Hastings 2 v brighton 2

Hastings to went into their last division two match against newly promoted Brighton 2 knowing that a draw
would secure promotion to the first division however Brighton had something to play for needing at least a draw to be promoted champions Hastings would also be promoted champions if they could win however for a second season on the trot the second team fell at the final hurdle only being able to produce a modest team due to the unavailability of our stronger players we lost the match 2 3 despite the fact that we are badly upgraded it was a credible performance but as Jim Wheeler said on the day close but no cigar in truth we really lost the chance of promotion when we lost to relegation candidates Eastboune
1. D.Lowe (172) 0 C.Brewer (186) 1
2. J.Wheeler (158) 1/2 R.Jones (164) 1/2
3. S.Blewitt (158) 1 P.Selby (155) 0
4. O Namouk (121) 0 M.Hamilton (153) 1
5. M.Woodhams (120) 1/2 C Lake (154) 1/2

1

4NCL – please help

The Sussex Martlets teams in the 4NCL are short of players for the final weekend which is the bank holiday weekend commencing Sat 29th April. We are particularly short for Sat 29th April as this clashes with the Sussex Megafinal in Hassocks and a weekend congress in Hastings. We are looking for players of all strengths to fill all 3 of our teams that play in the second, third and fourth divisions. We thought the teams were nearly safe but if we do not fully fill the final weekend with complete teams then we will be subject to penalties which could lead to the relegation of the second team. Do you know anyone in your club or amongst friends that can help ?
 
Players over approx. 160 are required for the first team. They do not need a Sussex connection.
 
Thank you all for considering this. Just to mention that according to the 4NCL rules ECF membership is not required, if you are playing as a Wildcard (which you will be) for the weekend. (It is if you are a registered player in the squad).
 
We are looking for 5 players over the 3 teams so your help will be much appreciated. Players graded over 110 to 230 can be accommodated.
 
Thank you for those that have been in touch, I will reply to all emails.
 
Sue Howell
Sussex Martlets – 4NCL

 

ECF Finance Council

Dear All,

The annual ECF Finance CouncilECF Finance CouncilECF Finance Council, and associated BCF Council, meetings will take place on Saturday 22nd April in Birmingham.  I invite your comments on any of the agenda items.

The ECF Finance Council Agenda is somewhat limited, but nonetheless meaty, consisting of just 3 substantive items.  These are a proposal to abolish Game Fee, the budget for 2017 / 18 and possible voting reform.  The first two are, to some extent, inter-related.

Taking each in turn:-

1.  Abolition of Game Fee (  http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Abolition-of-Game-Fee-Final-1.pdf  and  http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/C26.6.1-Proposed-Bye-Law-No.-2.pdf  ).
When the Membership Scheme was introduced a few years ago a Game Fee fall back option was retained.  It was said that this was intended to be a temporary situation whilst we all got used to the Membership option, and the fee was set at a level that was intended to act as an incentive for most people to become Members.  Currently, the Game Fee is set at £2.50 per adult standard game or £1.25 per adult rapid game.  Corresponding amounts of 60p and 30p apply in exclusively junior events.  There have been 2 main criticisms of this system.  From the ECF’s standpoint, it is labour intensive to identify and collect what are often quite trivial amounts.  From a club’s standpoint, even at the relatively low value of £2.50, it has been seen as a disincentive for newcomers to get a taste of competitive chess playing.  The gist of the new proposal is to allow someone to play up to 3 games in any League or internal club competition without being an ECF Member, or facing a Game Fee, but then to hit any League / club in which they play 4 or more games with the rather heftier fee of £25 (adult) or £12 (junior) for each player playing 4 or more games without becoming a Member.  (This would be applied separately for each League / club, so if someone played in more that one League / club, they could play up to 3 times in each without incurring a charge.)  So, still a carrot and stick approach, but I think it would be a beneficial change in minimising workload for the ECF and giving some freedom for new or occasional players to play a few competitive games without immediately being hit by an ECF charge – albeit a rather big hit after 3 games for any still averse to carrots.  It is expected that the new charging system would be fiscally neutral compared to the current system.  So-called “Pay-to-Play” fees in a congress where someone lacked the appropriate level of ECF Membership would still apply.  The concept of “Deemed Game Fee” will continue to exist to determine Council voting rights – pending any changes from the voting reform proposals.

2.  Budget for 2017 / 18  (  http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/C26.7.1-ECF-Finances-April-2017.pdf  and  http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/C26.7.2-Detailed-Forecast-and-2017-18-Budget.xls  )
A lot of work has been going on behind the scenes to recover from the loss of John Philpott on the eve of last autumn’s AGM.  The bookkeeping function has been outsourced and the accounts are being computerised.  This is still a work-in-progress, but amongst the benefits it should facilitate the regular production of management accounts – the lack of which has been something that the ECF has reasonably been criticised for up till now.

At last year’s Finance Council, increases in Membership Fees were rejected.  However, at last October’s AGM, Council indicated support for a forward plan that included increases for 2017 / 18 and again in 2019 / 20.  This was not a binding vote by Council, but if Council was now to overturn the 2017 / 18 increases that the Finance Director has included in his proposed budget, it would indicate just how difficult it would be for any forward planning.  The proposed increases (for adults, with new rates in parentheses) are Bronze £1 (£16), Silver £1.50 (£23.50) Gold £2 (£34) and Platinum £10 (£70). 

A criticism that was raised by Council at the last AGM was that it wasn’t sufficiently clear what was intended to be covered by current income from Membership / Game Fees and what needed to be funded by sponsorship / donations, reserves or drawdown of capital from the Permanent Invested Funds (PIF) or John Robinson Youth Trust (JRYT).  The data at the foot of the Summary tab in the budget spreadsheet is intended to address this.

The ECF has had some success over the last couple of years in attracting sponsorship money, but as things stand today the proposed expenditure does anticipate a need for some capital drawdown.  As the FD indicates in his Paper, the PIF Trustees have been reasonably receptive to such a request but, so far, the JRYT Trustees have declined to shift from their current practice of only distributing income from the funds entrusted to them.  My fellow non-exec director, who is a qualified lawyer, has reviewed John Robinson’s will and indicated that it did not contain any such restriction on use of capital, so a renewed approach to the JRYT Trustees is intended, but if still unsuccessful the financial plans will need further review.

If the proposal to abolish Game Fees in their current form, as discussed above, is rejected by Council, it is intended that there will be a proposal to increase Game Fees in line with the proposed increases in Membership Fees.

3.  Voting Reform  (  http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/C26.8.1-Possible-Voting-Reform.pdf  and  http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/C26.8.2-Results-Possible-Voting-Reform.pdf  )
I consulted with you previously on these proposals that have come jointly from the Board (but with severe reservations from me) and the Governance Committee.  As a result of the ECF’s consultation, no substantive changes have been made to the Paper being put to Council.  The second document referenced above is a summary of the responses the ECF received to the initial consultation, compiled by the Chairman of Governance.  It records there were only 25 respondents, and I understand many of those simply indicated a preference for one of the proposed options but with no discussion.  The Paper has the response I coordinated on behalf of the SCCU annexed to it.  This limited response in no way surprises me, but reinforces my view that whilst giving greater weight to direct voting by Members sounds wonderfully democratic, it could only expect to attract very limited participation and not be likely to reflect the views (if any!) of the Membership at large.    I anticipate that this is one item on which I will wish to address Council as a Council Member rather than as a Director!

The BCF Council agenda contains just one substantive item at present.  This is a proposal that Council endorses the request to the JRYT Trustees to release capital to support junior chess activities.

Your comments are invited on any of these matters.  The SCCU Executive Committee will be meeting this Friday (7th April) to determine its voting intentions for the Council meetings.

Regards

Julie

3 – Stevenson Cup

Hastings travelled  to the weald of Kent  for our last Stevenson cup match knowing that a draw  would be sufficient for us to make the semi-final the weald of Kent although badly out graded   put  up  stiff resistance  and we only managed to draw  the match however this was sufficient  and we now play  Sevenoaks in the semi-final

 

Kent Chess Association League – Match Result Form
                     
Tournament 3 – Stevenson Cup   Date 3 April 2017   Region Mid
Home Team Wealdofkent 1   Away Team Hastings 2        
                     
Board Colour Home Player ECF Ref Grade Score Away Player ECF Ref Grade Score Game Type
1 Black Dakin, Adam 285203C 176 0.5 Tebbs, Howard L 120198A 187 0.5  
2 White Cove, Henry 190922J 165 0.5 Willson, Ollie 276301B 184 0.5  
3 Black Hart-Dyke, James 123117A 135 0 Bryant, Marc 107571J 141 1  
4 White Warrick, David 123118C 108 0 Willson, Gary 277244K 137 1  
5 Black Oram, Clive 253358D 112 1 Cosens, Derek 247569J 135 0  
6 White Garfield, Alex 297606H 111 1 Harvey, D 112269B 131 0  
Grades Total 807 3 Grades Total 915 3
Grades Average 134.5 Grades Average 152.5

 

Hastings v Crowborough

after our defeat against Eastbourne require a good result  against Crowborough to keep our promotion chances alive as you can see this was an excellent result  and in all probability we now only require a draw  against Brighton 2  get promotion

   
HELP Results Form Feb 17        
Date of Match   Division / Competition ?
17-Mar
Home Team     Away Team
Hastings 2     Crowborough 2
 
Grade Player Player Grade
1 172 Lowe, Daniel 1 0 Ahluwalia, Amardip 182
2 167 Cove, Henry 1 0 Lawrance, JAN 170
3 165 Anstead, Jerry 1 0 Redman, Michael A 123
4 158 Blewitt, Stephen D 1 0 Dunn, Chris C 109
5 0 Kolani, Arjun 1 0 Grisenthwaite, Jonathan C 104
5   0
       

 

Division 2 Results

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 plyd MP GP DP
1 Brighton & Hove 2 xxx 2 3 3.5 1.5 4.5 3.5 3.5 7 5 21.5 0
2 Horsham 3 3  xxx 1.5 1.5 3 4 2 3.5 3 8 5 21.5 4
3 Lewes 1 2 3.5 xxx 3.5 2.5 2 3.5 3.5 7 4.5 20.5 0
4 Hastings & St Leonards 3 1.5 3.5 1.5  xxx 0.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 8 4 19 2
5 Hastings & St Leonards 2 2 2.5 4.5  xxx  5 3.5  2 3 7 4.5 22.5 0
6 Crowborough 2 3.5 1 3 1.5  0  xxx 0.5 3 7 3 12.5 3
7 Uckfield 1 0.5 3 1.5 2.5 1.5 xxx 3 6 2.5 12 0
8 Eastbourne 2 1.5 1.5 1.5  3 4.5 2  xxx 2.5 7 2.5 16.5 0
9 Argumentatives 1.5 2 1.5 2.5 2 2 2.5  xxx 7 1 14 0

 

eastbourne v Hastings

Hastings travelled from relegation candidates Eastbourne knowing  that two wins the next two games  would guarantee promotion however things did not go our way and although there is one game outstanding the likely result will be  3  2 to Eastbourne this means that we now need a good result against Crowborough in our next match  of victory of more than 3 1/2  1 1/2 to get our promotion challenge back on track this would mean  in all likelihood it will only need a draw  in our last match against Brighton

Division 2 Results

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 plyd MP GP DP
1 Brighton & Hove 2  xxxx 2 3 3.5 1.5 4.5 3.5 3.5 7 5 21.5 0
2 Horsham 3 3  xxxx 1.5 1.5 3 4 2 3.5 3 8 5 21.5 4
3 Lewes 1 2 3.5  xxx 3.5 2.5 2 3.5 3.5 7 4.5 20.5 0
4 Hastings & St Leonards 3 1.5 3.5 1.5  xxx 0.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 8 4 19 2
5 Hastings & St Leonards 2 2 2.5 4.5 xxx 3.5  2 3 6 3.5 17.5 0
6 Crowborough 2 3.5 1 3 1.5  xxx 0.5 3 6 3 12.5 3
7 Uckfield 1 0.5 3 1.5 2.5 1.5 xxx 3 6 2.5 12 0
8 Eastbourne 2 1.5 1.5 1.5  3 4.5 2  xxx 2.5 7 2.5 16.5 0
9 Argumentatives

 

 

1.5 2 1.5 2.5 2 2 2.5  xxx 7 1 14 0

 

