CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

[Gary Ruben]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Thank you. I was wondering about the low number of paid entrants.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Vlad, can you recheck those dollar amounts? The total deficit was $6000 but they only asked for $1500? (doesn't seem to make sense to me) :)
Does that mean someone is eating the deficit for the Arbiter's seminar?

Yes, the organizers are eating the deficit. They indicated that they were doing so in order to help create an infrastructure of qualified FIDE arbiters. I am pretty comfortable with what was asked for by the organizers and what was provided. I don't think that the CFC could be asked to cover the whole deficit given that there were certain discretionary items which might have been changed to reduce the total amount. The encouraging thing is that the organizers were able to come close to breaking even despite the spare no expense first class tournament that they have put on. I hope that if they had it to do over again and decided to include another arbiters' seminar that they would do something like what was done last year which was more modestly priced but just as good from the point of view of the final result.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

By the way, will the kids be getting their prize money from the CYCC? I was reading about that on this forum.

My feeling is that the CFC should let the organizing committee disburse the funds as they proposed to do. When hearing both sides and reading the language of the contract and seeing a few emails that were shared among the committee members I have returned to this point of view after briefly wavering based on the key point of understanding who was taking the financial risk had this whole tournament gone south. Right now I am convinced that the risk takers were the four committee members with the fifth member being given a vote in order to break ties if they occurred.

I was against deferring this issue to the executive though given the situation a reasonable resolution is still possible. The key issue for me is that if the committee is within their rights to spend their money in any reasonable manner then the CFC (as long as the CFC receives what was contractually promised and which has already occurred in the form of certified checks or bank drafts which were presented at day one of the AGM) should not behave in a way that makes it seem like they are grubbing for control of the money that was awarded to the kids.

A few governors seized on Victor Itkine's wording in the meeting and declaring the full amount of profits before the distribution is the surplus referred to in the documents but I do not believe that is correct. The emails indicate to me that this was not the understanding of any of the principals involved. Also some of the governors made obviously heartfelt appeals to the image of players who would not be able to attend NAYCC, WYCC and another tournament which I can't recall but then undermined that argument totally by being inconsistently nonchalant about the fact that awarding the 2012 CYCC to a chess centre which is likely to result in a much lower fund raising potential towards the WYCC was not a problem since the result had no impact on the CFCs budget since the funds raised were just a passthrough item on the budget.

I hope that the CFC does what is morally right and not what seems expedient. Give the kids the money that they were promised. No amount of money is worth the black eye that will result from the CFC taking control of this money and distributing it against the wishes of the 2011 CYCC organizing committee. The benefit is negligible given that either way the money will go to chess playing kids either the ones at the 2011 CYCC who helped to raise the money by playing or to many of the same kids later. Why open such a can of worms and why offend the people who worked so hard to bring such success to the table?

All of these people on the 2011 CYCC organizing committee deserve thanks and congratulations for the fantastic job that they did in organizing and executing this tournament. It is sad that being successful resulted in acrimony but that does not take away from what was accomplished.

If chess is to grow and succeed the governors cannot ignore the key role of such organizers and their wishes in disbursing the funds. We need to build and improve those relationships so that their can be many future successes with the same people instead of trying to fight over a bone that offends them and causes them to be gone forever particularly when there are hot and fresh steaks awaiting on the table in the next room. Let go of that bone.

As an aside:
I was not aware of the fact at the time and I have not fully checked the standings to verify the fact but I have been told that four of the kids in my Friday night chess study group at Sobeys finished in second or third place in one of several sections. Not bad for a class that typically runs to an attendance of eight or twelve kids. In addition we have a fifth student who finished 2nd at last year's CYCC and thus is apparently entitled to make the trip to the World Youth Chess Championship on that basis if I am not mistaken. The two second place finishers also finished in first place in their sections at the Ontario Youth Chess Championship. So we have five kids with a chance to play for the world youth chess championship based on qualifying from one tiny little Windsor club on the very edge of the Canadian chess universe.

