The position of Chief Grader (CG), Membership Secretary, Webmaster and Magazine Editor are not up for formal election at the AGM – they are classed as appointments. However in the absence of detailed up to date job descriptions it might be useful to explain who does what in the organisation. The manifesto for CG would be to continue with the tasks.

The CG is responsible for all aspects of grading and along with membership are the two functions where players are most likely to have direct contact with CS.

The CG liaises with around 50 area graders round the country to assist with the operation of the grading program, the importing of result data and maintaining the accuracy of the results and player database. CG deals with the upload of results and the maintenance of the FIDE database of Scotland players.

CG is in regular contact with the membership secretary to import the weekly update of current CS members to create the valid list of people able to consult the online system. CG liaises with tournament organisers and entries secretaries to identify newcomers and visitors and assign appropriate grades. CG liaises with the programmers in relation to the online system and the programs created to import and upload data. CG liaises with treasurer to issues invoices for grading fees and maintain a database of outstanding bills. CG creates the year end printed grading list and arranges printing.

Other issues:
Web news: CG updates some of the news stories on the website along with Dick Heathwood and Andy Howie. The range of people posting information in the news list was meant to expand so that directors could have control over the frequency and content of the news and web reports on their area of responsibility – this now looks to be a likely welcome development with the issue specifically mentioned in some manifesto descriptions.
100 Club: CG liaises with treasurer and membership secretary to maintain database of subscribers and select winners.
Grand Prix: CG arranges current sponsorship and liaises with Home director, Junior Home and the programmers on the operation of the competition.

Background: CS grader for over 20 years. SCM editor in the 1990s. Started CS website in 1997.

Guys
I've thought long and hard on thisI think we may be missing a trick here to stop the bickering and other such negativity. Insteading of putting this on the president or executive commitee, couldnt we have a director, e.g the customer services director try to handle these minor grievances informally (as a primary remit for him/her) and then have the grievance escalated (possibly to the executive committee) if the grievance is unresolved. This would allow the president and others to perform his/her duties more effectively and not worry about accusations of bias etc and would hopefully reduce the vitriol on the forums. Members on all sides are obviously not happy with the present setup and feel they do not have a voice. Moderators having to step down in this environment is just not good enough. Within Chess Scotland we have a wide wealth of talent at our disposal, so let's use it productivity. We all love chess to the point sometimes it blinkers our rationale =)

We have an accommodation option that will directly benefit Congress funds. It is a four-bedroom (all doubles) apartment in the City Quay area that has been ‘loaned’ to us in lieu of cash sponsorship. If we can let the rooms – which we will do as individual units – all receipts, less cleaning & laundry costs, will go to our funds.

Full details, photos and a video can be viewed at http://www.dundee-congress.co.uk/cityQuay.htm. We are offering the rooms for the two days of Friday and Saturday (no single nights):

Ground floor bedroom - £60
One en-suite bedroom (2nd floor) - £80
Each of two bedrooms (2nd floor) - £70

For comparison, Travel Inn and Travelodge City Centre hotels are on offer (at 15th Aug) for £136 and £81 for the two nights.

Contact me directly if you are interested – <!-- e --><a href="mailto:director@dundee-congress.co.uk">director@dundee-congress.co.uk</a><!-- e --> or 01382 534863 or 07957 761653

Keith Rose

Manifesto of Calum MacQueen for IJD

Apologies to David Deary for stealing his structure 

Aims/Objectives

I have a few ideas of what the role of IJD entails. I feel the major responsibilities are

• Improve the strength of our juniors
• Send competitive squads to international tournaments including “home” internationals such as the Glourney

Only two overall objectives but I think most ideas I have fall under these two categories.

I have many plans with regards to helping our juniors reach their potential. Firstly, over the past few years we’ve seen the introduction of an online coaching set up where players up and down the country can receive good quality coaching from some of Scotland’s strongest and most motivated players. I really believe this is helping and I would like this scheme to continue to go from strength to strength. For this, I’ve enlisted the help of Andrew Green as it was his idea. He’s got some big plans moving forward and I have total confidence that he’ll keep up his good work.
Training days are also important and I’m looking into organising regular ones. I’ve been in contact with some GMs who said they’d be interested but would need some firm details before making a decision and obviously I can’t promise that just now. Online group coaching is potentially an option as well, I did some a couple of years ago for the team who went to Brazil and I think it worked well.

Selections are always a controversial policy and that’s just the nature of the beast. I’m very confident in the selectors we’ve got currently and I am in favour of allowing them as much access to information as possible which is why I’m in favour of the new selection criteria.

Experience

I’ve just “graduated” after many years as a Scottish junior after starting to play when I was 6 years old and I have seen first-hand where I think there are weaknesses in the international junior scene. I’m very passionate about junior chess and currently have 6 students online and worked in 4 schools while at university.
I totally accept that I’m a bit light in this area but I’ve got great support from some of Scotland’s old hands so I don’t think that can be a serious problem.

