federation as a condition for participating in an olympiad there to permit the mercenary hiring of grandmasters if one is prepared to pay the right price?

Denis_Jessop
21-10-2006, 12:33 PM
Is the non prerequisite of player "membership" of a federation as a condition for participating in an olympiad there to permit the mercenary hiring of grandmasters if one is prepared to pay the right price?

No. I don't think so.

But one aspect of this matter that seems to have been largely overlooked is the provisions in C 05 of the FIDE Handbook regarding Paticipation in FIDE Individual and Team Competitions.

Para 1.1.1 provides that entries for those events are to be made by Federations except for the special case in 1.1.2 which is relevant only to qualifiers from one FIDE competition for another.

Para 2 deals with eligibility for participation in official FIDE Competitions and talks of players representing Federations. The only criteria are citizenship, naturalisation or residence. There is no mention of membership of the Federation. Indeed, there may be Federations that, like the ACF, do not have formal membership and FIDE is hardly likely to want to try to regulate that matter so it doesn't.

The provisions mentioned by Peter relate only to rating and not to entitlement to participate.

DJ

eclectic
21-10-2006, 01:36 PM
Para 2 deals with eligibility for participation in official FIDE Competitions and talks of players representing Federations. The only criteria are citizenship, naturalisation or residence. There is no mention of membership of the Federation. Indeed, there may be Federations that, like the ACF, do not have formal membership and FIDE is hardly likely to want to try to regulate that matter so it doesn't.

The provisions mentioned by Peter relate only to rating and not to entitlement to participate.

Yes, but for many countries an olympiad is the best chance of gaining norms or titles so aren't they going to want their prospective opponents rated or rateable and thus "members" of their federations for that purpose?

Denis_Jessop
21-10-2006, 05:13 PM
Yes, but for many countries an olympiad is the best chance of gaining norms or titles so aren't they going to want their prospective opponents rated or rateable and thus "members" of their federations for that purpose?

Maybe; but the point that was being made was that it is a FIDE requirement that Olympiad participants be Federation members and that is not so.

DJ

arosar
23-10-2006, 12:28 PM
Is Manuel Weeks a member of a state association in this country? If not, then will he be included in the Australian FIDE list?

AR

peter_parr
24-10-2006, 11:24 AM
The three wise men of the ACF Jessop, Gletsos and Bonham repeatedly claim that the players from NSW who were not members of the NSWCA had every right to be members of the ACF Olympiad Men’s and Women’s Teams without being a member of anything.

So who is right Peter Parr and the rest of the world or the three wise men.

I did not study law, computer programming or kookaburras as a teenager but greatly excelled in sheer common sense taught by my parents which I value much higher than academic studies.

My father came under the direct command of Field Marshall Montgomery (Monty to his friends) after winning the prestigious Hastings Premier Chess Tournament 1939/40 while resting on R&R leave from the Battlefields of Dunkirk.

Monty spent much of his valuable time talking not only to senior officers but also to the troops, the average soldier, solving numerous problems daily. I learned a great deal from my father about Monty which served me well in the army and naval cadets and in later life.

Gletsos is no Monty.
A President should solve problems not carry on and on and on and on without resolution. Monty would have promoted him to sergeant-major in a POW Camp on the Isle of Lewis.

I have on a number of occasions advised the three wise men the simple solution.
Memo - Monty to SM Gletsos - You have been advised that the Olympiad players agree to join the NSWCA and all they need is a membership form - stop - be a good chap and deliver to my HQ the completed forms by 23.00 hours tomorrow - stop - end of order.

As late as 21st October 2006 Gletsos explains every event ranging from lightning, rapid-play, weekenders, Sydney, NSW Championships, grade matches etc etc where each and every player must be a member of NSWCA.

NSW players who compete in each and every division of the Australian Championship/Australian Open and supporting events must be members of the NSWCA.

In fact every player from absolute beginner to Grandmaster must be a member of NSWCA in these events - yet now he says (for the first time in 21 Olympiads) there is no requirement to be a member of anything for a NSW player to compete in the Olympiad.

The NSWCA Membership form 2006 lists under "benefits of membership"
“The NSWCA supports national championships, ACF participation in international competitions and junior training programs." This is a benefit of NSWCA Membership - it says so on the membership form.

The three wise men are fortunate to be guided by a very bright light.

Close your books for a while and enter the world of common sense.

