Board order

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Board order

Does the Handbook define the term 'ranked order'?

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Board order

What do you mean by this?

What was wrong with the other "non-Quebec" option?

I don't understand. Where in my post do I talk about that? I just said Lesiège's selection was surprising given his long period of inactivity and him being obviously a little rusty.

Anyways, I'm not trying to talk against anyone here. If Lesiège is back in top form, it will be a treat to watch him at the Olympiad. His games at the recent Quebec Open were impressive. A 2650 performance in a local tournament is quite an accomplishment.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Board order

Putting Eric Hansen on board 4 guarantees at least 1 point every round. Alexander Lesiege on any board equates to 0 points.

What a stupid comment. Zero IQ!

[Rene Preotu]

Re: Board order

I don't understand. Where in my post do I talk about that?

Hansen et Sambuev sont en grosse chicane. Le comité de sélection a choisi Hansen, donc Sambuev n'y est pas. Absoluement rien à voir avec l'entente FCE/FQE. Voire si la FQE irait dire 'envoyez Lesiège aux Olympiades, sinon c'est fini les miliers de $$ pour la FCE'.

Et, by the way, Sambuev, Hansen, Kovalyov... tous des GM qui habitent à Montréal. En quoi on ne les considèrerait pas comme des citoyens québécois? Le Québec est très bien représenté sur l'équipe qui ira aux Olympiades.

Ce qui est dommage pour les amateurs d'unifolié c'est que des enfantillages de GM feront en sorte que le Canada ne va pas envoyer l'équipe la plus forte possible. Sambuev est de loin supérieur à Lesiège en ce moment.

I read all your postings from the french side of chesstalk and you have never mentioned the "non-Quebec" option. You only considered GM Sambuev and GM Lesiège.

His games at the recent Quebec Open were impressive.

And in 27 games he only beat 1 (one) higher rated opponent (GM Sambuev in this year Quebec Open).

[Rene Preotu]

Re: Board order

What a stupid comment. Zero IQ!

I agree .

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Board order

I read all your postings from the french side of chesstalk and you have never mentioned the "non-Quebec" option. You only considered GM Sambuev and GM Lesiège.

GM Sambuev was the obvious choice back then.

I don't care where the guy comes from. But apparently you do. I would thus appreciate if you could stop putting words in my mouth. Thanks.

And in 27 games he only beat 1 (one) higher rated opponent (GM Sambuev in this year Quebec Open).

Recent games carry more weight, IMO. But the point is moot because these games were played after the selection. I agree that Lesiege's record at the time of selection wasn't looking good at all. And I did say so back then. But if he's back into form, it's all for the best.

I think his recent performance gives the fans of the canadian team something to look forward to. As I said, a 2650 performance in what was basically a local swiss tournament is pretty impressive. Regardless of the province where he lives, before you say anything.

[Denis Allan]

Re: Board order

What a stupid comment. Zero IQ!

It does put Chesstalk on a par with main stream sports websites, where any nobody can get almost anything published.

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Board order

It does put Chesstalk on a par with main stream sports websites, where any nobody can get almost anything published.

That's deeply insulting to any and all of 'mainstream', 'sports', 'websites', 'nobodies' and 'anything'...

[Rene Preotu]

Re: Board order

GM Sambuev was the obvious choice back then.

I agree that GM Sambuev was the obvious choice between the 2 Quebec GMs but I still don't understand why you ignored the 3rd option. Below is John Upper's post from a different thread so I don't have to say the same thing again.

Mathieu,

I read a lot of posts on this issue on the French side of CT, but my French isn't good enough to want to get involved in the discussion there. I saw you had a lot of posts in it, and maybe you could help me with something I don't understand about that thread.

It seemed to me that almost all of the discussion was about whether Alex or Bator was the better candidate for the Olympiad Team.
Since none was willing to make a case for Alex, the issue moved to speculation about why Bator was not chosen, and that spun into discussions about whether Bator gets along with other players and also about whether Alex or Bator is "from Quebec"... a phrase which seems to have more than one meaning... and some people pointing out that Maili-Jade is also on the Olympiad Team and she's from Quebec.*

But it seems to me that's only one part of the problem with the committee's choice. In my opinion, Razvan Preotu is also clearly a better choice than Alex: he plays better and he plays more often and his rating is higher. Also, if anyone thought it was relevant, they could argue that he should be on the team because he has 2 GM norms and the Olympiad is an excellent opportunity to make a third. But no posts that I saw on the French CT mention Razvan.

Why do you suppose the discussion has been all "Alex or Bator" rather than "Alex or Razvan"... or "Bator or Razvan"?

[David Ottosen]

Re: Board order

And having the option of using Hansen on either board 3 or 4 seems useful.

It also means that Lesiege will never be playing below board 3, and will need to regularly play board 2.

[Victor Plotkin]

Re: Board order

The idea is to maximise the number of "right" colours with the specialists.

I have no idea if this is the strategy but in the Olympiads I played on the board order was shuffled to try and get favourable colours.

So players like Roman Pelts would get more Whites and players like Deen Hergott and Lawrence Day would get more Blacks.

In "good old days" a captain had more flexibility. With 6 players (now 5) a captain had 720 options for the board order (now 120) and 15 options for every round (now 5) for 14 rounds (now 11). Life was much more interesting those days.

Seriously speaking, Eric on board 4 gives us more flexibility in certain circumstances. I will be happy to answer any question about board order, line-ups and my other decisions after Olympiad.

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Board order

I agree that GM Sambuev was the obvious choice between the 2 Quebec GMs but I still don't understand why you ignored the 3rd option. Below is John Upper's post from a different thread so I don't have to say the same thing again.

I don't care how you order the guys for 2nd and 3rd when there's only one spot to fill. The data available at the time of selection indicated that Sambuev was the best option, period. Not the best option from Québec, but the best option overall.

And again, why this insistance on the province of Québec? You really seem to have a problem with the fact that some of the strongest players in Canada live in Québec and that they are selected to play on the Olympiad team?

[Rene Preotu]

Re: Board order

The data available at the time of selection indicated that Sambuev was the best option, period.

I do have a lot of respect for GM Sambuev to start arguing with you about this, period.

You really seem to have a problem with the fact that some of the strongest players in Canada live in Québec and that they are selected to play on the Olympiad team?

I don't have a problem with this. I do have a problem with the CFC executives because they didn't ask the selection committee to explain their "short-sightedness" before announcing the team.
The CFC executives (and the majority of the Canadian chess community) knew that the selection committee decision wasn't the correct one but they swallowed it so they don't upset the FQE.

[Aman Hambleton]

Re: Board order

After Lesieges very solid win at the Quebec Open, I wouldn't say that! Neither would I say "the other" that...... But at least we have the novel situation of discussing Canadian bred players, which is so difficult these days?

Wasn't the Quebec Open, along with the Canadian Open this year, one of the weakest Open tournaments in Canadian history?

[Fred Harvey]

Re: Board order

Wasn't the Quebec Open, along with the Canadian Open this year, one of the weakest Open tournaments in Canadian history?

Absolutely, but you should know that a win is a win is a win!

I posted this in the middle of the Canadian Open....

"Now is not the time, while the event is going on, but some one should explain at some point why this does seem to be a "non-event"? In spite of a superior venue, there is an acute paucity of "name" players, and I believe the overall attendance is about half that of recent Opens held in southern/central Ontario.

A guess would be that players are voting with their feet....but why?"

You can add the Quebec Open to this question if you wish.....