PDA

View Full Version : 8. 2012-H TDOCP Motion (Simon Ong)



Lyle Craver
12-31-2011, 04:48 PM
8. Proposed Motion 2012- Section 20 of the CFC Handbook

Moved by: Simon Ong; Seconded by: Hal Bond

Moved adding the following regulation to current section 20 of the CFC Handbook

Regulations:
1. Introduction

20.1 The following regulations can be altered by the CFC executive with the recommendation from the TDOCP committee members.

20.2 The titles for award are the Regional-TD (RTD), Regional-Organizer (RO), National-TD (NTD), and National-Organizer (NO).

20.3 Individuals with National-TD (NTD) and National-Organizer (NO) will qualify to apply for the FIDE arbiter and organizer titles (NA, FA, IA, and IO).

20.4 The titles are valid for life from the date awarded. Licence fee will be charge every 6 years.

20.5 The judging unit is the TDOCP committee members.

20.6 All applicants for these titles must be current CFC members.

20.7 All applicants must have at least 2 recommendations from 2 different people preferably FIDE-certified arbiter/organizer, CFC Executive/Governor and Provincial/Club Executive member.

2. Regulation for the Regional-TD (RTD)

20.8 Knowledge of the Laws of Chess, CFC Regulations for chess competitions outlined in the CFC handbook.

20.9 Skills in operating electronic chess clocks , SwissSys/SwissManager program, and computer (Words, Excel, Email).

20.10 Experience as tournament director in at least 4 CFC-rated events, including one Swiss and one Round Robin. The Swiss tournament must have at least 10 participants and the Round-robin must have at least 4.

3. Regulation for the Regional-Organizer (RO)

20.11 Knowledge of the organizing chess tournament, CFC Regulations for chess competitions outlined in the CFC handbook, and submission of CFC/FIDE reports to CFC office.

20.12 Experience as tournament organizer in at least 4 CFC-rated events, including one Swiss and one Round Robin. The Swiss tournament must have at least 10 participants and the Round-robin must have at least 4.

4. Regulation for the National-TD (NTD)

20.13 The NTD title is awarded only to those who have already been awarded the title of RTD.

20.14 Experience as tournament director in at least 4 CFC-rated events, including one national and/or international event. In order to count as a norm, the Swiss tournament must have at least 20 participants and the Round-robin must have at least 6.

20.15 Attend either FIDE Arbiters’ Seminar or CFC TDOCP(TD) Seminar. You must pass the examination (80% +) given in either of the aforementioned seminar.

5. Regulation for the National-Organizer (NO)

20.16 The NO title is awarded only to those who have already been awarded the title of RO.

20.17 Experience as tournament organizer in at least 4 CFC-rated events, including one national and/or international event. In order to count as a norm, the Swiss tournament must have at least 20 participants and the Round-robin must have at least 6.

20.18 Attend either FIDE Organizer Seminar or CFC TDOCP (Organizer) Seminar. You must pass the examination (80% +) given in either of the aforementioned seminar.

6. Regulation for CFC TDOCP Seminar
The list of lecturers shall be nominated by the TDOCP committee. There should be at least one lecturer in each province. The lecturer can be FIDE arbiter/organizer and/or National certified TD/organizer.

20.19 The TDOCP (TD) seminar will be a full day discussing the following topic:
(a) Laws of Chess
(b) CFC Rating System & Regulations for chess competitions outlined in the CFC handbook.
(c) SwissSys/SwissManager Program
(d) Use of the electronic clocks
(e) Directing FIDE-rated Events
(f) Other topics suggested by the TDOCP committee.

20.20 The TDOCP (Organizer) seminar will be a full day discussing the following topic:
(a) Laws of Chess
(b) CFC Rating System & Regulations for chess competitions outlined in the CFC handbook.
(c) SwissSys/SwissManager Program & Submission of tournament report to CFC.
(d) Topics from Chess Organizer’s Handbook
(e) Organizing FIDE-rated Events
(f) Other topics suggested by the TDOCP committee.

20.21 The TDOCP Committee will prepare multiple choice/written examinations for each seminar. The participants must achieve 80% or above to pass the examination.

20.22 NTD and NO applicants who fail the examination must wait one month before taking the examination the second time.
20.23 The cost of attendance of TDOCP seminar (including the examination fees) will be decided by the TDOCP Committee members. The money collected from the TDOCP seminar will be submitted to the CFC office. The CFC office shall pay the lecturer on the basis of the number of participants.
20.24 The details to the TDOCP seminar (i.e. date, address, lecturer, etc) must be approved by the TDOCP committee one month before the starting day of the seminar.

Certificates & Pins
1. Qualified applicants may request a certificate and “CFC TD/organizer” pin at the cost of $15 (not including tax). The $15 includes shipping.

Comments:
(1) The objective of this program is to allow inexperienced TDs and organizers to learn from the experienced ones which will improve the quality of the tournament directing in Canada.
(2) This program provides the first stepping stone in obtaining FIDE arbiter and organizer titles (NA, FA, IA, and IO).
(3) This program does not restrict other CFC members from directing and organizing CFC-rated events in Canada.
(4) The regulation will be in effect as of Fall 2012.

Fred McKim
01-01-2012, 03:54 PM
1) Will existing title holders be grandfathered ?
2) Does this eliminate the category of LTD ?
3) What is the licensing fee ? Why is a fee needed ? Perhaps just a re-application form illustrating activity.........

Lyle Craver
01-01-2012, 07:19 PM
While in favor of the proposal I'm NOT in favor of the licencing fee as I'm not happy with titles that can disappear.

For example in 1979 I earned a "BC Teachers Permanent Certificate" which about 5 years ago our provincial government revoked if one did not keep up one's membership in the BC College of Teachers (which was $35 / year and was created after I got my certificate) - there was no mention of grandfathering or anything else.

In general I dislike ex post facto legislation and would be shocked if my National Tournament Directors' status lapsed before my International Arbiter title did (which expires when I do!)

Simon Ong
01-01-2012, 07:38 PM
2) Does this eliminate the category of LTD ?


-I think local T.D.s is part of the category of Regional T.D.
-Existing title holders should show that they are still active in directing & organizing to be on the list of CDN T.D.s & Organizers.
-After reading again, I agree with Mr. McKim and Mr. Craver that licence fees might not be a good idea.

Christopher Mallon
01-01-2012, 07:42 PM
I'm not sure that "existing" title holders are really relevant... other than those with FIDE titles already.

When the last attempt at the program went through, the CFC requested a "Grandfather" list from the provinces. They gave no other details. I was OCA Secretary at the time and was asked to compile the list based on the OCA President's specs, which basically meant that anyone who had directed at least 3 events ever got put on the NTD list. Talk about watering down a title.

Best to start new, I say. Anyone good and interested enough to get the new titles will certainly have no trouble acquiring them.

Paul Leblanc
01-01-2012, 08:30 PM
Will events run by non-qualified organizers and/or non-qualified TDs be rejected by the CFC?

Fred McKim
01-01-2012, 09:13 PM
Will events run by non-qualified organizers and/or non-qualified TDs be rejected by the CFC?

I think this is answered in the Comments - point 3.

Paul Leblanc
01-01-2012, 11:37 PM
Sorry, I was psyched out by the frequent use of the word Regulation. I'm happy now.

Christopher Mallon
01-01-2012, 11:44 PM
Can we have a ruling from the Chair about whether or not this motion as written would start a new list of certified TDs and ignore previous lists?

If not I wish to move an amendment to cause that to happen.

Michael von Keitz
01-02-2012, 01:46 AM
Can we have a ruling from the Chair about whether or not this motion as written would start a new list of certified TDs and ignore previous lists?

If not I wish to move an amendment to cause that to happen.

If implemented, previous titleholders would not see their credentials stripped. Instead, under proposed regulation 20.5, it would fall to the TDOCP Committee to determine whether to consider them current (likely on a case-by-case basis and only for those that choose to apply). That's how I'm reading it.

Michael von Keitz
01-02-2012, 01:48 AM
-After reading again, I agree with Mr. McKim and Mr. Craver that licence fees might not be a good idea.

Simon, are you moving to amend the motion by removing this clause, or musing?

Simon Ong
01-02-2012, 03:26 AM
Simon, are you moving to amend the motion by removing this clause, or musing?

Based on the recent discussion, it seems like governors are in favour of the idea but not the licence fees as they would like to see the title to be permanent. I would like this motion to pass so we can update our list of active t.d's and organizers and give them recognition.

So, yes, Mr. Von Keitz, I would like move to amend the motion by removing the part mentioning licence fee. Do I need someone to second?

Thanks everyone for giving their opinions/suggestions. Look forward to more suggestions :)

Simon Ong
01-02-2012, 03:35 AM
If implemented, previous titleholders would not see their credentials stripped. Instead, under proposed regulation 20.5, it would fall to the TDOCP Committee to determine whether to consider them current (likely on a case-by-case basis and only for those that choose to apply). That's how I'm reading it.

Great idea, Mr. von Keitz!

Also, we can have a separate list of "inactive" T.Ds/organizers. Some of the previous titleholders might fall on that list. Any thoughts?

Should we have a rule for previous titleholders to "recertify" and be on the "active" T.Ds/organizers list? But, we always have the proposed regulation 20.5 such that the TDOCP Committee can make some of these decisions.

Lyle Craver
01-02-2012, 04:34 AM
Just as long as you are aware that people may be holders of multiple titles.

FIDE didn't take Abe Yanofsky off the International Arbiter list for nearly 5 years after his passing - they took him off the International Grandmaster list as soon as they heard the news but didn't check for other titles...

But then until I got Hal to go to bat for us last year, FIDE thought Lynn Stringer was male and yours truly female so what can I say?

Egidijus Zeromskis
01-02-2012, 09:28 AM
There should be definitions for "national and/or international event"s.

A recently finished Hart House Holidays Open had five international players (federations) and some came from other provinces.
Can it be called a national and international event? :rolleyes:

Simon Ong
01-02-2012, 11:59 AM
There should be definitions for "national and/or international event"s.

A recently finished Hart House Holidays Open had five international players (federations) and some came from other provinces.
Can it be called a national and international event? :rolleyes:

Very good point, Mr. Zeromskis!
I am thinking of the following definitions-

National event- CFC/FIDE rated event which include players from 3 different provinces/territories.

International event- CFC/FIDE rated event which include players from 3 different federations.

Initially, I was thinking of defining the national event to include only the official CFC championships- i.e. Canadian Open, Canadian Closed, Canadian Youth Chess Championship, Canadian Junior Chess Championship, Canadian Amateur Chess Championship, etc. Then, I think it might not be a good idea.

Any suggestions on defining the terms "National event" and "International event" :)

Christopher Mallon
01-02-2012, 01:09 PM
International event should definitely be FIDE rated - that puts some extra requirements on it as far as the TD/TO candidate having formal assistance and monitoring from an already-certified person.

Pierre Dénommée
01-02-2012, 03:30 PM
This is a private discussion, but when this will go public, I will certainly get a call from Richard Bérubéé. He will ask me if the FQE certified arbiters will be required to also become CFC certified arbiters in order to access the FA and IA titles.

The FQE has been certifying arbiters continuously since the 1980s, The actual FQE list can be found here http://www.fqechecs.qc.ca/cms/story/arbitres but there are many more certified individuals who are either inactive or whose FQE membership has lapsed.

Because the FQE has its own Tournaments Rules, different from our's and from FIDE's, recognition should not be automatic. Furthermore, the FQE Official Rules of Chess book has suffered a tremendous delay and the written version is still the 2005 Laws of Chess event though the 2009 version is actually used in their tournaments.

Christopher Mallon
01-02-2012, 03:52 PM
I don't see why we should be supporting the FQE's certification process... what do they ever do to support us? So I would say the FQE certifications should be ignored as far as CFC rules go.

Pierre Dénommée
01-02-2012, 04:01 PM
Two levels are clearly insufficient. Other sports have 4 levels: local, regional, provincial and national.

I agree that the CFC should certify only the highest two levels. The other levels of certification should be left to the affiliated provincial organisation where they exists and to a group of arbiters of the province where they don't.

I disagree with the absence of restrictions for directing tournaments. National Events and all their qualifiers should be restricted to CFC Certified Arbiters. This should have little impact on the normal activities of the CFC and it will grant some values to the titles.

