7c. Women's CFC Titles (Moved/Seconded Vlad Drkulec / Julia Lacau-Rodean)

Drkulec - Lacau-Rodean Women's CFC titles

It is proposed that we add two new CFC titles for women and girls. The titles are Woman National Master and Woman National Candidate Master. The requirements for the Woman National Master title would be the same as the current requirements for the current National Candidate Master title which are three performances in tournaments of at least five games at 2100 or higher or attaining a CFC rating of 2100.

The requirements for the Woman Candidate Master title would be the same as the requirements for the current Class A title which require three performances in tournaments of at least five games at 1900 or attaining a CFC rating of 1900.

This is the current usual cutoff range for qualification for the Canadian woman's Olympiad team. The hope is that this would encourage more women and girls to continue to participate in chess for a longer period of time and also to give recognition to the women and girls who have attained this level of performance in Canadian chess.

Currently in Canada we do not have the level of female representation in chess tournaments and CFC membership that are seen in the United States. My observations in Windsor are that the level of chess interest in girls is about the same as that of boys but over time they become discouraged from playing by the observation that there are few other girls playing. It is hoped by making the top Canadian women more visible by offering this recognition that girls will continue playing chess in an effort to attain the additional titles and achieve similar recognition as the top titles.

Initially I thought to offer intermediate titles which would require norms in the 2200 level range for the WNM title and 2000 range for the WNCM title but after consultations with my co-sponsor and with governors have amended the levels to where they are attainable by Canada's top women and girls. Once the WNM title was set it made sense to make the WNCM title levels two hundred points below the higher title to be consistent with all of our other titles. For the most part implementation of this would merely require editing the web page that currently lists the NCM title holders to include the title Woman National Master and the web page that currently lists the class A titled players to include the Woman National Canadidate Master title. Women that wish a printed certificate could ask for one for the usual charge with the Women's National Master title certificate being offered for free as is the usual practice for the National Master title.

Am I correct and understanding that Vlad and Julia are proposing simply inflating the Canadian titles for women/girls by one notch, i.e. a WNCM would become a WNM and a women's Class A would become a WNCM. Has anyone surveyed female players to see if they would support this title inflation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gordon Ritchie

Am I correct and understanding that Vlad and Julia are proposing simply inflating the Canadian titles for women/girls by one notch, i.e. a WNCM would become a WNM and a women's Class A would become a WNCM. Has anyone surveyed female players to see if they would support this title inflation?

---

When I started this at the prompting of an two time women's Olympiad team member my initial idea was to provide an intermediate title which fell in between NCM and NM titles. After discussion with governors, and female players including the women's coordinator it was determined that the bar was set a bit too high under my proposed title, given the precedent of FIDE having women's titles with a 200 point difference with the corresponding regular titles. Every female player or female player's parent that I have discussed this idea with has been in favour. Of course the people who I consulted were for the most part Windsor players where we don't have as much of a gender gap as other parts of Canada.

I would really like to see chess just as popular among girls and women as it is among boys and men in Canada. In Windsor for a few years it seems to me that it starts out that way but over time the girls stop playing and it is not because they aren't as good as the boys. In Detroit and Michigan I see a larger percentage of female players than I see in Ontario (aside from Windsor). In Europe and South America there seem to be more female players on a proportional basis.

There are criticisms that the female players might just obtain the titles and then quit but if that is the case then at least they might play a little longer before they obtain the title and the ten and fourteen year old girls will see them and think that chess is something that girls can do and compete with boys on a somewhat equal footing and maybe they will play a little longer.

John Coleman makes a joke about the Riverside Library Chess Club which is the only adult chess club in Windsor. He says that its a club for grumpy old retired men. Given my discussions with women and girls it seems to me that this measure would offer some encouragement to our stronger women to continue to play. If you want to keep this as the bastion of the grumpy old men then by all means do so but don't be surprised if the young ladies all disappear into the activities and pursuits where they are welcomed.

I will vote against this motion. I talked with some of the strongest women in Quebec, and they don't want to be treated as inferior to men.

As I said on Chesstalk :
Some literally feel insulted of such titles (to quote one : " Only because we are women, we need to do less efforts to have a title? What is the rational behind this?")
When I organized the Women Championship last year, I discussed of the titles with several people, including the sponsors (Goddesschess). The general opinion is that different titles actually increase the barrier between men and women.

