Hastings 2 Argumentatives

Results Form

Date of Match Division / Competition 2
05 April
Home Team Away Team
Hastings 2 Argumentatives ?

Grade Player Player Grade
1 171 Kelly, Paul J 0 – 1 Farr, Peter G 185
2 166 Anstead, Jerry 1/2 – 1/2 Graham, Jim 154
3 157 Lowe, Daniel 1 – 0 Kington, Paul N 149
4 149 Wheeler, James M 1 – 0 Collard, Dennis GE 91
5 130 Harvey, Derek D 1 – 0 Default –
3 1/2 1 1/2


Report of the ECF Council Meeting, 16 April 2016

Report of the ECF Council Meeting, 16 April 2016


Firstly, apologies that I have been longer than promised in reporting back.  Secondly, apologies also to those of you who responded to my letter but have not received an acknowledgement.  The message came from me, Michael Farthing, but was sent out on my behalf by Gary Willson at the ECF office.  If you responded directly to Gary the message did reach me promptly, but I had assumed that most were duplicates and didn’t manage to read them until close to the meeting time .


I received 92 replies from silver members (about 3-4% of the total) some commenting extensively and some just making a few points, but all very welcome and thank you very much indeed.  I felt much more confident going into the meeting with a fairly clear idea of what silver members thought and it was noticeable that on most issues there was a consensus view.   Keep comments coming for future meetings and persuade your friends to send in their comments to.  I have made an honest attempt to categorise your views into pro, anti and mixed and give these figures at various points below.  This wasn’t always straightforward so you must just trust that I did my best.


When I wrote to you I expected to have only one vote (as a silver rep) but then acquired a second vote (representing my own Lancaster and Morecambe chess league).  Just before the meeting my colleague and other silver rep, John Reyes, fell ill and asked me to exercise his votes for him, as did another member of Council who could not attend.  So I finished up with 8 votes!  Now most matters are decided on a simple show of hands and only if the result is unclear does a card vote happen.  The problem with a show of hands is that if you have multiple votes and want to use them in different ways there is no way of putting up half a hand.  I chose to vote where the majority of my votes were heading, so it could happen that what I would do as a silver rep could be overridden by what my other instructions were.


So what happened? (I’m only covering the interesting bits):




There was a long presentation on the proposed budget (which is the primary purpose of this meeting).  I have criticised this elsewhere, believing that it fundamentally largely repeated what was in the papers available before the meeting and reduced the time available for discussion – but it seems I’m in a minority with this view, so hey.. I must live with it.


The budget was proposed on the assumption that no sponsorship money would come in, and it is worth stressing to the many of you who said that sponsorship, ratherv than membership fees, should pay for high profile events that sponsorship is getting much much harder to obtain.  However, Malcolm Pein reported good news that some had been achieved and more is in the pipeline.  But he added that he saw sponsorship as enabling extra activity and that already proposed should still come from membership fees.


At about 4.00pm, having listened to the presentation, asked questions and discussed some of the cost implications we reached the point of voting.  It is important here to point out that it had been decided by this point that the budget for next year could still go ahead even if membership fees were not increased as the ECF had higher than anticipated reserves.


We voted on membership fees first.  We voted ONLY on next year’s fees.  It was proposed from the floor that membership fees should be left the same for next year.  Of the 73 that commented on this to me  (usually assuming that the proposed budget depended on the fee decision) 46 were against an increase, 16 in favour of it and 11 with mixed views or proposing an in-between solution.   On this basis, and my judgements about how to use my other votes, I voted in favour of no increase in the hand vote.  So did most of the meeting.  It did not go to a ‘card’ vote.  Membership fees are unaltered for next year.


This vote was followed by a similar one on the ‘game fee’ the amount charged for non-members playing games to be graded.  It was again proposed no increase.  I forgot to include this in my letter but the strength of feeling from you that ‘incoming’ players needed encouragement left me in no doubt.  I voted for no increase.  So did most of the meeting.  There was no card vote.


