Equipment for Disabled Players

[Andrew McHarg]

No. I'm not suggesting you fund it. I was thinking more along the lines of Chess Scotland: Steve insists CS must help....

But, Jonathan has put his finger on a tender point. This particular clock would not cater for increments? Pity.

This is one of the issues I think. I'm pretty sure that if a clock could be purchased for £30 which does what is needed for a disabled player to take part in an incremental-time-control event, then it could be considered a reasonable allocation of funds to get a couple for use at congresses. However, digital clocks which can be used seem to cost a whole lot more (£140+ according to Steve). As unfortunate as that is, I do not think it should stop an event from having such time controls if it's what the majority of players want to see. Perhaps events could say to the disabled players that if they invest themselves in the technology then the events will offer them an entry discount for a few years to help offset the cost?

[StevieHilton]

David,
I am happy to agree to your suggestion. John is deaf/blind so he is a different case anyway.
As for myself, because I can use a talking digital clock that has incremental time controls on it I will be able to play. I am not used to them true, but I will adjust.

The tactile clock statistics you quoted from the BCA are correct but that price of £30 is for BCA members only.
Others would have to pay the full price of £60 The RNIB charged £30 for each clock modification.

Andrew,
DGT the official digital clock supplier to FIDE wanted 25000 Euros just to develop a prototype talking digital chess clock That sort of funding is way outwith the finances of all braille associations. The Spanish Talking Digital clock was 140 Euros, is easy to programme, ie: easily programmed by a blind player themselves Has set controls a digital counter, can programme each side of the clock in a different language if needed. Can also tell you when the batteries are running low. Can also operate as an ordinary digitial clock. Only when you use earphone can you hear the voice. That is good value for 140 Euros not pounds
Federations Andrew have a duty to support all players as best they can. FIDE's motto is Gens Una Sumus which means we are one people. The disabled are just as much a part of the chess family as everyone else

[David G Congalton]

FEES

Half year (1st Apr-30th Sep) £3.50

1 year (1st Oct-30th Sep) £7.00

5 years £20.00

Life membership £50.00

Under 25 years of age free!

I don't know what level of membership would be required to qualify for a reduced price clock but the BCA appears to be a good starting point for anyone visually impaired who wants to play chess.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.braillechess.org.uk/">http://www.braillechess.org.uk/</a><!-- m -->

[Andrew McHarg]

Can also operate as an ordinary digitial clock. Only when you use earphone can you hear the voice. That is good value for 140 Euros not pounds

It's not good value in terms of buying them for players who would not use all the features (if you're suggesting every clock bought by CS should be one of these). This would be a silly thing to do.

Federations Andrew have a duty to support all players as best they can. FIDE's motto is Gens Una Sumus which means we are one people. The disabled are just as much a part of the chess family as everyone else

This is the key point. How best can CS support you guys? Money has to come from somewhere Steve. It's a matter of finding the best cost:benefit ratio in my opinion (i.e. what expenditure will benefit the most number of players). 140 Euros for a single clock for a single player is quite a lot. Whether CS decides to go for that or not is not up to me, but if it were then I'd be looking for alternatives first; and failing that at the very least a contribution from the player who specifically wants the clock. It seems only fair that the player should contribute at least some of their own money if they will primarily get all the benefit from the device.

[andyburnett]

Not sure I agree at all with your last point there Andrew. The player doesn't specifically 'want' the clock, he more specifically 'needs' the clock to maintain some kind of parity with the new incremental controls. I don't believe there should be some sharing of the cost* except as a last resort, and if we are that short of money we're in trouble!

Although 140 Euros (how do I get a Euro sign?) is a lot for a clock, it would also be used for non-visually impaired players too when not otherwise required according to Stevie, so that brings the cost down to, say, 100 Euros in real terms. I don't think that's a ridiculous figure for CS to invest in order to make things as equitable as possible. Throw in a Braille clock (*Stevie's old one donated to offset the cost of a new one!) and CS now has some equipment to hand for tournament organisers to call on when needed

On another point, I still don't can't figure out why increments would be more difficult for visually impaired players than allegro finishes with time scrambles? :\

[Mike Mitchell]

Employers are required to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that as far as is practically possible, disabled people enjoy the same freedoms and possibilities as non-disabled people. The disabled employee does not have to pay or contribute to this.

CS is not an employer (as far as tournament players are concerned). However it does not strike me as unreasonable for CS to buy a clock that has the features needed to accommodate an individual player's needs, whether they be current or future players. Particularly if more tournaments follow Davie's lead and adopt the use of increments. A budget has already been identified as having a surplus.

My experiences within CS of assistance provided to disabled players has been hugely positive, with many individuals pitching in to enable me to play. Sometimes you have to show a certain level of sensitivity and get on with it, and that has been my experience to date.

[Phil Thomas]

Not sure I agree at all with your last point there Andrew. The player doesn't specifically 'want' the clock, he more specifically 'needs' the clock to maintain some kind of parity with the new incremental controls. I don't believe there should be some sharing of the cost* except as a last resort, and if we are that short of money we're in trouble!

Although 140 Euros (how do I get a Euro sign?) is a lot for a clock, it would also be used for non-visually impaired players too when not otherwise required according to Stevie, so that brings the cost down to, say, 100 Euros in real terms. I don't think that's a ridiculous figure for CS to invest in order to make things as equitable as possible. Throw in a Braille clock (*Stevie's old one donated to offset the cost of a new one!) and CS now has some equipment to hand for tournament organisers to call on when needed

On another point, I still don't can't figure out why increments would be more difficult for visually impaired players than allegro finishes with time scrambles? :\

Andy,
attempting to answer both your questions.

Alt 0128 produces this Euro symbol €

For a visually handicapped player - recording moves is likely to take up a more significant fraction of the extra 30 seconds awarded per completed move than would be the case for a fully sighted player.
Hence: in a traditional time scramble both players are capable of running out of time; but with incremental timings a fully sighted player will very rarely lose on time.

[David Deary]

Alt 0128 produces this Euro symbol €

Holding Alt Gr & 4 at the same time produces this one: € (Oooh look they are the same!)
Be sure to use the 4 above the letter keys as the numpad doesn't work for the above.

[Calum MacQueen]

Steve,

are you not marketing secretary? Why don't you try and use your role to raise money for "visually handicapped" players? You are obviously passionate about the issue, so why don't you try exploring that avenue? Or, since you raised it, try use some money you've already brought in?

I've heard that you have achieved sponsorship to go to tournaments before, so surely a few hundred quid for a couple of clocks isn't too hard?

RE David's point, I agree. It does seem that 140 pounds for a piece of equipment that can only be used by two players seems excessive. If more handicapped players were about then the issue changes, as David pointed out.



PS. I put "visually handicapped" in quotes as I think this applied so many disabilities, a similar argument exists.

[Calum MacQueen]

Also like to say nice work David!

Sounds like a great tournament and I'm looking forward to it.