If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
I don't believe the rules were followed and I believe the interpretation ran contrary to the intent of the rules. The selection is entitled to one choice only, not two choices. Any judge worth his salt would rule that "declinations" should be treated the same as "withdrawals" in the absence of explicit language re "declinations". Authority has been arrogated to the Selection Committee that they do not have. The Selection Committee gets to choose one player not two players.
I have now decided I will have nothing more at this time to say publicly on the Olympiad Teams Selection. I have already made my position known.
Hal Bond has given a report to the governors that he accepts the status quo. No other executive officer has objected to Ilia's decision.
I will be bringing to the CFC members some time in the future, a motion to correct the Handbook and set out a new section dealing with Invitees Declining.
As I stated, my position is already known - my post above from June 2:
" The issue is the instructions you were given, which has nothing to do with you [ Ron ] and Igor.
I don't understand your first instruction. I thought that the initial team was to be invited via:
1. Canadian Champion -Jean
2. 3 by rating - Kevin, Mark and Leonid
3. 1 by your Selection Committee - but this was not what you were asked to do ! I think the instruction to you is not according to the CFC Handbook.
I think you should have chosen 1 player - it seems your first choice was Pascal.
The next things that should have happened I think are:
1. Kevin, Jean and Pacal decline;
2. So the Olympiad Coordinator/Selection Committee, take the next 2 by rating to replace Kevin and Jean - that would have been Artiom and Eduard ( this is my interpretation of how the exisiting Handbook section should be used ).
3. The Selection Committee gets to replace the declining wildcard selection, and determines a wildcard replacement - you seem to have Thomas as your second on the wildcard list ( this is my interpretation of how the exisiting Handbook section should be used ).
4. The 3 replacements are invited, and CFC waits to see who accepts. ( Artiom and Thomas accepted; the problem arises that Eduard has never been contacted ! )
I think now, that Nikolay needs to be told that his position on the team is tentative, because of the error of the CFC in not following the Handbook/proper interpretation of the Handbook, and that his participation hinges on what Eduard will do when invited. Then Eduard should be invited, and CFC await his reply.
If Eduard declines however, we will then be replacing a player " chosen by rating ". My interpretation is that CFC then has to go and invite the next highest player by rating, which would be Tomas Krnan ( Nikolay is lower rated ).
It Tomas accepts, then Nikolay is not on the team. If Tomas declines, then Nikolay, as the next highest rated, gets the replacement by rating invite.
The above is my best shot at what I think should be happening. "
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Friday, 4th June, 2010, 09:29 AM.
Re: Olympiad Selection Process - the Wildcard Selection
Hi Gary:
The CFC Governors have already decided, and it is in the Handbook, that one person ( " wildcard " ) is picked by the 2-person Selection Committee, " consisting of two well known and respected individuals who are of at least master strength and have knowledge of the Canadian chess community " ( Section 1205 ).
So it is these two competent people who exercise their considered judgment whether to choose the next player on the Selection Rating List ( which they can do if they want ), or some player ( " promising " ? ) further down the list. We expect they will not choose only whom they like better, only someone because they happen to be young, etc.. They are to weigh all relevant factors - and the person chosen is chosen by the two of them - a pretty good process I think.
So far, what has been of any help exactly ? We can't take everything that Spraggett says at face value, granted, but casually dismissing everything that he says would also be a mistake.
I don't believe the rules were followed and I believe the interpretation ran contrary to the intent of the rules. The selection is entitled to one choice only, not two choices. Any judge worth his salt would rule that "declinations" should be treated the same as "withdrawals" in the absence of explicit language re "declinations". Authority has been arrogated to the Selection Committee that they do not have. The Selection Committee gets to choose one player not two players.
The situation isn't to my liking either. Probably I will either cheer for the players of the nation of one of my friends or not bother watching at all.
Re: Olympiad Selection Process - the Wildcard Selection
It appears like there were a couple of players chosen by the committee this time.