The Grandfathering problem is what has caused the last attempt to fail. Now that we have a list of Certified Arbiters here http://chess.ca/cfc-arbiters I tough that this debate was over. Are we reopening it?

Licensing fees for Arbiters is not a good idea. We should fight it at the FIDE level and not implement it at our level.

SwissSys should not be mentioned by name. Parings software endorsed by FIDE or the CFC should be uses instead. Did we forget that we are trying to move to SwissManager?

I am volunteering for the TDOCP and for writing the French examinations.

Christopher Mallon
01-02-2012, 04:18 PM
Where did the list at Pierre's link even come from?

Fred McKim
01-02-2012, 04:33 PM
Where did the list at Pierre's link even come from?

If you are talking about the list on the CFC web site - I can tell you that it came from David Cohen's site. These were the provincial submissions to the CFC in 2004.

I have received no challenges to it's accuracy.

Aris Marghetis
01-02-2012, 04:56 PM
Two levels are clearly insufficient. Other sports have 4 levels: local, regional, provincial and national.

I agree that the CFC should certify only the highest two levels. The other levels of certification should be left to the affiliated provincial organisation where they exists and to a group of arbiters of the province where they don't.

I disagree with the absence of restrictions for directing tournaments. National Events and all their qualifiers should be restricted to CFC Certified Arbiters. This should have little impact on the normal activities of the CFC and it will grant some values to the titles.

The Grandfathering problem is what has caused the last attempt to fail. Now that we have a list of Certified Arbiters here http://chess.ca/cfc-arbiters I tough that this debate was over. Are we reopening it?

Licensing fees for Arbiters is not a good idea. We should fight it at the FIDE level and not implement it at our level.

SwissSys should not be mentioned by name. Parings software endorsed by FIDE or the CFC should be uses instead. Did we forget that we are trying to move to SwissManager?

I am volunteering for the TDOCP and for writing the French examinations.
There are FAs & IAs (another CFC webpage : http://chess.ca/arbiters-and-organizers ) that must have largely achieved those levels while our "TDOCP" was relatively dormant? Shouldn't all FAs & IAs, even IOs, active or inactive, also be designated as CFC NTDs?

Christopher Mallon
01-02-2012, 05:15 PM
If you are talking about the list on the CFC web site - I can tell you that it came from David Cohen's site. These were the provincial submissions to the CFC in 2004.

I have received no challenges to it's accuracy.

Consider this a challenge then.

Why should someone at a provincial association be able to make up a list any which way they want and we call those people certified?

Lyle Craver
01-02-2012, 05:42 PM
Pierre makes very good sense to the extent that my personal #1 option would be to table this motion with a view to re-introducing it in April in a re-drafted form.

There is both the question of unaffiliated federations (mostly the FQE but not entirely so), at what level we require TD certification, the question of fees and non-specific language concerning software.

Speaking personally I would prefer tabling to taking a final vote on this motion now in its present form.

I support the idea - but the devil is in the details.

Fred McKim
01-03-2012, 12:06 AM
Consider this a challenge then.

Why should someone at a provincial association be able to make up a list any which way they want and we call those people certified?

It seems there is an existing committee, now, so I suppose you could issue the request to revoke all of these titles to them.

This was the decision of the CFC in 2004 as a means of generating an initial list. There were criteria given to the Associations as to how to assign these titles.

Ken Craft
01-03-2012, 10:06 AM
Some of us received our titles under a previous CFC system and passed a written test in order to do so. Will you be revoking the titles of people who achieved them in this manner?

Parenthetically, Lyle, I have possessed a NB Teachers' License for 17 years without having been required to pay any fees.

Egidijus Zeromskis
01-03-2012, 10:32 AM
Will you be revoking the titles of people who achieved them in this manner?

There should be some kind of courses and tests that TDs' knowledge are updated with current chess laws, pairings, etc.
These titles are not a honor type like GM/IM/FM which have a rating showing the current status of players.

Christopher Mallon
01-03-2012, 10:35 AM
Some of us received our titles under a previous CFC system and passed a written test in order to do so. Will you be revoking the titles of people who achieved them in this manner?.

