PDA

View Full Version : 5B1 - NEW MOTIONS - Olympic Team Selection (Moved Victor Plotkin, Seconded Fred McKim



Lyle Craver
11-18-2016, 10:44 PM
Motion #1. Selection of payers.

a. The National Team shall consist of 5 players, as follows:

1). The winner of the last Canadian Closed that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as a qualification for a previous Olympiad.
2). The 4 highest ranked players as determined by formula.
3). If no tournament described in a1 took place, then the 5 highest ranked players as determined by formula.

b. The Women Team shall consist of 5 players, as follows:

1). The winner of the last Canadian Women that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as a qualification for a previous Olympiad.
2). The 4 highest ranked female players as determined by formula.
3). If no tournament described in b1 took place, then the 5 highest ranked female players as determined by formula.

c. If a player declines their invitation, a replacement player will be selected according to formula.

Christopher Field
11-22-2016, 10:11 PM
Motion #1. Selection of payers.

a. The National Team shall consist of 5 players, as follows:

1). The winner of the last Canadian Closed that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as a qualification for a previous Olympiad.
2). The 4 highest ranked players as determined by formula.
3). If no tournament described in a1 took place, then the 5 highest ranked players as determined by formula.

b. The Women Team shall consist of 5 players, as follows:

1). The winner of the last Canadian Women that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as a qualification for a previous Olympiad.
2). The 4 highest ranked female players as determined by formula.
3). If no tournament described in b1 took place, then the 5 highest ranked female players as determined by formula.

c. If a player declines their invitation, a replacement player will be selected according to formula.

for (b): The Women's Team ...
1. The winner of the last Canadian Women's Closed ...

Chris Field.

Ken Craft
11-23-2016, 10:14 AM
If this motion and no other is passed, no formula is included in the motion.

Victor Plotkin
11-23-2016, 10:25 AM
If this motion and no other is passed we continue using the current formula: (top FIDE + top CFC) / 2.

Victor Plotkin
11-23-2016, 10:28 AM
I agree with you, Ken. The wording could be better. It's very difficult to prepare to all 64 (2 in power of 6) possible results of the voting.

Ken Craft
11-23-2016, 10:33 AM
It should have been one motion. To which people could have made amendments.

Paul Leblanc
11-24-2016, 10:59 AM
Wasn't there a requirement for selected players to play a minimum number of games in a specified time prior to selection? I can remember a discussion where I suggested that players who are selected should play a minimum number games in Canada.

Vladimir Drkulec
11-24-2016, 11:39 AM
Wasn't there a requirement for selected players to play a minimum number of games in a specified time prior to selection? I can remember a discussion where I suggested that players who are selected should play a minimum number games in Canada.

I don’t think that this proposal negates that one (minimum games, FIDE, CFC or FQE) which passed as I recall. Minimum games in Canada never made it into a motion and I believe that it would be the death knell to achieving strong results like the one we had last Olympiad.

Paul Leblanc
11-24-2016, 02:07 PM
OK. I missed that these motions did not cover the entire criteria for selection.

Michael Lo
11-24-2016, 04:44 PM
Could someone help to post the rest of the criteria for selection? I would guess they are in the CFC handbook, but the CFC site is down.

Michael Lo
11-25-2016, 04:27 PM
Could someone help to post the rest of the criteria for selection? I would guess they are in the CFC handbook, but the CFC site is down.

The cfc site is still down. I would very much like to know the entire criteria for selection to have a whole picture before voting on Victor's motions. The deadline for voting is Nov 26 (tomorrow). If I cannot get access to the entire criteria for selection, I would request the President to prolong the voting period due to insufficient information to make a decision.

Pierre Dénommée
11-25-2016, 05:52 PM
We did achieve our best Olympic result with a selection committee. It is not clear why we want to get rid of it. Kasparov career would have been slowed down if a selection committee hasn't chosen him.

Victor Plotkin
11-25-2016, 06:47 PM
The cfc site is still down. I would very much like to know the entire criteria for selection to have a whole picture before voting on Victor's motions. The deadline for voting is Nov 26 (tomorrow). If I cannot get access to the entire criteria for selection, I would request the President to prolong the voting period due to insufficient information to make a decision.

Now, the team consists of:

1. The winner of the last Canadian Closed (or Canadian Women)
2. 3 players by rating. (top CFC + top FIDE) / 2. Top = max rating in 12 months before the deadline. Deadline = 6 months before the start of the Olympiad.
3. Selection Committee chooses 1 player.