   
HELP Results Form Feb 17        
Date of Match   Division / Competition ?
31-Mar
Home Team     Away Team
Eastbourne 2     Hastings 2
 
Grade Player Player Grade
1 151 Butt, Laurence A 1/2 1/2 Lowe, Daniel 172
2 142 Weiss, Oliver 1 0 Anstead, Jerry 165
3 141 Pannett, Matthew 1/2 1/2 Bryant, Marc A 140
4 127 Moore, John TA A A Cosens, Derek 135
5 0 M.Cohen? 1 0 Cload, Adrian 132
3   1
       

En Passant Cup

EN PASSANT MID AREA P W D L GP   PEN MP
SWALE (1) 8 5 1 2 28     5.5
TUN WELLS (3) 8 3 2 3 26     4
RAINHAM (3) 7 3 2 2 22.5   1 4
MAIDSTONE (3) 7 4 0 3 19     4
HASTINGS (2) 8 1 1 6 17.5     1.5
Kent Chess Association League – Match Result Form
                     
Tournament 4 – En Passant Cup   Date 26 March 2017   Region Mid
Home Team Hastings 2   Away Team Maidstone 3        
                     
Board Colour Home Player ECF Ref Grade Score Away Player ECF Ref Grade Score Game Type
1   Tebbs, Howard L 120198A 187 0.5 Lane Bob E 114052J 157 0.5  
2   Wheeler, James M 143359D 151 0.5 Heath, Dave R 112463F 145 0.5  
3   Kolani, Arjun 295162K 148 1 Smith, Douglas 154729L 132 0  
4   Bryant, Marc 107571J 141 1 Dirmauskas,Peter 304398J 99 0  
5   Hossack, Keith 289581L 123 1 Wise, Christopher MW 295656B 79 0  
6   Chandler, Gregory F 155452K 83 1 Cox, Robert 300401G 63 0  
Grades Total 833 5 Grades Total 675 1
Grades Average 138.8333333333 Grades Average 112.5  

 

 

 

 

Hastings 3 Snodland 1

Report

We had a good team out for the Harvey cup match at home on Saturday 25th March, Keith lost fairly quickly and it wasn’t that long before I suffered the captains curse and went the exchange down falling foul of a knight fork so losing a rook for a knight and I went on to lose.

Next a good win for Umberto on board 6.

James then gained a win while pushing a pawn to the 8th rank his opponant gave up his rook to stop it which really ended the game.

On board 5 Bill offered a draw when his position looked lost but his opponant accepted the draw as he didnt have a lot of time left and had played his moves very slowly.

On board 1 for a time it looked as though Brendon would lose with 2 knights to a rook but a few pawns up, he fought on brilliantly to trap the black king with the knights which would have allowed a single pawn to advance and his opponant resigned

Result Hastings 3.5 v Snodland 2.5

regards

Adrian

Kent Chess Association League – Match Result Form
                     
Tournament 5 – Harvey Cup   Date     Region Mid
Home Team Hastings 3   Away Team Snodland 1        
                     
Board Colour Home Player ECF Ref Grade Score Away Player ECF Ref Grade Score Game Type
1   Ruane, Brendan 288310H 159 1 Hollands, George E 273983F 166 0  
2   Wheeler, James M 143359D 151 1 Thompson, Robert G 281305B 137 0  
3   Cload, Adrian 294401H 127 0 Lettington, David 150118F 133 1  
4   Hossack, Keith 289581L 123 0 Pol, Jerry 182271J 124 1  
5   Stock, William 103658A 106 0.5 Miners, Neil 270011G 98 0.5  
6   Jozwiak, Umberto 287680C 78 1 j.box   73 0  
Grades Total 744 3.5 Grades Total 658 2.5
Grades Average 124 Grades Average 109.6666666667
 

 

 

HARVEY MID AREA P W D L GP   PEN MP
MAIDSTONE (4) 5 3 1 1 16     3.5
HASTINGS (3) 5 3 0 2 17     3
SNODLAND (1) 4 2 1 1 13     2.5
TUN WELLS (4) 5 2 0 3 15.5     2
WOK (2) 5 2 0 3 15.5     2
MEDWAY (1) 4 1 0 3 7   6 0

Hastings1 v Horsham 2 Thursday 23 March

 

Est. 1882