5.H Discussion of Saskatchewan Chess Federation motion regarding CYCC

[Vladimir Drkulec]

6A. Motion-
The Saskatchewan Chess Federation would like to submit a motion for the 2018 Spring Online Meeting:


1) Starting in 2019, every junior player from a province that hosts the CYCC is eligible to play in the CYCC provided he or she took part in a local CYCC qualification tournament for which the organizer had remitted the fees to the CFC (i.e., any child who played, regardless of the result achieved, will have the right to go to the CYCC).


2) Starting in 2019, if junior player from any province couldn't take part in any local CYCC qualification tournament, he or she becomes eligible by remitting a fee that is split between the CFC and the provincial chess federation.


3) The exact amount of the fee and the split details are to be reviewed periodically. For 2019-2022, the fee is set at $40, with 75% going to the CFC and 25% to the provincial federation.


4) The above stipulations are optional; it is up to the local organizers to choose if they shall apply.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Here is what I posted in the CFC News Forum:

Remember that the Saskatchewan Federation is basically starting almost from zero with its junior programs. There are four junior members from Saskatchewan. I would prefer to forgo the fee and make any change temporary. Alternatively maybe we can give the provincial junior coordinator some additional power to appoint players who can play. Saskatchewan is a big province geographically and it may be difficult for players in outlying districts to travel to whatever YCC's that are taking place.

[Lyle Craver]

Vlad makes good points about Saskatchewan.

That said the original intent of the whole CYCC cycle was that provincial YCCs help fund travel costs to the CYCC. (And any surpluses devoted to travel costs for WYCC - the whole point is that the CYCC / WYCC was supposed to be self-funding) This is particularly a big deal for BC and AB due to the higher transportation costs.

To me the provincial YCCs have no reason for existence if not to qualify players for the nationals. A system where irregardless of the outcome of the qualifying event one can buy one's way to the nationals is the antithesis of what the provincials are supposed to be about.

As such while I appreciate SK's concern I don't plan on supporting this.

[Michael Lo]

2) Starting in 2019, if junior player from any province couldn't take part in any local CYCC qualification tournament, he or she becomes eligible by remitting a fee that is split between the CFC and the provincial chess federation.

3) The exact amount of the fee and the split details are to be reviewed periodically. For 2019-2022, the fee is set at $40, with 75% going to the CFC and 25% to the provincial federation.


Under the current practice, a player can skip the provincial qualifying tournament and play in the CYCC just with the approval of the CYCC organizer. I understand that there are occasions that exceptions are acceptable, e.g. sickness with doctor prove, conflict with important exams, etc. I support that a player can skip the provincial qualifying tournament:
1) with the CYCC organizer's approval (should exercise extreme care in such approvals),
2) remitting a fee that is not less than the provincial qualifying tournament entry fee, split 50/50 between the CFC (goes to the Junior Fund) and the provincial federation (goes to the Junior Fund if one exists).

[Pierre Dénommée]

Vlad makes good points about Saskatchewan.

That said the original intent of the whole CYCC cycle was that provincial YCCs help fund travel costs to the CYCC. (And any surpluses devoted to travel costs for WYCC - the whole point is that the CYCC / WYCC was supposed to be self-funding) This is particularly a big deal for BC and AB due to the higher transportation costs.

To me the provincial YCCs have no reason for existence if not to qualify players for the nationals. A system where irregardless of the outcome of the qualifying event one can buy one's way to the nationals is the antithesis of what the provincials are supposed to be about.

As such while I appreciate SK's concern I don't plan on supporting this.

I agree. If there are few players, grouping them with another province in a central location such as Lloydminster or Medecine Hat could be a solution if it is not inconvenient to the ACA.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Under the current practice, a player can skip the provincial qualifying tournament and play in the CYCC just with the approval of the CYCC organizer. I understand that there are occasions that exceptions are acceptable, e.g. sickness with doctor prove, conflict with important exams, etc. I support that a player can skip the provincial qualifying tournament:
1) with the CYCC organizer's approval (should exercise extreme care in such approvals),
2) remitting a fee that is not less than the provincial qualifying tournament entry fee, split 50/50 between the CFC (goes to the Junior Fund) and the provincial federation (goes to the Junior Fund if one exists).

There is no requirement to play in a provincial championship. For example the top three finishers in each section from the previous year are automatically qualified. You can play in a YCC while skipping the provincial championship. You can be one of the top ten players in the country or the top player in your province and so on to qualify. The organizer can qualify up to three people per section. The CFC does not want to nickel and dime participants and have to do complicated calculations for every individual to decide on splits between the province and the CFC. The real cost in time and effort would far exceed the revenues collected. We have one full time employee who is quite busy already.

[Michael Lo]

Other than the qualification channels mentioned, the majority players do require to play in a provincial championship to qualify to attend CYCC.

If there is a resource constraint, I do not see an immediate need to implement a remitting fee since it is not yet a serious problem of players skipping the provincial YCC (at least not in BC). We can definitely look into it again if deem necessary in the future.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Other than the qualification channels mentioned, the majority players do require to play in a provincial championship to qualify to attend CYCC.

If there is a resource constraint, I do not see an immediate need to implement a remitting fee since it is not yet a serious problem of players skipping the provincial YCC (at least not in BC). We can definitely look into it again if deem necessary in the future.

