The recent history of the selection process

[Victor Plotkin]

Recently Brian Hartman provided a lot of information about "ancient" (or maybe medieval) history of Canadian Olympic Teams. Sure, it should be interesting, but I believe that recent information is more useful for many people here. So, I start from 2010.

I. 2010. The Champion J.Hebert (declined). Qualified by rating M.Bluvshtein, K.Spraggett (declined), L.Gerzhoy. Selection Committee (SC) selected 3(!) players:

1. T.Roussel-Roozmon (that time FIDE 2488)
2. N.Noritsyn (2403)
3. A.Samsonkin (2406).

Among not-selected player E.Porper (2431) and E.Hansen (2415). A lot of frustration for players from Alberta. Discussions here on CT: CFC sending Ontario team.

Y.Ochkoos was elected by players to serve as a Team Captain.

II. 2012. The Champion B. Sambuev. Qualified by rating M.Bluvshtein (declined), K.Spraggett (declined) and L.Gerzhoy.

SC initially included 3 members: Y.Teplitsky, V.Pechenkin and N.Khoudgarian. Later Natalia was replaced by V.Drculec (that time Master Representative). The reason: conflict of interest (Natalia was a Women Team player).

3(!) players were selected:

1. N.Noritsyn (2475)
2. E.Hansen (2454)
3. E.Porper (2438)

Many players had 2400+ rating that time, like R.Panjwani (2416), T.Krnan (2415) and B.Cheng (2415).

Y.Teplitsky (the most experienced and higher-rated member of SC) was unfortunately against E.Hansen (unclear reasons for me) and against E.Porper (not chess-related reasons).

I was elected by players to serve as a Team Captain.

Few weeks after 2012 Olympiad I posted here on CT few proposals about improvement in selection process. You can find it on page 200+ here.

1. Eliminate CFC rating from consideration.
2. SC chooses only 1 player.
3. SC gives some preferences to younger players.

During 2013 special on-line meeting CFC discussed 4 (!) motions:

1. Eliminate CFC rating from consideration - failed.
2. Eliminate SC - failed.
3. Increase the number of games for qualified players from 10 to 20 - failed, but passed 2 years later.
4. CFC executive and not the Team Players chooses the Captain - passed.

III. 2014. The Champion B.Sambuev. Qualified by rating: A.Kovalyov, E.Hansen and K.Spraggett (declined).

SC: B.Hartman, V.Pechenkin, R.Berube.

Without motions, governors, votes and other unnecessary democratic procedures, CFC executive limited SC to choose only 1 player. So A.Hambleton qualified as next-in-the-line.

1 selected player: L.Gerzhoy (2468), ahead of T.Roussel-Roozmon (2466) and N.Noritsyn (2449).

I was appointed to serve as a Captain.

IV. 2016. The Champion T.Krnan. Qualified players: E.Bareev, A.Kovalyov and E.Hansen. The first time in more than 10 years nobody declined.

SC - the same as in 2014.

1 selected player: A.LeSiege (2497) ahead of B.Sambuev (2540), R.Preotu (2468) and N.Noritsyn (2466).

[Aris Marghetis]

Re: The recent history of the selection process

IV. 2016. The Champion T.Krnan. Qualified players: E.Bareev, A.Kovalyov and E.Hansen. The first time in more than 10 years nobody declined.

SC - the same as in 2014.

1 selected player: A.LeSiege (2497) ahead of B.Sambuev (2540), R.Preotu (2468) and N.Noritsyn (2466).

The elephant in the room seems to be why was A.LeSiege the one to get "selected" ...

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: The recent history of the selection process

It seems the elephant is here to stay though, and the "unnecessary democratic procedures" will remain unnecessary.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: The recent history of the selection process

The elephant in the room seems to be why was A.LeSiege the one to get "selected" ...

Hi Aris:

Presumably because the selection committee drew up a list of candidate names, declared that rating was to basically be ignored, debated the strengths and weaknesses of each player, and then voted on whom they felt would be the best fit for the team.

The proof will be in the pudding.

Steve

[Peter McKillop]

Re: The recent history of the selection process

Hi Aris:

Presumably because the selection committee drew up a list of candidate names, declared that rating was to basically be ignored, debated the strengths and weaknesses of each player, and then voted on whom they felt would be the best fit for the team.

The proof will be in the pudding.

Steve

Hi Steve. Hmm...maybe something like that did happen but I'm not sure that's a good approach for a selection committee. Isn't the primary objective to build the strongest team possible? Would the Canadian Olympic Committee say to a high jumper who has earned a spot on the team, sorry but our world-class marathoner thinks you're a douche so you won't be on the team? I think what the COC would say to the prima donna marathoner is, suck it up or stay home.

In any event, you're speculating as to what happened. In the absence of any information on how the SC made their decision, how about this as an equally plausible speculation: player x, who is stronger than player y, says, "I don't like player y and I'm not playing if player y is going to be there." Instead of saying, sorry x, hope to see you in 2018, the SC says to itself, gee player y will reduce the strength of our team if x goes - therefore, no invitation for y.

Hope that didn't happen but if the SC is going to make what appears to be a controversial decision without announcing their rationale for that decision, then I guess the SC will have to suck it up while others question their choice. In the circumstances, it's a perfectly natural thing to do.