Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39

Thread: 7c. Women's CFC Titles (Moved/Seconded Vlad Drkulec / Julia Lacau-Rodean)

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    So the purpose of the system is to encourage more women to play chess. It is my view that in 45 years the percentage of women players has increased minimally.
    If this is the case, where is the proof that the separate women's system is accomplishing anything? Everyone defends the system, and mouths the goal, but there is no proof it works.
    Women today are participating more in every aspect of life now, in areas where previously their numbers were low. So it is my contention that the increase in women in chess that we've seen would have happened anyway, WITHOUT the system.
    Hi Bob, I've been watching this debate with interest while working out the final details for the Ontario Girls Chess Championship. I hope we can all agree that more women playing chess is desirable. So instead of "throwing in the towel", maybe we should be doubling our efforts.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ottawa Ontario National Master Former Gov.
    Posts
    10,761
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pierre Dénommée View Post
    This will never be a good idea unless you want to abandon Swiss pairings. The credibility of the winner produced by the Swiss system depends greatly on the accuracy of the ratings of the players. Without rating, a player with a perfect score against five 1200 players would get a better result then another player with 4/5 against 5 grandmasters. The Swiss pairing rules ensure that this ridiculous situation will never happen.
    Personally I think more knockout or round-robin style events would be good for chess, as exciting a format as I think they are. These formats do have drawbacks compared to swisses (or sectional RRs, i.e. Congresses), which do seem to require a rating system as you allude to - at least Kotov never addressed the concern about swiss pairings without ratings being used that you've expressed, Pierre. I can't recall if Tom ever did either.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Félix Dumont View Post
    In any case, as a governor I represent the interest of Quebec players. After consulting people (including women that would be elligible for these titles), I have failed to find someone in favour or such detrimental titles.
    No one will require anyone who finds the title detrimental to apply for it. If you don't like it you have the option of simply taking the class A title and the National Candidate master title. This was not exactly what I initially envisioned but what evolved after discussions with two recent women's Olympiad team members including Iulia who was after all the women's coordinator and the input of the governors when I brought up this idea initially on the governor's board. A post on Chesstalk by Andrei Botez who I believe has at least two daughters in chess indicates "If this title is achieved before a certain age, I can tell you for sure that all the players are more then happy." This would indicate to me that there is some support among three recent women's Olympiad team members.

    As I recall the vote was a healthy majority for accepting Iulia as CFC women's coordinator. Why go through the pretense of having a women's coordinator if you aren't going to listen to her suggestions? There is a perception that this chess federation is an old boy's club. Much of the discussion around this issue here and on chess talk reinforces that perception.

    Further to the idea that Windsor girls are unrepresentative of Canadian girls in general the fact is that among the most active chess players we usually have a participation of 40% to 50% girls. We had a tournament this year where it seemed to me at least 400 girls out of 1000 kids competed and last year the number was somewhere between 600 and 700 out of 1400 kids. If that is an anomaly it is an anomaly that the CFC should pay attention to. This year's lowered numbers were the result of the public schools not taking part due to the teacher's refusal to participate in extracurricular activities as part of an argument over Ontario government legislation they disagree with which infringes on their collective agreements with the government.

    As our president, Mark Dutton has pointed out we really need to take more of a marketing approach. If we can keep a few of our best woman players playing for a little longer and give them an endorsement that they can use when they are teaching chess to other girls (and boys) then maybe they stay in chess a little longer and we get more girls who stay in chess because they have these visible examples and role models that tell them that it is normal for young women to play chess, to succeed and achieve recognition.

    For the CFC to implement this would require some minor modifications to the html of the pages which display titles. You don't even necessarily have to list their names separately though it would be nice if that were possible. In addition there is some slight addition to the duties of the CFC office. In some cases they will have to type in Woman National Master instead of National Candidate Master in the body of the certificate. In discussions Michael Von Keitz was very much in favour of this initiative when he was CFC President so I am sure he will accommodate this minor variation to his duties.
    Last edited by Vladimir Drkulec; 04-04-2013 at 01:37 PM.

  4. #24

    Default Promotion of Women's Chess - A Laudatory Goal

    Hi Bob G:

    I am not "throwing in the towel" on women's participation in chess!!

