Concerning extra players representing CANADA at 2011 WYCC in Brazil

[Mikhail Egorov]

Thanks Ken,

I completely agree with you.

In fact Mr. Barron did not special authorization from Mrs. Daxin Jin to do this. He posted private emails without any authorization.

Mikhail

[Peter McKillop]

...
The Executive has exercised its right to uphold our rules. Shame on us!!

Yes, I think so too, Hal. Shame on the executive!

I doubt that any human has every devised a set of rules that could fairly take into account all possible variables or exigencies. Changing one's mind is a very human thing to do. The child to whom this discussion pertains, if I've understood correctly, is one of the top players, by rating, in her/his age group. The parents, if I've understood correctly, are prepared to pay all expenses including a $300 contribution to the CFC's youth program (which, I assume, covers off the CYCC entry fee they didn't have to pay because they attended the Pan-Am tournament instead of the CYCC). Really, what does the CFC have to lose here by being magnanimous?

Every organization needs a set of 'rules' to operate under. But surely one of the measures of the quality of an organization is, can they operate fairly and with integrity in spite of those rules.

[Rob Clark]

I can very well understand why the exec made the decision it did. People have called it protectionist but that is part of the exec and governor's job, to protect those events and their importance. I can also understand how frustrated they are over this request. Ms. Jin had clearly agreed beforehand to not pursue this and yet, here we are. However, here we are, we have Canada's top female under 10 by more than 200 points asking if she can play in the WYCC on her own dollar. She was not able to participate due to her CFC sanctioned participation in the Pam Ams which conflicted with the CYCC. Also given how active she is with Canadian and Ontario Youth Championships I'm not sure she wouldn't have participated in the CYCC even if she didn't have any intention of playing in the WYCC.

Is the exec within their right to refuse her ability to play in the WYCC? Yes, however, I still disagree with their decision, not based on any sort of rules but by looking at the results of the decision of not allowing her to play. If we let her go, we are nurturing one of Canada's young female talents, we are certainly putting together a stronger team for the female U10 and the youth fund is getting 300$. If we disallow her from playing we are certainly following the rules but at the detriment of one of our young players. Also her lack of participation allowed others to get a chance to play in the WYCC and win a bursary. (I'm reasonably certain she would have qualified).

Also regarding the rules, I've seen quite a few rules broken in my time, most weren't afforded this much debate. Also part of the reason for the exec's existence is to decide when rules must be broken, since no set of rules is universally applicable. So I will reiterate my point, is the exec technically correct in their decision based on the rules? Yes, but if you make a pro and cons list, I can't see a reason to not let her go. At the very least put it before the governance to see how they feel.

[Kerry Liles]

I can very well understand why the exec made the decision it did. People have called it protectionist but that is part of the exec and governor's job, to protect those events and their importance. I can also understand how frustrated they are over this request. Ms. Jin had clearly agreed beforehand to not pursue this and yet, here we are. However, here we are, we have Canada's top female under 10 by more than 200 points asking if she can play in the WYCC on her own dollar. She was not able to participate due to her CFC sanctioned participation in the Pam Ams which conflicted with the CYCC. Also given how active she is with Canadian and Ontario Youth Championships I'm not sure she wouldn't have participated in the CYCC even if she didn't have any intention of playing in the WYCC.

Is the exec within their right to refuse her ability to play in the WYCC? Yes, however, I still disagree with their decision, not based on any sort of rules but by looking at the results of the decision of not allowing her to play. If we let her go, we are nurturing one of Canada's young female talents, we are certainly putting together a stronger team for the female U10 and the youth fund is getting 300$. If we disallow her from playing we are certainly following the rules but at the detriment of one of our young players. Also her lack of participation allowed others to get a chance to play in the WYCC and win a bursary. (I'm reasonably certain she would have qualified).

Also regarding the rules, I've seen quite a few rules broken in my time, most weren't afforded this much debate. Also part of the reason for the exec's existence is to decide when rules must be broken, since no set of rules is universally applicable. So I will reiterate my point, is the exec technically correct in their decision based on the rules? Yes, but if you make a pro and cons list, I can't see a reason to not let her go. At the very least put it before the governance to see how they feel.

