Board order

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Board order

    Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
    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.
    As far as I know the rules of the selection committee do not give us the option of questioning their decision. The delay in organizing the committee was because some of our candidates declined to serve. Good luck getting future committees put together if the end result was that we bypassed their decision whatever our personal feelings about the decision. Another president and executive might have manufactured an excuse to intervene and ignore the rules that are in place but down that dark path there are many temptations and the damage that it would and could do are not justified even if many feel that the current decision was incorrect. The executive as a whole did not ever discuss this situation.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Board order

      Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
      As far as I know the rules of the selection committee do not give us the option of questioning their decision.
      In another post you said

      Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
      3. There are many rules in the handbook that are no longer relevant.
      Who decides which rules are relevant or not?

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Board order

        Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
        In another post you said



        Who decides which rules are relevant or not?
        The CFC Executive do not have the skill set to make a player selection to the Olympic team. That's why there is a Selection Committee. Their deliberations are private.

        These our are guidelines.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Board order

          As much as possible I have promised to follow the previous rules. Some are contradictory or simply impossible to reconcile or no longer relevant (no smoking rules - no one could hold a smoking tournament in Canada in the present environment). Others make great demands on certain people especially organizers which results in tournaments not being organized every year. Some are against the provisions of the NFP act. Clearly anything against the NFP act will not be relevant. Large portions of the handbook deal with historical information which might be interesting and relevant to a historian but have been superseded by our new bylaws.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Board order

            Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
            As far as I know the rules of the selection committee do not give us the option of questioning their decision. The delay in organizing the committee was because some of our candidates declined to serve. Good luck getting future committees put together if the end result was that we bypassed their decision whatever our personal feelings about the decision. Another president and executive might have manufactured an excuse to intervene and ignore the rules that are in place but down that dark path there are many temptations and the damage that it would and could do are not justified even if many feel that the current decision was incorrect. The executive as a whole did not ever discuss this situation.
            I will basically reiterate what I was saying for the past four years and suggest getting rid of the selection committee which always causes controversy. Instead just go with ratings. In the rare occasion that there is a real problem with one of the players this should be addressed to the CFC Executive and dealt with. Of course, the fact that one of the players dislikes another is not a cause for not having them on a team, as many successful teams have members who dislike each other, so it should be actually something serious.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Board order

              Originally posted by Vlad Rekhson View Post
              I will basically reiterate what I was saying for the past four years and suggest getting rid of the selection committee which always causes controversy. Instead just go with ratings. In the rare occasion that there is a real problem with one of the players this should be addressed to the CFC Executive and dealt with. Of course, the fact that one of the players dislikes another is not a cause for not having them on a team, as many successful teams have members who dislike each other, so it should be actually something serious.
              So straightforward, fair and libertarian!
              But the sense of 'power' derived from meddling into whatever you can, on flimsy grounds, is so ingrained in both authoritarian and socialist cultures...

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Board order

                Originally posted by Vlad Rekhson View Post
                I will basically reiterate what I was saying for the past four years and suggest getting rid of the selection committee which always causes controversy. Instead just go with ratings.
                Yes, throw out the selection committee.
                Screw the ratings (nobody will ever agree on which ratings to use anyway).
                Forget minimum games, etc ,etc,etc.

                Just have a vote. All CFC members get a vote.
                Everyone gets 5 votes for the National team, 5 votes for the Ladies.
                The 5 players on each team who get the most votes, that's your team!

                Simple? Why not!
                It sure would spur some interest in the team!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Board order

                  Originally posted by Vlad Rekhson View Post
                  Instead just go with ratings.
                  But which ratings ? FIDE, FQE, CFC's ? A combination of those or not ? Combined in what way ? Over what period ? Based on how many games (local or international) ?
                  And then a player might be chosen over another by a matter of a couple of points because he might play more or less FIDE rated events, fewer games in weaker events, and so on and so forth. Simple solutions often turn out to be simplistic and just as likely to be criticized than a commitee decision. No easy way out in this matter.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Board order

                    Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post

                    Just have a vote. All CFC members get a vote.
                    Just when I thought that the "just go by ratings" had been taken care of, someone comes up with something new, totally unexpected and totally dumb.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Board order

                      Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post
                      So straightforward, fair and libertarian!
                      But the sense of 'power' derived from meddling into whatever you can, on flimsy grounds, is so ingrained in both authoritarian and socialist cultures...
                      Exactly. Once you start down that slippery slope it is difficult to get back up onto the proper path again.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Board order

                        Originally posted by Jean Hébert View Post
                        But which ratings ? FIDE, FQE, CFC's ? A combination of those or not ? Combined in what way ? Over what period ? Based on how many games (local or international) ?
                        And then a player might be chosen over another by a matter of a couple of points because he might play more or less FIDE rated events, fewer games in weaker events, and so on and so forth. Simple solutions often turn out to be simplistic and just as likely to be criticized than a commitee decision. No easy way out in this matter.

                        Having a few pre-determined criteria in addition to the latest FIDE rating should not make the selection very complicated or controversial... and the CFC executive is always there to deal with unforeseen exceptions...

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Board order

                          Originally posted by Jean Hébert View Post
                          But which ratings ? FIDE, FQE, CFC's ? A combination of those or not ? Combined in what way ? Over what period ? Based on how many games (local or international) ?
                          And then a player might be chosen over another by a matter of a couple of points because he might play more or less FIDE rated events, fewer games in weaker events, and so on and so forth. Simple solutions often turn out to be simplistic and just as likely to be criticized than a commitee decision. No easy way out in this matter.
                          The question of which ratings to use is of course important, but that is a separate topic because there is a current system to determine the top 3 by ratings, so why can't we use the same for 4? Anyway, the topic of which ratings to use and what should be the deadline is important and in fact if there is no need for a selection committee then the rating deadline can be extended closer to the Olympiad.
                          Anyway, I made a proposal for CFC AGM to eliminate selection committee so if any other voting members would like to support it they can second it.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Board order

                            Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post
                            Having a few pre-determined criteria in addition to the latest FIDE rating should not make the selection very complicated or controversial... and the CFC executive is always there to deal with unforeseen exceptions...
                            Absolutely agree with you. It's also much easier for players/their parents who missed the team if they knew that they lost because of "formula" than because of a "human factor". I have some ideas and will publish my proposal in a separate thread.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Board order

                              Originally posted by David Ottosen View Post
                              The only justification I can imagine is that you consider Lesiege and Krnan to be your weak links, and want to give them as many whites as possible to protect them, including the likely possibility of giving them both white when playing together when one of the top two boards sits out. If so, I retract my earlier harsh criticism of the selection as it makes logical sense. My long held criticisms of selecting Lesiege remain however.
                              Your "only justification" is very far from the reality.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Board order

                                Originally posted by Jean Hébert View Post
                                Just when I thought that the "just go by ratings" had been taken care of, someone comes up with something new, totally unexpected and totally dumb.
                                I think Bob's tongue was firmly in his cheek.

                                Steve

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X