5B3 - NEW MOTIONS - Olympic Team Selection (Moved Victor Plotkin,Seconded Fred McKim)

[Victor Plotkin]

I also do not see why the rules should be different for women vs men.

This is a very reasonable question. I hope, I am ready to answer it. Interesting, how many posts will I make in the next 7 days?

3 months ago, I posted my initial ideas on chesstalk. I compared, how relevant are CFC and FIDE ratings for different groups of players.

FIDE below 1800. FIDE is irrelevant.
FIDE between 1800 and 2000. CFC rating is more important.
FIDE between 2000 and 2200. Both CFC and FIDE ratings are important equally.
FIDE between 2200 and 2400. FIDE rating is more important.
FIDE above 2400. CFC rating is irrelevant.

Our women team has average rating around 2100 FIDE. So, I am completely OK with the current rules (50% CFC, 50% FIDE). At the same time, every member of the national team is (and hopefully will be) above 2400. That's why it is different.

I have another reason not to propose any change here for the women team. Many contenders are young and have K-factor of 40. Their FIDE rating is too volatile and thus less reliable. For the men team, every contender has a K-factor of 10, even the youngest players. K-factor changes to 10 after 2400, no matter how young the player is.

[Pierre Dénommée]

This is a very reasonable question. I hope, I am ready to answer it. Interesting, how many posts will I make in the next 7 days?

3 months ago, I posted my initial ideas on chesstalk. I compared, how relevant are CFC and FIDE ratings for different groups of players.

FIDE below 1800. FIDE is irrelevant.
FIDE between 1800 and 2000. CFC rating is more important.
FIDE between 2000 and 2200. Both CFC and FIDE ratings are important equally.
FIDE between 2200 and 2400. FIDE rating is more important.
FIDE above 2400. CFC rating is irrelevant.

Our women team has average rating around 2100 FIDE. So, I am completely OK with the current rules (50% CFC, 50% FIDE). At the same time, every member of the national team is (and hopefully will be) above 2400. That's why it is different.

When explained like that, it is clear that it is not discrimination against Women. I would have been forced to vote against any such discrimination because of my current CFC office.