21-08-2014, 07:13 PM
Not connected directly or prompted by any previous motion or discussion I intend to propose under AOCB that "The Richardson and Spens Cups should be FIDE rated."
There is much previous debate on this board on this topic and it concluded with the thought that FIDE licensed arbiters had to be physically present at each match to allow the event to be rated. That regulation was not one with which CS could comply - ie lack of relevant arbiters necessary for multiple locations often on same day.
FIDE regulations on this point are badly drafted and although the presence of an arbiter is implied another interpretation is also possible. We have been continuing a correspondence with a FIDE official who insists that for a rating only non-title tournament (ie just like Rich/Spens) the only requirement is that the person mentioned on the registration is a licensed arbiter. Captains cannot act as arbiters but can indicate rules to players and advise them to comply.
“The arbiter named at the point of registration is responsible for ensuring that results are submitted to the national Rating Officer. They must be on the list of paid-up Licensed Arbiters.”
We have licensed arbiters who are willing to put their name forward as the registered official.
So on that basis I think Rich/Spens can be rated. The motion will give members a chance to give their view on whether they want these events FIDE rated.
If the AGM vote is yes and subsequent FIDE regulations specify arbiter must be present then at least we will have a recorded vote indicating member preference on the issue.
The reason why this idea of proposing a vote on FIDE rating Rich/Spens is delayed until now is because this issue of arbiters physically present was meant to be thrashed out at the relevant meeting in Tromso but it was never discussed such was the reported chaotic nature of the FIDE congress.
Douglas Bryson (CS rating)
There is much previous debate on this board on this topic and it concluded with the thought that FIDE licensed arbiters had to be physically present at each match to allow the event to be rated. That regulation was not one with which CS could comply - ie lack of relevant arbiters necessary for multiple locations often on same day.
FIDE regulations on this point are badly drafted and although the presence of an arbiter is implied another interpretation is also possible. We have been continuing a correspondence with a FIDE official who insists that for a rating only non-title tournament (ie just like Rich/Spens) the only requirement is that the person mentioned on the registration is a licensed arbiter. Captains cannot act as arbiters but can indicate rules to players and advise them to comply.
“The arbiter named at the point of registration is responsible for ensuring that results are submitted to the national Rating Officer. They must be on the list of paid-up Licensed Arbiters.”
We have licensed arbiters who are willing to put their name forward as the registered official.
So on that basis I think Rich/Spens can be rated. The motion will give members a chance to give their view on whether they want these events FIDE rated.
If the AGM vote is yes and subsequent FIDE regulations specify arbiter must be present then at least we will have a recorded vote indicating member preference on the issue.
The reason why this idea of proposing a vote on FIDE rating Rich/Spens is delayed until now is because this issue of arbiters physically present was meant to be thrashed out at the relevant meeting in Tromso but it was never discussed such was the reported chaotic nature of the FIDE congress.
Douglas Bryson (CS rating)