    I am a strong supporter of greater women participation, as in the Scarborough CC where we have probably 10 % women participation ( a high rate in Canada, I believe) ---- in the "open" Thursday night swisses. Women are treated totally equally, as they should.

    I agree to making significant efforts to get women participating in general areas where they have not been, or where participation has been prevented.

    This includes significant efforts by the chess community to have women play/continue to play chess.....in the open system.

    I do not believe the separate system is helping. In fact, I think it is inhibiting. It sends an implied message of inferiority. The separate women's system has been around for a very long time, and no one has any scientific proof that it has helped at all. I am not aware of any significant study that proves the value of the separate women's system! Any rise in women's chess participation is due to generally better participation of women in all aspects of life.

    That said, I do wish the best to you and all those using the separate system to try to promote women's chess. All effort is helpful.

    Bob A
    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; 04-04-2013 at 12:49 PM.

  5. #25

    Default

    I'll be supporting the Women's coordinator's recommendation.

  6. #26

    Default

    The problem with knockouts is that a drawn game is the result of a well fought game. We have no efficient way to remove those drawn results. Tiebreak with blitz are not truly significant. Almost nobody knows the name of the IM who has a 2920 FIDE blitz rating. There is obviously no proof the the better blitz player is the better player at standard chess.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
    Personally I think more knockout or round-robin style events would be good for chess, as exciting a format as I think they are. These formats do have drawbacks compared to swisses (or sectional RRs, i.e. Congresses), which do seem to require a rating system as you allude to - at least Kotov never addressed the concern about swiss pairings without ratings being used that you've expressed, Pierre. I can't recall if Tom ever did either.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
    Vlad,

    Your post hints strongly but doesn't really make a case that even one single girl would stay in chess due to the existence of these titles. And you admit you've mainly talked to only Windsor chess players.
    My interest in this idea came from an enquiry from Liza Orlova who recently had an excellent tournament result after a long absence from CFC chess. She asked about the title which does not currently exist. I talked to our President Michael Von Keitz who liked the idea and referred me to Iulia, the CFC women's coordinator and those discussions led to something close to the current proposal. Finally I talked to the governors on the governors forum which led to this current version of the motion. I talked to a number of Windsor girls and all were quite positive about the idea once it was clarified that the new titles were not required and they could go with the old titles. You might argue that the Windsor girls are somehow not representative of Canada as a whole but the fact is if you had the same proportional participation from the rest of Canadian youth at the last CYCC as you had from Windsor then you would have had more than 2000 kids playing in the tournament.

    I reject the idea that the Windsor girls or kids in general are all that unique. If the CFC governors did the same things that we are doing in Windsor, I have little doubt that we would have similar results all across Canada. The real target of this motion, is an indirect target and that is the eight or ten or twelve or fourteen year old girl that likes to play chess but doesn't have too many role models. I know that this will keep the Windsor girls playing longer and that in turn will encourage more girls to start to play and to start to put effort into and excel at chess because they see the example of the older girls and aspire to enjoy their same success competing against boys and adults. They want the certificates and trophies and ribbons that these girls have shown, by their example, that they too could earn.

    I don't have any peer reviewed studies that would support my belief that this will help. I do have many years of chess teaching and coaching experience in one area of the country where chess is enjoying exploding interest among girls (and boys). If they tell me that they view this positively, I suspect that there is a large pool of potential players who are very similar in psychological makeup and motivation across the country who will also view this positively.

    When I first got involved with the CFC as a governor there were comments among some influential individuals that I was wasting my time and that the CFC was a bastion of stodgy, time and money wasting governors, where nothing would ever change, and no progress could ever be made. Lets prove them wrong. We need to widen our appeal. This will widen our appeal. Lets do it.
    Last edited by Vladimir Drkulec; 04-04-2013 at 03:25 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    694

    Default

    I also would tend to defer to the women's coordinator and support her recommendation.
    Paul Leblanc
    Treasurer, Chess Foundation of Canada
    CFC Voting Member

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    591

    Default

    I support this initiative. It's good for women's chess. There is no cost, so it helps the whole community without canibalizing something else.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hal Bond View Post
    There is no cost,
    No monetary cost perhaps. But it does further devalue the title of "Master".
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •