4b) Motion 2013-T Olympic Regulations (McKim/Rekhson) - discussion only

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

I think, things are much better the way they are now, then what is proposed.
As mentioned by Michael Barron, in strong chess countries, the captain is appointed by high officials of the federation, and is responsible for selecting the players. Canada is at an amateur chess level, and I think that players selecting the captain works well here. Also, I dont think a strong grandmaster captain or even coach can do much to help the team during the olympiad. It is much more important to have training sessions before the olympiad, but there is no money for that.

Same goes for CFC ratings, it is important to have our players play in CFC tournaments. I guess, when Canada has a team of five 2600 players, it is a good idea to just use fide ratings, but not now.

As for the selection committee, I think it should continue to exist, but it should only have the right to choose one player. A little subjectivity is ok, but choosing 3/5 members of the team as it happened last time is too much power.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Please disclose all selections. Who and whom.
One person judged others and some of those got offended, and the system became faulty. grr.


Even if it was only ratings and funds would have been available to atract best (and so on), Eric would missed a team...

Players			Tit	FIDE	CFC	Avrg	#G	Elg	Pl WNE
Sambuev Bator		GM	2531	2753	2642	≥20	Champion
Bluvshtein Mark		GM	2611	2634	2623	≥20	Yes	1
Spraggett Kevin		GM	2588	2618	2603	≥20	Yes	2
Gerzhoy Leonid		IM	2503	2647	2575	≥20	Yes	3
Noritsyn Nikolay	IM	2475	2661	2568	≥20	Yes	4
Lesiege Alexandre	GM	2528	2577	2553	0	No	5  NEG
Charbonneau Pascal	GM	2517	2585	2551	0	No	6  NEG
Tyomkin Dimitri		GM	2498	2570	2534	4	No	7  NEG
Hansen Eric		IM	2454	2612	2533	≥20	Yes	8

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Regarding Teplitsky's choices on the committee - I think Eric definitely should have been selected, and he was, and he would be by rating too (all the ones above him did not plan to play). I myself think Teplitsky is quite qualified to make decisions, but to avoid a lot of conflicts - the committee should be elected by the players that have a chance to play at the olympiad, lets say top 20 players in Canada (better criteria can be used, of course). Just like it is a tradition to elect the Appeals Commitee during Canadian Closed tournaments, I think it would work here as well. I believe, mostly people would vote for individuals they think are fair and respected, not for people who could later return the favour by putting them on the team. Same goes for captain selection.

I think this whole matter should be for the top players for discussion, since, after all, it affects them the most, not for the governors.

[Bob Armstrong]

Regarding Teplitsky's choices on the committee - I think Eric definitely should have been selected, and he was, and he would be by rating too (all the ones above him did not plan to play). I myself think Teplitsky is quite qualified to make decisions, but to avoid a lot of conflicts - the committee should be elected by the players that have a chance to play at the olympiad, lets say top 20 players in Canada (better criteria can be used, of course). Just like it is a tradition to elect the Appeals Commitee during Canadian Closed tournaments, I think it would work here as well. I believe, mostly people would vote for individuals they think are fair and respected, not for people who could later return the favour by putting them on the team. Same goes for captain selection.

I think this whole matter should be for the top players for discussion, since, after all, it affects them the most, not for the governors.

I voted against the motion to have the Executive choose the captain of the Olympiad team ( if I got the motion right, and the right motion ). I think Nikoay's idea makes sense in terms of the Selection Committee. However, with the Team Captain, I think the five players should select a captain by unamimous consensus. If they cannot do that, then the Executive chooses the captain. I do not think it would be a good thing for the Captain to be elected by majority vote - this will just entrench tension into the Olympiad Team immediately.

But it looks like, at the moment, the regulation will be changed to give the choice to the executive ( if I understand the motion ). So it may be that our ideas will not be able to be brought in motion form again to the governors, until there has at least been one opportunity for the new rule to be tried. If others think the issue can be raised again earlier, they will have to convince a lot of people, I think, that they are not just trying to again win a vote they just lost.

Bob A

[Edward Porper]

I voted against the motion to have the Executive choose the captain of the Olympiad team ( if I got the motion right, and the right motion ). I think Nikoay's idea makes sense in terms of the Selection Committee. However, with the Team Captain, I think the five players should select a captain by unamimous consensus. If they cannot do that, then the Executive chooses the captain. I do not think it would be a good thing for the Captain to be elected by majority vote - this will just entrench tension into the Olympiad Team immediately.


And that's exactly what happened in 2012: the captain was voted for by 2 players out of 5 and chosen by default on a secondary vote!
What "team choice" can we possibly talk about?!
If all 5 could be unanimous, that would be a perfect case, of course - otherwise, favouritism is just inevitable...

But it looks like, at the moment, the regulation will be changed to give the choice to the executive ( if I understand the motion ). So it may be that our ideas will not be able to be brought in motion form again to the governors, until there has at least been one opportunity for the new rule to be tried. If others think the issue can be raised again earlier, they will have to convince a lot of people, I think, that they are not just trying to again win a vote they just lost.



Bob A

Well said, I think.
We have all seen how the old system failed to work. Let's give a chance to the new one - and come back to the topic in 2014 if necessary.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Of course, it would be best decided by consensus, but generally it is quite normal people vote for people they know well. Canada is a big country, and Ontarians don't get to see Albertans very often for example. I don't believe a consensus would be possible. Having the executive decide is like having a neutral person decide. In strong chess nations, the "executive" are usually people with a lot of knowledge of chess, and the people in chess, so they are very much qualified to decide. Its different in Canada. Also, the executive are a group of people, and they would have to vote as well (with concensus being just as unlikely) - so why not just let the players decide?

Yes, it would be a pity if such an important and difficult issue was decided on so fast.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Edward, in 2012, if there would be only two captains to vote for, we would still likely have the same captain.

[Edward Porper]

Edward, in 2012, if there would be only two captains to vote for, we would still likely have the same captain.

True, Nikolay - in that case it would be a choice of 3 out 5.
As you yourself said, Ontarians don't know people from the West too well - so they would always prefer someone from the East.
The opposite might be true as well.
In other words, the current system provides for a situation when the captain would ALWAYS come from the same province as a slight majority of the players - and he would know this majority much better than the rest of the team. Besides he would owe them his nomination.
Are you trying to convince me or anybody that he would treat everyone the same under those circumstances? :-)
In reality, it's possible only in case if the whole team comes from the same area - which effectively turns it into a provincial rather than national team. I don't think that's what we want to end up with...

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

I know democracy isnt perfect, Edward. Is it going to be different if the executive votes? It consists of 7 members. Not a very big difference, and no guarantee they are any less biased. If the players vote, at least the majority will get what they want. If the executive votes, the opposite might happen. Is that what you want?

I see nothing wrong with a 5 man team from Alberta, or Ontario, as long as they are the best ones to represent Canada. It would still be a national team - they are the best players, after all. The way it is, it has not and will not happen.

I think, Team Captain is a very serious and nerve wrecking position, especially for the mens team, and it by no means is a vacation. The captain stays in the playing hall every single playing day, until the games are finished. That - among other things, of course.

[Edward Porper]

I know democracy isnt perfect, Edward. Is it going to be different if the executive votes? It consists of 7 members. Not a very big difference, and no guarantee they are any less biased. If the players vote, at least the majority will get what they want. If the executive votes, the opposite might happen. Is that what you want?


Anything is better than the majority getting what it wants while the minority doesn't, Nikolay - for a simple reason, that it's one Team.
As I was advised today, The captain should not play favourites. The team is like a hand, the players like fingers, you cannot expect the hand to perform if you break or sprain one of the fingers. And that's exactly what happened in Turkey :-(
If all 5 agree on their choice, it's indeed perfect - if not, a neutral body or person should decide. This way the captain won't owe his position to anybody and will have no reason to favour some over the others.
Besides, what is it that you want, to be honest? You are a strong player, no doubt about that - so how come that you don't care about the quality of your captain? How can you be satisfied with a captain who hasn't touched a chess board for the whole duration of the Olympiad, wasn't able to give a single advice? Is captain a clerk who enters the squad into the system and signs protocols? I personally don't think so.
In my opinion, Captain is first and foremost a coach/second/assistant. That's the case with many teams, and that's how i should be!
I see nothing wrong with a 5 man team from Alberta, or Ontario, as long as they are the best ones to represent Canada. It would still be a national team - they are the best players, after all. The way it is, it has not and will not happen.


IF they are the best players, Nikolay - and that's a big IF.
Surely, it's not the case right now

I think, Team Captain is a very serious and nerve wrecking position, especially for the mens team, and it by no means is a vacation. The captain stays in the playing hall every single playing day, until the games are finished. That - among other things, of course.

Frankly, Nikolay, I would absolutely love to have this privilege of watching the best players in the world every single day for 2 weeks while having all my expenses paid and not a real duty to perform!
Why on Earth is it a nerve-wrecking position NOW? It will become so after the motion has passed because then the Captain would have to actually work every single day and be responsible for the end result. So far there is no connection whatsoever between the results and the reception at home as we see. One can bungle everything, blame it on players and still be regarded as a real asset to the national program...