John Coleman deserves much of the credit, along with Zoltan Kiraly, Istvan Kiraly and Denton Cockburn, Herb Alice, Terry Coulombe, Alan Baljeu and others who regularly help the kids with analysis of their games or playing them in order to provide the kids with some stronger competition. Usually I do the bulk of the chess lectures but many of those individuals occasionally spell me as well when I am attending tournaments.

[Paul Beckwith]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

I agree completely that the kids should be paid what they were promised; with the hope that they will attend the future tournaments. To do anything else would be unfair from their and their parents perspective and turn many of them off chess completely...

[Duncan Smith]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Its more complicated then it seems though. Many of the committee members have less experience at CYCC/WYCC events then I do, but they were making adhoc prize decisions at the last minute. I'm really not sure that second place in U18G deserves a lower prize then second place in other girls groups ( for example ). I'm not sure that really encourages a trip to WYCC.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Consideration of the bids was put off to an online meeting of the governors over the next two weeks or so. Bids expire at the end of July or the beginning of August. There were some concerns about the bids, in particular the need for a compressed Canadian Open over six days instead of the traditional nine days. This would be accomplished by having the first three days having double rounds. Apparently the Grand Pacific Hotel venue was unavailable for Saturdays which necessitated changing the traditional format for this bid.

The schedule seems to not be acceptable considering there is about a year to find a venue which will allow the normal playing schedule. Two rounds a day the first 3 days is a little much.

[Victor Itkine]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

I was against deferring this issue to the executive though given the situation a reasonable resolution is still possible. The key issue for me is that if the committee is within their rights to spend their money in any reasonable manner then the CFC (as long as the CFC receives what was contractually promised and which has already occurred in the form of certified checks or bank drafts which were presented at day one of the AGM) should not behave in a way that makes it seem like they are grubbing for control of the money that was awarded to the kids.

Thank you, Vlad, for your fair opinion. I will not make any additional comments until we will finalize this issue with the CFC Executive. We are in the process now.

In addition we have a fifth student who finished 2nd at last year's CYCC and thus is apparently entitled to make the trip to the World Youth Chess Championship on that basis if I am not mistaken. The two second place finishers also finished in first place in their sections at the Ontario Youth Chess Championship. So we have five kids with a chance to play for the world youth chess championship based on qualifying from one tiny little Windsor club on the very edge of the Canadian chess universe.

Congratulations to the players from Windsor !

Vlad, according to your post it looks like you are not aware about the latest motion which have been passed some time ago. Take a look at the Paragraph 1012 of the Handbook, especially at the sub-paragraph (d) quoted below:

(d) All other CYCC participants wishing to participate at WYCC are eligible to submit to CFC their applications for participation during 15 days after ending of CYCC. CFC Executive has the right to reject the application if the applicant's level at their discretion is significantly lower than the average level of his/her category at WYCC. All players whose applications are approved will be eligible to participate at WYCC using their own funds plus paying extra fee of $150 to CFC Youth Program fund.

[Victor Itkine]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Its more complicated then it seems though. Many of the committee members have less experience at CYCC/WYCC events then I do, but they were making adhoc prize decisions at the last minute. I'm really not sure that second place in U18G deserves a lower prize then second place in other girls groups ( for example ). I'm not sure that really encourages a trip to WYCC.

Duncan, I have no doubt that you have more experience than we have. I agree also that the distribution proposed is arguable and not perfect.

However, I would like to inform you and all chess community that the decision about the prize distribution was not made at the last minute. The algorithm for the prize distribution was discussed and approved on July 3 (prior to CYCC) at the CYCC Organizing Committee's meeting. The minutes of this meeting have been presented at the AGM.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Congratulations to the players from Windsor !

Vlad, according to your post it looks like you are not aware about the latest motion which have been passed some time ago. Take a look at the Paragraph 1012 of the Handbook, especially at the sub-paragraph (d) quoted below:

(d) All other CYCC participants wishing to participate at WYCC are eligible to submit to CFC their applications for participation during 15 days after ending of CYCC. CFC Executive has the right to reject the application if the applicant's level at their discretion is significantly lower than the average level of his/her category at WYCC. All players whose applications are approved will be eligible to participate at WYCC using their own funds plus paying extra fee of $150 to CFC Youth Program fund.

