Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

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

  • Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

    1. Agenda
    2. Opening Comments of Chair
    3. voting member Sign-in - sign in by voting for any of the options
    4. Reports (Executive members and Officers please post your reports here)
    A. President
    B. Vice President
    C. Secretary
    D. Past President
    E. FIDE Representative
    F. Youth Coordinator
    G. Masters Representative
    H. Woman’s Coordinator
    I. Rating Auditor
    J. Chess Foundation of Canada
    K. Kalev Pugi Fund
    L. Treasurer
    M. Executive Director: Financial Report

    5A Discussion Items
    1) Robert Hamilton lawsuit
    2) Olympiad Qualifications and Motions by Victor Plotkin
    3) Chess Foundation discussion
    4) CFC Handbook
    5) New business

    5B Motions.
    6 motions by Victor Plotkin see below
    1 motion by Paul Leblanc, Pierre Denomme see below


    Part II "The Voting Booth" Voting on motions

    Attention voting members: the voting period if required is day 4 (November 23) through day 7 (November 26)
    6.
    1 Voting on motions


    Part II At end of meeting
    7. Closing Comments by Chair
    8. Adjournment


    Motions regarding selection of players for the Olympiad teams.
    Proposed by CFC masters representative Victor Plotkin
    Motion #1. Selection of payers.

    a. The National Team shall consist of 5 players, as follows:

    1). The winner of the last Canadian Closed that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as a qualification for a previous Olympiad.
    2). The 4 highest ranked players as determined by formula.
    3). If no tournament described in a1 took place, then the 5 highest ranked players as determined by formula.

    b. The Women Team shall consist of 5 players, as follows:

    1). The winner of the last Canadian Women that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as a qualification for a previous Olympiad.
    2). The 4 highest ranked female players as determined by formula.
    3). If no tournament described in b1 took place, then the 5 highest ranked female players as determined by formula.

    c. If a player declines their invitation, a replacement player will be selected according to formula.

    Motion #2. Formula for ranking payers.

    a. The composition of the Teams shall be determined by formula, calculated 5 months before the start of Olympiad.

    b. The formula takes the last published rating as a base for the Teams.

    Motion #3. Rating for the Olympiad.

    The formula uses FIDE rating only as a base for the National Team. The formula uses the average CFC-FIDE rating as a base for the Women Team. Any number is rounded to the nearest 1. 0.5 is rounded to 1. If 2 or more players have the same total number then the younger age will be used as the tie-breaker.

    Motion #4. Bonuses/penalties for the last Canadian Closed and Canadian Women.

    Bonuses/penalties for performance in the last Canadian Closed or last Canadian Women, respectively, that took place 5-36 months prior to the Olympiad and that has not been used as qualification for a previous Olympiad:

    +20 points for 2nd place
    +10 points for 3rd place
    -10 points if the player did not participate or withdrew.

    This bonus/penalty will be added/subtracted to any base rating number (last rating, average rating or highest rating).

    Motion #5. Bonuses for young players.

    5 points for every full year of age under 23. This bonus will be added to any base rating number ((last rating, average rating or highest rating).

    Motion #6. Bonus/penalties for performance in the last Olympiad:

    (Points won subtracted by the expected number of points according to rating) multiplied by 10. 0 points if the player did not participate.

    This bonus/penalty will be added/subtracted to any base rating number (last rating, average rating or highest rating). The number is rounded to the nearest 1. 0.5 is rounded to 1.

    Motion regarding rating of games played outside the CFC
    Moved by Leblanc seconded by Denommee:
    Handbook article 436 pertains to CFC members applying to have their results in foreign FIDE rated events rated by the CFC for a fee of $25 provided the CFC is notified a month in advance. I move that FQE and USCF events be added to this article. In the same article, new CFC players with USCF or FIDE ratings are started with whichever of those ratings under which the player has played the most recent games. I move to add FQE to that criteria. Some editorial changes to the wording would be necessary so that FQE members are not referred to as foreign players or non-residents.

