Scottish Championships 2019

[Alan Tate]

And did these 16 people not stop to think about the consequences for the very specific case of Matthew Turner?

[Alastair White]

Alan and others - as one of the 12 present at the 2016 AGM, I was not under the impression that that vote changed anything other than to prevent someone who was registered elsewhere but qualified by residence or parentage to become Scottish Champion. So for example someone registered with another federation who was currently resident in Scotland, or had Scottish parents, would be ineligible; likewise anyone registered in Scotland who chose to transfer to another federatrion would lose his eligibility regardless of residence or parentage. I don't think the proposal stated that anyone with a 'SCO' registration was eligible to be Scottish Champion.

Prior to the 2015 AGM I personally did a lot of work on coming up with elgibility criteria as part of the constitutional review. There was a lot of discussion around that time and there was no general consensus on the best way forward. Ultimately it was decided that this should not be a constitutional matter and eligibility rules should be part of the operating procedures for the appropriate officials/bodies. However that does result in some perceived lack of visibility.

I produced a proposal along with a detailed discussion paper at that time and this still represents my own considered views on the whole area of eligibility in general. I would be tempted to publish that here but would not do so without the permission of the President (who commissioned the review and who provided some input to it personally).

[WBuchanan]

Useful, thanks Alastair. Alan's original post suggests there is a perception that an AGM granted Matthew eligibility; I don't think this is the case, but it may have been a CS official going from memory.

It's clear that if there was such a motion, it couldn't have been the 2016 one (the AGM vote was on the motion "Chess Scotland Champion must be SCO registered"; as noted, this was about dual nationalities) or 2015.

The 2011 AGM afforded Matthew a transfer of nationality to Scottish - indeed that was the subject matter. At that point Matthew didn't have a nationality, or was about to relinquish it. A nationality is needed  by FIDE to even process ratings, so would have been relatively urgent for him. But his eligibility (for International Selection or Championship) was not put to the membership, as far as I can tell. Open to correction, but I've not found it in any of the minutes. On the contrary, there are numerous instances of statements from some CS officials who evidently believed that the 'Scottish parent' criterion should be changed (in the context of Matthew) to 'grandparent' in order to give Matthew eligibility. Not all CS officials agreed of course - indeed the change to 'grandparent' was raised at a 2014 Council meeting, but voted against.

More generally, I hope Alastair you publish your thoughts on eligibility as I know you've looked into it in great detail!

[TimWall]

I would like to put on record my thanks to those Scottish chess players who answered my questions yesterday about Scottish Championship eligibility. I was researching a possible article on the issue of the 2019 Championship outcome for Chessbase.com, but decided ultimately not to go ahead with publication.
I felt it would reflect negatively on Scottish chess, which was not my intention, and harm Scottish chess players, for whom I have the greatest affection and among whom I have many great friends.
I am, however, extremely critical about the lack of information and clarity about who is eligible to compete for the Scottish Champion title, as I felt very bad for Colin McNab, a dear friend of mine, who clearly thought that Matt Turner was not eligible and therefore took a very quick draw, foregoing any attempt to play for first prize.
Not only were there no clear notices on display at the tournament hall about who was and was not eligible, but the 4-word phrase in the entry form ('satisfying Scottish nationality (SCO)') seems to me extremely ambiguous. There is also no information about the 'Scottish Championship Entry Rules' on the 'Information' page on the Chess Scotland website: https://www.chessscotland.com/information/rules/
Tournament Director Alex McFarlane seems to think that phrase was sufficient to inform everyone, but given what I am now learning about the somewhat confusing history of the requirements to play for Scottish teams and to be eligible for SCO affiliation with FIDE, it is perhaps not surprising that no players in the tournament (including even Matt Turner) appeared to know that he was in fact eligible for the Scottish title. Matt told me himself in an email yesterday that the first time he heard he was eligible to win the title was when Jonathan Grant mentioned it to him half an hour before the prizegiving.
I am, of course, purely a disinterested (but sympathetic) outsider, but I do hope Chess Scotland manages to get its information out there properly and clearly in future.
A good start would be a simple apology and putting those 'Scottish Championship Entry Rules' up on the website!
I would particularly like to thank Chess Scotland President Jim Webster for taking the time to talk personally to me (off the record) by phone yesterday. His thoughtful comments, and promise that any problems will be rectified for next year, have gone a long way to satisfy me that the situation will be resolved.
And I do hope to play again in the Scottish International Open if the organisers will have me

[amuir]

Were the results shown on a noticeboard at the congress ? Or was chess-results the only format ? A few years ago on the noticeboard, the controller would clearly show who was eligible to win scottish championship, junior /senior titles etc. This process should be retained in future championships.