My proposal (motions)

1. No Selection Committee. The champion + 4 by rating.
2. Only FIDE rating for the National Team.
3. Last published rating instead of max rating.
4. Bonus/penalty for Canadian Closed
5. Bonus for juniors.
6. Bonus/penalty for the last Olympiad performance

Pierre Dénommée
11-25-2016, 07:28 PM
No selection Committee, but it is a team tournament. The players selected by the formula could be mortal enemies. That would ruin the fun of being together and the team spirit.

Michael Lo
11-25-2016, 11:01 PM
Wasn't there a requirement for selected players to play a minimum number of games in a specified time prior to selection? I can remember a discussion where I suggested that players who are selected should play a minimum number games in Canada.


I don’t think that this proposal negates that one (minimum games, FIDE, CFC or FQE) which passed as I recall. Minimum games in Canada never made it into a motion and I believe that it would be the death knell to achieving strong results like the one we had last Olympiad.

I am referring to the above. Seems like there are more selection criteria, e.g. minimum games, that are not listed.

Victor Plotkin
11-25-2016, 11:07 PM
The current requirement is 20 games CFC or FIDE rated during the 12 months period before the deadline.

Vladimir Drkulec
11-25-2016, 11:58 PM
The current requirement is 20 games CFC or FIDE rated during the 12 months period before the deadline.

This proposal does not affect the 20 game minimum.

Michael Lo
11-26-2016, 12:53 AM
In summary, the current selection criteria are:

1. Played 20 games CFC or FIDE rated during the 12 months period before the deadline.
2. The winner of the last Canadian Closed (or Canadian Women)
3. 3 players by rating. (top CFC + top FIDE) / 2. Top = max rating in 12 months before the deadline. Deadline = 6 months before the start of the Olympiad.
4. Selection Committee chooses 1 player.

With Victor's motions (if all passed), the criteria will be:
1. Played 20 games CFC or FIDE rated during the 12 months period before the deadline (according to motion 5B2 a, the deadline is 5 months before the start of Olympiad).
2. No Selection Committee. The champion + 4 by rating.
3. Only FIDE rating for the National Team.
4. Last published rating instead of max rating.
5. Bonus/penalty for Canadian Closed
6. Bonus for juniors.
7. Bonus/penalty for the last Olympiad performance

Any other criteria not mentioned above exists? Please confirm.

Michael Lo
11-29-2016, 02:29 PM
I finally get hold of a cached version of the CFC handbook. Following are the sections concerning the Olympiad players' selection:

905. The Selection Committee

The CFC Executive shall appoint a Selection Committee consisting of three well known and respected individuals who are of at least master strength and have knowledge of the Canadian chess community. [Motion 2012-V Barron/Zeromskis]

a) The Selection Committee shall be appointed no later than 180 days before the start of the Olympiad.

b) The Selection Committee shall select three players to be eligible for the National Team in a ranked order and three players to be eligible for the Women's team in a ranked order, taking into account the players' recent results, potential for improvement and such other factors as they consider relevant. These selections shall be made no later than 165 days before the start of the Olympiad. [Motion 2011L Bluvshtein/Zeromskis; amended by McDonald/von Keitz]

c) [Motion 2004-05 GL6 Harper/Feng] Neither member of the Selection Committee may play for the Canadian National Team in the Olympiad in question.

906. Selection of the players

a) Eligibility: Players are eligible to play on a Canadian Team if they are:

i) A Canadian Citizen or a permanent resident of Canada. Proof of status must be provided to the CFC Executive when a player accepts a position on a Team.

ii) A member in good standing of the CFC and the affiliated provincial association in the province of residence (if one exists) at the time of selection.

iii) Have played at least 10 regular CFC rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).

b) National Team: [Motion Smith/Jaeger 2007-08 GL6, amendment of original Craver/Gillanders motion] The National Team shall consist of five players, as follows:

i) The Canadian Champion, as of 180 days before the start of the Olympiad.

ii) The three highest rated players on the Selection Rating List.

iii) One player decided upon by the Selection Committee.

c) Women’s Team: The Women’s Team shall consist of five players, as follows:

i) The Canadian Womens Champion, as of 180 days before the start of the Olympiad.

ii) The three highest rated female players on the Selection Rating list.

iii) One player decided upon by the Selection Committee.

d) Notification: Players shall be notified of their selection by the CFC Executive no later than 150 days before the start of the Olympiad.

e) Acceptance: Players shall notify the CFC Executive of their intention to play by no later than 120 days before the start of the Olympiad.

f) Replacements: If a player either declines the invitation or withdraws after indicating his or her intention to participate as a member of the National or Women's team {911}, a replacement player shall be notified as soon as practicable and shall have one week after being notified to inform the CFC of his or her intention to play. [Motion 2011M Bluvshtein/Zeromskis]

907. Selection Ratings

Selection of players for the Teams by rating shall be based on the average of the player’s highest CFC rating and highest FIDE rating during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).

a) Established CFC and FIDE ratings shall be used to determine team selection.

b) The CFC shall publish, with each rating update, a list of the top 10 Selection Ratings and the top 10 Selection Ratings of female players.

