18-09-2013, 02:59 AM
Hi Andy
Thanks for your kind wishes.
I’ll get my explanation in first – I wasn’t at the AGM and haven’t seen the minutes but I have been given some gen on this topic. I did follow the arguments re 50/80 variation, published/live, etc but got fed up after a while. I concluded that whichever system was used some people would be content, others not so, and so there can be no single system that would please everyone.
Spens question first – the decision at the AGM was 5 – 2 for strict grading order versus 50 point variation, so that’s clear enough;
Richardson – the decision was 4 – 4. So what to do? Normally in the case of a tied vote my inclination is to go for status quo on the basis that no decision has been made to change. My approach to all the tournaments that I had to look at was that status quo would not be best so in this case I plumped for change. I’m aware that grading order has been controversial but at least there is no longer room for interpretation, the rule is clear, everyone knows what it means and it will be the same for all.
By the end of the season if there is wide opposition to the variation rule then it can be challenged at the next AGM.
Doubtless there will be other questions/queries but if they are all ‘minor’ I’ll be content.
There is still work to be done.
Cheers
Keith
Thanks for your kind wishes.
I’ll get my explanation in first – I wasn’t at the AGM and haven’t seen the minutes but I have been given some gen on this topic. I did follow the arguments re 50/80 variation, published/live, etc but got fed up after a while. I concluded that whichever system was used some people would be content, others not so, and so there can be no single system that would please everyone.
Spens question first – the decision at the AGM was 5 – 2 for strict grading order versus 50 point variation, so that’s clear enough;
Richardson – the decision was 4 – 4. So what to do? Normally in the case of a tied vote my inclination is to go for status quo on the basis that no decision has been made to change. My approach to all the tournaments that I had to look at was that status quo would not be best so in this case I plumped for change. I’m aware that grading order has been controversial but at least there is no longer room for interpretation, the rule is clear, everyone knows what it means and it will be the same for all.
By the end of the season if there is wide opposition to the variation rule then it can be challenged at the next AGM.
Doubtless there will be other questions/queries but if they are all ‘minor’ I’ll be content.
There is still work to be done.
Cheers
Keith