A swiss with foreigners is a bit unfair anyway in deciding titles, e.g. Murad quick draw with Gormally etc in previous year.

Should we stop the under 30-move draw too ?

[George Neave]

Matt Turner - Scottish Champion but not eligible to play for Scotland?

Personally I'd like to see Alistair White's paper.

[TimWall]

I have perhaps an even simpler solution to the question of how to run Scottish Championships in future. Now that it is clearly established that anyone affiliated as SCO with FIDE is eligible, why not just organise an a 10-player All-Play-All Scottish Championship (with possibilities for GM, IM and other norms)?
The lineup this year would have been:
1 GM Matt Turner
2 GM Colin McNab
3 GM Keti Arakhamia-Grant
4 FM Iain Gourlay
5 FM Alan Tate
6 IM Roddy McKay
7 IM Craig Pritchett
8 Andrew McClement
9 FM Neil Berry
10 Adam Bremner
If it were necessary to increase the rating strength, just try to get more of Scotland's (semi-retired) GMs to play. It would be a nice tournament, and surely not that difficult to persuade them!
Alongside the closed Championship, run an international open Swiss. That would also give up and coming players opportunities (and qualifying places for next year's Scottish Ch).
What do you think, folks? Surely it's not rocket science

[WBuchanan]

Tim wrote:

"Tournament Director Alex McFarlane seems to think that phrase was sufficient to inform everyone, but given what I am now learning about the somewhat confusing history of the requirements to play for Scottish teams and to be eligible for SCO affiliation with FIDE, it is perhaps not surprising that no players in the tournament (including even Matt Turner) appeared to know that he was in fact eligible for the Scottish title. Matt told me himself in an email yesterday that the first time he heard he was eligible to win the title was when Jonathan Grant mentioned it to him half an hour before the prizegiving."

There is a good reason why no-one 'knew' !

There has been only one source seen so far that believed that Matthew was eligible to be Scottish Champion, or indeed to be selected for Scotland. The Tournament Director did not appear to obtain the current criteria.

The communication was not the main problem.
Was this decision not therefore simply an error?
In which case, the question is not how or whether the Tournament Director 'informed everyone' but what is the scope of this error.

No one has called for an altered outcome to the Championship decision - but this fact should not be taken as indication that this case should form a new eligibility policy, and that the old one can be discarded.

If the eligibility criteria on July 6 were based on Scottish birth, parentage or residence then that's what they should be today. It needs a formal process to change them.

[Adam Bremner]

What a shame this is the thread to come of the event. First of all thanks to the organisers for running a great event to play in, it was my first Scottish Champs and won't be my last. Venue was fantastic, the pairings were always made and put online as soon as they were able, live boards were working for people watching online, and overall from a playing conditions standpoint, everything was great. Also congratulations to Matt on winning the title, he never looked in trouble in any round, and was a deserved winner.

As the person who took the draw with Colin in the final round... I had always assumed Matt could win the title based on the entry form, however when I saw the r9 pairings, I felt I had to confirm that with Alex to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting. Despite playing terrible chess for a few rounds at the start, if Matt was not eligible, there was an outside chance I could have become Scottish Champ with a win, so I would have to try everything. When it was confirmed Matt was eligible, I knew I was out of the running, and with a draw on the top board, Colin was also unable to win. I assumed Colin had offered me a draw also knowing this and was resigned to a quick draw on b1, and as I was out of the running with Matt being eligible, I decided to take it and go home to watch the cricket final.

If there was misunderstanding caused by the criteria that is very unfortunate, but it's not fair to level that at the event or Matt.

[Alan Tate]

Lots of interesting points and ideas but before getting sidetracked I just want to know exactly how the vote went down and if proxies were used. 
Hopefully Alistair can publish his findings too.