8a. DISCUSSION: Report on Olympiad (Victor Plotkin - as seen on ChessTalk)

Canadian Team selection process

Quote:

---

May be now, few days after finish of Olympiad in Istanbul, is the best time to consider some changes in Canadian Team selection process.

1. For the last 2 Olympiads, the Selection Committee chose 60% of the Canadian Team line-up. The initial idea (1 Canadian champion, 3 by rating, 1 by Committee) looks logical to me; however, the reality of Canadian chess increases the power of this Committee. K.Spraggett doesn't want to play for Canada and J.Hebert (2010) and M.Bluvshtein (2012) decided not to participate.

For the 2014 Olympiad, the Committee will probably choose at least 2 players. K.Spraggett is still playing very strong, but his conflict with CFC isn't solved, and almost for sure he will be qualified by rating but decide not to play. BTW, I am pretty sure both Canadian eligible GMs (B.Sambuev and E.Hansen) will play for Canada in 2014.

I believe, right now Committee has huge power. I want CFC to consider some changes, so this Committee will choose only 1 player. In my opinion, this decision could make the selection process more fair and more predictable.

Taking this year as an example, we will have had these steps:
1). B.Sambuev (champion 2011) - accepted.
2). M.Bluvshtein (rating) - declined.
3). K.Spraggett (rating) - declined.
4). L.Gerzhoy (rating) - accepted.
Now instead of giving the Committee 3 spots, we continue to go to the next eleigible player by rating.
5). N.Noritsyn - accepted.
6). E.Hansen - accepted.
Only after 4 eligible players accepted the invitation, Committee chooses 5-th player.

I know that this year the Committee chose players according to their rating; however it could be different next Olympiad.

2. Now the average between the highest CFC and FIDE rating is calculated for the selection. In my opinion, the CFC rating for the top Canadian players became almost irrelevant and thus shouldn't be taken into account at all.

After a couple of years of "artificial inflation", CFC rating became much higher than FIDE, but this is not the main problem for the selection. The main problem is the difference between more inflated (Ontario, especially Toronto, and maybe Alberta) provinces and other (Quebec, BC) provinces, which is absolutely unfair for players outside of Ontario (and maybe Alberta).

Playing in BC this summer, I paid attention to very low (around 30-50 points) rating differences between CFC and FIDE ratings for most BC players. In Ontario this number is around 150-180, in Alberta more than 100. This makes it pretty difficult for players outside of these 2 provinces to qualify by rating.

As a team captain, I didn't regard CFC rating for the board order. As far as I know, in 2010 Yura Ochkoos did exactly the same. For example, in 2010 T.Russel-Roosmon was playing on board 2, although his CFC rating was the lowest in the team.

Nowadays, almost every tournament is rated in both CFC and FIDE. For the last couple of years, I played only 1 tournament that was not FIDE-rated (Hamilton Open). CFC rating is now useful mostly for kids' tournamnents and for lower-rated (below 2000) players.

3. Now about the 5th Team Canada player, which would be chosen by the Committee. I believe that the main factor for the selection (of cource, after chess level) should be age. This wild-card should be given in most cases to a young player, who can improve his chess in the future.

This proposal doesn't mean that veteran players cannot qualify. They can do it by rating or by winning Canadian Closed (like J.Hebert). But this wild-card is not for them.

Taking this year as an example, the Committee could have considered players like T.Krnan, B.Cheng, R.Panjwani, A.Samsonkin and maybe even R.Sapozhnikov. They all were lower-rated than the nominee, but the difference wasn't too big.

Again the best time for changes is now. A few months before the deadline (around March 2014) will be too late; everything will be taken personally.

---

I think it would be best if the committee chose a list of say 3 players in order... but their list was separate. So the 2nd player picked by the committee would only play if the 1st player picked declined. Canadian Champ and Rating List selections should be replaced by the rating list.

1. Selection committee should include a captain (coach) who will work with the team before and during the Olympiad. To make this into reality would require a lot of changes in a whole section. The selection process should stay the same.

2. (Ratings) From a political point the CFC rating should stay as a selection criteria. Though the CFC should encourage more inter-provincial events to level geographical discrepancies.

3. It goes to Selection-committee's preferences (whose mandate is to predict a future of budding champions).

I suggest we do something (maybe create a negotiating team) to address GM Kevin Spraggett's conflict with CFC. We are still about 2 years away from the next Olympiad and this should give us enough time to reach an outcome (hopefully positive).

Anyone interested in this suggestion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valer Eugen Demian

I suggest we do something (maybe create a negotiating team) to address GM Kevin Spraggett's conflict with CFC. We are still about 2 years away from the next Olympiad and this should give us enough time to reach an outcome (hopefully positive).

Anyone interested in this suggestion?

---

Valer: I tried this. Have you ever talked to Kevin ? I suppose you could try and form a team from those who haven't been publicly or privately insulted by him.

Could you or anyone else provide any details of what the conflict is about and what has been discussed? I do not mind to read about it in private; this way I do not highjack this thread with it.

My email address is:
vdemian @ shaw dot ca
Eliminate the spaces and use the proper dot :)

Both sides deserve another chance.

It's fair to say that Olympic team selection has been a 'can of worms' for the entire 20+ years I've been on the Assembly of Governors.

No matter WHAT we do the Assembly and Executive are going to get flak from one quarter or another. Someone is inevitably going to see some grievance. I really do feel that at least as far as some folks are concerned if the Executive or the Olympiad Selection Committee walked on water we would be faulted for our inability to swim!

At the same time the Office has always had issues in the area of keeping in contact with our top players in a timely manner and this too the Executive and ED have been slagged over. Never ever is it suggested that those affected have a duty to keep their contact info up to date and available at the Office! (Even at the Assembly of Governors I as CFC Secretary have had issues arising because people change their e-mails and I am the last to know)

Moral of the story in my books is that I am generally content as long as we demonstrably do our best to try to be fair and avoid obvious follies. We can't pretend perfection but we can be pretty good.

Obviously if someone does not wish to play we can't force them - all we can hope to do is field our best available team and wish them Godspeed!

I remember when I was President a certain active person gave me flak for not contacting several inactive Masters and informing them of what they'd have to do to qualify for the team. As if the rules were secret or something, and as if this person could not have just done it themselves since they knew these other (inactive!) players.

Heh heh - yes indeed.

Bottom line is that we expect far too little of our top players and I very much do think if a player thinks he/she has a realistic shot at being chosen as a team member or representative it behooves them to keep their contact info current with the Office.

Much as I appreciate the Business Office I do not think psychic powers or the ability to walk on water should be expected as part of their job description!