31 Motion 2011-M – Pan-American YCC and North American YCC Representatives

[Lyle Craver]

Motion 2011-M – Pan-American YCC and North American YCC Representatives

Moved: Anna Jin; Seconded: Bob Armstrong

That section 10 of the CFC Handbook, Rules of procedure for The Canadian Youth Championship Tournaments, section 1012, Participation in World Events, be amended by adding as a paragraph to subsection ( a ), after the words “ the order of finish “, the following:
If the World YCC , and/or the Pan-American YCC, and/or the North-American YCC occur before the same year’s Canadian YCC, then the official players’ selection will be: the highest CFC-rated player from each section as of two months before the event date.

[Bob Armstrong]

Jin/Armstrong Motion 2011-M Commentary:

It sometimes can happen, as it is partly in 2011, that the winners at the CYCC, held in July of the prior year, who are chosen to represent Canada at the World YCC, the Pan-American YCC or the North-American YCC, have played in their respective tournaments, Then the subsequent year, the WYCC, the PAYCC and/or the NAYCC are scheduled BEFORE that year’s CYCC ( e.g. the July 2011 CYCC is after this year’s PAYCC and NAYCC ). It is felt that the 2010 winners should not be entitled to play twice; also, because of the time lag, some of the winners may have changed age category. Canada needs the strongest players to play in this situation, and current CFC ratings should take precedence in determining the representative. Thus we are making the choice based on ratings two months before the respective event. In such a case, the following CYCC will not award prizes for the tournaments already held.

Also, the “ official players “ at the Pan-American YCC or the North-American YCC in such a situation as in 2011, will still be able to be “ official players “ in the same year for the World YCC, if they are Canadian YCC winners.

[Michael Barron]

Jin/Armstrong Motion 2011-M Commentary:

It sometimes can happen, as it is partly in 2011, that the winners at the CYCC, held in July of the prior year, who are chosen to represent Canada at the World YCC, the Pan-American YCC or the North-American YCC, have played in their respective tournaments, Then the subsequent year, the WYCC, the PAYCC and/or the NAYCC are scheduled BEFORE that year’s CYCC ( e.g. the July 2011 CYCC is after this year’s PAYCC and NAYCC ). It is felt that the 2010 winners should not be entitled to play twice; also, because of the time lag, some of the winners may have changed age category. Canada needs the strongest players to play in this situation, and current CFC ratings should take precedence in determining the representative. Thus we are making the choice based on ratings two months before the respective event. In such a case, the following CYCC will not award prizes for the tournaments already held.

Also, the “ official players “ at the Pan-American YCC or the North-American YCC in such a situation as in 2011, will still be able to be “ official players “ in the same year for the World YCC, if they are Canadian YCC winners.

Dear Governors,

As a CFC Youth Coordinator, I strongly oppose this Motion.

This issue is currently under discussion on the CFC Youth Committee, and we're close to producing clear, logical and transparent rules which could help us to select official players in such situations.

Anna's idea of using CFC rating as the only criteria for selecting official players was rejected by the Committee.
That's why nobody from Committee members, who are CFC Governors, are unwilling to second her Motion.

I already stated it many times, and could repeat again:
We can't use CFC rating as selection criteria, because it's inconsistent across the country.

Just one example:
World Champion Jason Cao never had high CFC rating, and even after receiving 400 rating points as a "gift", he's not a top rated in his category.
If we pass this Motion, Jason would never have a chance to win World Championship.

Thanks for your consideration!

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

and we're close to producing clear

Can Governors expect an amendment before this motion goes to a voting stage??

[Michael Barron]

Can Governors expect an amendment before this motion goes to a voting stage??

Yes, we can!

[Michael Barron]

Here is clear, logical and transparent rules produced by the CFC Youth Committee after discussion:

Definitions
Cycle - period of time between consecutive CYCCs
Qualified players - placed 1st, 2nd and 3rd at most recent CYCC, if their result was at least 50%.

Rules
1. Qualified players are chosen to be official representatives during the cycle in the following order:
1st place in the same age category
2nd place in the same age category
3rd place in the same age category

2. When a player exercises his/her right to be an official representative, he/she moves to the end of the list, and could be chosen again, after other 2 qualified players exercise their right or decline to participate at the event under consideration.

3. If all qualified players in a category decline to participate at the event or move to the older age category before the end of the cycle, the best available player should be selected by the following criteria:

(a) Highest FIDE rating

(b) Highest CFC rating

4. All official players should be CFC members in good standing.


I ask Governors to consider these rules as amended Motion 2011-M and approve them.
In this case we could use them for selecting official Canadian representatives at the 2011 North-American YCC in June.

[Bob Gillanders]

Michael,

I just spent hours wading thru all the posts on Youth committee discussion, so I am playing catch up myself. Here are my comments:

1. There is no consensus opinion on the Youth committee yet.

2. The 2010 CYCC is a year ago now, 50% of the kids are now in a different age category. Also, 2010 CYCC was never meant as a qualifier for 2011 NAYCC. For these two reasons, 2010 CYCC participation should not be used as a criteria for selecting 2011 NAYCC official players.

3. In addition to #2 issues, 2010 CYCC is a year ago. The kids ability changes a lot in a year. 2010 CYCC performance should not be a factor.

4. Current CFC rating is best (but not perfect) indicator of current strength. Both FQE and FIDE ratings need to be considered. Good arguments are made on Youth committee board. Can we find a reasonable formula to incorporate them into rules, or is some judgement still required?

We need to remember that NAYCC is open to all players. We are just trying to find the right selection rules for the official players that will receive benefits from NAYCC organizers (free accommodations etc). The Youth committee seem to be in agreement on many of the selections. There are a limited number of age/gender categories where there is dispute. Often only between 2 or 3 players. This maybe decided easily if some players decide not to go. If only one player in that age/gender category wants to go, then he/she is the official player. Correct?

In summary, I am inclined to support the original motion. Perhaps it needs some minor amendments to reflect FQE and FIDE ratings.

Where it comes down to a difficult decision between two players, maybe we can find a compromise where they share the benefits of being selected official player? Is this possible?

Comments.

[Vladimir Birarov]

Bob,

1. There is no consensus opinion on the Youth committee yet.

I think this is not exactly the case. From how I see it, after Michael posted first version of the rules above, it is only the wording which is discussed but most of the committee members agreed on general approach.

2. The 2010 CYCC is a year ago now, 50% of the kids are now in a different age category. Also, 2010 CYCC was never meant as a qualifier for 2011 NAYCC. For these two reasons, 2010 CYCC participation should not be used as a criteria for selecting 2011 NAYCC official players.

All these arguments are correct but still it makes a lot of sense to let the player, who qualified from 2010 CYCC and he/she remains in the same age category, to be "official representative" in 2011 within the "cycle". In all other cases we'll go by highest FIDE and CFC ratings as described in paragraph (3).

[Bob Gillanders]

All these arguments are correct but still it makes a lot of sense to let the player, who qualified from 2010 CYCC and he/she remains in the same age category, to be "official representative" in 2011 within the "cycle"

Vlad - I disagree. Are you not be definition excluding 50% of the players from being official representative?
That can't be good.

[Ken Craft]

I'm happy to leave the decision in the Executive's hands for this year and look at passing some rules for next year's event.