Hi Victor,

Thank you on behalf of the Windsor kids. I am also proud of some of the kids that didn't qualify but who played well. There are also a few who have not been seeking help but have elevated their game by playing against some of the children in the class. I am very optimistic about the prospects for Windsor chess if we can keep up the momentum.

I was aware the the CFC allowed additional people to play last year at the World Youth Chess Championship. My main point was that the Windsor kids were able to qualify without needing any additional permission. John Coleman started the Friday night Sobeys chess club to help the Windsor kids prepare for the out of town tournaments and we are seeing some very good results from our efforts and the children's diligent study and work.

I have the feeling that next year we will be even stronger. There were a few children that had uncharacteristically uneven performances at the Ontario Youth Championship but who are capable of much more when things are going well. I expect that some of them will bounce back and show what they are capable of as well.

Thank you to you and the rest of the organizing committee for putting on a successful tournament.

Vlad

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

The schedule seems to not be acceptable considering there is about a year to find a venue which will allow the normal playing schedule. Two rounds a day the first 3 days is a little much.

I would really prefer that we not mess with tradition but many of the other people that I have talked to don't seem to mind the compressed schedule. We had a Canadian Closed with a similar schedule just two months ago. I would really hate for this to become a regular occurrence as the one game a day schedule is something that I really enjoy about the Canadian Open but maybe this once it could be made to work. I am going to have to do some thinking about these bids before I make up my mind on which way I will vote. There are counter arguments to all of the bids and truthfully from a purely selfish perspective I like the Toronto bid(s). The Windsor kids will be able to participate a lot more easily in Toronto than they will in BC. I also understand the school of thought that suggests that national championships should move around. On the other hand, we are sure adding a significant expense to the bulk of the potential participants.

I guess that's why they pay the governors the big bucks to make such momentous decisions. Oh wait... Nevermind...

[Gary Ruben]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

I can remember when the Canadian Open was 11 rounds so we can see how changes slip in and become permanent.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

I can remember when the Canadian Open was 11 rounds so we can see how changes slip in and become permanent.

That would be a huge concern to me.

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

I've never attended a CO, but the one thing that keeps me thinking about it is that rare opportunity to play only one game per day, compared to all the weekend swisses.

[Wilf Ferner]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Hi: re 2012 CO bids to be dealt with by the governors-apparently on a six
day schedule vs regular nine days

Could someone from the current CO organization or CFC , before the last round of the current CO, ask the assembled players if they would come back and play next year on a six day schedule(by show of hands) This might help
all concerned.

Wilf Ferner

[Duncan Smith]

Re: CFC AGM Day 1/July 11, 2011

Duncan, I have no doubt that you have more experience than we have. I agree also that the distribution proposed is arguable and not perfect.

However, I would like to inform you and all chess community that the decision about the prize distribution was not made at the last minute. The algorithm for the prize distribution was discussed and approved on July 3 (prior to CYCC) at the CYCC Organizing Committee's meeting. The minutes of this meeting have been presented at the AGM.

Victor, I'd like to stress for the most part I am 100% on your side its a more progressive way of thinking then what we've become accustomed to with the CFC in the past. If you waited for the CFC to decide it could have taken months if not years to firm up the rules. By proactively moving forward, you've forced things to get done. The July 3rd date is interesting, because it tends to raise questions about the process, unfortunately most players are already committed to play by then. As I said, its a complicated situation, some of the background issues have existed unresolved for a decade.

Several people I talked to on Sunday were happy with your event, and unfortunately some of the recent improvements were too late for our own kids. One might note the last really big push to reform CYCC rules occurred when my daughter registered in the open section in Montreal. That is part of the "experience" I was referring to. I'm sure you know far more about running these events then I ever will. We just had a chance to attend quite a few CYCC/WYCC events, and have a good deal of experience with the good and bad of all of it.