Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 60

Thread: 8. New Business

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Félix Dumont View Post
    The solution is actually rather simple : why wouldn't we use FIDE ratings?
    It would be much better and simpler... I still can't believe we consider CFC ratings for the Olympiads, while we all know that they are not accurate at all and highly depend on the number of tournaments a player participates in every year.
    Because your FIDE rating also depends highly on the number of tournaments you participate in, and some players have better access to FIDE events than others.

    I will be interested to see if the upwards trend in the number of FIDE events in Canada is affected by the ridiculous new arbiter tax FIDE has decided on. I for one have no intention of paying for the "privilege" of running events which funnel even more money into FIDE.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Félix Dumont View Post
    I still can't believe we consider CFC ratings for the Olympiads
    Own shirt is always warmer LOL
    .*-1

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael von Keitz View Post
    The intention of the mover and seconder is for these regulations to apply for 2014.
    It the original motion would be accepted for 2014 Olympiad, I don't think that the required number of games (10->20) can be changed then.
    .*-1

  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
    There are other posts:
    http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...6454#post16454
    Seems that the real threshold is 10 games. Ilya just stopped counting games after it reached 20 games.
    Hmmmm... In that case, it is a potential problem. In any event, the mover and seconder of the amendment can specify that it comes into effect for the next cycle, or some other governors can propose that amendment to the amendment. We can also have a special meeting next month for the purposes of dealing with this motion. For these reasons, I still don't see this amendment as a drop dead issue for the purposes of implementing these changes for 2014, should they be adopted by resolution of the assembly.
    Last edited by Michael von Keitz; 01-03-2013 at 11:45 PM.

  5. #25

    Default

    The sole purpose of a selection committee is to avoid personality clash and poor team players in the National Team. A good individual player may be a poor team member.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Félix Dumont View Post
    The solution is actually rather simple : why wouldn't we use FIDE ratings?
    It would be much better and simpler... I still can't believe we consider CFC ratings for the Olympiads, while we all know that they are not accurate at all and highly depend on the number of tournaments a player participates in every year.
    That may be the simplest way to avoid protracted struggles over conversion formulae. If we filter out people who are inactive all three lists will show that certain same "usual suspects" return to the short list regardless of which ratings we use.

    TOP 12 by FIDE

    1 Kovalyov, Anton Verdun, QC 2606
    2 Hansen, Eric Calgary, AB 2568
    3 Sambuev, Bator Montreal, QC 2510
    4 Gerzhoy, Leonid Toronto, ON 2484
    5 Noritsyn, Nikolay Richmond Hill, ON 2464
    6 Hambleton, Aman Ottawa, ON 2462
    7 Rabinovich, Alex Thornhill, ON 2423
    8 Krnan, Tomas Burlington, ON 2420
    9 Porper, Edward Edmonton, AB 2416
    10 Panjwani, Raja Kitchener, ON 2402
    11 Cheng, Bindi Toronto, ON 2397
    12 Samsonkin, Artiom Toronto, ON 2397

    Top Players by CFC Rating

    1 Sambuev, Bator Montreal, QC 2684
    2 Kovalyov, Anton Verdun, QC 2638
    3 Noritsyn, Nikolay Richmond Hill, ON 2598
    4 Hansen, Eric Calgary, AB 2588
    5 Krnan, Tomas Burlington, ON 2576
    6 Gerzhoy, Leonid Toronto, ON 2571
    7 Hambleton, Aman Ottawa, ON 2571
    8 Samsonkin, Artiom Toronto, ON 2547
    9 Panjwani, Raja Kitchener, ON 2517
    10 Porper, Edward Edmonton, AB 2490
    11 Cheng, Bindi Toronto, ON 2485
    12 Doroshenko, Maxim Vancouver, BC 2482

    Top FQE ratings

    1 50264 LESIEGE Alexandre 2587.26 Montréal
    2 100535 KOVALYOV Anton 2586.25 Montérégie
    3 100539 SAMBUEV Bator 2579.25 Montréal
    4 102390 CASTELLANOS Renier 2516.25 Montréal
    5 91708 CHARBONNEAU Pascal 2509.25 Montréal
    6 48295 ROUSSEL-ROOZMON Thomas 2466.24 Montréal
    7 10012 COUDARI Camille 2432.24 Montréal
    8 10495 HEBERT Jean 2417.25 Montérégie

  7. #27

    Default

    The CFC must act in such a way that the CFC rating is perceived as important and relevant. Selecting on another rating would completely devaluate one of our greatest assets.

    Quote Originally Posted by Félix Dumont View Post
    The solution is actually rather simple : why wouldn't we use FIDE ratings?
    It would be much better and simpler... I still can't believe we consider CFC ratings for the Olympiads, while we all know that they are not accurate at all and highly depend on the number of tournaments a player participates in every year.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
    No need for a special tournament Vlad. Just take the top 5 finishers from the Canadian Closed.
    Good idea!

    A possible modification:
    With annual Canadian Closed select winners of last 3 Canadian Closed Championships plus top finishers from the latest one.
    Thanks,
    Michael Barron

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
    It the original motion would be accepted for 2014 Olympiad, I don't think that the required number of games (10->20) can be changed then.
    OK. These are still intended to be 2 separate motions. One concerns the selection committee, the other concerns the team captain.

    While I would support the number of games required increasing to 20, I would see this as a separate motion - and as Michael says would probably not be able to be changed until the 2016 Olympics.

    I personally wouldn't be in favour of increasing the number of spots from the Canadian Closed (as it stands: 1).

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred McKim View Post
    I personally wouldn't be in favour of increasing the number of spots from the Canadian Closed (as it stands: 1).
    I'm not in favour either, I just mentioned it as the obvious choice if that was the route to go with.

    Egis, I'm willing to second an actual motion (not just an amendment) stating something like "That the required number of games to qualify for the National or National Women's teams be changed from 10 to 20 (handbook section 906 a3)." We can discuss it for the duration of this meeting and Michael can decide when we vote on it, with the understanding that it takes effect for the 2014 Olympiad (so the vote would have to conclude before February 1st)...

    Also I note that the way the regulations are currently worded, this rule actually applies to ANYONE wanting to be on the team, including the Canadian Champion and the Selection Committee list.... not sure if this is intentional or not.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •