The FIDE Qualifications Commission has just published a new set of regulations for titles and player licensing which come into effect on 1 July 2013. (Click here for details) While the title regulations were discussed at the 2012 FIDE Congress, the new regulations for the licensing of players is a bigger surprise.
I'll start with the player licensing first. Essentially all players are to be registered with their National Chess Federation (NCF) and issued with a FIDE ID. The information gathered as part of the registration process includes: name, DOB, Place of Birth, gender, a photo, passport number, and existing FIDE ID.
The requirement to collect such information has already caused some ructions in various discussion forums, and on one level I can see why. Apart from the varying privacy provisions related to data collection and storage, there is clearly some information that cannot be provided. Not everyone has a passport number, and even for those that do, sharing it with others may also be a concern. Certainly in the case of the PNG Chess Federation, the vast majority of potential players do not have one. In practice that field is going to be blank for an awful lot of players.
While registration is free (at least for now), there are still financial costs attached to other parts of the regulations. Under the new regulations, all players in a FIDE rated event must be registered with FIDE before the start of the event, otherwise there is a 50 euro penalty charged to the organisers. There is an obvious problem with players who wish to enter an event and who aren't licensed. Given that the first contact most chess federations have with players is when they turn up to a tournament, it leads to a 'chicken-egg' situation in which a player can't play unless registered, while there is no point in registering a player unless they play. Having discussed this issue with QC Chairman Ignatius Leong, he suggests that NCF's license players when they play in their first domestic (ie non-FIDE rated) event. This of course still leaves the problem of players whose first event is a FIDE rated tournament. A better application here would simply require organisers/NCF's to register players at/after their first event, without penalty.
The other issue with the new system is that Federations can 'delist' players ie remove their license to play. At the 2012 Congress the FIDE Ethics Commission rules that while NCFs can sanction players belonging to their own federations, they cannot extend these sanctions to prevent players from playing in other countries. But under this new system, a Federation can apply a financial disincentive on such players, by removing their players license, and forcing any organiser who accepts their entry to pay an extra 50 euro penalty. A kind of 'end-run' around the Ethics Commission.
Apart from the flaws I have spotted, the major issue will simply be one of hard work. Federations who do not have direct membership schemes (eg Australia, England in part), will almost have to set up a de-facto one, to fulfil the requirements of the new system. Not that this is a bad thing in my opinion, but there will certainly be teething troubles to start with.
(NB: This post and the opinions contained are made in a private capacity, and not connected with any positions I hold on FIDE Commissions)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Hello sir,
May I share your article?
Regards,
Charles
Just curious, is there such a thing as private capacity when commenting on FIDE regulations, when holding FIDE positions? I suppose (and hope) there is.
Am also interested in something I cannot figure out myself, being not an expert on the new 2013 title regulations.
Is it correct to say that with title-norms-tournaments, one can hope to become a WIM/IM/WGM/GM without ever beating a single WIM/IM/WGM/GM? If so, is this a flaw in the system or maybe not?
This is about the first semi official comment I have seen.
What do you say to the view that the FIDE Commission have grossly over exceeded their license to make changes? Such a fundamental change, that you need to ask the permission of FIDE and the national Federation before playing a tournament should surely be put through the GA.
From the English perspective, the likely reaction is a rapid reversal of moves to increase the numbers of FIDE rated events.
Just a note to those leaving comments. I am happy to answer questions but I do need a name attached to the comments (not necessarily a real one). It is just a thing I have.
I see that FIDE have now withdrawn this rule. Their letter says: "The licensing of the players has been cancelled. The new documents about registration will be presented in due course." Have you any idea what that second sentence means, please? I see also that the Handbook on the web-site still contains these licensing rules. Should we assume that they haven't given up on this?
All the best,
Pete
I see that FIDE have now withdrawn this rule. Their letter says: "The licensing of the players has been cancelled. The new documents about registration will be presented in due course." Have you any idea what that second sentence means, please? I see also that the Handbook on the web-site still contains these licensing rules. Should we assume that they haven't given up on this?
All the best,
Pete
Apologies for leaving this twice; the first time I clicked nothing seemed to happen at my end, so I clicked again. Sorry.
Funnily enough I was talking to a FIDE official on this issue, three hours before the announcement was made. (I assume this was just coincidental!). Based on my discussion, there is still a desire within FIDE to have such a system, but they recognise the need to 'do it right'. This both involves the process (possibly QC needs to discuss it first, and General Assembly has to approve), and the format (handling new players etc).
I would suggest that Federations think about what kind of system would suit them (from 'none at all' upwards) and make some proposals to QC. I almost certainly will.
Post a Comment