Michael Lo
11-29-2016, 02:29 PM
I am in support of most if not all of Victor's motions, but have a few procedual concerns. Please see whether the President and the Secretary could clarify on the following concerns. I do not wish the see the motions get passed but are not able to implement due to procedural errors.

1) Minimum games played (10 games, not 20 games)

Handbook section 906.a.iii) Have played at least 10 regular CFC rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).

Other than the minimum games rule, there are also the residency rule and membership rule stated in section 906.

It is ambiguous to which section(s) of the Handbook are being affect/replace by Victor's motions. It would be best if the motion(s) could state this clearly.

2) Status of Selection Committee

From what I gathered from Victor's comments, his motions are intended to eliminate the Selection Committee, but this is not being explicitly stated in his motions. Victor's motion 5B1 "Motion #1. Selection of payers." corresponds to the Handbook section "906. Selection of the players". Even if Victor's motions are passed, I do not see that it will affect the Handbook section "905. The Selection Committee". Thus, I would expect there will still be a Selection Committee executing Victor's proposed selection rules. Victor, is this your intent?

Michael Lo
11-29-2016, 02:54 PM
Furthermore, there are wording updates to the original motions:

1) Suggested by Garland, agreed by Victor

The formula uses the FIDE rating only as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is above 2300. The formula uses the average FIDE and CFC rating as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is below or equal 2300.

2) Agreed by Victor and Michael Barron

+20 points for 2nd place
+10 points for 3rd place
-10 points if the player did not participate or withdrew.

to:

+10 points if player played all rounds of Canadian Closed
+20 points for third place
+30 points for second place

How and when will the above be updated in the motions? By amendment before the voting ends? Can we still modify the motions after the voting?

Victor Plotkin
11-29-2016, 07:38 PM
Furthermore, there are wording updates to the original motions:

1) Suggested by Garland, agreed by Victor

The formula uses the FIDE rating only as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is above 2300. The formula uses the average FIDE and CFC rating as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is below or equal 2300.

2) Agreed by Victor and Michael Barron

+20 points for 2nd place
+10 points for 3rd place
-10 points if the player did not participate or withdrew.

to:

+10 points if player played all rounds of Canadian Closed
+20 points for third place
+30 points for second place

How and when will the above be updated in the motions? By amendment before the voting ends? Can we still modify the motions after the voting?

I believe, the president is supposed to answer these questions. From my point:

1. I fully accept "grammar" corrections by Christopher Field. I am sure, we do not need the special voting for it.

2. I never agreed to change the motion about Canadian Closed. It was just an example how we can avoid the word "penalty" if some governors are so unhappy with this word. Actually, the initial wording is more logical and looks better for me. I do not see any reason to change anything in this motion.

3. About FIDE and CFC-FIDE ratings. Yes, the wording with 2300 borderline looks better and more logical. If Vlad can change the wording without any additional voting, it's great. If not - I prefer not to have another voting. This motion was very important for me, the 2nd most important among 6 motions. Only the elimination of the Selection Committee was more important.

Victor Plotkin
11-29-2016, 07:53 PM
I am in support of most if not all of Victor's motions, but have a few procedual concerns. Please see whether the President and the Secretary could clarify on the following concerns. I do not wish the see the motions get passed but are not able to implement due to procedural errors.

1) Minimum games played (10 games, not 20 games)

Handbook section 906.a.iii) Have played at least 10 regular CFC rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).

Other than the minimum games rule, there are also the residency rule and membership rule stated in section 906.

It is ambiguous to which section(s) of the Handbook are being affect/replace by Victor's motions. It would be best if the motion(s) could state this clearly.

2) Status of Selection Committee

From what I gathered from Victor's comments, his motions are intended to eliminate the Selection Committee, but this is not being explicitly stated in his motions. Victor's motion 5B1 "Motion #1. Selection of payers." corresponds to the Handbook section "906. Selection of the players". Even if Victor's motions are passed, I do not see that it will affect the Handbook section "905. The Selection Committee". Thus, I would expect there will still be a Selection Committee executing Victor's proposed selection rules. Victor, is this your intent?