  • #2
    Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

    If you are a CFC voting member please vote.
    http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...-on-motion-5B5

    According to this post http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...7592#post27592
    "The meeting and all polls will be extended for one week due to connection issues associated with moving our server." That's December 4th

    Where can I find a list with the CFC voting members? The CFC website still shows 62 "governors" in 2013-14
    http://chess.ca/governors-page

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

      Right now, less then 2 day before the end of the voting time we have these numbers:

      1. Motion 1 (no SC) +19 -1 =3. Motion passed 100 %.
      2. Motion 2 (last rating, not best rating) +19 -1 =3. Motion passed 100 %.
      3. Motion 3 (no CFC rating for the National Team) +17 -4 =1. Motion passed 100 %.
      4. Motion 4 (bonus/penalty for the Canadian Closed) +14 -7 =2. Motion passed almost certainly.
      5. Motion 5 (bonus for juniors) +11 -11 =1. Draw. 50% chances to pass.
      6. Motion 6 (bonus/penalty for the last Olympiad performance) +6 -9 =2. Motion failed (very likely).

      At least, my main goal was achieved: SC will be eliminated. One positive surprise for me: governors support motion 3 with a very big margin. One negative surprise for me: motion 5, which I was sure about it, has a good chances to fail.

      Motion 6 would have had more chances to pass before the last Olympiad. Our good performance played against this motion.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

        Where can I find a list of the current CFC Voting Members ("Governors")? The list on the CFC site is over two years old.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

          The final score will likely be 4-2.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

            Originally posted by Victor Plotkin View Post
            The final score will likely be 4-2.
            It will be interesting to see who voted what.
            Why do we have so many voting members if they don't bother to vote? CFC should replace them if they don't vote.
            Last edited by Rene Preotu; Friday, 2nd December, 2016, 04:36 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

              Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
              It will be interesting to see who voted what.
              Why do we have so many voting members if they do bother to vote? CFC should replace them if they don't vote.
              CFC should do many things, and replacing not-active governors and not-active executives is definitely one of these things.

              Perhaps, you will see who voted what in a few days.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                [QUOTE=Victor Plotkin;108969]CFC should do many things, and replacing not-active governors and not-active executives is definitely one of these things.

                Frankly speaking, it is very sad to see such situation happening in CFC. The inactive governors and non active executives should voluntarily resign if they do not have a heart/time to help CFC. Why they are still there ? Only they themselves know why they are still there. We call ourselves 1st class nation but there are these inactive guys sitting there doing nothing for CFC and not even vote. Shame on them !!!

                I would not hold my breath waiting for a change though by this posting !

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                  [QUOTE=Gary Hua;108971]
                  Originally posted by Victor Plotkin View Post
                  CFC should do many things, and replacing not-active governors and not-active executives is definitely one of these things.

                  Frankly speaking, it is very sad to see such situation happening in CFC. The inactive governors and non active executives should voluntarily resign if they do not have a heart/time to help CFC. Why they are still there ? Only they themselves know why they are still there. We call ourselves 1st class nation but there are these inactive guys sitting there doing nothing for CFC and not even vote. Shame on them !!!

                  I would not hold my breath waiting for a change though by this posting !
                  Haven't we been through all this years spear-headed by Bob Armstrong?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                    Don't blame the VMs nor the Exec. Blame the lame president who's vision of dribs & drabs has tactfully moved the Chess Federation of Canada into a prolonged state of apathy.

                    Not only will I inspire the VMs & the Executive (one way or another) I will also energize the entire Membership.

                    Easy and simple solution ... at the next CFC AGM vote Drkulec out of office.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                      Actually, this time 25-27 governors voted. These number are close to the numbers earlier this year.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                        Originally posted by Victor Plotkin View Post
                        Perhaps, you will see who voted what in a few days.

