Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Scottish Girls Championships - Location
#11
Quote:I would like to highlight that the decision to host the "Official" Scottish Girls championship in a fairly remote part of Scotland (2.5 hrs from Glasgow & Edinburgh, and over 3.5 hrs from Ayrshire) shows poor judgement. Are we to subject our children to 5-7 hours travel that day, or is the ideal to implicitly restrict it to those that can afford the accommodation costs (and disruption) that will be incurred?

Surely the distance is the same whether traveling to this "remote" area as traveling from it? Or are you thinking that the juniors who live there are less effected by long journeys, and it is therefore fair that they are always the ones that must travel?

Must say that the journey is often a big part of the experience and was certain something the Gillespies players enjoyed when they went to Aberdeen for a Scotsman match or to Carlise and York (and Belfast!) for UK school matches.

BTW why the quotes round Official?
Reply
#12
Hi,

It's clearly an emotive topic, so I won't labour it - the concept of what constituents "fair" is one people have disagreed on for millennia on a variety of topics. On such things, my view is that the best course is to be as objective as possible based on *data* - and I say that without knowing what the data would tell us (hence I'd be happy to accept whatever it shows).

So, for example, it could be considered "fair" that such things rotate around regions automatically. Or, it could be considered "fair" to minimise the travel for the younger cohorts. *Or*, it could be considered "fair" to simply minimise the overall travel for the bulk of likely attendees. My sympathies lean toward the last two approaches, which I suspect is likely to push things toward major population centres - and no, I don't live in or particularly near one. Edinburgh is a good 1/5hrs for me and Glasgow rarely less than an hour, but I accept the logic of many events being held there "for the greater good" - and I would not push the case for an Ayr venue if it turned out that this inconvenienced a large proportion of (particularly young) potential attendees.

Kynes had a point about facts - ultimately all I am saying is lets look objectively at the facts/data and base decisions on that (especially for juniors). If the conclusions is then that Skye be the logical location, then so be it. In fact, surely such an approach would actually encourage regional chess by recognising and rewarding local achievement/activity - all they'd have to do is produce a quantity of competing players at that level. Given the low numbers involved overall, that's a viable motivation/strategy for all of them(including Ayr).
Reply
#13
Peter,

I am really struggling to see what your line is. You seem to feel that all age group competitions should be played at centres of highest population from a travel cost viewpoint. We are ChessScotland, representative of every area of our country. Is it not correct that national age and gender competitions should be rotated geographically throughout Scotland to give everyone a "fair" chance to compete?

Do you wish the Scottish junior age champion to be always from the Glasgow or Edinburgh central belt area, say, or would you rather it was the best player in their age group like Andrew McClement (Macrahanish), Ali Roy (Maybole), Anna Milton (Aberdeen), Monica Espinosa (Girvan), Murad Abdulla (Aberdeen), Kai Pannwitz (Inverness), Vagif Ramazanov (Aberdeen) or Liam Richmond (Oban) to name a few?

The cost of travel to national events for the parents of these players is considerable. The cost of international events to recent places like Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Istanbul, Slovenia, Brazil and the United Arab Emirates is positively frightening.

I am trying to put a "fair" perspective on things from a parents costings point of view regarding national and international chess.
Reply
#14
I would add to Robin's comments to say that I would not disagree entirely with Peter's comments but would say that it is clearly unfair for these events to be always in the same area - its not unreasonable to expect the majority to put themselves out to travel from time to time.

By moving the events about one will hopefully stimulate interest in these areas and by using different organisers perhaps new ideas will be generated on how to run and promote the events?

My only concern is that this change in policy is/was introduced with fair notice to the incumbent organisers (SJC) and that we do not see in future years multiple national events being run with multiple champions.
Reply
#15
Mike Scott Wrote:My only concern is that this change in policy is/was introduced with fair notice to the incumbent organisers (SJC) and that we do not see in future years multiple national events being run with multiple champions.

Surely more tournaments is better than less?

I don't see the problem in someone being the SJC Girls Champion and someone being the CS Scottish Girls Champion.
Reply
#16
Mike Scott Wrote:I would add to Robin's comments to say that I would not disagree entirely with Peter's comments but would say that it is clearly unfair for these events to be always in the same area - its not unreasonable to expect the majority to put themselves out to travel from time to time.

By moving the events about one will hopefully stimulate interest in these areas and by using different organisers perhaps new ideas will be generated on how to run and promote the events?

My only concern is that this change in policy is/was introduced with fair notice to the incumbent organisers (SJC) and that we do not see in future years multiple national events being run with multiple champions.


Mike,
with reference to your third paragraph SJC decided at our agm (31st August) to run a junior event for girls only. CS were informed via private email many many weeks ago. SJC are not worried about CS also running an event for girls only - the more junior events organised the better - in my view.

Just checked the calendar on the web site. Listing calls our event "SJC girls championship" not a very imaginative title I know. The entry form calls it "Scottish Junior Chess Scottish Girls Championships and Fun day"

Perhaps the double use of the word "Scottish" might be seen by some as a problem. I have received no private emails to that effect.

As for your first two paragraphs I want to say that it is good to see a balanced and reasonable argument being put forward by a non-member of Chess Scotland. Perhaps this notice board would be more harmonious if only non members of Chess Scotland were allowed to post here?
Reply
#17
Phil Thomas Wrote:ust checked the calendar on the web site. Listing calls our event "SJC girls championship" not a very imaginative title I know. The entry form calls it "Scottish Junior Chess Scottish Girls Championships and Fun day"

Perhaps the double use of the word "Scottish" might be seen by some as a problem. I have received no private emails to that effect.

Phil, this was raised at Council and I have recently emailed you about it, which you probably have not seen yet. =)
Reply
#18
Derek,

you are right - I am at work and not checked mails at home for some hours.

Working with that limited knowledge - I was not at the council meeting - I have to ask why raise this topic only 6 days before the SJC event? Was council really discussing my actions/ SJC actions and my/our rationale for them while I was not in the room?

Not a very effective investigative procedure I must say.
Reply
#19
Quote:Perhaps this notice board would be more harmonious if only non members of Chess Scotland were allowed to post here?
You've let the cat out the bag now! I have been amused and bemused by the objections put forward by some against non-members making comments or suggestion. If the non-members had turned up at an agm and made comments then fair enough but on the notice board? I mean if a successful businessman like Tom Framer were to come alone with deep pockets and good advise on how best to run CS would you ignore him until he became a member?

Derek/Phil
More tournaments = better? Sometime but not always. If we agree its good to have individuals and teams recognized as national champions we would surely want there only to be 1 of each. Also, given limited resources players/teams may only be able to make it to one or other of the events with the direct consequence that each event and the titles won at each are poorer as a result.
Reply
#20
Phil, it was just a general point raised reasonably in a discussion forum. You were not mentioned and it was more of a general point for going forward rather than about a specific event in 6 days time.

I'm sure we will discuss it further off-line. =)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)