16-08-2012, 10:16 AM
I'm still uneasy about making FIDE "national" badging a requirement for properly CS recognised "residents" to win the Scot ch title.
1. As I understand it, the existence of FIDE national bandings was never intended to take away the discretion of any member country to decide who should qualify to win their national championships. FIDE's sole purpose in using these is merely to bring order to the management of the rating system and to regulate the "nationality" of participants in "national" teams playing in FIDE events.
2. To take the Danny Kopec case (as it's been raised and is quite a good one):
(a) FIDE would certainly nowadays bar such a USA banded player from playing in FIDE events for Scotland and they probably did in 1980 too (in my view quite rightly).
(b) Yet there remains a very strong case for member countries, if they so wish, to allow players such as Danny to play for their national championship title (if he/she meets whatever is the current definition by a member country of residency).
© Danny Kopec actually lived for about 5-6 years in Scotland and contributed immensely to Scottish chess at the time. His case in fact actually raises an interesting Q as to whether the motion should not really be about rationalising the aptness of the current definitions "permanent" and "transitory" residence. These perhaps really ought to be rationalised and replaced by a straightforwardly objective "period" of residency - of however many years lived in Scotland (and perhaps proportions of years to catch any truly "transitory" person).
(d) Since how can you assess, in particular, "permanent"? Say someone from another FIDE member country gets a job in Scotland, relocates to Scotland with a view to a "permanent" life stay, but then gets made suddenly redundant after whatever period is set for "residency" and shifts back out of Scotland.
(e) It would in that case seem bizarre to have disallowed someone like Danny Kopec from winning the 1980 Scot champ title (after some 3-4 years residence in Scotland) yet to have allowed this other person that right, simply because he / she wasn't deemed "transitory" ar even, heaven forbid, a "student".
3. Apart from that, I also agree with Alex and Douglas that any link to the FIDE banding raises many other tricky management Qs, not least costs for transfers and considerable scope for admin disputes.
4. And, to answer Andrew's point, I can't for the life of me see why someone like Jacob Aagaard should not be able to choose to retain his DEN classification and decide not to play for SCO yet because of his very long-term residence and obvious chess activity in SCO not also be able to play for the Scot Champ title.
1. As I understand it, the existence of FIDE national bandings was never intended to take away the discretion of any member country to decide who should qualify to win their national championships. FIDE's sole purpose in using these is merely to bring order to the management of the rating system and to regulate the "nationality" of participants in "national" teams playing in FIDE events.
2. To take the Danny Kopec case (as it's been raised and is quite a good one):
(a) FIDE would certainly nowadays bar such a USA banded player from playing in FIDE events for Scotland and they probably did in 1980 too (in my view quite rightly).
(b) Yet there remains a very strong case for member countries, if they so wish, to allow players such as Danny to play for their national championship title (if he/she meets whatever is the current definition by a member country of residency).
© Danny Kopec actually lived for about 5-6 years in Scotland and contributed immensely to Scottish chess at the time. His case in fact actually raises an interesting Q as to whether the motion should not really be about rationalising the aptness of the current definitions "permanent" and "transitory" residence. These perhaps really ought to be rationalised and replaced by a straightforwardly objective "period" of residency - of however many years lived in Scotland (and perhaps proportions of years to catch any truly "transitory" person).
(d) Since how can you assess, in particular, "permanent"? Say someone from another FIDE member country gets a job in Scotland, relocates to Scotland with a view to a "permanent" life stay, but then gets made suddenly redundant after whatever period is set for "residency" and shifts back out of Scotland.
(e) It would in that case seem bizarre to have disallowed someone like Danny Kopec from winning the 1980 Scot champ title (after some 3-4 years residence in Scotland) yet to have allowed this other person that right, simply because he / she wasn't deemed "transitory" ar even, heaven forbid, a "student".
3. Apart from that, I also agree with Alex and Douglas that any link to the FIDE banding raises many other tricky management Qs, not least costs for transfers and considerable scope for admin disputes.
4. And, to answer Andrew's point, I can't for the life of me see why someone like Jacob Aagaard should not be able to choose to retain his DEN classification and decide not to play for SCO yet because of his very long-term residence and obvious chess activity in SCO not also be able to play for the Scot Champ title.