07A Motion 1: Olympiad Selection Regulations Player activity rules

Motion 1: Olympiad Selection Regulations Player activity rules will be debated here.

7. Motions
7A. Motion 1 Olympiad Selection Regulations Player activity rules
906. Selection of the players
Old Rule
iii) Have played at least 10 regular CFC rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).




New Rule
iii) Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games or USCF rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad) and 40 regular CFC, FQE, FIDE or USCF rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process.

Not sure how I feel about including USCF rated games in this; am not opposed to the idea generally

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle Craver

Not sure how I feel about including USCF rated games in this; am not opposed to the idea generally

---

Without that we might open ourselves up to the situation of being without our highest rated FIDE player on both the men's and women's side. The reality is that there a number of chess scholarships available in the U.S. We shouldn't chase away our players if they become successful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle Craver

Not sure how I feel about including USCF rated games in this; am not opposed to the idea generally

---

Let me be more direct:
I am opposing to the idea to use foreign-rated not FIDE rated games for Canadian National team selection.

I understand that out top players are currently study and live in US, and we need to count their games played there for Canadian National team selection. But I insist that such games should be FIDE rated.

Is there any major US event which is not FIDE rated? :confused:

I, also, don't feel that USCF should be in this discussion ... FIDE should be enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Barron

Let me be more direct:
Is there any major US event which is not FIDE rated? :confused:

---

I played in a Dearborn, Michigan event which Anton Kovalyov won and in which there were quite a few GMs and Canadian players including our women's coordinator Liza Orlova. The event was listed as FIDE rated but was never rated by FIDE (unless that happened months later). I think that we should make some allowance for the players who gain scholarships for chess in the U.S.A. and play lots of chess. Anton played only 18 or so CFC games in Canada in 2014 in two events. In 2014 Anton played in a dozen USCF events (raising his USCF rating to over 2700), two Canadian events and shows up in the FIDE database for most of the events.

In 2014 Yuanling Yuan played in four USCF tournaments for a total of 31 games. She played 6 CFC games (though more in the Olympiad selection period time window) and had 40+ games under FIDE most of which I suppose are the USCF and CFC games.

I wouldn't like to see a situation which is possible where one of the best players in Canada could potentially not make the team despite playing a great deal of high level chess. I don't think we should punish our few success stories.

The current situation is that a player can play in two weekend tournaments once a decade with no restriction on the strength of the opposition and find themselves on a Canadian Olympiad team based mainly on their previously established rating which may have little relation to their current playing strength.

I prefer the way the motion reads as it does. The intent is to have our representative having played chess prior to representing Canada. To me, if they're playing chess, it doesn't matter whether it's FIDE or USCF, their games should count. I don't know the answer whether every major US tournament is FIDE rated (it's possible that some are not). As noted above, the player may be in a situation where they're unable to attend a FIDE rated tournament yet have played a number of USCF tournaments. If that occurs, in my view, they shouldn't be disqualified from representing Canada.

I can envision a time when the majority of the Canadian women's Olympiad team is at U.S. colleges (on chess, athletic or academic scholarships). I think that most observers agree that the current rule does not give us the most competitive team possible on the women's side. I think that we should make some allowance for the youngsters who continue to play chess in college especially when two of the most notable examples played board one on the national and women's team in 2014.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

I can envision a time when the majority of the Canadian women's Olympiad team is at U.S. colleges (on chess, athletic or academic scholarships). I think that most observers agree that the current rule does not give us the most competitive team possible on the women's side. I think that we should make some allowance for the youngsters who continue to play chess in college especially when two of the most notable examples played board one on the national and women's team in 2014.

---

I agree. The motion is also fair, in making the rule the same for both men's and women's teams.
Certainly there could be potential players for both teams in similar situations.

Chris Field.
Voting Member (Ontario).

I will definitely vote NO.
The main reason is the proposed 40 games within 2 years prior to the start of the selection process. For an elite player, 40 games mean about 3 months out of "normal life". (It includes chess preparation, analysis, travel, making arrangements, actual chess etc.) As many elite contenders to our Olympic teams are amateurs, their "normal life" does not include chess. So they would need to take vacation or time off school/job. In addition to this, the proposed language regarding 2 years takes into account games from 2.5 years to 0.5 years prior to the Olympiad. In my opinion, games played more than 1.5 years prior to the Olympiad should not be counted in the selection process as they are irrelevant to a contender's chess strength at the Olympiad.