It was proposed that the fee for member organisations (leagues, congresses etc) should stay the same.  This motion was also clearly passed.


By this stage the chair was increasingly worried about the time remaining and the need to progress through the agenda and we were pressed to a vote on the budget.  I had wanted to press for the different new areas of expenditure to be considered separately, and I know some other representatives also wanted this, but I felt the understandable concern of the chair for speed made this an inappropriate thing to pursue.  I was a bit annoyed and have (a little over-strongly) said so elsewhere.  The meeting altered the motion slightly to make it clear we were only approving one year’s expenditure, not the three put before the meeting, and that any shortfall would come from cash reserves not investments.


Those of you who responded on particular items of the budget broke down as follows:

League Management Software:           In favour 4;      Against: 5        Mixed feelings: 1

Junior Elite Academy                          In favour 10:    Against: 4        Mixed feelings: 0

International competitions                   In favour 3:      Against: 7        Mixed feelings: 0

British Championship                          In favour 2:      Against: 4        Mixed feelings: 0

Publicity                                              In favour 4:      Against: 7

Publicity also attracted comments on particular items, most noticeable a 10-0 hostility to chess masters in pubs.  I talked to Mark Jordan (ECF publicity manager) about this after the meeting (in a pub) and he was clear that this was not quite what he intended: the pub was an example – it is really about having community based chess events (maybe in a library or a town square – not just pubs).

He’s very approachable and such events would be in cooperation with local chess clubs, so if any of you have ideas he would welcome hearing from you – contact details are on the ECF website (www.englishchess.org.uk or Email manager.publicity@englishchess.org.uk).


Anyway, back to the voting.  I was in a bit of a quandary with only a few moments to make my mind up.  I decided on balance that with the membership fees stationery you would want me to vote in favour and that so would my other principles.  So I did.  It was passed on a show of hands quite easily.


Coffee Break


20 minute coffee break during which there is a meeting of the British Chess Federation (as distinct from the English Chess Federation).  This is a dinosaur of an organisation whose sole function is to look after our investments.  Only a few Council members are also Council members for the BCF but because of those people who gave me their votes I was one and felt I had to attend.  We just get told how people want to restructure the investments and then we agree to it on the grounds that they probably know best.  And I didn’t get the coffee.  Grunt grunt.


British Go Association


The British Go Association have been left £300,000 to provide a drop in centre for Go players in London.  Realising that this is quite a hard thing to achieve they want to go into partnership with the ECF (and possibly others, in particular bridge players) to provide a joint centre.  There was a surprising sympathy for this (I thought it a good idea but was doubtful about the financial viability)

but following an enthusiastic presentation from those involved we gave the Board our permission to engage in a feasibility study at a fairly modest cost.  (Though on the agenda, the papers for this only appeared shortly before the meeting which is why I didn’t mention it in my original letter).




11 of you commented on the proposed constitutional amendments with 10 in favour and one against.  The meeting was also very largely in favour of the changes and they all went through.

Constitional amendments require 75% in favour and notice must be given before the meeting.   As a result the couple of tweaks I suggested in my letter could not be considered.  On the Board voting out a Board member, where I wanted the chairmen of Council and of Governance involved, I decided to vote against.  I was the sole person against.  I felt very exposed and blushed!


There was one controversial bit in that the creation of a non-executive Chairman of the Board was at the last minute opposed by a Board member (Malcolm Pein) when he realised (for technical constitutional reasons) that this would prevent appointment of a Board member for Women’s chess.

This led to the only card vote but was carried by 87%, easily clear of the 75% requirement.


FIDE Rating of County Championships


Council meetings are scheduled to finish at 6.00pm with the option of extension to 6.30pm.  This is rigidly adhered to as many representatives really do have to get a train back home (even leaving at 6.30pm poor Ben Edgell was not back home in the West Country until 3 in the morning).  Anyway this item began discussion at approximately 6.22pm.