"At the very least put it before the governance to see how they feel."

In that case, why is there an Executive at all? Why not have all the Governors (at least the ones who bother to vote) decide every thing that comes up. By extension, you can eliminate all the Governors too and just have an Internet poll where all fully-paid CFC members can vote on every item too.

[Peter McKillop]

...
In that case, why is there an Executive at all? Why not have all the Governors (at least the ones who bother to vote) decide every thing that comes up. By extension, you can eliminate all the Governors too and just have an Internet poll where all fully-paid CFC members can vote on every item too.

Good ideas, Kerry. You've got my vote!!

[Christopher Mallon]

The Governors back in January, in their infinite wisdom, delegated this responsibility to the Executive. So, naturally, as soon as the Executive makes a decision that the Governors don't happen to agree with, the Governors want the power back in their hands

[Michael Barron]

Mr. Barron,

So this is the real reason for not allowing youth to participate at Pan-Am games and penalize them, if they do?

Quote:'The Executive in fact made the decision that Canada will not send the team to PanAm due to the fact that the dates of PanAm appeared to be in conflict with CYCC.

In your previous post you claimed :
‘2. The main reason for the new motion was to allow more Canadian players to participate at WYCC (not only first 3 finishers).’

I am really getting confused here, but thank you very much for additional information!

Mikhail

Mr. Egorov,

You are really getting confused here, because you are mixing up several different issues.

Let me clarify it for you:
The real reason is the objective of the Chess Federation of Canada, how it's stated on the CFC website (http://chess.ca):
"to promote and encourage the knowledge, study and play of the game of chess in Canada".

It means - to promote chess in Canada, not in Colombia, in Brazil, or anywhere else.

Of course, you could have a different opinion, especially if you get a direct financial benefit from it.

Different people have different opinions, as you can see in this thread, and it's very good.
The question is:
How could we make a decision, if we have several alternatives?

Usually in such situations the majority rules, and minority follows - it's how the democracy works.

Thank you for understanding!

[Rob Clark]

Firstly Mr. Liles, I wrote 3 paragraphs you managed to take one sentence and miss the entire point of what I said; without addressing any of the rest of it. The side who supports Liu going to the 2011 WYCC clearly doesn't have the support to get anything done with the Sept 25th deadline soon approaching. So until the next AGM this is all pointless and the debate is degrading quickly.

As for the supporting chess in Canada, I see supporting chess players in Canada as supporting chess in Canada. A huge amount of money goes to supporting our Olympiad team, while this doesn't directly support chess in Canada (geographically speaking) it benefits our players greatly. The same is true for the junior championships and in my opinion the Pan Ams. It gives our players an opportunity to play opponents they normally wouldn't and experience they wouldn't be able to get in Canada while representing Canada on the international stage.

Lastly, I really don't understand why grown men are using "stick out tongue" icon. Using that doesn't make what your saying a joke. Finally, Mr. Barron I find the ending of your last post addressed to Mr. Egorov a tad out of line.

[Halldor P. Palsson]

If there are players in Canada that would like to go to the WYCC and pay there own way this is a good for everybody.

The country organizing the WYCC gets to make some extra revenue and pay for the tournament. The tournament lives and dies on the extra entrants and we are trying to dicourage them.

Canada as a country or zone loses nothing by allowing these folks to go.

Those that went through the CYCC get all the benefits that come with that. Our official rep gets entry and local expenses and they are a drain on the WYCC for the local organizers. The extra Canadians that could make the tournament a success are blocked by the CFC. BRILLIANT!

What is our point exactly?

[Hal Bond]

Halldor - it's true that the WYCC organizer loves to see extra paying participants. As the exclusive FIDE franchise in Canada, the CFC can broker these deals and charge whatever slice we want. It's tempting! Especially in our precarious financial condition.

How principled is it to allow wealthier families to bypass the CYCC, pay the penalties and their own expenses and attend the WYCC?

Rob Clark - when you list the pros and cons of this case, remember that several other families abided by the decision to ignore the PanAms, and played instead in the CYCC. What do we say to them if we change our tune now?

Just wondering!