I think each province is different. Most kids want to go to the provincial championship but for example in Ontario we had the Ontario High School Chess Championship which was a YCC and the OYCC on the same weekend. I am told we had forty or more Windsor kids at OYCC and a full contingent at the OHSCC (where Massey High School which has most of the kids that used to go to the Windsor advanced class at Sobeys won the championship without their highest rated player). The kids at Massey fundraise all year to send an official team to the High School championship.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I would have preferred that each clause gets a separate vote. I don't like clause 3. All such fees currently go to the youth fund. I don't think a $40 fee is really necessary or appropriate for this situation. Fees for WYCC are designed to replace the funds lost by someone not attending CYCC. In this case, the fees lost are just $1.50 We have earned a great deal of good will in the last few years by not being just about the money we can extract from players. I would prefer that we keep up that momentum.

[Aris Marghetis]

I would have preferred that each clause gets a separate vote. I don't like clause 3. All such fees currently go to the youth fund. I don't think a $40 fee is really necessary or appropriate for this situation. Fees for WYCC are designed to replace the funds lost by someone not attending CYCC. In this case, the fees lost are just $1.50 We have earned a great deal of good will in the last few years by not being just about the money we can extract from players. I would prefer that we keep up that momentum.

I strongly agree that combining multiple clauses practically forces many to vote no.

[Garvin Nunes]

I think I would rather the CFC president or the CYCC organizer, more informally, hand out exemptions to the qualification system for some kids (as is currently allowable under the rules) on a case by case basis. This would be better than hard coding a "lower standard". For example, the CYCC organizer could exempt the six kids from Saskatchewan under the current rules, for example. It would be understood this is a temporary thing as they get their youth program back on its feet. I woud approve of this kind of informal exemption happening five years in a row, as long as the exemption had a good reason each time.

In the past, when the CYCC qualification system was being debated, It was constantly being brought up that Canada had "low standards" in how it was deciding who would play in championships and who it would send abroad. This system was brought in, in part, to raise that standard. The CYCC qualification system, with all its flaws, I have to admit, still had the benefit that it started bringing more junior players to locally organized events.

The optics of having to achieve a certain goal "to qualify" are the players had to achieve something before moving onto the next stage. I think that sense of "legitimacy" given to candidates, in other words, also served as a promotional tool...and that, down the road, can help organizers in Saskatchewan too.

[Michael Barron]

I think I would rather the CFC president or the CYCC organizer, more informally, hand out exemptions to the qualification system for some kids (as is currently allowable under the rules) on a case by case basis. This would be better than hard coding a "lower standard". For example, the CYCC organizer could exempt the six kids from Saskatchewan under the current rules, for example. It would be understood this is a temporary thing as they get their youth program back on its feet. I woud approve of this kind of informal exemption happening five years in a row, as long as the exemption had a good reason each time.

In the past, when the CYCC qualification system was being debated, It was constantly being brought up that Canada had "low standards" in how it was deciding who would play in championships and who it would send abroad. This system was brought in, in part, to raise that standard. The CYCC qualification system, with all its flaws, I have to admit, still had the benefit that it started bringing more junior players to locally organized events.

The optics of having to achieve a certain goal "to qualify" are the players had to achieve something before moving onto the next stage. I think that sense of "legitimacy" given to candidates, in other words, also served as a promotional tool...and that, down the road, can help organizers in Saskatchewan too.

Well said, Garvin!
I agree with every your word, and could add:
such proposal should be brought for discussion by Youth Committee before submitting for vote.

[Pierre Dénommée]

Motion-
The Saskatchewan Chess Federation would like to submit a motion for the 2018 Spring Online Meeting:

1) Starting in 2019, every junior player from a province that hosts the CYCC is eligible to play in the CYCC provided he or she took part in a local CYCC qualification tournament for which the organizer had remitted the fees to the CFC (i.e., any child who played, regardless of the result achieved, will have the right to go to the CYCC).

I have learned from my former life as an organizer that local participation in a national event is essential in order to break even. My first impression is favourable to the motion.

[Undriadi Benggawan]

I agree with Garvin and Michael.

Thanks,
Undriadi Benggawan
CFC Jr Coordinator

[Aris Marghetis]

I think I would rather the CFC president or the CYCC organizer, more informally, hand out exemptions to the qualification system for some kids (as is currently allowable under the rules) on a case by case basis. This would be better than hard coding a "lower standard". For example, the CYCC organizer could exempt the six kids from Saskatchewan under the current rules, for example. It would be understood this is a temporary thing as they get their youth program back on its feet. I woud approve of this kind of informal exemption happening five years in a row, as long as the exemption had a good reason each time.

In the past, when the CYCC qualification system was being debated, It was constantly being brought up that Canada had "low standards" in how it was deciding who would play in championships and who it would send abroad. This system was brought in, in part, to raise that standard. The CYCC qualification system, with all its flaws, I have to admit, still had the benefit that it started bringing more junior players to locally organized events.

The optics of having to achieve a certain goal "to qualify" are the players had to achieve something before moving onto the next stage. I think that sense of "legitimacy" given to candidates, in other words, also served as a promotional tool...and that, down the road, can help organizers in Saskatchewan too.

I agree, and voted NO. And also, I don't believe that poll should have been posted by Vlad. It's out of process in multiple ways, and most replies here agree with Garvin.

[Lyle Craver]

I'm not supporting this as while I do understand the Saskatchewan situation can see the potential for abuse when the CYCC is held in a much larger province. For instance next time the event is held in Toronto and 30-40 kids turn up claiming entry under this motion. Even with the additional fee it would be less than for instance a major event like the Ontario Open much less the Canadian Open. I could see similar dodginess with the event held in Vancouver, Calgary or Edmonton all of which have up and coming juniors.

I'm all for helping SK, but am not convinced this is the way either via the original motion or the first clause alone.