Posts: 1,927
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
Congratulations to Neil Berry for not only achieving his final IM norm, but also becoming 2015 Scottish Champion.
Overall winner was Oleg Korneev
Craig Pritchett was Scottish Seniors Champion
Colin McNab and Roddy McKay were the U50 Seniors Joint Champions
Junior Champion was Declan Shafi
Sarah Smith was the Girls Champion
and finally Player of the Year was Andy Burnett
Congrats everyone!
I'll be updating the website later on when I get in 
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 462
Threads: 14
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
1
Well done Neil. Long overdue!
Posts: 1,927
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
Can I personally thank the following :
Our Benefactor for allowing this event to go on
Alex McFarlane for the organising despite not being 100%
Lara, Donald, Ken, Dave and Simon for their invaluable assistance arbiting, game entering etc etc (without these 5 we would not have been able to do half the things we did!)
The Jannies for being so good with us
Howard for the book store
Karen Howie for taking entries
David Congalton, Finance Director extrodinare!
and finally, each and every one of you who played, watched online or spectated, for making it a really good Scottish this year. We had no issues of note and many many laughs. We got a lot of positive feedback on that venue!
See you all next year hopefully in Glasgow
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 208
Threads: 18
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
Yes, great event, thanks all round and congrats to Neil Berry, who played an excellent tournament and fully deserved Scot Championship title. Alas a correction is necessary, as below.
I am pleased to say that I actually won both the 50+ and 65+ scot championships. Sadly this is contrary to the erroneous announcement at the CS homepage (and above) that I won 'only' the 65+ title. In fact, I was the highest placed 50+ player and won that title, too.
The organisers made an extremely unfortunate howler, to say the least, by awarding the 50+ title to Colin McNab and Roddy McKay at the prize-giving. As I scored 6.5/9 to their 6/9, I was shocked and completely aghast when I wasn't called up to receive the 50+ title, as I had expected to be.
There was nothing in the rules to say that a 65+ player could not qualify for the 50+ title. Apart from anything else it would be age-discriminatory to do so and it is also contrary to FIDE rules in seniors chess ... 65+ players are free to enter 50+ events ... of course!!
I am not prepared to leave this matter as it stands and insist that CS recognises my 50+ title asap or it will go much further.
Posts: 40
Threads: 10
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
0
Totally agree. If you are 65+ then you must also be 50+. However, the "seniors" has always been a fun title and as such I think that titled players should be excluded. What do you think?
Good sense is of all things in the world the most equally distributed, for everybody thinks himself so abundantly provided with it, that even those most difficult to please do not commonly desire more of it than they already possess. Descartes
Posts: 1,927
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
Scottish Grading can be found here and FIDE here. Please can I ask you to check them and let me know of any errors
Cheers
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 1,003
Threads: 101
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
1
To my mind, even though it wasn't explicit, the 50+ section was designed to be 50-64, and the 65+ is a separate section. It didn't state this, but I would be surprised if anyone would think it fair that a 66-year old could win both prizes but a 64-year old couldn't?!
Posts: 208
Threads: 18
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
Andy B
Thanks for the thought, but you are aware that what you suggest is age-discriminatory ... you can't rule out 65+ players from 50+ events (even FIDE understands this!)
Moreover, if forced to choose (I disagree that you should be) whether I'd wish to 'claim' my 50+ or 65+ title, which do you think I'd have plumped for? Nobody even did me the courtesy of asking me that question.
Why not just support me and correct an unfortunate administrative howler?
Posts: 1,003
Threads: 101
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
1
Hi Craig, you're obviously feeling aggrieved and perhaps rightly so. The senior eligibility wasn't explicit so as it stands I think you are in the right.
My point was that I feel the intention was to have separate sections (I may be wrong about this) and I don't see what would be 'age-discriminatory' about this considering that the entire concept itself is obviously discriminatory in nature?!
I'm more than happy to support you once I'm convinced that you're correct in what you say. It would be interesting to know what the organisers and others think about the situation, or perhaps FIDE guidelines which cover 'senior titles within a larger event'.
Congratulations on your title(s) anyway Craig- hopefully this matter can be resolved amicably and clearer rules and guidelines put in place for next year.
Posts: 208
Threads: 18
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
From The Equalities Act 2010. My case falls into the first of four main categories of age discrimination.
direct discrimination: treating someone less favourably because of their actual or perceived age, or because of the age of someone with whom they associate. This treatment can only be justified if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim which means it must be appropriate and necessary, (economic factors such as business needs and efficiency may be legitimate aims).
1. I am being treated less favourably because of age by being forced to accept the 65+ title but not the 50+ title ... simply because I am 65+
2. in chess this would be legitimate if we had played NOT in one BIG Swiss event (in which all ages are competing in the same competitive environment) BUT in age-separate tournaments (then if I'd won, say the 65+ event, I couldn't have won the 50+ event or vice versa, quite legitimately).
3. While the Act applies only to 'employees', it's principles tend to be regarded as best practice more widely (and would normally be the sort of guide that one would expect a well-functioning community representative body (such as CS) to aspire and adhere to.
4. Legally matters are less clear but leaving the Act aside, the promise in the entry form does not suggest that (at the very least) someone who is the best scoring 50+ Scot (and 65+) should NOT be given the choice (none was offered) of whether they wish to 'claim' the 50+ title OR the 65+ title.
5. My view (in accordance with 2 above) is that in a single Swiss event anyone eligible for whatever number of Scottish titles should be awarded all of them (if they win them by scoring most points). I would, however, recognise that an exception might be made for any relevant money prizes (but not the actual titles), so that winning a clutch of titles isn't simply a money-spinner. I believe that this would be FIDE's view (but they only organise separate age-group tournaments for seniors and juniors).
6. Having 'won' the 50+ title, I now find that my name is expected to be expunged from the CS record, as having done so. I'm livid, all right! Something for the Standards Committee to get their teeth into?
|