This change directly disadvantages silver members and of the 13 commenting, 10 were against.  2 particularly singled out their opposition to the minor section being FIDE rated.  I should clarify that the minor section is for smaller counties unable to field as many players: it does not refer to the grade restricted county championships that many of you may be familiar with.   A motion from the floor requested the minor section to be removed from the proposal and this was carried.  The substantive motion on the County Open Championship drew some debate and the suggestion of a card vote, but this was discarded as there was insufficient time.  As a silver representative I felt duty bound to vote against the motion, but I decided that my other votes would have preferred the other direction, so on this issue I voted in favour of the FIDE rating, as did the meeting, which then closed with 60 seconds to spare.


Unreached Items


The motion that card votes should not be secret was not reached.   Your views on this were 15 in favour and 1 against.  The “one” was personally present at the meeting as an observer and I discussed this with him.  His concern stems from seeing skullduggery in FIDE where delegates can be ‘persuaded’ to use their vote in a given way and this persuasion is clearly more effective when voting is not secret.


The PQASSO Quality Mark motion was also not reached.  Your views were 2 in favour; 18 against and 1 with mixed feelings.  (A lot of the 18 were quite strongly against, many citing experience of such schemes).


I enjoyed being the representative.  Next meeting is the AGM in October.  Around September the ECF will invite nominations for the silver reps and if a lot appear there will be an election.  The term of office is for one year (starting after the AGM) so you’re landed with me for at least one more time.   In the meantime, if you have concerns, issues, queries or whatnot do feel free to contact either John Reyes or myself.  My Email is michael@hallfarthing.me.uk and this is also available on the ECF website.


Minutes of the Directors Meeting: Monday 09 May 2016, 1815,


Minutes of the Directors Meeting:  Monday 09 May 2016, 1815, Pelton House, Richard Almond Room


Present:  Marc Bryant, Paul Kelly, Bill Penfold, Lona Steuart, Jim Wheeler, Mason Woodhams [6]


In Attendance: Ken Lucas (Minutes)


The Chairman opened the Meeting at 1815


1 Apologies for Absence: Adrian Cload, Jeremy Hudson


2 Minutes of the Meeting of 11 April 2016 (previously circulated) – accepted, signed by the Chairman.


3 Matters arising not already on the agenda –

The Chairman advised the Committee of the very sad death of Con Power, read out the Email sent to all

members, the funeral at St Mary Star of the Sea, 1200, Wednesday 11 May 2016.

A minutes silence was observed.  He will be missed by us all.


4 Library – MB advises ‘still on-going’.


5 Chairman’s matters

5.1 Replicas : MB advised Championship, Pelton, Rush done and presented.  Awaiting Summer Tournament results.

5.2 Weekend Tournament : 14 entered, possible slight profit, 1st M Cutmore, Paul Kelly joint 2nd.  Intends to repeat

in 8/9 weeks but <175 this time – agreed.

5.3 Framing of pictures : more done, more to be done


6 Secretary’s report and correspondence : PK nothing to report


7 Treasurer’s report and financial

7.1 Membership renewals : JW advised waiting on 4/5 members to complete their subscription

7.2 Budget : new sheet distributed and discussed

JW advised in touch with Inland Revenue who advise no Corporation Tax required, and Rate Relief from HBC.

MB expressed the very grateful thanks of the Club to JW, saving the Club considerable expense.


8 Premises officer’s report

8.1 Back wall : PK reports done.

8.2 Council landlord registration : PK advised forms sent and acknowledged

8.3 Curtains rehanging : PK will do during break.

8.4 LS reported a water drip through the light fitting in ladies toilet – PK to investigate.

8.5 BP asked about the back drain – PK advised cleared and had reminded tenant to check regularly.

8.6 Club Sign – bits falling off : BP suggested it was checked and repainted, PK advised nothing needed doing,

JW suggested it was should look smart. MW suggested a design competition for a new sign. LS suggested

a new lit sign. MB suggested investigation first.

