Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

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

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor Plotkin View Post
    If you want to make a point, please provide us with the real FIDE rating. The CFC site gives the wrong FIDE rating.
    You're right, Victor - the CFC site gives the wrong FIDE ratings.
    Here is correct ones from FIDE website:

    # Name Title Fed Rating G B-Year
    1 Bareev, Evgeny g CAN 2666 0 1966
    2 Kovalyov, Anton g CAN 2647 4 1992
    3 Hansen, Eric g CAN 2603 1 1992
    4 Spraggett, Kevin g CAN 2542 2 1954
    5 Sambuev, Bator g CAN 2534 5 1980
    6 Lesiege, Alexandre g CAN 2525 5 1975
    7 Preotu, Razvan g CAN 2495 0 1999
    8 Noritsyn, Nikolay m CAN 2479 0 1991
    9 Roussel-Roozmon, Thomas g CAN 2463 5 1988
    10 Tyomkin, Dimitri g CAN 2455 0 1977

    Still my point stands:
    FIDE rating is not accurate for players who play mostly in Canada.

    At the moment Canada has 3 very strong players, whose place in the National team is guaranteed:
    Evgeny Bareev, Anton Kovalyov and Eric Hansen.
    The next group of players, who are the real contenders for remaining spots - Bator Sambuev, Alexandre Lesiege, Razvan Preotu, Nikolay Noritsyn - play approximately at the same level.
    But their FIDE ratings are significantly different:
    experienced players - Bator and Alexandre - have higher ratings,
    while younger players - Razvan and Nikolay - have lower ratings.
    Difference between Bator and Nikolay is 55 points.
    It's quite a big difference, but does it reflect their current strength?
    Do you recall - when last time Bator achieved a better result than Nikolay at the same event?
    Thanks,
    Michael Barron

  2. #12

    Default

    We maintain separate rating system for good reasons. It gives us both money, the rating fees remains in Canada, and control, our Rating Auditor can correct CFC rating rapidly in case of error. As a former CFC Rating Auditor, I can say that when a rating error has been made outside of Canada, only the Federation of the Country in which the error has been made can correct the error. It is completely irrelevant that the title or rating of a Canadian player is at stake.

    We should proceed cautiously to ensure that we are not diminishing the value of one of our main asset, our own Canadian Rating which contribute significantly to our bottom line.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor Plotkin View Post
    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.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    411

    Default

    Michael,

    I was really surprised to read your post. Your example with Sambuev, LeSiege, Preotu and Noritsyn is excellent. Your explanation (young - experienced) is ... not exactly right.

    Hopefully, many governors know about the gap between CFC and FIDE rating. This gap was created long time ago with "artificial inflation" in CFC rating (around 2007-2008). Right now, we don't have inflation in CFC rating, but the gap still exists. Another problem: the gap is very different in different provinces. In Ontario the gap is almost 150 points, in Quebec and BC the gap is around 70 points only. Why? Because during the period of "artificial inflation" Ontario players played more tournaments and got more bonus points. Sooner or later, the gap will be the same everywhere in Canada, but it will take many years. How many years? Around 20-30, in my opinion.

    Now, if you take CFC rating into account, you discriminate players outside of Ontario. Ontario players have higher CFC rating not because they are younger. Many times, my CFC rating was very close to rating of GM Roussel-Roozmon, while his FIDE rating was about 150-200 points higher. He is 20 years younger than me.

    Sambuev used to be a 2700 CFC player. Now he is around 2600. Why? Not because he lost 100 points of "strength". His FIDE is about the same level, around 2530-2550. Because he used to play mostly in Ontario, and now he plays mostly in Quebec.
    Last edited by Victor Plotkin; 11-21-2016 at 04:37 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    411

    Default

    Pierre,

    I never asked to cancel CFC rating. I agree with you, CFC rating is very important for 99% of Canadian players. In some cases, for younger and lower rated players, CFC is more reliable than the FIDE rating. CFC rating is also great for CFC finance. My proposal was just to stop using it for the National Team.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Victor - can we assume you have polled our top players and that they are on board with this?
    If yes, how many did you poll and how many did you get responses from?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    411

    Default

    I spoke with a few members of Team Canada about it. The common reply was "CFC rating is a joke". We did not discussed this issue on our team meetings.

    I spoke with other strong players about it. Vast majority liked my proposal. A few of them do not care. Probably, Michael Barron is the only player with the rating above certain level, who against it.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    My personal bottom line is that I'm skeptical that all 6 of theses taken together would be readily understandable and accepted by masters generally - while not against any particular proposal the sum total makes me wonder if we'll get the needed "buy-in" from those most affected by it. Perhaps I'm mistaken but it does seem every single Olympiad team over the last 20-30 years has a different selection procedure and there is ALWAYS someone second-guessing the criteria.

    Obviously if you ask 30 masters you'll get at least 30 opinions but overall I'd be satisfied with just FIDE as the more complicated one gets the more we get accusations that we're doing it to favor one player or group over another.

    It's the ultimate "damned if you do damned if you don't" situation. At least right after the Olympiad we're doing it at a time that minimizes kvetching!

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Almonte, ON
    Posts
    371

    Default

    I would propose the following formula. Assuming a player has played in n FIDE rated games during the time period, where n is less than 20, their rating would be calculated as:

    Rating = [ n * FIDE + (20 - n) CFC] / 20.

    This would give weight to the FIDE rating, while allowing those without the opportunity to play in FIDE events to have their CFC rating count. This would work for both men and women, and avoid arbitrary weightings based on gender, current CFC or FIDE rating, etc.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    411

    Default

    Player, who is contender to the National Team, plays only FIDE-rated games. I do not remember the last time where player like Sambuev, Noritsyn or Preotu (all of them play mostly in Canada) played in a tournament with slow time control without FIDE rating. I want to repeat: nowadays almost every game in Canada in open section is FIDE-rated.

    Some governors believe that my proposal is too complicated. This formula is much more complicated than my proposal.

Page 2 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
  •