Why I am running?

I find some of the most satisfying moments in my chess career are ones where my students or other young Scots have done well. It’s with this in mind that I believe I’ve got the drive and ability to make a difference in the lives of young chess players.
I was delighted to hear David Deary and June Underwood were also running for their respective posts: two people I have spoken to about junior chess who have similar goals and I think we’ll make a great team taking things forward.

Cheers
Calum


Ps. Maybe my manifesto is a bit light but I’m very wary of stepping on the toes of David and June. Let me say that I fully support David’s manifesto and will help in any way that I’m needed.

From the motion on the Standing Operating Procedures of the Standards Committeee

"6. Competency of Complaints
The Committee will not investigate a complaint unless it is of the opinion that all appropriate direct routes for its resolution, if any, have been exhausted by the complainant. Where appropriate, the Committee will advise the complainant that resolution of the dispute/complaint may be best effected by other means.

Complaints which refer to an incident which occurred more than 42 days before receipt of the complaint will be time-barred, unless, in the opinion of the Panel, exceptional reasons exist for not presenting it earlier."

It's reasonable for the Standards Committee (not a very light or relaxed option) to be the last resort and not the first recourse - but I would have thought that the 'appropriate resolution' of many complaints would often take more than 42 days? If so, the SC might not do much business. Should this timescale/deadline be longer?

Technical Director

Plans:
Dependent on the outcome of the elections, I hope to continue the routine work (it’s that type of post) described in my report.
I hope to move forward the new system of arbiter qualification, though this is a bit hampered by the smaller number of arbiters who would be able to act as mentors of candidates. I hope to run a course or courses for prospective arbiters. The one-day course organised by Ayrshire last year was successful and I’d encourage other areas to do likewise – local areas know who might be interested in their area.
As indicated in my report, updates to the laws and rules will be dealt with when appropriate.

Background:
I have been a Scottish Arbiter since 1976 and International Arbiter since 1984. Though not doing as much as I used to, I still expect to be active in the arbiter area.
I organised the Scottish Congress 1995-1997. I was on the Glasgow Congress committee 1973 to about 2007.
I have held various posts since 1977 in SCA/CS, mostly in the general area of tournaments and arbiters.

Ken Stewart

Popped on very briefly as I am about to go out working.

Hamish has asked me to post the following as he is not on the noticeboard

I am submitting this Manifesto in response to Stephen Hilton posting
his as I believe it is important for members to be able to compare the
views of both candidates.
I want to make it clear I have total respect for Stephen Hilton who is
my opponent in the forthcoming election.

Chess Scotland, Election for President, August 2013
Manifesto and Curriculum Vitae for H Glen

I will work with my fellow Directors to promote and enhance the image
of Chess Scotland to put us in a position to be ready to host the
Commonwealth Championships and the Junior Team Home Internationals
next summer which CS can use to highlight the profile of Chess in
Scotland.
The year ahead is an important one for us and I have the determination
and leadership to ensure we succeed.

I will strive to promote chess at ALL levels in Scotland, which will
mean building a strong working partnership between directors, some of
whom will be new to their posts, and all others who contribute to the
Chess Family of Scotland.

The problems over the last year have shown limitations in the CS
Constitution when dealing with such issues and I intend to form a
Working Group to work on a review and redraft, which will go to CS
Council for consideration, in line with the motion already put forward
to the AGM. This must include looking at the role of Office Bearers
and in particular who deals with matters between Council Meetings.

I fully support the motion to bring Junior Chess in Scotland back
under the umbrella of Chess Scotland while still allowing different
areas the autonomy to organise events etc for themselves with the full
backing and support of Chess Scotland. The setting up of a Junior
Management Board with a direct input to CS Council would add credence
to this motion.

I will not copy it, but Point 4 in Steve's Manifesto I agree with
completely - it is the only way for Chess Scotland to move forward!!

If re-elected, I promise a Proactive year rather than the Reactive
year which has just passed

C.V.

I have been an active chess player since starting Secondary School in 1966.

I am currently Treasurer of the Glasgow Chess League, a post I have
held since May 2011.

I am currently Treasurer of Bellshill Chess Club whom I play for in
both the Glasgow and Lanarkshire Leagues.

I was Head of Delegation and Coach to the group of Chess Scotland
Juniors who attended the European Union Youth Chess Championships in
Mureck, Austria in July/August 2012.

I was Secretary of the Glasgow Chess League in 2008 until I went to
Australia on a 1 year Teacher Exchange programme where I ran the
school chess club for the year I was there, joined Geelong Chess Club
and took the opportunity to compete in the equivalent of 2 Grand Prix
tournaments with varying success.