Michael,

Our handbook was not updated a very long period of time. The 20 games requirement was accepted by governors about 2 years ago. The next (2018) campaign will the first one with this 20 games requirement.

About the Selection Committee. My main goal for all 6 motions was ELIMINATING of this committee. I prefer motion 1 to pass and all other motions to fail then the opposite scenario (motion 1 fails, all other pass). According to motion 1, the team will have 5 players (the champion + 4 players by rating). There will be no space for any nominee of any committee.

Michael Lo
11-29-2016, 09:23 PM
I believe, the president is supposed to answer these questions. From my point:

1. I fully accept "grammar" corrections by Christopher Field. I am sure, we do not need the special voting for it.

2. I never agreed to change the motion about Canadian Closed. It was just an example how we can avoid the word "penalty" if some governors are so unhappy with this word. Actually, the initial wording is more logical and looks better for me. I do not see any reason to change anything in this motion.

3. About FIDE and CFC-FIDE ratings. Yes, the wording with 2300 borderline looks better and more logical. If Vlad can change the wording without any additional voting, it's great. If not - I prefer not to have another voting. This motion was very important for me, the 2nd most important among 6 motions. Only the elimination of the Selection Committee was more important.

Victor, sorry that I thought you agreed change the motion about Canadian Closed. Please note that, I personally would vote "yes" if the motion is changed to:

+10 points if player played all rounds of Canadian Closed
+20 points for third place
+30 points for second place

But would vote "no" for the original motion. Although the final point counting would be the same, the original motion explicitly penalize players not participated in the Canadian Closed which I do not agree with. To me, it is not just a change of wording, but it is a change of the objective of the selection rule.

I also prefer not to have another voting if possible.

Michael Lo
11-29-2016, 09:36 PM
Michael,

Our handbook was not updated a very long period of time. The 20 games requirement was accepted by governors about 2 years ago. The next (2018) campaign will the first one with this 20 games requirement.

About the Selection Committee. My main goal for all 6 motions was ELIMINATING of this committee. I prefer motion 1 to pass and all other motions to fail then the opposite scenario (motion 1 fails, all other pass). According to motion 1, the team will have 5 players (the champion + 4 players by rating). There will be no space for any nominee of any committee.

Thanks for the clarification on the 20 games.

So your motions are intended to:
a) eliminate Handbook section 205,
b) keep Handbook section 206.a, and
c) replace Handbook section 206.b

I am fine with all of the above, but worry that we may not be able to execute your motions as you intended. Eliminate Handbook section 205 is not mentioned in your motions at all, although it is your intent, I do not think we can execute "intent". Your motion "Motion #1. Selection of payers." corresponds to the Handbook section "906. Selection of the players", if passed, we may be forced to replace the whole Handbook section 206, including 206.a, which I do not think is your intent. Like you said, we will need the President to clarify on the situation. Vlad?

Ken Craft
11-30-2016, 12:54 PM
Do we know how the courts might view the age discrimination clause?

Victor Plotkin
11-30-2016, 01:34 PM
Do we know how the courts might view the age discrimination clause?

I don't see any discrimination here. My proposal gives a minor preference to younger players. The initial intention of the SC (selection committee) was to give priority to players "who can improve their game in the future". Definitely, younger players could do it (improve) easily.

I want to eliminate the SC for many reasons. However, the initial goal of the SC is good. Giving a priority to juniors is very important for chess in Canada in general. I don't believe, this is a realistic scenario, that somebody lost his spot to junior because of bonus points and went to the court for justice.

Actually, this system works well in some other sports and in some other countries. For example, the winner of World Junior gets a spot for the World Cup (interzonal in the past). FIDE doesn't give the same privilege to the winner of the World Senior, for example.

Ken Craft
11-30-2016, 01:49 PM
I guess we will find out when the first individual losing their place because of points awarded under that clause. Preference and discrimination are essentially synonyms.

Michael Lo
12-03-2016, 02:44 PM
Thanks for the clarification on the 20 games.

So your motions are intended to:
a) eliminate Handbook section 205,
b) keep Handbook section 206.a, and
c) replace Handbook section 206.b

I am fine with all of the above, but worry that we may not be able to execute your motions as you intended. Eliminate Handbook section 205 is not mentioned in your motions at all, although it is your intent, I do not think we can execute "intent". Your motion "Motion #1. Selection of payers." corresponds to the Handbook section "906. Selection of the players", if passed, we may be forced to replace the whole Handbook section 206, including 206.a, which I do not think is your intent. Like you said, we will need the President to clarify on the situation. Vlad?