Every day like Monty I talk to the troops - the average club player - chess officials - and every Tom, Dick and Garry.

The opinion of chess players is clear and simple. If membership is required for all NSWCA events for all players their opinion is 100% clear - Olympiad players must also be members.

SM Gletsos would acknowledge this overwhelming opinion if he spoke to his troops (members). Nothing is more clear, simple and sensible as agreed by all members of the Olympiad team.

Time for the three wise men to re-open the books.
A former excellent NSWCA and ACF President and Barrister was so fed up over a lengthy dispute with the three wise men that he left chess administration.

Very sad - but the bright light remains.

In the FIDE Handbook Standing Orders 2.4(g) national chess federations must send to FIDE by 1st April each year a report containing the numbers of players belonging directly or indirectly to the Federation on 1st January of the year in question.

Read my lips again and again - FIDE Handbook B02 par 16 "To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE".

It is very clear. The Australian Chess Federation is a member of FIDE. When a player competes in the Olympiad each and every game he plays is submitted to the FIDE Ratings Officer.

So every Australian competing in the Olympiad must be a member. The NSW players who were not members must be according to this FIDE regulation.

B02 par 16 applies to each and every player on the FIDE rating list or who wants a FIDE rating. Membership is required for the period the FIDE rated event is being held.

This means if an event is to be FIDE rated in the jungle of the far far west of Sydney or the Doeberl Cup, or any FIDE rated event anywhere the above membership (FIDE Handbook B02 par 16) is a FIDE requirement.

When FIDE in the FIDE handbook lists the requirements of each individual event (dozens) it lists only the special requirements for that individual event. The membership and other issues are clearly laid out in the relevant sections of the handbook.

Winning a place in the Australian Olympic team is a dream chased by many but achieved by only a few.

It is the duty of our leading administrators to ensure that all competitive players are members from the top players right the way down. The players are selected by the Australian Chess Federation to represent the Federation as members of the Olympiad team.

On arrival at the Olympiad the team members receive accreditation and free Olympic accommodation.

The members of NSWCA are asked to donate to the team members on the NSWCA membership form. The ACF has many official fund raising activities for members of the teams. The ACF has a lengthy procedure to select the members of the team.

How is it possible for anyone to come to the conclusion that there is no requirement to be a member of anything to be selected by the Australian Chess Federation to be in the Olympiad team.

This is a clear breach of FIDE regulations, common sense, and Australia's own requirements for membership.

Field Marshall Montgomery to SM Gletsos - time is up 23.00 - see General Winston Parr at 06.00 sharp at HQ.

arosar
24-10-2006, 01:52 PM
When I was chatting to you yesterday Peter, I didn't expect anything like this from you. I mean, this is one of those posts that just about leave your readers as if like flies in the mist of a fart.

AR

pax
24-10-2006, 02:01 PM
2000016 Fischer, Robert J g USA 2780 0 1943 M i

Gee, I wonder whether Bobby is keeping up his USCF membership?

bergil
24-10-2006, 04:25 PM
When I was chatting to you yesterday Peter, I didn't expect anything like this from you. I mean, this is one of those posts that just about leave your readers as if like flies in the mist of a fart.

ARYou said it AR, that post was rank! :owned:

MichaelBaron
24-10-2006, 04:27 PM
In fact every player from absolute beginner to Grandmaster must be a member of NSWCA in these events - yet now he says (for the first time in 21 Olympiads) there is no requirement to be a member of anything for a NSW player to compete in the Olympiad.


In the FIDE Handbook Standing Orders 2.4(g) national chess federations must send to FIDE by 1st April each year a report containing the numbers of players belonging directly or indirectly to the Federation on 1st January of the year in question.

Read my lips again and again - FIDE Handbook B02 par 16 "To be included in the FIDE rating list a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE".

It is very clear. The Australian Chess Federation is a member of FIDE. When a player competes in the Olympiad each and every game he plays is submitted to the FIDE Ratings Officer.

So every Australian competing in the Olympiad must be a member. The NSW players who were not members must be according to this FIDE regulation.


When FIDE in the FIDE handbook lists the requirements of each individual event (dozens) it lists only the special requirements for that individual event. The membership and other issues are clearly laid out in the relevant sections of the handbook.

Winning a place in the Australian Olympic team is a dream chased by many but achieved by only a few.

.

1) I think it is a common practice worldwide to pay the top players whenever they play for a national team rather than to request them to join some association
2) Right now, our representatives pay their way to represent Australia overseas. To expect those who are prepared to pay as it is to support their country to join this association is unreasonable
3) Let ACF/NSW chess association find in sponsor to pay for our senior and junior teams to go and play for Australia overseas. When it happens - The respective Associations will have a moral right to demand the players to join in and become members. As of now - If a player pays his way to play overseas - It means he is playing for himself only -not for any country, club or association

eclectic
24-10-2006, 05:11 PM
As of now - If a player pays his way to play overseas - It means he is playing for himslef only -not for any country, club or association

All players play for themselves; the national flags which hover near their clocks are for decoration only. :whistle:

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 10:37 AM
:doh: According to the latest ACF Bulletin, Australia will be represented in the Asian Championships by Lee Jones. This is yet another confirmation of the way things are in australian chess. Grandmasters and Masters stay at home cause they can not be bothered to pay their own way to the championships and whoever is interested to go - can go.

Brian_Jones
25-10-2006, 12:00 PM
:doh: According to the latest ACF Bulletin, Australia will be represented in the Asian Championships by Lee Jones. This is yet another confirmation of the way things are in australian chess. Grandmasters and Masters stay at home cause they can not be bothered to pay their own way to the championships and whoever is interested to go - can go.

Come on Michael get your facts right. It is the Commonwealth Championships in Mumbai.

Lee is an FM who finishes his IT contract this Friday and will be a professional player as of Monday morning!

Why did you not apply?

Vlad
25-10-2006, 12:18 PM
It is hard for me to understand what you are complaining about, Michael. Just go to a travel agent, buy a ticket, fly and play. :evil:

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 02:02 PM
Come on Michael get your facts right. It is the Commonwealth Championships in Mumbai.

Lee is an FM who finishes his IT contract this Friday and will be a professional player as of Monday morning!

Why did you not apply?

LOL "Professional Player" :)

No Comment. I do not want to offend anyone so I will not comment on where the FM title came from and what is the value of FM titles from zonals. Anyway good luck to Lee!

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 02:03 PM
It is hard for me to understand what you are complaining about, Michael. Just go to a travel agent, buy a ticket, fly and play. :evil:

I am not strong enough to be a professional player :(. Otherwise would be no problem

Brian_Jones
25-10-2006, 02:56 PM
I am not strong enough to be a professional player :(. Otherwise would be no problem

I heard that you make 50 grand a year playing blitz against your friends.

But maybe not self-confident enough to be able to take on world class players from overseas!

Or maybe you are just not comfortable flying?

You could take the bus up to Sydney next year and play in the Sydney International Open (SIO).

Now what was this thread about Michael?

Vlad
25-10-2006, 03:07 PM
I heard that you make 50 grand a year playing blitz against your friends.

But maybe not self-confident enough to be able to take on world class players from overseas!

Or maybe you are just not comfortable flying?

You could take the bus up to Sydney next year and play in the Sydney International Open (SIO).

Now what was this thread about Michael?

50 grand a year?? What a number and I have been playing for free..:lol:
Arosar, did u hear that? Next time I see you I expect my 100K.:)

arosar
25-10-2006, 03:12 PM
Arosar, did u hear that? Next time I see you I expect my 100K.:)

Only after I get that 100K from Michael and his mates.

AR

eclectic
25-10-2006, 03:26 PM
I was listening to Andrew Martin a few days back on Playchess where he stated there simply wasn't the money to be a professional chess player in the UK and that income was supplemented by coaching, journalism etc ... so I'd deduce from that there's much less chance of earning money professionally from chess here in Australia ...

... unless of course you're a marketing "guru" :owned:

... or a savvy centralised Sydney chess retailer that's not obsessed with "members" :owned:

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 03:53 PM
I heard that you make 50 grand a year playing blitz against your friends.

But maybe not self-confident enough to be able to take on world class players from overseas!

Or maybe you are just not comfortable flying?

You could take the bus up to Sydney next year and play in the Sydney International Open (SIO).

Now what was this thread about Michael?

You are right...I am not an international player...long way to go till i feel confident enough about playing in commonwealth champs ;)

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 04:10 PM
50 grand a year?? What a number and I have been playing for free..:lol:
Arosar, did u hear that? Next time I see you I expect my 100K.:)

50K a year? wow...I am impressed myself. Last time i played for money I won about 9 bucks or so - I never realised that if I add up all my chess winnings it could be 50k:D . Next time I am playing in the park I will increase the stakes.

