Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
MacIsaac and Nancy Elder
Hi Keith,

Congratulations on becoming Home Director I am certain you will do a great job. I thoroughly enjoy Dundee Congress and this is in no small part down to your efforts.

In terms of the MacIsaac and Nancy Elder, I think the issues are two fold: primarily, a lot of players don't seem to know the tournaments exist so we need to raise their profile a little bit and make a spectacle of them. Secondly, I believe we need to open the tournaments up and loosen the restrictions a little bit to get more participants.
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!
Hi David
and congratulations to you too. The junior scene has a dynamic new voice!
I'm glad you enjoy Dundee - as it happens we're running it again this year Big Grin

Thanks for your input re MacIsaac/NE - letting as many as possible know about them has, so far anyway, relied on club secs letting their memberships know but perhaps that hasn't always been diligently carried out. I'm not sure how to improve on this.

As for your last sentence, I respectfully refer you to the answer I gave to the honourable gentleman one post ago 8)
Well, the rules aren't that restrictive - any club can enter a player in each tournament.
I suspect lack of publicity and the possible travel involved for just one game are the more likely reasons for a low turnout.
I get my kicks above the waistline, sunshine
No restrictions. (Except possibly CS membership).

All players invited to participate. £5 entry fee.

Local/Regional groups of ideally 4. 3 games each. Winner advances. Tie's decided by rapid game or some other play-off.

Second round - as above but slightly wider regions.

Third round - as above but even wider regions.

Final - 4 finalists for each event. 3 games over a weekend. Two incremental time games on Saturday. One on Sunday. World cup style tie-breaks if required. Ayr Congress at end of May could offer venue for such a final and possibly free accommodation for the Saturday night to finalists.

Format would support up to 256 participants in each event.

Just the bones.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
David G Congalton Wrote:No restrictions. (Except possibly CS membership).

All players invited to participate. £5 entry fee..

Appreciate this alternative idea but surely that should be a new competition. The MacIsaac & Nancy elder is aimed specifically at club members or more precisely club champion. Therefore cs membership should not be a requirement so long as the player is a member of the club. To expand these events maybe it should not be restricted to just the club champ especially if they dont want to take part. Maybe the club can nominate a player as well as club champ.

Imo the problem of these events has been getting the matches organised and played. Perhaps the first two rounds can be arranged at a central venue on one day. First round in morning, losers of the first round still play in the afternoon but as graded friendly. Depending on the entry further one day events could be organised in the same format. By advertising the one day dates in advance players will then know what they are committing to. Where as currently they dont know if they are committing to travel from Dumfries to Inverness for one game which is putting people off. However I also agree the event doesn't have a high profile or well known of who is eligible or how to enter as relying on club Secretaries to promote.
The club has to be a member of Chess Scotland. There is no restriction on the person being a member if I recall correctly
"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"
In the past these tournaments have been restricted to one player per CS-member club, and there has been no requirement for the individuals to be members of Chess Scotland.

If the tournaments are opened to all members of CS-member clubs (without limit of numbers), it would seem reasonable to continue without a requirement for the players to be individual members of CS.

But if the tournaments are opened to all players, regardless of club membership, then there is a case for restricting entry to individual CS members. I am not saying there should be such a restriction, but if the tournaments are being run by CS it would seem reasonable to restrict the benefit to CS members (like the Grand Prix and the Scottish Championships). In that case I would, however, argue that juniors up to age 11 (at least) should not need to be CS members to take part.

In essence, we are talking about new tournaments, rather than about the MacIsaac and the Nancy Elder as they were envisaged and as they used to be. But if no new approach is tried, the tournaments will die and their names will disappear into history. At least by trying something new we may be able to preserve them and thereby continue to honour the memory of the people whose work they commemorate.
Well, we have a sudden avalanches of suggestions - thank you all. Further contributions would be very welcome.

It is now mid-Saturday evening and as I am starting to wind down a little forgive me if I don't reply to all the points above but I will throw down some early thoughts:

Quote:a lot of players don't seem to know the tournaments exist
Quote:the event doesn't have a high profile or well known of who is eligible or how to enter

This is certainly true. I know from my own experience as Sec of Castlehill. Every AGM I ask if anyone wants to take part, yet every time I am asked – often by the same ones who asked the year before - what the events are about, what’s involved, etc. Perhaps the problem here is that Secs get a piece of paper from Dick Heathwood and they announce (or not) the details at their pre-season meetings or in other restricted ways. This time, with Dick Heathwood’s help, I intend to email full details (from me) club Secs with a request to circulate among their members. It might help a little

Quote:All players invited to participate. £5 entry fee.

The new arrangements (to be announced publicly soon but still open to improvement) will give the chance for more players to participate than current rules allow.
Re entry fee, this won’t be for me to decide, but my view is that entry fees should be levied as they have in the past, i.e a single charge for each tournament that enables a club’s members to participate. Thinking about that, perhaps there is a barrier here also, if a club doesn’t wish to fund entrants. Maybe there’s a way to enable players to bypass this and pay their own entrance fee if they wish. More thought needed.

Quote:Local/Regional groups

Certainly, if there are enough entries.

Quote:the possible travel involved
Quote:travel from Dumfries to Inverness

Travel is definitely an issue. If numbers rise then regionalising at least one round should be possible. If numbers don’t rise significantly then perhaps some of the other ideas in this thread might help, but I’ll need to give them further thought. As can you if you don’t mind
The current rules allow for a central venue to be used if players live more than 60 miles apart, but I take your point – even 59 miles could be problematic for some.

CS members, or not.

Not a decision for me, I think, or not only me anyway. My first thoughts are that entry should be open to anyone, regardless of individual membership, who is a member of a club that is a member of CS, as is currently the case. For those who are not in CS-member clubs if we demand individual CS membership that would debar a large number of players so, until we can get numbers up, I believe we should not introduce this restriction. Those players would, of course, be contributing something to CS as they would have to pay their own entry fee (which, I suggest, should be the same as the clubs’ fees)

Excuse me for not responding to other points in the thread – my winding-down is accelerating and my concentration is nosediving.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)