Break 1009-1919

MW proposed replace with a new sign.  V 2 for / 3 against.

JW proposed  refurbish.  V 2 for /1 against/ 2 abstentions.  PK to investigate.

8.7 PK suggested front needs painting as back has been done – much discussion on safety and need for scaffolding

if PK to do.  PK to investigate.

8.8 Front door colour : Green V 2 for/3 against.  Black V 1 for/2 against.  Red V 2 for/1 against.


9 Website : MW advised ‘still to do.’


10 Junior chess : MW advised attendance holding at 10-12, Delaney challenge completed, 3 to Mega stage,

2 progressing to Giga stage.  MB reminded that all claims should be with JW before end June.


11 Tournament controller : MB advised Winter Tournament completed, Summer Tournament ‘sign up’ sheet up.


12 Captains

12.1 Mid Sussex league : completed.  1st T came 5th, 2nd T nearly promoted, 3rd T possible relegation escape,

4th T relegated.

12.2 Kent League : 1st T lost in Semi-Final.

12.3 McArthur Cup : Horsham beat Brighton.  Final Hastings v Horsham (to be arranged).


13 Membership

13.1 New Members : B Ruane (FM) – agreed, unanimous.

R Webb (FM) – agreed, unanimous.

MB will take over ‘Membership’ until further notice.


14 Time/date next meeting : Monday 20 June 2016, 1815, Richard Almond Room, Pelton House.


15 Any other business : MW advised the property in Robertson Street is again up for sale (information only),

LS asked about air fans – next Agenda.

The Meeting closed at 2008.



Hi everyone
With no Snodland event this year I am canvassing for interest in a 6 round 30 min – Swiss Rapid-play on Sunday 17th, 24th or 31st July in Folkestone.
VENUE: Wellbeing Centre, Folkestone. For info on parking, venue etc http://folkestone-chess.wix.com/folkestonechessclub
The venue accommodates 64 players perfectly but only 64. No entering on the day – thus a prompt start which is 12am to make travelling easier.
COST: There are no prizes – I am aiming for a price of £12 as a County tournament so the price accommodates Kent Bronze members at no extra cost. For a Congress open to players beyond Kent then Bronze members would be required to upgrade to silver – eg pay the grading fee of £7.50 so an entry fee of £20 for them. Also bare in mind that if as a Bronze member you intend to take part in the Thanet Congress any grading fee paid here will serve as an upgrade for Thanet as well.
THEREFORE 1-2-3 – clock by 5th JUNE: If you would like to take part in such an event please reply with 1. name, 2. club, 3. ECF membership at platinum, gold, silver or bronze – also confirm if you are willing to bring a CLOCK with you on the day.
On June 10th I will I will confirm YES or NO if there there was insufficient interest. If ‘yes’ then the 64 places will be available to book – if the interest does not turn into entries then the event will of course be cancelled.
Please forward this email to anyone you think will be interested.

Matthew Cussens,

Final Mid Sussex Table

Division 1 Results

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 plyd MP GP DP
1 Brighton & Hove 1 3.5 3.5 4 3 2.5 4 3.5 4 3.5 9 8.5 31.5
2 Horsham 1 1.5 4.5 3.5 2.5 3 3.5 3 2.5 4 9 7 28
3 Worthing 1 1.5 0.5 3.5 3 3 3.5 3 5 4 9 7 27
4 Eastbourne 1 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 3 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 9 4.5 21.5
5 Hastings & St Leonards 1 2 2.5 2 3.5 2 1.5 4 2 4 9 3.5 23.5
6 Horsham 2 2.5 2 2 2 3 3 2 3.5 2 9 3.5 22
7 Haywards Heath 1 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 3.5 2 3.5 4 2.5 9 3.5 21
8 Crowborough 1 1.5 2 2 1.5 1 3 1.5 2.5 3 9 2.5 18 1
9 Brighton & Hove 2 1 2.5 0 2.5 3 1.5 1 2.5 2 9 2.5 16
10 Lewes 1 1.5 1 1 1.5 1 3 2.5 2 3 9 1.5 16.5


