7D. "The Voting Booth" Windsor Bid for 2015 CYCC

[Lyle Craver]

Fellow Governors / VMs - the details of the Windsor bid for the 2015 Canadian Youth Chess Championship (CYCC) can be found at http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...Bids-2015-cycc

Voting options are (1) accept the bid, (2) reject the bid and (3) abstain.

At present this is the only bid for the 2015 CYCC.

Voting begins immediately and ends at the conclusion of the meeting which is scheduled for 2200 Sunday July 13 (unless the meeting is extended which is not planned at this point)

[Michael Barron]

I'm voting to reject this bid, because scheduling CYCC for July creates many problems that we see this year:
- it conflicts with PanAm YCC,
- it doesn't leave time for proper registration and preparation for WYCC,
- it can't qualify players for NAYCC in June.
If organizers could change CYCC dates to March, I would support this bid.

[Sasha Starr]

I'm voting to reject this bid, because scheduling CYCC for July creates many problems that we see this year:
- it conflicts with PanAm YCC,
- it doesn't leave time for proper registration and preparation for WYCC,
- it can't qualify players for NAYCC in June.
If organizers could change CYCC dates to March, I would support this bid.

Agree with your reasons. I vote to reject this bid.

Thanks, Sasha Starr.

[Garland Best]

I'm voting to reject for different reasons. This bid was proposed only within the past couple of days. There is no bid for the Canadian Open. We were not given any times to discuss the merits of the bids.

We need more time to see if another bid can be offered for the CYCC and CO. We can always revisit this at the next meeting.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

I agree with Garland, I think it would be best to revisit this bid at the next meeting.
Regarding the idea of holding the CYCC in March - this would solve a lot of problems. Its a risk though, since its something that has not been tried before. Perhaps there could be a survey done during the current CYCC asking if there is support for such an idea?

[Fred McKim]

So, one rejection is because we don't hold it with a Canadian Open, another because we don't hold it in the spring (obviously not going to line up with a Canadian Open bid). I think if somebody wants to hold the event in March let them bid on it, otherwise don't tinker. We've had several CYCC / CO's in different places. The rules of the CFC cvlearly call for bids to be received by the AGM. Let the Tournament Co-ordinator help find someone to run the CO. You four who posted in front of me would all be good candidates for that officer position.

[Félix Dumont]

I think the bid is a very good one.
However, I share the concerns regarding the Canadian Open. It would be surprising if we received a nice bid for the CO (unless it is by CMA?) if the CYCC is not organized with it.
Still, as a Quebec governor I must represent the players from my province, which are clearly more interested in the CYCC. Last year, more than 20 Quebec kids played in the CYCC, while 2 or 3 Quebec players were at the CO (Gatineau excluded). Windsor took the time to put forward a good bid, and in absence of other bids I will vote yes.

[Halldor P. Palsson]

I think the CFC should stick with the CO & CYCC model so I vote no.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I don't think that it is very wise to reject the only bid. I also don't understand why you think the CMA would be interested in putting on this tournament after they have said that they are not interested.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

So, one rejection is because we don't hold it with a Canadian Open, another because we don't hold it in the spring (obviously not going to line up with a Canadian Open bid). I think if somebody wants to hold the event in March let them bid on it, otherwise don't tinker. We've had several CYCC / CO's in different places. The rules of the CFC cvlearly call for bids to be received by the AGM. Let the Tournament Co-ordinator help find someone to run the CO. You four who posted in front of me would all be good candidates for that officer position.

I think it sets a dangerous precedent to create a new requirement that potential bidders have to bid on a package of events in order to bid on the event that they want. This has never been a requirement. As for a March tournament date for CYCC, I don't think it would be viable in Windsor or maybe anywhere where the tournament site was not free or close to it. You would see a precipitous drop in numbers of players attending from out of province.

I think if after three financially successful CYCC's in Ottawa, Montreal and Windsor we might be able to experiment with a possible financial disaster in 2016. I think we will still have enough in the youth fund to pay for WYCC. I would suggest that to mitigate the chance of disaster the tournament would have to be in Toronto or Montreal or Vancouver on the weekend where the two major provinces' March breaks overlap with a schedule from Friday to Monday so each of the two largest provinces players would miss just one day of school. Of course I don't like this scenario because it leaves the rest of the provinces out in the cold but under that scenario the tournament could be moderately successful.

Of course we could put it in Vancouver during their March break which would not coincide with those of Ontario, Quebec or Alberta if my memory serves me correctly. Cue outrage from affected Ontario parents. Look at your feelings about that idea and understand why a March break tournament is not the best idea.

The Pan Am youth tournament is usually only attended by a few Canadian players. Thankfully so as this year they moved their dates after players and families had already made arrangements to attend the originally scheduled dates. Communicating with the organizers is difficult. The biggest issue with having a Pan Am tournament that conflicts with CYCC is only a problem if you add a useless provision that you can only attend WYCC if you attend CYCC leaving Pan Am participants out in the cold. The job of the CFC should not be to prevent the best Canadian players from competing on the world stage. I know that view may be controversial in some quarters.