I support the motion because I believe that Canada's strong players should be supporting our tournaments. In fact I would prefer to see the games limited to CFC/FQE regular rated events.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ilia Bluvshtein

I will definitely vote NO.
The main reason is the proposed 40 games within 2 years prior to the start of the selection process. For an elite player, 40 games mean about 3 months out of "normal life". (It includes chess preparation, analysis, travel, making arrangements, actual chess etc.) As many elite contenders to our Olympic teams are amateurs, their "normal life" does not include chess. So they would need to take vacation or time off school/job. In addition to this, the proposed language regarding 2 years takes into account games from 2.5 years to 0.5 years prior to the Olympiad. In my opinion, games played more than 1.5 years prior to the Olympiad should not be counted in the selection process as they are irrelevant to a contender's chess strength at the Olympiad.

---

It should be noted that in 2014 all of the players on the national team and all of the young players on the women's team would have been compliant with this rule to the best of my knowledge. I am open to the idea of amendments to exempt the Canadian champion and perhaps the selection committee pick though some that I have talked to have been opposed to that idea. Funding the Olympiad team is a significant expense every two years. Does it really make sense that all it takes to get a ticket to the Olympiad is ten games in one year without any consideration of the competition and then to see the player disappear again for ten years once the Olympiad is over. On the other side we have players who really would like to represent their country who are objectively stronger than the player that bumped them and become discouraged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

Does it really make sense that all it takes to get a ticket to the Olympiad is ten games in one year without any consideration of the competition and then to see the player disappear again for ten years once the Olympiad is over.

---

A new clause of 20 games within a year is OK. Effectively it shuts the door to those who want just a ticket to the Olympiad. A 40 games clause is not good for the reasons I wrote above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

I wouldn't like to see a situation which is possible where one of the best players in Canada could potentially not make the team despite playing a great deal of high level chess. I don't think we should punish our few success stories.

---

Vlad,
As you said, both Anton and Yuanling played more FIDE rated games than necessary to qualify, and don't need such events like Dearborn to be counted.

We use FIDE and CFC ratings for Canadian team selection.
The purpose of activity requirement is to ensure than selection rating is up to date.
It simply doesn't make sense to count games which don't affect selection rating.

This is a good point Michael.

I agree with Michael and Ilia, only CFC and FIDE rated events should be taken into account. Events like Dearborn, not FIDE rated, are obviously an exception - almost all high level tournaments in US are rated. I also think 20 games/last year before the Olympiad should be sufficient.

I think 40 is too high of a number. I would support 20 in the year before the Olympiad.

I am willing to break it out into two parts which can be voted on separately. I would also consider the suggestion to delay implementation of the 40 game provision raised on the governor's board to 2018 since we are already within the window of the two years for the 2016 Olympiad.

The problem with using only FIDE rated games is that even if a tournament is FIDE rated the games against non-FIDE players don't count. Even the U.S. Senior champion from a few years ago didn't have a FIDE rating when I played him two years ago.

I agree with Ken and Ilia. 20 games in one year is sufficient activity.

With regard to USCF rated games, I would prefer more information regarding percentage of USCF rated university games that are also FIDE rated. If the percentage of games is high enough, then the addition of USCF rating is unnecessary. Certainly CFC, FQE, and FIDE rated games should be the primary basis of consideration.

I guess another consideration is geography. Players in Ontario or Quebec can find lots of events to enter without travelling too far. Not the case for someone in say Winnipeg.

All valid points. I hear what you're saying Ilia however if the player is serious in representing Canada on an international level, then they have an obligation to put the time into their game. I really don't see too much into the 1.5 years vs the 2 years, especially if the player has played 40 games in the last 2 years. If the motion creates a problem after it's applied, the players will hopefully make their position and reasoning known. Then as anything else, it can be amended at a later date. I vote in favour of the motion as it reads now.

I am against including USCF games and will be voting no to the motion as it stands.

I have no problem having the number of required CFC, fide or fqe games be a low number like 10. I am not quite sure I understood/agreed with the argument that this should be a high number. Let's use this as the variable to maintain a high number of candidates..not games from other federations.

A low number like 10 games allows people to sit on their high ratings which might have been achieved a long time ago, thus not showing their current level (which usually deteriorates without practice).

As I see it:
- there is no question players in ON/QC have more opportunities to play than in places like AB/BC

- there should be a special rule for the Canadian champion - under normal situations you WANT the Canadian champion leading the team on board 1

- I have less concern about foreign (e.g. US) games being counted for fulfilling the activity requirement than I do with such games being considered for actual qualification and I am skeptical that there are many games of a suitable calibre to be included for US activity that are not FIDE rated. (I have the vision of a player winning 4 tournaments 6-0 against players of my strength - e.g. class A/B - and qualifying and well remember one player who has since played on the Olympic team who in his first 3 tournaments scored 14.5-.5, giving up a last round draw to a 2300 opponent and getting a rating of about 2150/15 - all of you would know the foreign-born player I'm referring to if I named him)

I don't like the idea of out of practice players playing for Canada any more than the rest of you but I am wanting the best possible Olympic team with a system that does not create mega-stress at the Office and endless appeals to the National Executive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

New Rule
iii) Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games or USCF rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad) and 40 regular CFC, FQE, FIDE or USCF rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process.