Division 2 Results

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 plyd MP GP DP
1 Worthing 2 3 3.5 2.5 3.5 3 3 2.5 4 8 7 25
2 Woodpushers 1 2 3.5 2.5 4 3.5 3  2 3 8 5.5 23.5
3 Horsham 3 1.5 1.5 2 4 3.5 3.5 3.5 5 8 5 24.5
4 Hastings & St Leonards 2 2.5 2.5 3 2.5 3.5 2.5 4 1.5 8 5 22
5 Eastbourne 2 1.5 1 1 2.5 1.5 3.5 3.5 3 8 3.5 17.5
6 Argumentatives 2 1.5 1.5 1.5 3.5 1.5 3.5 3 8 3 18 1
7 Lewes 2 2 2 1.5 2.5 1.5 3.5 2.5 1.5 8 2 17
8 Hastings & St Leonards 3 2.5  3. 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2.5 4.5 8 3 18
9 Horsham 4 1 2 0 3.5 2 2 3.5 0.5 8 2 14.5 2


Division 3 Results

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 plyd MP GP DP
1 Uckfield 1 2.5 2.5 3 3 5 3.5 3 7 6 22.5
2 Crowborough 2 2.5 4 4.5 5 2.5 2.5 4.5 7 5.5 25.5 1
3 Brighton & Hove 3 2.5 1 2.5 3.5 4 4 3 7 5 20.5
4 Horsham 5 2 0.5 2.5 1.5 3 5 3.5 7 3.5 18 1
5 East Grinstead 1 2 0 1.5 3.5 2.5 3 4.5 7 3.5 17
6 Uckfield 2 0 2.5 1 2 2.5 2.5 4 7 2.5 14.5
7 Hastings & St Leonards 4 1.5 2.5 1 0 2 2.5 2 7 1 11.5 4
8 Brighton & Hove 4 2 0.5 2 1.5 0.5 1 3 7 1 10.5


Con Power

Con Power
it’s my sad duty to report the death of con power who died at home on Thursday
Con had been the rock on which Hastings chess was built for over half a century
. I first met, con in 1977
at the Hastings chess Congress, where he already been Congress secretary for many years at this time he was all so running the Hastings junior school chess league and was a trustee of Pelton house Ltd, which owns the building in which we played today he was also a vice president of the club. and also served as a trustee on the junior education fund This does not even touch upon the duties. He performed as a club committee member
con became director of the Hastings chess Congress round about 1980 and his quiet and firm guidance was respected by all. He continued in this role, up to 2014 when he relinquishhed the role as he felt that it was beginning to take Its toll on his health, : during this time he was recognised by fide and was awarded the title international chess organiser in 1995 it. It was a testament to con that he was one of the very first to be recognised by fide in this way

all so in 1995 he received the British chess federations Presidents award and again it was a testament to Cons quiet, unassuming nature, that they again tried to give him the award in 2015, when you can only win it. Once
:: Con did not restrict his activities to just the chess Congress, he was all so a valid chess club committeee member serving In various posts over many years. He also helped in organiseing simultaneous chess tournament, on the pier, which Patrick Moore attended and he also helps with the Maureen Charlesworth tournament held locally.

con was not just about chess
he enjoyed going on holiday, long walks and quizes. He will be sadly missed by all those that knew him- I for one will not forget him, and would like to extend my condolences to Clare and her family. Rest in peace, con

Kent County Cup

Lady & Gentlemen,

An understrength Hastings lost, at home, in the semi-final of the Kent County Cup, by a score of 2.5 to 3.5.