I wasn't meaning to imply I thought we should revoke ALL previous titles, just the ones that were arbitrarily handed out in 2004 without any real criteria.

If we ARE keeping the ones from 2004 then the Ontario list should be added, I'm not sure why it's not included on the list published on the website. I might be way off but I do seem to recall about 120 names on it.

Fred McKim
01-03-2012, 11:12 AM
I wasn't meaning to imply I thought we should revoke ALL previous titles, just the ones that were arbitrarily handed out in 2004 without any real criteria.

If we ARE keeping the ones from 2004 then the Ontario list should be added, I'm not sure why it's not included on the list published on the website. I might be way off but I do seem to recall about 120 names on it.

I think it's there, as I recognize a lot of Ontario names on that list.

I'm not sure is we still have easily verifiable records of TD titles awarded before that time.

Halldor P. Palsson
01-03-2012, 06:43 PM
The program went dormant in 1992 as far as I can remember. It needed improving and was put on hold.

Several attempts at geting the program off the ground failed. In 2004 the Provincial Federations were asked by me for a list of people to grandfather. Those lists are on the CFC website.

When those lists were being compiled I was exposed to strong opinions about some TDs. I did not move on personal dislikes or opinions on suitability or lack of judgement becase nothing like complaints casting aspersions on these folks existed at the CFC. Backbiting TDs is so popular but not very productive.

In 2004 tournaments had been running for 12 years and a whole new generation of TDs had come to the forefront without the benefit of a formal CFC TD program. At various times something was done to train TDs. BC, Que and Alberta had more or less formal TD programs at that time.

It is now 2012 and the list from 2004 is older than sin. I would suggest that we use Pattersons lists of TDs and grandfather some more folks that have run 5-10-20 or 30 CFC rated events.

It is critical for us to get more people running tournaments. A start is perhaps to recognize those who have been carrying the can.

Pierre Dénommée
01-04-2012, 12:59 AM
There are FAs & IAs (another CFC webpage : http://chess.ca/arbiters-and-organizers ) that must have largely achieved those levels while our "TDOCP" was relatively dormant? Shouldn't all FAs & IAs, even IOs, active or inactive, also be designated as CFC NTDs?

The TDOCP has been dormant despite my attempts to revive it. Before organizing my first CFC rated tournament, i tried to get ca CFC certification but they were no longer offered. I have met the old requirements for NTD before becoming an IA but to my best knowledge, only one NTD has been officially awarded in a long period of time.

I agree that FA and IA should get the NTD title. I would second an amendment to that effect.

Pierre Dénommée
01-04-2012, 01:04 AM
It seems there is an existing committee, now, so I suppose you could issue the request to revoke all of these titles to them.


According to the CFC web site, this Committee has only one member.

Pierre Dénommée
01-04-2012, 01:13 AM
Lyle,

I wonder if it can be amended in time. It seems that motions dealing with the TDOCP get tabled at an alarming rate.

If memory serves well, the list of arbiters have been retroactively declared not adopted by the President because of a technicality.


Pierre makes very good sense to the extent that my personal #1 option would be to table this motion with a view to re-introducing it in April in a re-drafted form.

There is both the question of unaffiliated federations (mostly the FQE but not entirely so), at what level we require TD certification, the question of fees and non-specific language concerning software.

Speaking personally I would prefer tabling to taking a final vote on this motion now in its present form.

I support the idea - but the devil is in the details.

Pierre Dénommée
01-04-2012, 01:18 AM
The FQE has not only the names, but it also has all the examinations written by all FQE certified LTD. The FQE runs a 4 levels program. The level's names are : local, regional, senior and national. In Quebec, National is often misused for Provincial. All Quebec Provincial Parks are referred to as National Parks.


TIn 2004 tournaments had been running for 12 years and a whole new generation of TDs had come to the forefront without the benefit of a formal CFC TD program. At various times something was done to train TDs. BC, Que and Alberta had more or less formal TD programs at that time..

Pierre Dénommée
01-05-2012, 01:22 AM
Consider this a challenge then.

Why should someone at a provincial association be able to make up a list any which way they want and we call those people certified?