Goddesschess also wrote at several occasions on this (one example : http://goddesschess.blogspot.ca/2012...te-womens.html)

Vlad,

Your post hints strongly but doesn't really make a case that even one single girl would stay in chess due to the existence of these titles. And you admit you've mainly talked to only Windsor chess players.

I've argued for years against FIDE's gradual devaluation of their titles. The lower level ones (CM/WCM) aren't even "real" titles, mainly they are money grabs as far as FIDE is concerned. I don't understand why we want to bring this to Canada and I will never consider anyone who's not been above 2200 to be a master. 2200 has been the requisite to be considered a master for a long time, and it has become easier, not harder, to achieve in the modern ratings system.

So I can't support this.

Can movers BOLD the motion - what and where will be added in the Handbook? Right now it sounds only like an intention.

Just to play "devils advocate" I would like to speak in support of this motion to promote women's participation and "reward" in Canada.

In BC over the last few years at the Grand Pacific Open, we have had a number of "official" sponsors including "Goddess Chess" who donate $300 each year on the condition that the prize money be distributed to the top 5 women players in the event. "Top Women $80, $70, $60, $50, $40 (in addition to any other prize Courtesy of Goddess Chess)" is what is stated on our website and flyers. Is this a "fair" policy to all players - well probably not. Is it good for chess in Canada - absolutely!

FYI -- we have enjoyed an increase in attendance of women players. This year about 10% of our entries were women. I wonder if we have national stats on the typical tournament average participation of women? (is it less than 10% -- I would think so) In British Columbia, the numbers are on the increase! The point is anything that helps us, the CFC, to complete our mandate to "promote and encourage the knowledge, study and play of the game of chess in Canada" is good! Here is the final result from this year: Top Women (Courtesy of Goddess Chess) 1st: $80 WGM Katerina Rohonyan, 2nd-3rd $65 each: WFM Chouchanik Airapetian, Becca Lampman 4th-5th: $45 each Alice Huanyi Xiao and Joanne Foote.

The winner of the GPO from 2011 was WGM Nino Maisuradze! This year we had WGM Katerina Rohonyan give the winner Jack Yoos a run for his money.

We, at the CFC, need to promote and retain women's memberships too! This is a good motion by the Women's Coordinator Iulia Lacau-Rodean and I am voicing my support of this motion.

Attachment 199

Attachment 200

Thanks to Douglas Bain of Bluegiraffe Photography - Our Official Photographer's Photos: http://bluegiraffephoto.zenfolio.com/grandpacificopen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle Craver

Drkulec - Lacau-Rodean Women's CFC titles

It is proposed that we add two new CFC titles for women and girls. The titles are Woman National Master and Woman National Candidate Master. The requirements for the Woman National Master title would be the same as the current requirements for the current National Candidate Master title which are three performances in tournaments of at least five games at 2100 or higher or attaining a CFC rating of 2100.

The requirements for the Woman Candidate Master title would be the same as the requirements for the current Class A title which require three performances in tournaments of at least five games at 1900 or attaining a CFC rating of 1900.

This is the current usual cutoff range for qualification for the Canadian woman's Olympiad team. The hope is that this would encourage more women and girls to continue to participate in chess for a longer period of time and also to give recognition to the women and girls who have attained this level of performance in Canadian chess.

Currently in Canada we do not have the level of female representation in chess tournaments and CFC membership that are seen in the United States. My observations in Windsor are that the level of chess interest in girls is about the same as that of boys but over time they become discouraged from playing by the observation that there are few other girls playing. It is hoped by making the top Canadian women more visible by offering this recognition that girls will continue playing chess in an effort to attain the additional titles and achieve similar recognition as the top titles.

Initially I thought to offer intermediate titles which would require norms in the 2200 level range for the WNM title and 2000 range for the WNCM title but after consultations with my co-sponsor and with governors have amended the levels to where they are attainable by Canada's top women and girls. Once the WNM title was set it made sense to make the WNCM title levels two hundred points below the higher title to be consistent with all of our other titles. For the most part implementation of this would merely require editing the web page that currently lists the NCM title holders to include the title Woman National Master and the web page that currently lists the class A titled players to include the Woman National Canadidate Master title. Women that wish a printed certificate could ask for one for the usual charge with the Women's National Master title certificate being offered for free as is the usual practice for the National Master title.

---

There should be more Women only completions, especially at the Youth level. This would be more helpful to Women Chess then Women titles of inferior value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark S. Dutton, I.A.

