Olympic Team

[Ken Craft]

Re: Olympic Team

Has the CFC ignored its selection rules again?
Some of us can still remember the O'Donnell Affair.

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: Olympic Team

!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Olympic Team

Has the CFC ignored its selection rules again?
Some of us can still remember the O'Donnell Affair.

You guys should stop harassing the CFC. Without it there would no organised chess in Canada. ;)

[John Coleman]

Re: Olympic Team

Has the CFC ignored its selection rules again?

Ilia has been very good at responding to posts. Maybe he can give the reason for not following the selection rules.

[Ken Craft]

Re: Olympic Team

John, I am not at the point of asking for reasons yet. I'm trying to ascertain whether the rules were followed or not.

[Mark Bluvshtein]

Re: Olympic Team

Hi Brian,

Your help would be greatly appreciated.
Your campaigns for the 2004 and 2006 teams were nothing short of amazing.

Mark.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Olympic Team

Hi everybody,

As you might know, the Canadian Olympic teams have been selected.

Mark, could you reedit this your message and post it at http://www.chess.ca/Olympiad.shtml

[Tony Ficzere]

Re: Olympic Team

Hi Chris:

When FIDE went to 5 member teams, I thought CFC passed a motion that 4 players would be by rating, and one by the selection committee.

Could Ilia, or someone, advise whether Chris or I are right on this?

Bob

This is a good question Bob. Since the CFC Handbook is hopelessly out of date on the CFC website, it would take a considerable amount of sifting to find any changes that apply to the Olympiad.

If only one player is selected from the selection committee, then it would appear that the CFC didn't follow its own rules. We need to find out exactly what the rules are first.

It is true that Edward Porper did not receive an invitation from the CFC. I spoke to him personally this past weekend. As Eric Hansen points out, sending the invitation by email can be a problem. I would think a registered letter would be the best way to handle the invitations, avoiding any problems with invitations not being received. For example, I constantly have to review items that get spam filtered and occasionally I find something that is not spam.

I would happily sift through the GL's and try to find the answer, but I do not have the time until next week. If anyone out there does know, please post your findings here.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Olympic Team

Hi Gary,


If what I was reading was right, that players were invited based on email, I could see the CFC not having Edward's email or having an outdated one maybe. Relying solely on email will cause a lot of problems. But I also imagine that little effort was made to contact Edward in the first place as he is relatively new and unknown to a lot of Canadians especially since he doesn't live in Quebec or Ontario. But this is all under the assumption that Edward deserved an invitation, which is what I am inquiring about.

From what is being written farther down in the thread it would appear Edward was "passed over".

The Olympic team picks seem to have been given to the Ontario/Quebec CFC "power base".

Your provincial federation should take a tough stance with the CFC. Alberta has a legitimate qualifier for the Olympic team and he's passed over. It's outrageous.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Olympic Team

From what is being written farther down in the thread it would appear Edward was "passed over".

The Olympic team picks seem to have been given to the Ontario/Quebec CFC "power base".

Your provincial federation should take a tough stance with the CFC. Alberta has a legitimate qualifier for the Olympic team and he's passed over. It's outrageous.

Good luck finding the CFC.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Olympic National Team - Selection Process

Hi Eric:

Thanks for the further information. It is most important that the integrity of our Olympiad Team selection process is maintained.

I have sent your two posts and mine to Ilia and Hal to respond. You, and Edward, especially since he is new, are entitled to an answer from CFC.

Bob

[Ken Craft]

Re: Olympic Team

This is the most recent criteria I can find in a GL. From 07-08 GL6:

RESULTSOFVOTING:
Motion2008-03(LyleCraver/BobGillanders)
(b)National Team:The National Team shall consist of six players,asfollows:
(i)The Canadian Champion,asof 180days before the start of the Olympiad.
(ii)The three highest rated players on the Selection Rating list.
(iii)Two players decided upon by the Selection Committee.
(c)Women’sTeam:The Women’s Team shall consist of four players,as follows:
(i)The Canadian Women’s Champion,as of 180 day sbefore the start of the Olympiad.
(ii)The two highest rated female players on the Selection Rating list.
(iii)One player decided upon by the Selection Committee.

