11.G Other Business

[Vladimir Drkulec]

All other business not assigned a topic can be discussed here in this thread.

[Aris Marghetis]

Would there be any interest in a poll for whether the CFC could/should implement some kind of vaccine directive for all of the annual CFC national events?

My concern is that attendance will drop by people concerned for their health safety.

[Fred McKim]

Would there be any interest in a poll for whether the CFC could/should implement some kind of vaccine directive for all of the annual CFC national events?

My concern is that attendance will drop by people concerned for their health safety.

I think a discussion is warranted -- it's going to be next Easter before the next National event is held and things could be completely different by then.

[Aris Marghetis]

I think a discussion is warranted -- it's going to be next Easter before the next National event is held and things could be completely different by then.

oh yes, I agree things could be completely different

I still think we should start talking about this issue

[Vladimir Drkulec]

My family member that has COVID after being double vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, is somewhat immunocompromised after a prolonged outbreak of shingles. She seems to be recovering from COVID. Talked to her today on Facetime.

[Victoria Doknjas]

Starting September 13 (1 dose) and then on Oct 24 (fully vaccinated), BC will require proof of vaccination to access some events, services, and businesses. I assume that chess tournaments fall under the category of "Indoor organized gatherings like weddings, parties, conferences, meetings and workshops".

Similarly, Quebec is targeting Sept 1 and will require COVID-19 vaccination passport and is expect to be used for the following non-essential activities:
- High-risk activities with a limited number of people (gyms, team sports, bars, restaurants, etc.)
- Moderate- or low-risk activities with bigger groups of people (arts and entertainment, festivals and major events, games at sports stadiums, etc.)

[Christopher Mallon]

Starting September 13 (1 dose) and then on Oct 24 (fully vaccinated), BC will require proof of vaccination to access some events, services, and businesses. I assume that chess tournaments fall under the category of "Indoor organized gatherings like weddings, parties, conferences, meetings and workshops".

Similarly, Quebec is targeting Sept 1 and will require COVID-19 vaccination passport and is expect to be used for the following non-essential activities:
- High-risk activities with a limited number of people (gyms, team sports, bars, restaurants, etc.)
- Moderate- or low-risk activities with bigger groups of people (arts and entertainment, festivals and major events, games at sports stadiums, etc.)

It might be an idea to have one central place - a sticky on the forum, or more ideally a page on the main CFC site - listing any and all legal requirements and restrictions for in-person chess events for each province. Separately, a list of "best practices" could be developed by the first few people who run in-person events in various places with different restrictions.

That would be similar to what other sporting bodies do for their members, although the larger (and more-restricted) ones will also lobby and/or negotiate with the government, sometimes with comical effects such as last year when I think at one point wrestling was allowed but solo gymnastics was not in Ontario.

[Victoria Doknjas]

It might be an idea to have one central place - a sticky on the forum, or more ideally a page on the main CFC site - listing any and all legal requirements and restrictions for in-person chess events for each province. Separately, a list of "best practices" could be developed by the first few people who run in-person events in various places with different restrictions.


There would need to be someone, or a group, tasked to make updates or to notify the administrator of the forum/main CFC site that a specific province has updated their legal requirements.

[Aris Marghetis]

So the challenge with the ideas above is that different provinces have different positions (and many of them will probably change). My thinking is that the CFC would start with a position of one of the provinces, and make it our standard for national events. At this time, I don't feel very good about Ontario's position on this aspect.

[Paul Leblanc]

I don't see this proposed work being productive since the provinces have different mandated precautions and they are changing frequently. Local organizers, even of national events are bound by the provincial standards.

[Aris Marghetis]

I don't see this proposed work being productive since the provinces have different mandated precautions and they are changing frequently. Local organizers, even of national events are bound by the provincial standards.

Well, what I'm saying is that regardless of where the event is being held, that certain MINIMUM CFC standards are implemented. Of course, if that particular jurisdiction has more elevated requirements, then they must be legally adhered to. However, for example, let's say 8 provinces have vaccine mandates, but the others don't, and the event is being held in a non-vaccine-mandate province. Having had a CFC national directive in place beforehand would sure help, wouldn't it?

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Starting September 13 (1 dose) and then on Oct 24 (fully vaccinated), BC will require proof of vaccination to access some events, services, and businesses. I assume that chess tournaments fall under the category of "Indoor organized gatherings like weddings, parties, conferences, meetings and workshops".

