Live Boards

[Phil Thomas]

Since when was Chess Scotland run by a dictatorship?

Easier just to force everyone to play on live boards to be honest.

This does not sit well with my understanding of the situation. The use of the live boards was not advertised in advance, and I do not like the idea of 'forcing' someone to play on a live board in such a situation, or indeed in any situation.

As recently as the Prestwick Congress Steve took part, and played on the live boards in each of the 5 rounds. The difference being that the use of the live boards was advertised in advance.

Let's get this in perspective, although one or two people have been concerned, it is a very minor event, nobody died. Please get off your high horses.

You misunderstand. I didn't mean actually tying someone to a chair in front of a live board and making them play a game of Chess on it. They are entitled to go home if they wish. But if the Congress organisers decided to take Andy up on the offer of live boards being used then the odd player shouldn't disrupt proceedings because they don't want to play on it (I'm not saying that's what happened - but I'm saying it shouldn't). It doesn't state on an entry form that air will be available for breathing either, but it's assumed for the smooth running of the event. It becomes silly if organisers have to write a terms & conditions page on each entry form, purely to satisfy those who look for intricate details. People went to a Chess tournament and there were Chess sets there. It's not too much to expect people to play on the equipment which has been made available. It should be hardly surprising to people that others might actually want to watch some of the games. Why wouldn't they? You wouldn't turn on the Olympics and have the 100m sprint broadcast turned off because Usain Bolt didn't want anyone watching on TV, would you?

And there are no "high horses" to be coming down from Andy. We all have our opinions on the matter and the above is mine. I don't see it as a dictatorship that an organiser would want to supply the best equipment available and expect the players to play on it. If that is a dictatorship in your eyes then you'd have to conclude that every congress is the work of a dictator.

Reality check here.

Chess Scotland is a democracy. Necessary because it has a monopoly position

Most Tournament Directors are a dictator. Nothing wrong with that. They are all benevolent dictators. If players don't wish to attend a congress they can opt out for one year or more and it doesn't harm them in any way.

My personal view but dictator when used in the context of chess is another name for a committee of one.
And as such the guy is quite capable of requesting and receiving and taking advice from anyone of his /her choosing. In my experience there is no time or need for a formal selection process to choose which advisors - you just get on with the job.

Continuing the metaphor. The reason Oban has been so successful over the years is that large numbers of players time make major efforts to attend. To introduce a cliche (I would normally avoid cliches like the plague) the players vote with their feet.