Each time that we discuss the TDOCP, there is always a lot of problems. Motions dealing with the TDOCP have all been tabled and forgotten. At the AGM, the assembly has always refused to elect volunteers to the TDOCP.

It should be simple, we must have a list of arbiters. Furthermore, we have a duty towards FIDE to filter the applications for FA, IA and IO.

I have just one question. What is the real problem that we are so afraid of facing and that is so badly interfering with the normal operation of the TDOCP? Is it only the grandfathering of the Ontario arbiters? We cannot let a local problem stands in the way of the CFC. The CFC is a national organisation dealing with national problems. Filtering the FIDE applications, organizing seminars, administrating examinations, certifying arbiters and organizers are all national issues. We have been incapable to deal with those issue.

I can only congratulate the CFC Executive for the production the list of arbiters, whether it is perfect or not. It is better to begin with this list and then correct it. If the errors concern only a single province, there is no reason to penalize the entire country. TDOCP members of the other provinces should be able to sort this out. If it has been done in a completely arbitrary manner, then it will have to be undone. The first problem is to prove that some provinces have not done their jobs seriously.

There should be an easier first step: it is possible that some of the persons of this list no longer want to be arbiters and their names should be removed at their request.

Did you know that the only involvement of Canada Basketball in the referring process is to sign the applications for the title of International Arbiter? The true job is done by the Canadian Association of Basketball Official. I sometime wonder if the TDOCP job who not be done better by an independent Canadian Association of Chess Officials :rolleyes:. All IA, FA and IO in Canada would be the original members. Self control of arbiters by the arbiters works well and the model has been copied by other countries.

Michael von Keitz
01-05-2012, 01:58 AM
The mover and seconder of 2012-H are seeking the permission of the assembly to withdraw their motion for further fine tuning and future resubmission. Lyle was to have opened a poll to this effect a couple of days ago, but he seems to be otherwise occupied. In any event, when polls open, be prepared for a question regarding withdrawal of the motion.

Lyle Craver
01-05-2012, 02:57 AM
Actually Ken, I wrote the exams for both the Certified and Regional titles. I got my NTD by virtue of the International Arbiter Title.

I'm going from memory here but both CTD and RTD were mid-1980s for me. My memory of the RTD exam was that it was fairly tough but anyone who had done half a dozen tournaments at a regional or provincial level ought not to have had too much difficulty.

An important element in my opinion is TD judgment which is difficult to quantify in multiple choice form. I've had to deal with all kinds of situations where 'would this decision be fair' and 'is it good for the tournament or chess in this area' can fairly have been asked.

I well remember when I was at McMaster (1982-83) and played in the Ontario Open and had one of the worst tournaments of my life - it was Monday of a long weekend and I had been hoping for redemption in the last round and knew I was not in line for a bye. At the appointed round time I indeed DID get a bye on the grounds that the TD did not want to give a bye to a junior - even though this was completely against the rules. I protested but got nowhere and resolved never to play in this gentleman's tournaments again. (No need to name him - he's still active in chess)

I would hope a director who would make such a decision - both against the rules and screwing over an out of town player - would not receive a Regional or National TD title. How one would examine that sort of thing is beyond me.

Lyle Craver
01-05-2012, 03:03 AM
Moved: Ong; Seconded: Bond

Whereas further work is required on the motion;
Be it resolved that the assembly allow Motion 2012-H to be withdrawn.

The President has ruled consent of the Assembly is required to allow the motion to be withdrawn once put to the assembly.

Accordingly, please vote yes, no or abstain.

Deadline is midnight Thursday - this is as much time as we can give for voting since if this motion fails it would require extension of the meeting if beyond this date.

Pierre Dénommée
01-05-2012, 04:45 PM
If the movers want to withdraw the motion, I see no reason to oppose.

Hal, fell free to contact me if you require assistance. This motion is important and it cannot be delayed forever.

It is a huge piece of work. For examples see

Baseball Canada http://www.baseball.ca/files/Operations+Manual+v+2011.pdf

Volleyball Canada http://www.volleyball.ca/sites/www.volleyball.ca/files/Officiating_Arbitres/Administration/Policy%20and%20procedures%20Manual%20updated%20Feb %202011.pdf

Compared to these huge documents, I ounce make a short and sweet motion that has been tabled :).