I hardly need to send the details in private since they were very public affairs!
I hardly need to send the details in private since they were very public affairs!
Well in one case they did overturn a NAC decision, and in another case they agreed but increased the penalty.
The second case is possibly alright but it would be an example of the NAC and the Executive dealing with the same problem.
Ken,
I believe, actions speak louder than words.
I prefer spending my time at the chess tournaments rather than on the discussion boards.
But please rest assured - I regularly monitor CFC discussion board and always respond to all youth chess related questions in a reasonable time.
Thanks,
Michael Barron
Chris,
In France, the court of Appeal has suspended the application of the suspensions of the suspected cheaters of the last Olympiads until the decision of the tribunal on their validity.
This is based on a technicality. When the Executive wanted to appeal what it believes was an insufficient punishment, it should have complained to the CADE, like any normal plaintiff. instead, the Executive ordered the Federal Appeal Committee to proceed against the cheaters. The CADE role is to determine if a complaint is receivable and to direct receivable complaints to the appropriate disciplinary body. The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the Executive has no special powers that exempt it from the obligation to fallow proper disciplinary procedure. Following the proper procedure leaves open the possibility that the CADE could refuse the request from the Executive. This will likely be a very costly mistake in terms of Attorney's fees. Just at the interlocutory level, several thousand euros have already been spent.
This jurisprudence shows that the Exeutive must act cautiously and avoid abuse of authority. In the end, the players may be suspended, but it will cost a fortune to achieve this goal. The FFE has sent a complaint to the FIDE Ethics Committee which is not subject to the Laws of France and which could pronounce a world wide suspension.
True although with not being officially recognized as a sport in Canada, the CFC would not currently be bound by any Sport Canada rules.
I'll run for a Rating Auditor.
After some thoughts I would prefer to see a this kind of the rating system: the above 1800 (and below) the simple formula should be used. A simple formula means that everybody could understand the math (more precise - arithmetic). Additional changes for player below 1800: artificial adjustments might be done if the changes are supported by several players (min 3 ) with >2000. The maximum adjusted rating must not exceed 1800. IMHO, this artificial adjustment would allow for juniors and people coming from internet to reach their actual rating over a smaller number of event. Still the main climb must be on actual OTB results.
If you support my ideas (or my person), please include my name (Egidijus Zeromskis) in your proxies Thnx.
.*-1
Great that you have ideas but do you know what the Rating Auditor actually does?