Btw, I like the park atmosphere - it is friendly and social and we simply get together to enjoy ourselves.

Anyway, we usually play with time odds. Like Firegoat i was playing 2.5 to 5. Elwood Organizer - 2 to 5. Domagoi - 3 to 5.


Anyway, I never added up my winnings/losses. But certainly its not $1000s of dollars that are at stake cause we usually play something like 50c a game only

eclectic
25-10-2006, 04:14 PM
Btw, I like the park atmosphere - it is friendly and social and we simply get together to enjoy ourselves.
[snip]
Anyway, I never added up my winnings/losses. But certainly its not $1000s of dollars that are at stake cause we usually play something like 50c a game only

Just be careful there are no investigators from the ATO lurking in the bushes.

:eek: :uhoh: :rolleyes:

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 04:41 PM
Just be careful there are no investigators from the ATO lurking in the bushes.

:eek: :uhoh: :rolleyes:


May be I should follow the example of Arosar's Jamaican friend - and set up a little hub in the city to take on the "city slickers" in chess. I guess I will claim I am the champion of Vanuatu or Nauru:hmm:

arosar
25-10-2006, 04:48 PM
There are unconfirmed reports that this so-called Jamaican is now in NYC.

You can laugh all you like, but this guy is living the life. Don't be so judgemental you pric*s.

AR

eclectic
25-10-2006, 05:01 PM
There are unconfirmed reports that this so-called Jamaican is now in NYC.

You can laugh all you like, but this guy is living the life. Don't be so judgemental you pric*s.

AR

Can't wait to see your blog for the photos of him getting his comeuppance from the real pros at Central Park. :whistle:

Kevin Bonham
25-10-2006, 05:09 PM
I did not study law, computer programming or kookaburras as a teenager but greatly excelled in sheer common sense taught by my parents which I value much higher than academic studies.

That's not a good sign, Peter.

With all respect to your background, in my experience almost any invocation of "common sense" in online debate is in support of views neither commonly held nor sensible.

What the NSWCA requires state membership for is none of my concern. The issue for me is whether the ACF (i) does require state membership for selections (ii) should require state membership for selections.

The answer to (i) is definitely not. The answer to (ii) is that this is under active consideration. I can see strong arguments in favour of adopting such a practice but am concerned about the impact on Australian players currently living and playing overseas and the potential impact upon our goal of acheiving the best possible result.


It is very clear. The Australian Chess Federation is a member of FIDE. When a player competes in the Olympiad each and every game he plays is submitted to the FIDE Ratings Officer.

So every Australian competing in the Olympiad must be a member. The NSW players who were not members must be according to this FIDE regulation.

This doesn't follow at all. For instance it might be that a player plays in the Olympiad, but then a ratings officer, being notified that they are not a member of their national federation, refuses to rate their games.

FIDE allowed Nigerian players to compete in the last Olympiad although their ratings service was suspended for nonpayment of dues. They were seeded as if unrated although some were rated players before Nigeria ceased to be rated. This shows clearly that you do not have to be entitled to a FIDE rating to play in an Olympiad and thus the concepts of being entitled to be rated and being entitled to play in the Olympiad are from FIDE's viewpoint clearly distinct.

Finally I must advise you of the gravest, most momentous and least acceptable violation of fact in this debate to this point. The bird shown in my avatar is not, in fact, a kookaburra. :owned:

MichaelBaron
25-10-2006, 05:55 PM
There are unconfirmed reports that this so-called Jamaican is now in NYC.

You can laugh all you like, but this guy is living the life. Don't be so judgemental you pric*s.

AR

"Earning Living through deception"

Axiom
25-10-2006, 07:59 PM
"Earning Living through deception"yes, michael, just like mainstream media!:rolleyes:

eclectic
25-10-2006, 08:04 PM
yes, michael, just like mainstream media!:rolleyes:

Make that Hollywood (et al) too! :eek:

Denis_Jessop
25-10-2006, 10:57 PM
:doh: According to the latest ACF Bulletin, Australia will be represented in the Asian Championships by Lee Jones. This is yet another confirmation of the way things are in australian chess. Grandmasters and Masters stay at home cause they can not be bothered to pay their own way to the championships and whoever is interested to go - can go.