It looks to me like a good team from the Ontario/Quebec area. Good in that it's representative of the playing strength in the area but they won't likely contend for the top spots. Not what I call a national team but if the other provinces want theirs, they should get off their butts and insist on fair treatment. I'm surprised the western provinces have been so affable these days.
I agree the inactivity rule has validity. On the other hand, how long does it take players to get back in shape for an Olympiad? A couple of training events? These days with the internet, chances are many inactive players keep up that way. I guess it's a choice of sending active players over inactive players. I don't see inactive as the same as those who are pretty much retired players.
I may be wrong, but I suspect that what occurred this year is not all that different then what occurred in the past. I know the Selection Committee contacted the intended candidate to get some idea about acceptance and if the candidate declined they moved on to the next selection. Also, when the national team was 6 players there may have been two selection committee picks. Certainly the rules and communications from the CFC are very unclear.
With respect to some of the posts on this site, there seems to be this idea that somehow the chosen team is weaker then the alternatives. In no way could this be true all the discussed candidates are roughly the same skill level. In fact, if one values past Olympiad experience ( which I think is an important criteria ) and Canadian Closed wins the choices seem quite good. I know Spraggett hinted Hansen is stronger then Noritsyn based on FIDE rating but to me this is nonesense. The fact Noritsyn qualified by winning the Closed before despite having a low selection ranking is a good example why FIDE ratings alone are not the greatest indicators.
The irony of this whole topic is the Olympiad is not the "jewel" opportunity many of you might think. Expenses are unclear and it takes 3 weeks out of your life plus preperation time. The team resources are thin now,; one might note the women's team hasn't had an effective captain for three events now ( 2006 it was a sponsor with little knowledge of the players, 2008 it was a player's dad who took no interest in the rest of the team, 2010 it is a player's mom ). Some of the better teams have hired GMs to coach their women's teams. In 2006, there was some limited access to a GM coach but the national team got priority.
You might note numerous players declined the opportunity and several others gave the idea little thought this time out. My own observation would be I have a daughter that dismisses the whole process while she is in school ( a stronger project maybe she's have considered it ). The key is when these players are finished school. You might see some of these players reconsider Olympiad, or they may look at how the program is handled and give up. Women's team will almost all be in school next time out. Building a good team is going to need better planning and respect for all the players involved.
One concluding point, respect would mean everyone understanding that the players chosen and maybe even most on the Olympiad organizing committee may not be responsible for the issues at all. The "CFC" whatever that represents now has a habit of creating controversies by running itself in a mediocre fashion. There is something entirely wrong with this organization, the political structure seems ridiculous and it often attracts the wrong people to run it. Projects that should be highlights in people's lives often become miserable for no good reason. This organization has to stop playing games with people's lives. The CFC has to simplify and start supporting those who are genuine in their interest of chess beyond their own selfish requirements.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Friday, 4th June, 2010, 02:55 PM.
With respect to some of the posts on this site, there seems to be this idea that somehow the chosen team is weaker then the alternatives. In no way could this be true all the discussed candidates are roughly the same skill level. In fact, if one values past Olympiad experience ( which I think is an important criteria ) and Canadian Closed wins the choices seem quite good. I know Spraggett hinted Hansen is stronger then Noritsyn based on FIDE rating but to me this is nonesense. The fact Noritsyn qualified by winning the Closed before despite having a low selection ranking is a good example why FIDE ratings alone are not the greatest indicators.
Well said. I feel bad for Noritsyn. I am convinced that the selection committee used sound judgment. I hope that all that bickering will not hurt the morale of the team.
Did I miss something here ? I thought that Noritsyn was on the team and Porper out, due to the CFC's failure to properly follow its rules and invite him. If one should feel sorry for somebody...
Did I miss something here ? I thought that Noritsyn was on the team and Porper out, due to the CFC's failure to properly follow its rules and invite him. If one should feel sorry for somebody...
I presume that Jean Sasseville was feeling sorry for Noritsyn on the assumption that Noritsyn would have some additional pressure or angst related to the selection process. I have no idea, but I hope he does not. The process is typical CFC, but those who are actually going should feel proud to represent Canada and I am sure they will all try there very best.
Tweet
Comment