FIDE sent this information to federations on August 12 2013 with regard to FIDE IDs - the equivalent of our domestic pnums.

"FIDE receives a big number of mainly open tournaments where organizers welcome participants from their country or foreigners who have never played in FIDE rated tournaments before; that is players without a FIDE ID number. National rating officers create ID numbers for their own Nationals but the foreigners are submitted without IDs.

QC believes that FIDE should not take responsibility to register new players as it is not possible to confirm the players' details provided by organisers. It is also not possible for FIDE to contact all Federations and request them to confirm details and create ID numbers.
QC has instructed the Elista Office to reject tournaments which are submitted without ID numbers.

We kindly request the national rating officers who cannot submit their tournaments for the reason mention above, to contact the Federations and request that they create ID numbers for the players who do not have one.

It should be noted that if a player is declared with a wrong Federation and wishes to change Federation, the Registration, Transfer & Rules of Eligibility for Player will be applied."

The key point here is that a national federation can only create IDs for their own nationals ie SCO.

Previously you could generate IDs and request the player was changed from SCO to their requested federation - now the intention is that will no longer be possible.

***********

For several years CS has suggested that anyone who does not possess a FIDE ID and is about to play in a FIDE rated tournament outside Scotland supply their year of birth to <!-- e --><a href="mailto:grading@chessscotland.com">grading@chessscotland.com</a><!-- e --> and a FIDE ID will be created. Now it looks possible that if you dont already have an ID your entry to an event abroad could be declined until such time as CS generate your FIDE ID.

You can check FIDE IDs of all SCO registered players - both rated and unrated at this link.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ratings.fide.com/advaction.phtml?idcode=&name=&title=&other_title=&country=SCO&sex=&srating=0&erating=3000&birthday=&radio=name&line=asc">http://ratings.fide.com/advaction.phtml ... e&line=asc</a><!-- m -->

Check if the name appears under any nationality code by consulting the main database here <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ratings.fide.com/">http://ratings.fide.com/</a><!-- m -->

******

There are now implications for the Scottish Championships and any other domestic event which is FIDE rated.

FIDE state that a rating officer should request foreign players get an ID but will all federations answer this request instantly - probably not. And if not it would mean transfer fees would be imposed.

Therefore any event which intends to be FIDE rated by CS should defer the acceptance of any entrant who does not currently have a FIDE ID. The player would be asked to get an ID from his national federation and only then when the player was visible in the online FIDE system could the entry be approved.

The FIDE handbook now states that it is compulsory that any event must use a FIDE licensed arbiter if it is to be rated.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=161&view=article">http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article</a><!-- m -->

Introduction section 0.3

“All arbiters of a FIDE rated tournament shall be licensed otherwise the tournament shall not be rated”.

This is not a problem in a top weekend congress like Edinburgh when one of our main arbiters is present but this change inevitably rules out most of the rounds of our knock-out club competitions (ie Richardson/Spens) which are hosted in a home club’s venue. Even if they could be encouraged to attend it is unlikely there would be a sufficient number of arbiters available to accommodate multiple matches on the same day at various locations around the country. Currently CS has five FIDE licensed arbiters. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://chessscotland.com/membership/ArbitersList.htm">http://chessscotland.com/membership/ArbitersList.htm</a><!-- m -->

FIDE confirmed to CS that they intend to enforce the policy that licensed arbiters must be used for all rated games. They suggest that CS pay 20 euro per head for every team captain in the Richardson and Spens competitions to be classed as National Arbiters who would then be licensed with FIDE. These team captains could not play in the match.

This 20 euro would be in addition to the rating fee of 1 euro per player. It is doubtful that this would be a useful allocation of scarce CS funds.

Can anyone explain the rationale behind the pairings for this tournament? Is there a reason why top v bottom in a 128 player field should be used? It always seems incredibly unfair to me (but I may be missing some inherent logic?!)

1 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2813 Markov, Mikhail KGZ 2304
2 G., Akash m IND 2340 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2796
3 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2784 Bwalya, Gillan f ZAM 2341
4 Bjelobrk, Igor m AUS 2341 Grischuk, Alex. g RUS 2785
5 Karjakin, Sergey g RUS 2772 Ali, Sebbar m MAR 2371

........

60 Lupulescu, Const. g ROU 2634 Sasikiran, Krishnan g IND 2660
61 Zvjaginsev, Vadim g RUS 2659 Swiercz, Dariusz g POL 2654
62 Kobalia, Mikhail g RUS 2651 Khismatullin, Denis g RUS 2653
63 Yu, Yangyi g CHN 2662 Beliavsky, Alex. g SLO 2651
64 Istratescu, A. g FRA 2646 Lysyj, Igor g RUS 2648