                        MOTION 5B5

                        VOTE YES (12) Aris Marghetis Christopher Field Félix Dumont Fred McKim Gary Hua Ilia Bluvshtein Michael Barron Nikolay Noritsyn Paul Leblanc Victor Itkin Victor Plotkin Vladimir Drkulec
                        VOTE NO (16) David Gordon Elias Oussedik (ineligible) Halldor P. Palsson Ken Craft Ken Einarsson Les Bunning Lloyd Lombard Lyle Craver Marcus Wilker Mark S. Dutton, I.A. Michael Lo Pierre Dénommée Richard Bérubé Richard Bowes Robert Sasata Valer Eugen Demian Vladimir Semyonov
                        ABSTAIN (1) Hal Bond

                        MOTION DEFEATED


                        I know I'm biased but it's not a big surprise to see the Quebec's VMs voting against this motion.

                        Just for fun I compiled a list with players born after 1996 (under 23 in 2018) and FIDE rating over 2000. See below:

                        Player FIDE Year Bonus Points New Rating
                        Vettese, Nicholas 2152 2004 45 2197
                        Rodrigue-Lemieux, Shawn 2035 2004 45 2080
                        Hua, Eugene 2140 2003 40 2180
                        Talukdar, Rohan 2092 2003 40 2132
                        Zhang, Henry 2008 2003 40 2048
                        Doknjas, Joshua 2186 2002 35 2221
                        Cai, Jason 2088 2002 35 2123
                        Gedajlovic, Max 2338 2001 30 2368
                        Zhang, Yuanchen 2289 2001 30 2319
                        Chen, Richard 2123 2001 30 2153
                        Adnan, Habib 2034 2001 30 2064
                        Cao, Jason 2336 2000 25 2361
                        Song, Ziyuan (Sam) 2182 2000 25 2207
                        Bellissimo, Joseph F. 2180 2000 25 2205
                        Li, James 2105 2000 25 2130
                        Zhong, Joey 2050 2000 25 2075
                        Preotu, Razvan 2495 1999 20 2515
                        Song, Michael 2404 1999 20 2424
                        Yu, Zong Yang 2383 1999 20 2403
                        Chiku-Ratte, Olivier-Kenta 2300 1999 20 2320
                        Shi, Diwen 2293 1999 20 2313
                        Zhu, Hong Rui 2293 1999 20 2313
                        Doknjas, John 2252 1999 20 2272
                        Awatramani, Janak 2213 1999 20 2233
                        Graif, William 2192 1999 20 2212
                        Li, Yinshi 2144 1999 20 2164
                        Wang, Richard 2337 1998 15 2352
                        Dorrance, Adam 2260 1998 15 2275
                        Song, Guannan Terry 2190 1998 15 2205
                        Plotkin, Mark 2122 1998 15 2137
                        Vorobev, Alexander 2108 1998 15 2123
                        Nasir, Zehn 2047 1998 15 2062
                        Knox, Christopher 2187 1997 10 2197
                        Dunne, Francesco 2098 1997 10 2108
                        Fu, James 2061 1997 10 2071
                        Sohal, Tanraj 2310 1996 5 2315
                        Itkin, David 2095 1996 5 2100
                        Nyamdorj, Davaaochir 2050 1996 5 2055
                        Lepine, Cedric 2023 1996 5 2028
                        I think Victor Plotkin was right in his CFC post, so I'm wondering what was the logic of the VMs who voted against this motion?
                        http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...ed-Fred-McKim)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                          Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
                          what was the logic of the VMs who voted against this motion?
                          imho, a whole motions set should have been dismissed as out of order. Now somebody will need to update the Handbook with this mess (and it will require new motions, as logically you just can not cross a text out per your wish).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                            Because it discriminated based on age.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Agenda for CFC voting member meeting Fall 2016 November 20 to 27

                              Originally posted by Ken Craft View Post
                              Because it discriminated based on age.
                              Honestly, I got tired to hear this magic word "discrimination".

                              Funny, Ken you did not find any worthy motion to support. You voted "abstain" twice and "No" 4 times. Probably, our vice-president was not happy with the proposal in general (or believe that our selection process was the best in the world and no improvement was needed).
                              Last edited by Victor Plotkin; Monday, 5th December, 2016, 04:35 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X