Michael

There was a place for an Australian player to go with accommodation paid for by the host nation. This was advertised well before Paul resigned as Newsletter Editor. There were no applicants. I then put a posting on this Board while the Newsletter was inoperative due to our web problems and Lee applied. Kevin Bonham (the ACF Selection Coordinator) and I had no hesitation in endorsing Lee who I believe will be a worthy representative. I am rather disappointed that there was not a more enthusiastic response from other players at the beginning because the Commonwealth Championship is a special event run by the Commonwealth Chess Association and I believe we should support it. Indeed the Indian Chess Federation rang me to try to get lots of Australians as we are a sporting nation. I didn't have the heart to tell him that officially chess is not recognised as a sport here bearing in mind the tremendous following it now has in India.

DJ

Ian Rout
26-10-2006, 09:12 AM
The question of Olympiad players being members of a national federation sounds like a bit of a non-issue to me. If a country wants an otherwise qualified player in its team it can easily grant that player some sort of honorary membership, or pay a membership fee to itself on their behalf, considering they get ther own money back and it's a trifling amount anyway.

Did the great Soviet players of the 50s to 80s pay a fee to the USSR Chess Federation - or indeed have any choice about being designated as members?

eclectic
26-10-2006, 01:09 PM
Wouldn't such players be subject to residency requirements under FIDE transfer regulations anyway?

I doubt they would step off the plane and sign a membership form on the tarmac.

peter_parr
26-10-2006, 01:55 PM
NSWCA LIFE MEMBERSHIP (for NSWCA meeting 27 October 2006) and Chess Chat.

In recent years it has become a far too common practice for the NSWCA council to nominate its own current administrators on NSW Council or Junior Council for NSWCA Life (maybe for a 40 year or more period) Membership.

I have always believed (and stated so last year) that an absolute minimum of 20 years as a major office-bearer is essential. The NSWCA already has too many long-term life members considering its overall low membership figures.
In addition to at least 20 years life membership should not be considered before the age of 55.
We must not give life membership for 10-15 years or for younger than 55.

So far life-membership has only been awarded to administrators (apart from GM Rogers). This is not the opinion of the average chessplayer. I suggest the NSWCA consider two shorter-term life members for this year.

Firstly Maxwell Leonard Fuller.
He would become only the second chessplayer ever to receive life-membership of the NSW Chess Association for his expertise at chess. Fuller was a prominent junior, won the Australian Junior, played in the World Junior in 1963 and represented Australia in nine Olympiads (mainly on board 2) and was Captain in a tenth.
Forty years after winning the NSW Title he tied for first again in 2005 (losing the play-off to A.Bird).
He was Australian Open Champion 3 times. No other NSW player has anything like the very high record of Max Fuller.
His expertise was highly valued at numerous NSWCA Council meetings from the mid nineteen-sixties.

Ten years has passed since Fuller had a quadruple heart by pass which almost claimed his life.
At a later time paramedics saved his life literally 10 seconds before death.
Fuller was in hospital again this week with more serious problems but was fortunately allowed to go home late last night. His overall condition remains however very fragile.
I believe it appropriate that he be granted life membership as the second strongest NSW player over a period of the last 45 years.

Secondly Lloyd Stanley Fell.
Lloyd will be 88 by the time of the AGM. He was Champion of Sydney 4 times winning for the first time in 1944 (62 years ago) and NSW Champion once. Lloyd deserves a life-membership for being very easily the most active Australian chess player of all time. He has played many thousands of games as a member of NSWCA for well over six decades and remains active in 2006. It has been very rare for Lloyd to miss a tournament in my 38 year experience with NSWCA. Lloyd is a legend and a life membership for him would be well received by all NSW Chessplayers.

Correction to the NSWCA AGM Minutes of 2005.
President Gletsos - "There had been discussions concerning Peter Parr's suggestion of offering a membership fee of $10 for the first year only for new players who had never been a member of the NSWCA."

This is incorrect. There were a number of conversations in my shop in the CBD between NSWCA Presidential Candidate Jason Lyons, myself and Gletsos. Under the new President Lyons (Gletsos reneged on this firm agreement that he would not stand against Lyons for President) the $10 fee (for the first year) was to be suggested at the AGM as a requirement for all players in all clubs and competitions in NSW to become full members and be rated.
The motion altered by Gletsos must not bear my name.
The NSWCA membership numbers would have doubled in the first year of the new administration.