Similarly, Quebec is targeting Sept 1 and will require COVID-19 vaccination passport and is expect to be used for the following non-essential activities:
- High-risk activities with a limited number of people (gyms, team sports, bars, restaurants, etc.)
- Moderate- or low-risk activities with bigger groups of people (arts and entertainment, festivals and major events, games at sports stadiums, etc.)


Our status is a bit more complicated than that. I don't think it is realistic to expect the CFC to be up to date on the latest rules in every province which are constantly changing and evolving often weekly or even daily. In fact, in Ontario it is the local board of health that is in charge so you are dealing with - I am not even sure how many off the top of my head - multiple authorities, depending on where you are located. The best that I have had contact with are the Peel Region Board of Health. They eventually get on the line with a human who wants to help and does help moving issues up the hierarchy and does call you back after promising to do so. The Toronto Board hung up on me three times before I even talked to a human and then once more when I did.

We do have some extra status that allows us to hold events because we are recognized by the Canadian Olympic Committee as a national sporting organization. Examining all the rules and loopholes at the level of the Canadian government, it was possible to hold for instance the Pan Am hybrid event. We could have done it in a hotel. Putting it together in one month dealing with a somewhat unreliable partner with the possibility of a local health board throwing a spanner in the works just would have stretched us too thin.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I think it would be foolish for us to try to reinvent the wheel and maintain any such comprehensive listing of requirements. It would always be out of date. If you want to hold an event you have to research the requirements from your local health board which can change daily. For a large event, holding it in a hotel would shield you from some of the liability of things you have to complete like a covid plan (think WMIS) with significant fines if you don't comply with laws and regulations.

If I wanted to hold a large event at this time, I would research the canada.ca website which is pretty good on a national level. I would then go to the provincial website where you propose to hold the event. I would then go to the health board site for the location of the site. I would also talk to the local tourism board and the hotel where you propose to hold the event.

As a chess federation we need to look at FIDE and its guidelines and perhaps what the USCF is doing. They are holding large tournaments again.

[Victor Plotkin]

Last 2 months, I was playing in USA (Philadelphia, World Open) and in Latvia (Riga). Masks were formally required in both locations, but only in Philadelphia arbiters were strict about this rule. In Riga 90+% of players played mask-free.

This summer, some other Canadians played in different countries in Europe (Italy, Serbia, Ukraine, Austria, Czechia ant others). Unfortunately, no big tournaments in Canada yet.

[Fred McKim]

I am thinking the organizer of any Canadian Championship would agree on Covid-19 precautions with the CFC Executive, in advance of the tournament. Masks could possibly be agreed upon a few weeks beforehand, something like a vaccine requirement would need more advance notice.

[Don Hack]

The current challenge is no vaccine for the under 12 group of players.

I am very pro-vaccine, but how we would demand 12+ players get vaccines, then play someone unvaccinated?

This is an important topic, but may be constrained until a vaccine for the younger juniors and/or further guidance. Is there a reasonable trigger to encourage the board to discuss?

[Aris Marghetis]

I am thinking the organizer of any Canadian Championship would agree on Covid-19 precautions with the CFC Executive, in advance of the tournament. Masks could possibly be agreed upon a few weeks beforehand, something like a vaccine requirement would need more advance notice.

I suspect that I haven't done a good enough job yet in wording my request: I am hoping that the CFC Executive explicitly defines a minimum set of COVID-19 criteria for our national championships (which will cross multiple provincial health jurisdictions). "Minimum" implies the practical reality that some locations will entail "higher" requirements. These may be from regional health units, from provincial regulations, even perhaps the fully privately-owned playing venue. So, do people agree or disagree that this is something the CFC Executive should undertake? I offer to provide my input to such an initiative. My concern is that if the CFC does not take a leadership position, then events in provinces like Ontario might suffer from players who won't attend due to concerns their health isn't protected.

