20. Long-Term Planning Committee

[Lyle Craver]

This discussion is being led by Kevin Pacey

[Kevin Pacey]

I wish to propose creating a CFC Long-Term Planning Committee. Its purposes could include the following:

1) Long-term CFC business planning;
2) Long-term planning for Canada hosting more international events (e.g. norm tournaments);
3) Examining possible long-term CFC rating service alterations (e.g. consider having speed chess ratings);
4) Examining miscellaneous long-term CFC issues (e.g. reforming CFC governance).

A fifth purpose could involve planning for membership drives, though I prefer that this be done by a seperate committee (see the previous Oct. 2011 Online Meeting agenda item [#19]).

The overall goal of any Long-Term Planning Committee could be to construct a vision for the CFC, to be acheived within 10 years.

I am willing to serve on a Long-Term Planning Committee, with its purposes and overall goal as I have outlined, should it be struck.

[Christopher Mallon]

I would like to point out that for Point #3, speed chess ratings are already approved by the CFC and in fact there were two events rated in that way, although by hand as it is not in the database yet.

[Kevin Pacey]

I would like to point out that for Point #3, speed chess ratings are already approved by the CFC and in fact there were two events rated in that way, although by hand as it is not in the database yet.

Thanks Chris, I wasn't aware of that.

If someone can quote a particular motion in which speed ratings were approved, I'd appreciate it.

Other examples for possible purpose #3 of a Long-Term Planning Committee would include considering whether to combine the rating of Regular/Active/Speed events into having just one rating per player, i.e. regardless of the time control of an event (I personally am very sceptical of the idea, but it has been suggested by some people, in light of internet chess servers doing this). Another possibility is to use FIDE ratings in place of CFC ratings, but in light of recent events this seems less like a good idea than ever.

[Fred McKim]

I would like to point out that for Point #3, speed chess ratings are already approved by the CFC and in fact there were two events rated in that way, although by hand as it is not in the database yet.

The present CFC Database only holds regular and active ratings.

We know that there are several organizers that run their own speed ratings, so if we really wanted to do this, we could contract one of them to calculate CFC Speed ratings until such time as we overhaul the rating program and database.

[Hugh Brodie]

For several years, the FQE has offered to rate blitz events for free for everyone (members and non-members). This has resulted in a grand total of only 15 blitz tournaments having been rated since 2009. Most organizers stick to in-house blitz rating systems.

The FQE database has three ratings for players: slow, active, and blitz. The blitz ratings were taken from my Montreal blitz ratings with my permission (which I continue - usually rating only the monthly Cafe Pi blitz tournaments).

[Michael von Keitz]

I wish to propose creating a CFC Long-Term Planning Committee. Its purposes could include the following:

1) Long-term CFC business planning;
2) Long-term planning for Canada hosting more international events (e.g. norm tournaments);
3) Examining possible long-term CFC rating service alterations (e.g. consider having speed chess ratings);
4) Examining miscellaneous long-term CFC issues (e.g. reforming CFC governance).

A fifth purpose could involve planning for membership drives, though I prefer that this be done by a seperate committee (see the previous Oct. 2011 Online Meeting agenda item [#19]).

The overall goal of any Long-Term Planning Committee could be to construct a vision for the CFC, to be acheived within 10 years.

I am willing to serve on a Long-Term Planning Committee, with its purposes and overall goal as I have outlined, should it be struck.

Kevin Pacey presented his proposal, as quoted above. It was pointed out that speed ratings have already been approved by the CFC, though the CFC database does not hold them. Various blitz rating options were presented, which the committee will take under advisement, in addition to their discussions surrounding other possible rating structures (e.g. one combined rating for all types of play).