Currently the NSWCA continues to process numerous players ratings with no difference between members and non-members.

Entries would have been substantially higher in all events in 2006 if the new council had doubled its membership under the Lyons Presidency.

Peter Parr
NSWCA LIFE MEMBER

pull_my_finger
26-10-2006, 02:13 PM
Field Marshall Montgomery to SM Gletsos - time is up 23.00 - see General Winston Parr at 06.00 sharp at HQ.This is almost as bad as John Breenan comparing Alan Jones to JC himself! :clap: Wafi :hand:

peter_parr
26-10-2006, 03:19 PM
B02 par 16 applies to each and every player on the FIDE rating list or who wants a FIDE rating. Membership is required for the period the FIDE rated event is being held.

I firmly believe that the ACF should abide by this FIDE regulation.
All games played by Australia at the Chess Olympiad are FIDE rated.


For instance it might be that a player plays in the Olympiad, but then a ratings officer, being notified that they are not a member of their national federation, refuses to rate their games.

Kevin we must avoid this possibility by ensuring all our players are members in accordance with FIDE regulations.
Do you really want Australian games at the Olympiad not to be FIDE rated due to non membership?

This is not possible anyway as the opponent has the right to have the game rated and FIDE process all the results.

As I keep pointing out to you Gletsos and Jessop the NSW players who competed in the Olympiad have no objections to joining the NSWCA solving the problem. Sadly Gletsos does not even send them a membership form.

Membership is a requirement for all players at the time they are competing in any FIDE rated event.

Finally I acknowledge your expertise in advising the bird is not a Kookaburra – A life-time studying birds gives you high qualification in that field and deserves the same respect as a life-time devoted to all aspects of chess playing and organising.

To Michael Baron – If a situation were ever to arise (most unlikely) that a top player did not agree to pay a membership fee I am sure the ACF could resolve the problem from the Olympiad fund.

The point is Australia must abide by FIDE regulations for membership in all FIDE rated events.

In my 38 years experience in Australia I have not found any player who refuses to join the association when required to do so.

Denis_Jessop
26-10-2006, 04:09 PM
For instance it might be that a player plays in the Olympiad, but then a ratings officer, being notified that they are not a member of their national federation, refuses to rate their games.

FIDE reg B02 16 doesn't say that the games will not be rated but that the player will not be included in the Rating list. So what happens is that the games of the player are rated but his/her name is not in the rating list. Moreover this can happen should a federation find out that a person, whose name is on the rating list and should be a member of that federation (whatever that means) is not a member, even though the person in question has not recently played any rated games.

As this is the only provision to refer to federation membership - qualification to play in FIDE events rests on nationality , naturalisation or residence - I don't know how FIDE imagines it would work for a federation such as the ACF that doesn't have individual membership except for Phil Viner, Gerry Hartland, Evelyn Koshnitsky, Peter Parr, Robert Jamieson, Gary Wastell and John Hanks. Perhaps such a concept didn't occur to them. Though we generally regard a member of a State Association as an ACF member, I mention that Victoria doesn't have individual membership either so there one has to rely on membership of a club affiliated with CV which is getting rather removed from membership of the ACF.

DJ

Kevin Bonham
26-10-2006, 04:19 PM
The question of Olympiad players being members of a national federation sounds like a bit of a non-issue to me. If a country wants an otherwise qualified player in its team it can easily grant that player some sort of honorary membership, or pay a membership fee to itself on their behalf, considering they get ther own money back and it's a trifling amount anyway.

Yes, although the ACF structure with membership consisting of State Associations, Associated Bodies and Honorary Life Members is a sticking point in Australia's case. For an Australian player living overseas and ineligible to join any state association on that account there is a difficulty as to how under the current Constitution the ACF could declare such a person to be a member - short of awarding them life membership which would be quite irregular.


Kevin we must avoid this possibility by ensuring all our players are members in accordance with FIDE regulations.
Do you really want Australian games at the Olympiad not to be FIDE rated due to non membership?

This matter is about to be considered by the ACF. I am simply pointing out that it is currently a fact that an Australian player need not be an ACF member to play at the Olympiad, whatever the rating implications.


This is not possible anyway as the opponent has the right to have the game rated and FIDE process all the results.

I believe that what happens if this is the case is that FIDE still rates the non-member player, but suppresses any publication of their rating until the ACF notifies them otherwise. [Edit: Denis beat me to this; my initial comment about games not being rated was inaccurate. They are rated but the ratings are not published.]