[Richard Bérubé]

Hi,

We (FQE) are organizing a second youth OTB tournament in Quebec during pandemic time. This will be held september 5. We will asked the players to bring their Vaccination passport for players over 12 years old.
We will used plexiglas especially designed for chess.
See some images of the first one.

https://vimeo.com/462753187

[Victoria Doknjas]

I suspect that I haven't done a good enough job yet in wording my request: I am hoping that the CFC Executive explicitly defines a minimum set of COVID-19 criteria for our national championships (which will cross multiple provincial health jurisdictions). "Minimum" implies the practical reality that some locations will entail "higher" requirements. These may be from regional health units, from provincial regulations, even perhaps the fully privately-owned playing venue. So, do people agree or disagree that this is something the CFC Executive should undertake? I offer to provide my input to such an initiative. My concern is that if the CFC does not take a leadership position, then events in provinces like Ontario might suffer from players who won't attend due to concerns their health isn't protected.

My first reaction to this would be the CFC could either:
1. Take the stance that its minimum set of COVID-19 criteria would be the same as the province with the strictest regulations because if CFC's stance is less than that, it would not meet the requirements of the province with the strictest regulations. However, in those provinces' with less strict regulations, what power does CFC have to enforce this (or the organizers) other than CFC refusing to CFC rate these events.
- I am not as familiar with the current requirements in all provinces, so would chess tournament organizers have the right to mandate a stricter set of COVID-19 criteria than what their province has mandated? Likely the answer is "no", e.g., vaccine passports -- either your province has a mechanism in place for this or it doesn't.

OR

2. Take the stance that its minimum set of COVID-19 criteria is the same as what each individual chess tournament organizers' province is mandating, and refer these organizers to their local province's website, etc.

Aris: Are you asking what CFC should be mandating; or are you asking what CFC should be recommending (but know cannot legally enforce)?
- And again, the only authority that I see that CFC has is it can refuse to CFC rate a tournament if that organizer does not adhere to CFC's mandate and/or recommendations.

[Fred McKim]

At the moment there are no Covid-19 restrictions in public spaces in NB. Accordingly the organizer of the NB Tornado G/60 Championship this past weekend, had an event that resembled any pre-Covid event (except for one masked player out of 28). A previous tournament one month earlier, had everyone masked.

[Victoria Doknjas]

Obviously, at a minimum, each tournament organizer needs to adhere to what their own province's COVID-19 restrictions are -- so CFC doesn't need to do anything about that. I think the question is, does CFC feel that it is important enough, or care enough about the health and welfare of all our CFC Players, that we want the CFC to lawfully use whatever authority it has to enforce what we deem to be good safety COVID-19 practices. If so, the decision making process could look something like this:

Step 1: Does CFC think it should recommend stricter guidelines than what individual provinces are mandating?
a. If no, end of discussion.
b. If yes, one way would be CFC can choose not to CFC rate events that do not adhere to its recommendations.

Step 2: If yes, to above, then what would those stricter guidelines be?
- It might be more effective to create a small committee to draft up these guidelines/recommendations and then present to CFC Executives/CFC Voting Members for approval vs. trying to hammer out these guidelines/recommendations via group postings during this AGM; or some other more efficient way to get this done.

Step 3: Communicate these recommendations to tournament organizers either via CFC Forum, CFC website, CFC Facebook, shout it out from the rooftops, etc.

Like Aris, I also would like to offer my input for this initiative, as I think this is a vital, and in some case a potentially life-threatening, issue that CFC can help make a positive impact on the lives of all it's CFC Members, both young and older.

Richard: Is FQE allowing Players under 12 yrs old to play in the Sept 5 OTB youth tournament, and if so, what precautions are being taken with this unvaccinated group?

[Aris Marghetis]

My first reaction to this would be the CFC could either:
1. Take the stance that its minimum set of COVID-19 criteria would be the same as the province with the strictest regulations because if CFC's stance is less than that, it would not meet the requirements of the province with the strictest regulations. However, in those provinces' with less strict regulations, what power does CFC have to enforce this (or the organizers) other than CFC refusing to CFC rate these events.
- I am not as familiar with the current requirements in all provinces, so would chess tournament organizers have the right to mandate a stricter set of COVID-19 criteria than what their province has mandated? Likely the answer is "no", e.g., vaccine passports -- either your province has a mechanism in place for this or it doesn't.

OR

2. Take the stance that its minimum set of COVID-19 criteria is the same as what each individual chess tournament organizers' province is mandating, and refer these organizers to their local province's website, etc.