Just to play "devils advocate" I would like to speak in support of this motion to promote women's participation and "reward" in Canada.

In BC over the last few years at the Grand Pacific Open, we have had a number of "official" sponsors including "Goddess Chess" who donate $300 each year on the condition that the prize money be distributed to the top 5 women players in the event. "Top Women $80, $70, $60, $50, $40 (in addition to any other prize Courtesy of Goddess Chess)" is what is stated on our website and flyers. Is this a "fair" policy to all players - well probably not. Is it good for chess in Canada - absolutely!

FYI -- we have enjoyed an increase in attendance of women players. This year about 10% of our entries were women. I wonder if we have national stats on the typical tournament average participation of women? (is it less than 10% -- I would think so) In British Columbia, the numbers are on the increase! The point is anything that helps us, the CFC, to complete our mandate to "promote and encourage the knowledge, study and play of the game of chess in Canada" is good! Here is the final result from this year: Top Women (Courtesy of Goddess Chess) 1st: $80 WGM Katerina Rohonyan, 2nd-3rd $65 each: WFM Chouchanik Airapetian, Becca Lampman 4th-5th: $45 each Alice Huanyi Xiao and Joanne Foote.

The winner of the GPO from 2011 was WGM Nino Maisuradze! This year we had WGM Katerina Rohonyan give the winner Jack Yoos a run for his money.

We, at the CFC, need to promote and retain women's memberships too! This is a good motion by the Women's Coordinator Iulia Lacau-Rodean and I am voicing my support of this motion.

Attachment 199

Attachment 200

Thanks to Douglas Bain of Bluegiraffe Photography - Our Official Photographer's Photos: http://bluegiraffephoto.zenfolio.com/grandpacificopen

---

As many of you know, I think the current separate women's parallel system is in fact now detrimental to women's chess, and is retarding its progress. I would abolish the whole separate rating system, and women's titles. However, in my attempts to discuss this option, I have been amazingly, to me, alone.

So given that the separate system exists, I do not understand the women players complaining about "cheap" titles. The whole system is "cheap". The Women's World Championship system is patently inferior to the World Chess Championship cycle.

But the argument is that it is needed to attract/keep women in chess, even if it is by diluted titles. Since we have diluted titles already, and a diluted system, it seems to me that the extension of diluted titles, as in this motion, complies with the whole logic behind this system.

Why would you not create low level targets as "rewards" if you believe it attracts/keeps women players. If that is right, then by all means the motion should pass.

But I personally will abstain, because I don't believe in the whole separate system, and so, on some occasions, like this, I decide not to participate in tinkering with it. I'll let those who believe in the system decide what "improves" it.

Bob A

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Armstrong

As many of you know, I think the current separate women's parallel system is in fact now detrimental to women's chess, and is retarding its progress. I would abolish the whole separate rating system, and women's titles. However, in my attempts to discuss this option, I have been amazingly, to me, alone.

So given that the separate system exists, I do not understand the women players complaining about "cheap" titles. The whole system is "cheap". The Women's World Championship system is patently inferior to the World Chess Championship cycle.

But the argument is that it is needed to attract/keep women in chess, even if it is by diluted titles. Since we have diluted titles already, and a diluted system, it seems to me that the extension of diluted titles, as in this motion, complies with the whole logic behind this system.

Why would you not create low level targets as "rewards" if you believe it attracts/keeps women players. If that is right, then by all means the motion should pass.

But I personally will abstain, because I don't believe in the whole separate system, and so, on some occasions, like this, I decide not to participate in tinkering with it. I'll let those who believe in the system decide what "improves" it.

Bob A

---

I think, given that there are still far more men than women playing in organized chess events, and that probably as a consequence there are so few women among the top players of either gender, either nationally or internationally (i.e. Judit Polgar currently), a seperate 'system' for women as Bob calls it is something that can be retained - not that we have much influence over whether FIDE continues to retain such a 'system'.

This 'system' can be retained, that is, at least until there is a much greater percentage of female players, at which point it is probable that there will be a much higher percentage of females amongst the top players of either gender (nationally or internationally), and if so then the seperate 'system' can be shed without any misgivings at that point by both FIDE and the CFC. Until then, I'm in agreement with Mark that this motion could help the CFC (on the whole, anyway, given I suspect while some women may dislike the effect of it, many women, especially girls, will like it) if it is passed.