Voting is ending today. I still have the above concerns. Vlad?

Lyle Craver
12-03-2016, 05:55 PM
On a procedural basis no the mover of the motion does NOT have the right to reword motions once the start of voting has begun - all voting members have the right to know EXACTLY what they are voting for and if there are found to be overwhelming technical reasons why the vote should not proceed the president can make a ruling. However the time for this is BEFORE the start of voting. The problem with changes is that it's often a matter of opinion what is a matter of a change of substance and "minor corrections" and as such once the motion is called voting goes to a conclusion. It would be unjust for a member's yes or no vote to be taken as a yes or no for a reworded motion which they might not disagree with.

Once a motion is passed members can move to "reconsider" (which would cancel the original motion) or make a whole new motion with the desired changed wording.

Michael Lo
12-03-2016, 06:20 PM
My major concerns are not about "wordings", but what exactly will be affected by the motions. Re-wording my concerns, I am asking:

1) Will the Selection Committee be eliminated since Victor's motion did not mention anything about the Committee. If the Committee will be eliminated, what ground does the decision base on and who will make that decision? I think we need another motion to eliminate the Committee. If that is the case, I am proposing to get it done in this quarterly meeting, if possible.

2) Will Handbook section 206.a still be effective? We should also resolve this in this meeting, if possible.

A few words on the "wordings", along the discussion, it gives us (at least me) the impression that Victor is willing to change wording on some of the motions, and the wordings of some of the motions will be changed. Thank you for Lyle's explanation on how and when these changes can be done. I also strongly recommend that the change of wordings to Victor's motions be done before the end of this meeting.

The voting is ending today and the meeting is ending tomorrow. I would like to seek the President, Secretary and Victor's opinions on how to handle the situation asap.

Michael

Vladimir Drkulec
12-04-2016, 12:21 AM
Voting is ending today. I still have the above concerns. Vlad?

It is not really possible to change proposals once voting has started though we can correct the grammar as long as it does not change the intent of the motion. The selection committee is eliminated by this vote. There is no need for any additional motion to do so.

The handbook needs to be updated with non-NFP compliant sections being purged. Hopefully this can be done over the course of the next year. Once this is done we can ratify it as the continued will of the voting members with respect to certain matters of CFC policy.

Michael Lo
12-04-2016, 02:53 PM
Vlad, thanks for the clarification.

I would like to move to reconsider the motions 5B3 and 5B4.

Revised motion 5B3:

The formula uses the FIDE rating only as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is above 2300. The formula uses the average FIDE and CFC rating as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is below or equal 2300. Any number is rounded to the nearest 1. 0.5 is rounded to 1. If 2 or more players have the same total number then the younger age will be used as the tie-breaker.

Reason to reconsider: Eliminate possible gender discrimination complains.

Revised motion 5B4:

Bonuses for performance in the last Canadian Closed or last Canadian Women, respectively, that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as qualification for a previous Olympiad:

+10 points if player played all rounds of Canadian Closed
+20 points for third place
+30 points for second place

This bonus will be added to any base rating number (last rating, average rating or highest rating).

Reason to reconsider: remove connotation of penalizing players not participated in the Canadian Closed or Canadian Women.

Michael Lo
12-04-2016, 03:22 PM
Vlad, thanks for the clarification.

I would like to move to reconsider the motions 5B3 and 5B4.

Revised motion 5B3:

The formula uses the FIDE rating only as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is above 2300. The formula uses the average FIDE and CFC rating as a base for the team if the average FIDE rating of top-5 eligible players is below or equal 2300. Any number is rounded to the nearest 1. 0.5 is rounded to 1. If 2 or more players have the same total number then the younger age will be used as the tie-breaker.

Reason to reconsider: Eliminate possible gender discrimination complains.

Revised motion 5B4:

Bonuses for performance in the last Canadian Closed or last Canadian Women, respectively, that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as qualification for a previous Olympiad:

+10 points if player played all rounds of Canadian Closed
+20 points for third place
+30 points for second place

This bonus will be added to any base rating number (last rating, average rating or highest rating).

Reason to reconsider: remove connotation of penalizing players not participated in the Canadian Closed or Canadian Women.

I have re-posted the above to the Voting Results thread which I believe is more appropriate, please put any further replies there - http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/showthread.php?4482-6-quot-THE-VOTING-BOOTH-quot-results-of-voting.