Board 1:

Ollie probably had the better of Ian Snape, having walked him into a prepared position.

The Hastings player may have secured a draw, but that being insufficient for the team to progress, played on.

Unfortunately, time trouble led to a tactical error.

Board 2:

Bob held an advantage in time and space, but after an exchange of Queens, a drawish position arose.

Board 3:

Rasa’s opponent was always a little better, but simplification meant a stone-cold drawn Rook and pawn ending ensued.

Board 4:

Adrian’s sweet position soured when his opponent’s Bishop pair became active.

Weaknesses around the Hastings man’s King, and poor pawn structure told against him.

Board 5:

Paul played a most difficult position for about sixty moves, his pieces cramped in awkward defence.

The position really was lost and I expected a resignation any move, but Paul kept playing.

His opponent then squandered part of his advantage by refusing a Queen exchange, thereby allowing a Queen incursion.

The Beckenham man then fell foul of a two-move cheapo, losing a piece.

Paul then showed admirable endgame skills, to demonstrate an efficient and pretty conclusion.

Board 6:

Andrew seemed to have the better opening, but his opponent was obstructive.

A draw was agreed when Andrew’s progress became mired in a closed pawn structure.

All in all, a decent result from a side who were up against it. Beckenham certainly know their stuff, strong players and well drilled.

I take this moment to inform all involved that I’m standing down as captain, effective immediately.

It’s been an experience, but my attention span (and hence enthusiasm) wanes.

Time for a new broom!

I thank all players, especially the drivers, for their participation.

I also thank Marc Bryant, Paul Buswell and Bernard Cafferty for their behind-the-scenes assistance and advice.

I shall, of course, be available to assist (via email) whomsoever takes the post.


Ray Brooks.

Hastings 3 escape relegation

In a really exciting finish to the season with three matches to go it looked as if the 3rd team were destined for relegation still having to play the top two teams in the division and relegation rivals Lewis who at this stage were a point  in front of us when we could only draw to them which in itself was a good result as we were out graded. It appeared that the writing was on the wall. However we gave ourselves some hope when we entertained promoted Worthing,  although again badly out graded, and managed to draw the match. Omar had a  good win  over Cassie Graham which left us with a third difficult match against promotion chasers woodpushers at Brighton at present we are 2 1/2 1 1/2 up in this match with one game going to adjudication.

This meant that if Lewis did not win their last match we would survive relegation and I am glad to say we have.  Here is the final table of Division II subject to one outstanding adjudication.


Division 2 Results

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 plyd MP GP DP
1 Worthing 2 3 3.5 2.5 3.5 3 3 2.5 4 8 7 25
2 Woodpushers 1 2 3.5 2.5 4 3.5 3  1.5 3 8 5.5 23
3 Horsham 3 1.5 1.5 2 4 3.5 3.5 3.5 5 8 5 24.5
4 Hastings & St Leonards 2 2.5 2.5 3 2.5 3.5 2.5 4 1.5 8 5 22
5 Eastbourne 2 1.5 1 1 2.5 1.5 3.5 3.5 3 8 3.5 17.5
6 Argumentatives 2 1.5 1.5 1.5 3.5 1.5 3.5 3 8 3 18 1
7 Lewes 2 2 2 1.5 2.5 1.5 3.5 2.5 1.5 8 2 17
8 Hastings & St Leonards 3 2.5 2.5 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2.5 4.5 8 2.5 17
9 Horsham 4 1 2 0 3.5 2 2 3.5 0.5 8 2 14.5 2


Rasa wins French rapidplay

Rasa wins French rapidplay, our first success for quite some time
Teteghem Rapidplay, Sunday 24 April 2016
9 rounds, 20 minutes each.
In tie break order
2 Feryn (2180) 7½
3 Hetman (2020) 6½
five players on 6
40 players total incl Steve Blewitt 4½, Paul Buswell 4
<1800 grading prize to Jim Wheeler

Est. 1882