4b) Motion 2013-T Olympic Regulations (McKim/Rekhson) - discussion only

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nikolay Noritsyn

We are not in a big disagreement here. Personally, I think pre-olympiad training camp with a strong coach is much more important, but any help from a good coach should amount to some slight improvement. However, we do not have such an individual in Canada. If we had a 2600 non playing grandmaster, if he had a lot of coaching experience, if he was willing to volunteer to be captain and coach, that would be great. There are just too many "if's" in that sentence.

Lets try to at least imagine in advance (18 months is a lot of time to wait) how you want the new system to work...Who do you think could serve as captain+coach?

---

It seems like we agree on major points, and that's a good opportunity to combine our efforts and work together for the sake of chess in Canada.
Let's summarize what we do agree upon
1) A training camp would be great (yes, we know that so far there is no money for it, but I hope to contribute to launching a number of programs that might change that to a degree)
2) Even a slight improvement is better than no improvement - so any reasonably strong player who is also an experienced coach might be useful to the team.
We should establish if we agree on a definition of "a reasonably strong player" - and by doing that I could answer your actual question concerning the coach.
So, 2600+ would be great, no doubt. Do we have anybody like that who would other requirements you mentioned as well? It doesn't seem to be the case right now. Even if we manage to convince one of our high-rated GMs to return to chess, he would probably prefer playing rather than captaining/coaching. And so will Eric and Bator who are our only active 2500+s so far
So, what we have in Canada is a number of 2400+ titled players some of whom have quite a lot of coaching experience. Let's take yourself, for instance - your current resume is marked with a commendable WYCC experience as well as private coaching. Fore sure, as a second, you could be quite useful to any of our team members, whoever they turn out to be. The problem is, of course, that you yourself have every reason to expect to be one of them - so, you'll prefer to play, I presume. But IF for some reason you don't make the team, I would consider you a solid candidate for position.

I would not be a good candidate at all. I have no experience training anyone my level or above. Moreover, it is a volunteer position, and I would be losing money (I do when I play as well, but at least I get to play...) Thats why I stated, that a reasonable coach would have to be a strong grandmaster with a lot of coaching experience. Such does not exist.

By the way, I forgot to mention, that the coach should probably be buddies with the players, or at least with the majority of them. As a player, I would not want to work with a coach I do not like. I don't think I am the only one. Which is the worst thing about the executive choosing the captain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nikolay Noritsyn

I would not be a good candidate at all. I have no experience training anyone my level or above. Moreover, it is a volunteer position, and I would be losing money (I do when I play as well, but at least I get to play...) Thats why I stated, that a reasonable coach would have to be a strong grandmaster with a lot of coaching experience. Such does not exist.

By the way, I forgot to mention, that the coach should probably be buddies with the players, or at least with the majority of them. As a player, I would not want to work with a coach I do not like. I don't think I am the only one. Which is the worst thing about the executive choosing the captain.

---

That's why I suggest to wait until the squad for 2014 has been established, and interested applicant for the captain/coach position step forward.
And that's why I suggested that the choice should be made on merit of the quality of the applications.
I am not saying, it will allow to choose the best in the world - but surely, the best _available_
We do disagree about the _majority_ while we agree on that having the coach _everybody's_ buddy would be great.
And I believe there is a difference between "not liking" and not being a buddy. If the latter is impossible, there is nothing wrong in a mutually respectful professional relationship.

Since very little will change until 2014, we can already start asking ourselves who could be this individual. You did not find an answer. Even those 2400's we have, you can count them on the fingers of one hand. I doubt they would be any benefit at all in the role of coach. I also doubt any of them (except, perhaps, you) would be interested.

Yes, there is a difference between not liking and not being a buddy.
If you have any plans, as you implied here, to be captain-coach, you can send out emails to the players likely to play for the team already now. Just asking if they would be willing to work with you or not. I guess, if there is just one that wouldnt, then it doesnt work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nikolay Noritsyn

Since very little will change until 2014, we can already start asking ourselves who could be this individual. You did not find an answer. Even those 2400's we have, you can count them on the fingers of one hand. I doubt they would be any benefit at all in the role of coach. I also doubt any of them (except, perhaps, you) would be interested.

Yes, there is a difference between not liking and not being a buddy.
If you have any plans, as you implied here, to be captain-coach, you can send out emails to the players likely to play for the team already now. Just asking if they would be willing to work with you or not. I guess, if there is just one that wouldnt, then it doesnt work.

---

I am not trying to find an answer before the time comes - and I believe a lot can change in more than a year.
As for benefits, there is only one way to find out - and that is, to try.
As for my personal plans - yet again, I'll decide when the time comes.
Finally, as for what does or doesn't work, I believe we have just passed a motion that regulates the procedure.

Edward, you stated that you want every player to be happy with the captain/coach. So, according to you, if at least one of the players would not be willing to work with the coach, then it wouldnt happen.

So its clear (to me at least) that you have no answers to:

1. why the executive would make a better decision then the players on the team.
2. who exactly would be willing or able to work as captain/coach under the new rules.

By the way, motions are also passed by majority of votes. Like it or not.