---

As it is worded now, I'll oppose this rule.

A. As I've already mentioned on the Governor's board, there is no special clause when the rule will be applied. V.Drakulec mentioned that it probably should be in effect for the 2018 season. (However, that is not documented in motion.)

My suggestions did not find support:

Quote:

---

Thus, I propose an amendment to this Motion with an additional condition:
The rule will be used starting with the 2018 Chess Olympiad selection.
****
iii) could be split in two: iiia) 20 over for 1 year; and iiib) 40 over 2 years.

---

B. I like 20 part, but dislike 40.

C. I don't think that the CFC shall chase other rating systems. There is enough work to monitor two (CFC and FIDE) for ~40 players every month.

As there is no control for a quality/opposition for those 10-20-40 games, they will not solve the "idling" person problem - a person could play a match or a small RR with a friend or friends to get numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

Motion 1: Olympiad Selection Regulations Player activity rules will be debated here.

7. Motions
7A. Motion 1 Olympiad Selection Regulations Player activity rules
906. Selection of the players
Old Rule
iii) Have played at least 10 regular CFC rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).




New Rule
iii) Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games or USCF rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad) and 40 regular CFC, FQE, FIDE or USCF rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process.

---

Proposed voting:
OPTION 1 USCF games counted
New Rule
iii) a. Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games or USCF rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad)
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

OPTION 2 USCF games counted
iii) b. and 40 regular CFC, FQE, FIDE or USCF rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

OPTION 3 USCF games not counted
iii) a. Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad)
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

OPTION 4 USCF games not counted
iii) b. and 40 regular CFC, FQE, or FIDE rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

In either case part b. will not apply until 2018 and later. In either case part a. will apply to 2016 and later if the vote is positive.

I vote for option # 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

Proposed voting:
OPTION 1 USCF games counted
New Rule
iii) a. Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games or USCF rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad)
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

OPTION 2 USCF games counted
iii) b. and 40 regular CFC, FQE, FIDE or USCF rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

OPTION 3 USCF games not counted
iii) a. Have played at least 20 regular CFC rated or FQE rated or FIDE rated games during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad)
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

OPTION 4 USCF games not counted
iii) b. and 40 regular CFC, FQE, or FIDE rated games during the two years prior to the start of the selection process
YES
NO
ABSTAIN

In either case part b. will not apply until 2018 and later. In either case part a. will apply to 2016 and later if the vote is positive.

---

There shall be an additional question regarding the FQE system too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egidijus Zeromskis

There shall be an additional question regarding the FQE system too.

---

We have an agreement with the FQE which requires us to treat FQE members the same way we treat CFC members and where the FQE treats CFC members the same way they treat FQE members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

We have an agreement with the FQE which requires us to treat FQE members the same way we treat CFC members and where the FQE treats CFC members the same way they treat FQE members.

---

That does not extend to the FQE rated games as a selection criteria automatically.

FQE rated games are played under conditions equivalent to CFC rated games, and take place in Canada. If anything, FQE ratings are slightly lower than CFC ratings and more consistent with FIDE ratings. To ignore these games as counting for activity would be simply ludicrous. Might as well ignore the FIDE games while you're at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garland Best

To ignore these games as counting for activity would be simply ludicrous. Might as well ignore the FIDE games while you're at it.

---

The Olympiad is a FIDE product, the CFC is a part of the FIDE. The CFC did not use FQE rated games for decades. The CFC and FQE relationship are a contract base. I don't see a point to place this kind of the option in the Handbook.

There was an argument that the major USCF events are FIDE rated. The same can be said about Quebec FIDE rated events + they are CFC rated too per the same contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egidijus Zeromskis

The Olympiad is a FIDE product, the CFC is a part of the FIDE. The CFC did not use FQE rated games for decades. The CFC and FQE relationship are a contract base. I don't see a point to place this kind of the option in the Handbook.

There was an argument that the major USCF events are FIDE rated. The same can be said about Quebec FIDE rated events + they are CFC rated too per the same contract.

---

I think most of the voting members are interested in seeing the cooperation between the CFC and FQE continue and expand where possible. Counting FQE games in the activity numbers for purposes of Olympiad eligibility is consistent with the spirit of the agreement. I don't see any downside in this.