Our existing rules attempt to apply the same selection principles to two teams of different sizes.Now both the National team and Women's team are five player teams as per FIDE's rules.Therefore I am ruling that the selection criteria be the same for both teams.
Since both teams currently include the Canadian Champion from 180days before the Olympiad,it comes down to this choice for the other 4 players.
Please choose between:
Option One:2 players from the Selection Rating List and 2 players chosen by the Selection Committee
Option Two:3 players from the Selection Rating List and 1 player chosen by the Selection Committee
OptionThree:Neither of the above (in this case the floor is open for other options)
Votes for option1:(6)Barron,Duff,Langer,Luiting.McDonald,Wright
Votes for option 2:(6)I.Bluvshtein,Craft,Craver,Dénommée,Haley,Profit
Votes for option 3:(1)Wu
Abstention:(1)Gillanders
LyleCraver:though one of theoriginal movers of option1,Mr.Haley has convinced me of the merits of option 2.I share his view that maximizing involvement of top players is something all right-minded governors shouldf avour.
PhilHaley:I vote for option number2.Option 2 is more objective than Option 1and also encourages more active participation by our top players in events.
HalBond:I vote for option#2.I echo Phil Haley's comments completely.
Tie vote broken by the President–Option 2 passes.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Olympic Team

Good luck finding the CFC.

I hope you're as disgusted as I am. The question is why? Is he older than the other players and what they want? Is it to make a spot for a Quebec representative? Has the Alberta federation offended them?

[John Coleman]

Re: Olympic Team

Since the CFC Handbook is hopelessly out of date on the CFC website, it would take a considerable amount of sifting to find any changes that apply to the Olympiad.

I believe that Maurice Smith went thru all the GLs and updated the handbook, finishing sometime last winter or spring.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Olympic Team

This is the most recent criteria I can find in a GL. From 07-08 GL6:

RESULTSOFVOTING:
Motion2008-03(LyleCraver/BobGillanders)
(b)NationalTeam:The National Team shall consist of six players,asfollows:
(i)TheCanadianChampion,asof180daysbeforethestartoftheOlympiad.
(ii)ThethreehighestratedplayersontheSelectionRatinglist.
(iii)TwoplayersdecideduponbytheSelectionCommittee.
(c)Women’sTeam:TheWomen’sTeamshallconsistoffourplayers,asfollows:
(i)TheCanadianWomen’sChampion,asof180daysbeforethestartoftheOlympiad.
(ii)ThetwohighestratedfemaleplayersontheSelectionRatinglist.
(iii)OneplayerdecideduponbytheSelectionCommittee.
Ourexistingrulesattempttoapplythesameselectionprinciplestotwoteamsofdifferentsizes.NowboththeNationalteamandWomen'steamarefiveplayerteamsasperFIDE'srules.ThereforeIamrulingthattheselectioncriteriabethesameforbothteams.
SincebothteamscurrentlyincludetheCanadianChampionfrom180daysbeforetheOlympiad,itcomesdowntothischoicefortheother4players.
Pleasechoosebetween:
OptionOne:2playersfromtheSelectionRatingListand2playerschosenbytheSelectionCommittee
OptionTwo:3playersfromtheSelectionRatingListand1playerchosenbytheSelectionCommittee
OptionThree:Neitheroftheabove(inthiscasethefloorisopenforotheroptions)
Votesforoption1:(6)Barron,Duff,Langer,Luiting.McDonald,WrightVotesforoption2:(6)I.Bluvshtein,Craft,Craver,Dénommée,Haley,ProfitVotesforoption3:(1)Wu
Abstention:(1)Gillanders
LyleCraver:thoughoneoftheoriginalmoversofoption1,Mr.Haleyhasconvincedmeofthemeritsofoption2.Isharehisviewthatmaximizinginvolvementoftopplayersissomethingallright-mindedgovernorsshouldfavour.
PhilHaley:Ivoteforoptionnumber2.Option2ismoreobjectivethanOption1andalsoencouragesmoreactiveparticipationbyourtopplayersinevents.
HalBond:Ivoteforoption#2.IechoPhilHaley'scommentscompletely.
TievotebrokenbythePresident–Option2passes.

Looks like we should just post that (as is) on the website... it is at least as clear as anything else there. Wow.

PS:
Bob Armstrong managed to get me approved (by whom I am not sure) as the keeper of the Handbook. I have all the current text (including, apparently all the recent updates made by Maurice Smith). I am working on making the web formating consistent and looking at ways to show revision history.

Although I have come across a number of places where the wording is extraordinarily bizarre, downright wrong or just questionable, I am not sure I have a mandate to unilaterally change anything unless the new wording comes via a GL... I would be happy to get clarification concerning that issue.

It is obvious that the wording of some sections can have more of an effect than some other sections (the process for selection of the Olympic team being a clear and current example). Many of the introductory sections and other "preamble" sections are worded poorly, but that does not cause any lasting problems. The precise wording of some sections is critical.

Leaving the precise wording up to (say) a discussion among governors seems like a bad plan to me; it is not clear, however, what the proper procedure might be (of course, the Handbook doesn't make that clear either!)