Aris: Are you asking what CFC should be mandating; or are you asking what CFC should be recommending (but know cannot legally enforce)?
- And again, the only authority that I see that CFC has is it can refuse to CFC rate a tournament if that organizer does not adhere to CFC's mandate and/or recommendations.

So there have already been some cross-health-jurisdiction entities that have mandated restrictions across their operations. Then, if a jurisdiction has even higher restrictions, then those of course also have to be enforced. That's the kind of leadership position from the CFC that I am asking about here. I'm not 100% SURE this is doable/desirable, but I'm hoping that most of us agree it's both. Let's use a more tangible example. Richard (Quebec) indicated that their events would enforce vaccinated players (>12 years). That's nice for the Organizers/Arbiters because they seem to have that already stated by their provincial government and by their provincial chess association. I salute both of them for this! Then say the next weekend, I try to run a national event IN ONTARIO, where such supportive regulations have NOT been implemented by the provincial government. Well, now it becomes more challenging for me to have the same health restrictions that Quebec had the previous weekend. There will be challenges issued (albeit probably by a minority). On the other hand, if the CFC has already declared that it expects all national events to require vaccinated (again >12 years for now), well then an Ontario Organizer can easily say "following national CFC directives".

I hope this paints a better picture of advantages of CFC national directives (and which will be MINIMUMS!)

[Christopher Field]

I have also posted this under BIDS FOR 2021-22 EVENTS.
This is to let voting members - especially in Ontario - know that (assuming the given conditions are met),
the Ontario High School Chess Championship teachers organising committee will hold an over-the-board tournament in April 2022 in Toronto.
Please let teachers, students, and parents in your Ontario region know.
Thank you very much.

The Ontario High School Chess Championship will be held
in Toronto, in April, 2022
under the following conditions:
* the government of Ontario allows large gatherings;
* schools and school boards allow extra-curricular activities, including chess clubs, and school trips;
* parents and students are comfortable with attending
An announcement will be made on the website as soon as possible.
http://www.ohscc.on.ca (http://www.ohscc.on.ca)
The organising committee (OC) can be reached at
high.school.chess@gmail.com
It is asked that a representative of each school chess club - teacher, parent, or student - email the OC when the above conditions have been met for your school, and you know that players from your school will be able to attend.

A few notes about the OHSCC:
Why April? It used to be May, but now many schools run the IB programme, and many others run Grade 12 AP courses; both IB and AP courses have international exams in May (the IB exams start Apr 28).
The championship has 3 sections:
Championship (Open to all, 5 rounds);
Intermediate ( rated < 1500 or unrated, 6 rounds);
Beginner (rated < 1100 or unrated, with less than 2 years of tournament experience, 6 rounds)
4 rounds are played on Friday (Ch - only 3), 2 on Saturday
Time control: Ch Rds 1 and 2 1 hr / player; Rds 3-5 90 min / player + 30 sec incr
Int and Beg Rds 1 – 3 1 hr / player; Rds 4 – 6 90 min / player

The organising committee of teachers is working hard to complete arrangements for the tournament site. They will also make arrangements for hotel discounts at one or more nearby hotels for out-of-town students and staff.
They will not hold the tournament Easter week-end (Apr 15-16 – normally this would conflict with the Toronto Open !) or Apr 29-30 (IB exams).
The date and site will be announced on the website as soon as possible.

[Christopher Field]

I suspect that I haven't done a good enough job yet in wording my request: I am hoping that the CFC Executive explicitly defines a minimum set of COVID-19 criteria for our national championships (which will cross multiple provincial health jurisdictions). "Minimum" implies the practical reality that some locations will entail "higher" requirements. These may be from regional health units, from provincial regulations, even perhaps the fully privately-owned playing venue. So, do people agree or disagree that this is something the CFC Executive should undertake? I offer to provide my input to such an initiative. My concern is that if the CFC does not take a leadership position, then events in provinces like Ontario might suffer from players who won't attend due to concerns their health isn't protected.

I agree with Aris that this would be an important rôle for the CFC executive to undertake.

[David Gordon]

Provinces determine health regulations. I would disagree with CFC going beyond a provincial mandate.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I have had many discussions about covid with my siblings one of whom is an orthopaedic surgeon who is on the Covid committee of two different hospitals in the Dallas, Texas area and another who is a family doctor in the Windsor area. Two other siblings are dentists. My sister was a physiotherapist. One niece is a homeopathic doctor. A nephew and a niece are in medical school. I am the black sheep of the family with an MBA, a couple of undergrad degrees and an electrical-electronics engineering technology diploma and being president of the CFC.