By the way I noticed this which may help with the issue of stateless players:

16.3

Any player excluded from either rating list because he is unable to obtain membership of a national Federation, my apply to FIDE for special dispensation to be included.

But do we really want to make our overseas players go through that with no guarantee of the outcome, or not?


Finally I acknowledge your expertise in advising the bird is not a Kookaburra – A life-time studying birds gives you high qualification in that field and deserves the same respect as a life-time devoted to all aspects of chess playing and organising.

Again incorrect! Although I currently use a bird as an avatar that is merely the successor to my previous avatar (a Cape Barren goose) which was based on an in-joke on this forum. My interest in birds is not much more than that of the average keen field naturalist. I have spent much of my life thus far studying a particular group of critters but Aves they are not! (Who wants to help Peter out on this one? :D )

eclectic
26-10-2006, 04:26 PM
Though we generally regard a member of a State Association as an ACF member, I mention that Victoria doesn't have individual membership either so there one has to rely on membership of a club affiliated with CV which is getting rather removed from membership of the ACF.


The sense of feeling removed goes even further I think in that anyone in Victoria can apply to play in certain rated events in its jurisdiction but not be part of a club but still pay a rating fee on top of the pertinent entry fee in lieu.

It's all so confusing, isn't it? ;)

eclectic
26-10-2006, 04:40 PM
Why not have an overseas (or expatriate) membership class?

It might even serve as a precursor to direct player membership.

pax
26-10-2006, 05:11 PM
Are there any example of players being removed from the rating list for non-membership? I don't believe this has happened except where an entire federation has been removed for non-payment of fees.

It's a storm in a teacup. There are thousands of inactive players, who have presumably not been members of any association for decades who yet still appear on the rating list.

eclectic
26-10-2006, 05:40 PM
Are there any example of players being removed from the rating list for non-membership? I don't believe this has happened except where an entire federation has been removed for non-payment of fees.

It's a storm in a teacup. There are thousands of inactive players, who have presumably not been members of any association for decades who yet still appear on the rating list.

If only the FIDE site had a list similar to the ACF site's banned players list. :whistle: (Maybe they do?)

Those thousands of inactive players aren't worried about their ratings and membership. It's the ones playing now who would like to know where they stand.

If any of the Australian players overseas for example were expecting to receive a title in the not too distant future only to have it not happen because of bureacratic anomalies concerning "membership" we'd be getting more than a storm in a teacup.

Not that such a thing would ever come to pass, would it?

Kevin Bonham
26-10-2006, 07:21 PM
Why not have an overseas (or expatriate) membership class?


Yes, this is an idea I have raised in discussions about this too - to have a direct membership concept which would cover any player unable to join a state association by reason of residency overseas or in a state/territory without an active state association (eg the NT at the present time). In theory it might also cover anyone who was banned by their state association if the ACF disagreed with the banning, although I doubt that any such cases are likely to ever arise.

arosar
02-11-2006, 06:09 AM
Maybe it's there but I can't see it on the site. I'm sure it used to be there. Who are the NSWCA life members? Does anyone have a list?

Thanks,

AR

peter_parr
22-02-2007, 12:11 PM
The following appears on the first page of the English Chess Federation web page.

These FIDE regulations of course apply to all National Federations.


English Chess Federation

Notice About FIDE Rating

It is a FIDE requirement that "to be included in the FRL or FIDE Rapidplay Rating list, a player must be a member of a national chess federation which is a member of FIDE" (FIDE Handbook B.02, paragraph 16.1). The ECF will only submit a game for FIDE rating if both players of the game are members of a national federation. It is essential that to enter FIDE rated events membership of the ECF is necessary for FIDE rating purposes. It is very important to note that since ECF became a company limited by guarantee as well as completing the membership subscription form and paying the appropriate subscription fee all players will also need to complete and sign the ECF membership application form. Both the membership subscription form and the membership application form can be found by clicking on the "ECF membership application forms" link near the top left hand side of the ECF website www.englishchess.org.uk. The ECF application form need only be completed once for the lifetime of your membership and not annually as with the subscription form (clearly, this will not be required where players are already members of other national federations).

Please note that only original signatures may be accepted not fax or e-mail this is a legal requirement.

http://www.bcf.org.uk/national/2006/fide-rating_jun06.htm