I would look to FIDE which has more access to experts to develop the response to COVID. For me to offer anything beyond what the governments and health experts are telling us would have to be very strongly science based. We don't have the expertise to make that determination. I am skeptical of the utility of plastic barriers and wiping down surfaces as most of the reported studies do not support their efficacy. Plastic barriers may be detrimental because they restrict air flow. Even masks are only useful to the extent that they stop people from coughing in each others faces. The virus is airborne. Most masks allow the virus through them. The masks that don't allow the virus through them have their own issues. The original variant was not that easy to catch. You needed a prolonged exposure. The new variants are less deadly but more easily transmissible.

We are in an evolving situation where we just have to pay attention to what governments and health authorities are telling us. This situation is novel and evolving for them also. Guidelines from one month to the next can be contradictory as they acquire more information and try to apply that information to navigate their current understanding of the current reality.

[Aris Marghetis]

ok, lemme try to jumpstart this initiative with these 2 ideas:

1) over 12 years vaccinated!
2) others quick-tested onsite?

[Christopher Field]

ok, lemme try to jumpstart this initiative with these 2 ideas:

1) over 12 years vaccinated!
2) others quick-tested onsite?

This is clear and straight-forward.
Organisers would have to arrange for quick-testing.

[Aris Marghetis]

This is clear and straight-forward.
Organisers would have to arrange for quick-testing.

Thanks Chris. Note I'm not saying these should be the actual conditions. I just wanted to trigger someone Exec to take charge of building a team to examine this.

Again, I offer (as has at least Victoria), to provide input to Exec(s).

[Richard Bowes]

I don't agree that the CFC Executive should define a minimum set of Covid-19 criteria for national championships, which will cross multiple provincial health jurisdictions.

The CFC shouldn't place itself in a position where it will potentially be over-ruling individual provincial and territorial health authorities with respect to what pandemic protocols are needed in their province or territory.

A provincial health officer's judgment shouldn't be subject to second guessing by a non health authority like the CFC executive. Simply because other entities are applying this heavy handed policy doesn't justify it.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/covid19-testing-pcr-antigen-1.5905308

It is unlikely that chess organizers can afford private COVID testing (which would not be covered under most Canadian provincial health plans) unless we double tournament entry fees.

It is just crazy to think that we can add a whole layer of COVID regulation information and keep track of the health requirements all across Canada. What happens if the requirements change and we didn't update our website? Then someone gets COVID because they relied on our bad information.

As the old Clint Eastwood movie aphorism went, "A man's got to know his limitations." The same holds true for an organization.

In a perfect world, we would have unlimited resources and we could be all things to all people. In the real world, our resources including volunteers and employees are limited. We don't have an AI that can monitor the internet for changes in government (federal, provincial and local) COVID requirements. There are government websites that already do that for us. Consult them.

[Don Hack]

Frankly, maybe it makes sense to get a legal opinion.

If the CFC says "X" and it is too little or too much, it might not end well if someone were to take legal action.

We can recommend what one might call "best practices", but if we set a requirement, then we might be liable.

[Aris Marghetis]

I don't agree that the CFC Executive should define a minimum set of Covid-19 criteria for national championships, which will cross multiple provincial health jurisdictions.

The CFC shouldn't place itself in a position where it will potentially be over-ruling individual provincial and territorial health authorities with respect to what pandemic protocols are needed in their province or territory.

A provincial health officer's judgment shouldn't be subject to second guessing by a non health authority like the CFC executive. Simply because other entities are applying this heavy handed policy doesn't justify it.

I am talking about setting a MINIMUM national standard. If a provincial standard calls for more, then of course that "more" will also have to be implemented.

[Aris Marghetis]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/covid19-testing-pcr-antigen-1.5905308

It is unlikely that chess organizers can afford private COVID testing (which would not be covered under most Canadian provincial health plans) unless we double tournament entry fees.

It is just crazy to think that we can add a whole layer of COVID regulation information and keep track of the health requirements all across Canada. What happens if the requirements change and we didn't update our website? Then someone gets COVID because they relied on our bad information.

As the old Clint Eastwood movie aphorism went, "A man's got to know his limitations." The same holds true for an organization.

In a perfect world, we would have unlimited resources and we could be all things to all people. In the real world, our resources including volunteers and employees are limited. We don't have an AI that can monitor the internet for changes in government (federal, provincial and local) COVID requirements. There are government websites that already do that for us. Consult them.

I also don't see the practicality of onsite testing, I just listed it to get more discussion going. I don't see a need to maintain any ongoing CFC-COVID "department". I am just talking about setting a MINIMUM national standard. If a provincial standard calls for more, then of course that "more" will also have to be implemented.

[Aris Marghetis]

Frankly, maybe it makes sense to get a legal opinion.

If the CFC says "X" and it is too little or too much, it might not end well if someone were to take legal action.

We can recommend what one might call "best practices", but if we set a requirement, then we might be liable.

Yes, I would strongly support securing a legal opinion. I would also suggest "minimum + provincial requirements" vs. something like "best practices".

[Aris Marghetis]

So I guess this thread is fading. I don't get how minimums can "over"-rule provincial legal requirements, but more moot now, as this just announced re Ontario:

Ontario to institute vaccine passport system, sources say:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-vaccine-passport-1.6156343?ref=mobilerss&cmp=newsletter_CBC%20News%20Top%20Headlines%20%20% E2%80%93%20Evening_1617_306038

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

I am talking about setting a MINIMUM national standard. If a provincial standard calls for more, then of course that "more" will also have to be implemented.

I think there could be minimal specific chess related things: handshakes before and after the game are replaced by something; sanitizers every x table; pairing announcements to reduce crowds; separation screens;etc.

Also that shall not be to restrictive as no one will be interested to organize or play OTB.

[Aris Marghetis]

I was thinking more along the lines of some other sports that are already planning for mandatory vaccinations for anyone at the playing location. Moot point now.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

The kids 12 years and under are a significant number of our players. They can't be vaccinated currently and possibly for the forseeable future. There are some serious ethical questions surrounding vaccinating young people as most studies show they don't spread the disease and if they get the disease unless they have underlying conditions, they can just shrug it off. You are more likely to catch covid from a fully vaccinated adult with underlying conditions than an 8 year old kid.

[Patricia Gamliel]

The only requirement an organization can impose is proof of negative result’s testing done within 72 hours of a game. This is what the Canadian government requires travellers.

[Aris Marghetis]

The only requirement an organization can impose is proof of negative result’s testing done within 72 hours of a game. This is what the Canadian government requires travellers.

Well, like I wrote above, there's already some other sports organizations that have announced mandatory vaccinations for anyone at the playing location.

[Pierre Dénommée]

The only requirement an organization can impose is proof of negative result’s testing done within 72 hours of a game. This is what the Canadian government requires travellers.


The Quebec Premier has announced that any employer can force his employees to be fully vaccinated. It is up to each employer to gauge the risk and act accordingly.

There are many activities impossible without vaccination see https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coronavirus/progress-of-the-covid-19-vaccination/covid-19-vaccination-passport/places-and-activities-requiring-covid-19-vaccination-passport .

The provincial Government will notify the FQE which will notify the players. An announcement is expected in September. Pending that, we cannot claim that playing chess will be allowed without a proof of vaccination. The Quebec Premier believe that an employee can be dismissed with cause if he refuses vaccination.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

The players are not employees. I believe Bob is fully vaccinated but I think we would be on shaky ground if we were to try to force players to be vaccinated. I think we would also be on shaky ground if we assumed that a room of fully vaccinated people is safe from the spread of some of the new COVID variants. It likely means that no one will die from catching covid but there is a great deal of room between likely and certain.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Well, like I wrote above, there's already some other sports organizations that have announced mandatory vaccinations for anyone at the playing location.


In most of those cases the athletes receive funding that is administered by the sports body.

[Richard Bowes]

So I guess this thread is fading. I don't get how minimums can "over"-rule provincial legal requirements, but more moot now, as this just announced re Ontario:

Ontario to institute vaccine passport system, sources say:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-vaccine-passport-1.6156343?ref=mobilerss&cmp=newsletter_CBC%20News%20Top%20Headlines%20%20% E2%80%93%20Evening_1617_306038

Aris,

If the CFC sets a minimum standard that has to be met, and that minimum standard sets the bar higher than what the provincial health authority does, then the CFC would be over-ruling the provincial authority's standard. For instance, if the CFC demands that masks be worn by all players in national CFC championships, and a provincial health officer has done away with that requirement for all such activities in a province holding a national championship, then the CFC would be over-ruling that health authority and setting the bar higher.

[Aris Marghetis]

In most of those cases the athletes receive funding that is administered by the sports body.

Come on man, you weren't inside my head when I wrote:
"there's already some other sports organizations that have announced mandatory vaccinations for anyone at the playing location."
I was referring to sports organizations where families pay for their kids to play, etc.

[Aris Marghetis]

Aris,

If the CFC sets a minimum standard that has to be met, and that minimum standard sets the bar higher than what the provincial health authority does, then the CFC would be over-ruling the provincial authority's standard. For instance, if the CFC demands that masks be worn by all players in national CFC championships, and a provincial health officer has done away with that requirement for all such activities in a province holding a national championship, then the CFC would be over-ruling that health authority and setting the bar higher.

Hello Richard, yes, I see your point now. OK, thinking cap back on.

[Pierre Dénommée]

The players are not employees. I believe Bob is fully vaccinated but I think we would be on shaky ground if we were to try to force players to be vaccinated. I think we would also be on shaky ground if we assumed that a room of fully vaccinated people is safe from the spread of some of the new COVID variants. It likely means that no one will die from catching covid but there is a great deal of room between likely and certain.

It is not for the CFC to decide. 10 provinces will decide and enforced the rules. They may decide that vaccination is required to play chess.

According to Quebec, at the beginning of the pandemic, when there was no variant, the best protection level obtainable while playing chess was 97%. This may seems low risk, unless you understand what is a Bernoulli trial and that with multiple repetitions of a Chess activity, the probability of getting COVID increases. At the 23rd repetition of an experiment with a probability of success of 0.03, you already have a probability of more the 0.5 to get infected. The province never specified if the 97% is per game or per tournament.

[Pierre Dénommée]

Congratulations to all my opponents who got elected!

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Hopefully we will find a way to keep the people who might have lost elections to continue to be engaged with the CFC.

[Pierre Dénommée]

Hopefully we will find a way to keep the people who might have lost elections to continue to be engaged with the CFC.


Thank you for the nice words.

[Pierre Dénommée]

We were told by the CCES that we are not compliant with the Canadian sports anti doping rules. What did we do to comply? Are we making progress or ignoring the issue due to excessive costs in time of pandemic?

[David Gordon]

Are we getting caught with too much caffeine in our blood samples?

[Vladimir Drkulec]

We were told by the CCES that we are not compliant with the Canadian sports anti doping rules. What did we do to comply? Are we making progress or ignoring the issue due to excessive costs in time of pandemic?

Strictly speaking, that is not accurate. They did not say we were non-compliant. They said that they wanted to check if we were compliant and we would need to pay for them to make that determination. What the CCES said was that they could set up an anti-doping program for our players for a price of approximately $5,000 per year to the CFC with an explicit threat that FIDE (not the CFC) could be fined by WADA or the IOC (I don't recall which as it has been a while) if we were not compliant with the testing program either through CCES or FIDE. We could also accept FIDE's program which is free. We decided to accept FIDE's program. No other anti-doping agency anywhere is proposing to charge any other chess federation to pay to set up an anti-doping program. We told FIDE about the interaction and they were unconcerned. Strictly speaking we aren't yet playing rated chess so there is nothing to test. I don't think the costs included the cost of all the tests so that might have been extra.

Accepting this program would have added about 10% to our costs in a time when revenues have plummeted.

They saw the netflix show "The Queen's Gambit" and decided to crack down on the drugs and alcohol rife in the chess community. :) Since the possible consequences are to FIDE and FIDE is unconcerned, we can probably wait until things are back up and running to investigate more deeply what we should do. Some of the banned substances include marijuana and more relevant to me is things like insulin and certain blood pressure medications. Coffee addicts like myself also might have found ourselves further constrained.

WADA is a very complex set of regulations which will bind players, federation officials, arbiters, trainers and everyone to a complicated set of rules. For instance as a federation official, if I am aware of someone smoking marijuana, I would be required to inform on them. Maybe I need to inform on myself for taking blood pressure medication and insulin. As with every issue there are a lot of interesting complications.

[Pierre Dénommée]

Are we getting caught with too much caffeine in our blood samples?

Ritalin is more of interest because it could increase attention for everybody, not only for sick children suffering from a lack of attention.

[Pierre Dénommée]

WADA is a very complex set of regulations which will bind players, federation officials, arbiters, trainers and everyone to a complicated set of rules. For instance as a federation official, if I am aware of someone smoking marijuana, I would be required to inform on them. Maybe I need to inform on myself for taking blood pressure medication and insulin. As with every issue there are a lot of interesting complications.

There is something called therapeutic use exemptions https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/science-medical/therapeutic-use-exemptions . It allows a person with a genuine medical need for a drug to use it without penalty.

It is an excellent news that we are not in violation. Ottawa does not subsidize our tests and cost must be taken into account. We are very late compared to other countries, but in those countries, chess is recognized as a sport and financed accordingly.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

There is something called therapeutic use exemptions https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/science-medical/therapeutic-use-exemptions . It allows a person with a genuine medical need for a drug to use it without penalty.

It is an excellent news that we are not in violation. Ottawa does not subsidize our tests and cost must be taken into account. We are very late compared to other countries, but in those countries, chess is recognized as a sport and financed accordingly.

Unfortunately there is a very complicated procedure that you must follow to obtain therapeutic use exemptions which seems to me to violate human rights clauses in the Canadian constitution. Another thing that they wanted was signed contracts with every player, official, arbiter etc. which had to be renewed each year which would allow them to knock on your door and demand that you submit a urine sample under supervision. Three thousand contracts would take up a lot of room in Bob Gillanders's apartment. I don't think FIDE would be interested in potentially hundreds of thousands of such contracts. I brought this up at the FIDE meetings at the time and they said they had no intention of maintaining a warehouse of contracts. They specifically said that the e-contracts that some companies use would not be sufficient. So in addition to the many thousands of dollars per year we would have to maintain those thousands of contracts which sounds like a full time employee when you add in the requirement to chase people and parents of children to sign those contracts. It is not realistic to expect us to sign on to that type of intrusive scrutiny.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

On a final note about possible covid regulations, I talked to both of the currently practicing medical doctors in my family today. The advice I got was to simply tell everyone to follow provincial regulations. Some people are frustrated at my stance but it is the only way forward in the current environment.

The provincial governments are responsible for health care in Canada. We should follow their requirements and guidance. The studies that I have seen do not support washing pieces or barriers as being particularly useful in preventing transmission of the Covid virus. When the provincial governments deem it prudent to drop certain requirements, we should follow their lead. We don't have the people to maintain information about the ever changing regulations in every relevant jurisdiction. It is fairly easy to consult canada.ca and then the covid website for your province and your community.

[Pierre Dénommée]

I cannot locate any information about testing of officials. I can easily find testing of athletes of international and national level, which is very few players.

Obviously, all officials have been players previously or still play. Officials are CFC member in good standing, and as such, are allowed to play. I do hope that they exclude inactive players.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

When I was contacted by the individual from CCES, I looked up the WADA regulations. There are extensive documents online. It would not make sense that players would be bound by regulations and others would not. We are probably going back more than a year so I can't cite the exact clauses but I am sure I could find them again.

[Aris Marghetis]

On a final note about possible covid regulations, I talked to both of the currently practicing medical doctors in my family today. The advice I got was to simply tell everyone to follow provincial regulations. Some people are frustrated at my stance but it is the only way forward in the current environment.

The provincial governments are responsible for health care in Canada. We should follow their requirements and guidance. The studies that I have seen do not support washing pieces or barriers as being particularly useful in preventing transmission of the Covid virus. When the provincial governments deem it prudent to drop certain requirements, we should follow their lead. We don't have the people to maintain information about the ever changing regulations in every relevant jurisdiction. It is fairly easy to consult canada.ca and then the covid website for your province and your community.

Yes, I appreciate your position. In fact, I've realized since my first post on the matter that the majority of sports organizations that I've read about are provincial. When national, I'm noticing what really is a concurrent set of declarations by each province in the national organization. So, yes, I see where you're coming from.