Concerning extra players representing CANADA at 2011 WYCC in Brazil

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

Hi Fred:

Robert Song : " even if one of top 3 players doesn't go to WYCC, the 4th/5th place still can't get anything. "

Is Robert right on this ? - if one of the top 3 decides not to participate in the WYCC after qualifying, and winning a bursary, do the bursaries not all shift one position as a result ( ie. if # 1 declines, then # 2 becomes the " official rep " with the $ 1000 toward plane fare, etc., and # 4 then gets the # 3 bursary)?

Bob A

I do not believe that the bursaries shift to the next child in the case of number one through three not being able to take up the gauntlet. The money goes into the youth fund and is used for other tournaments and expenses as per the compromise worked out between the executive and the organizers of the 2011 CYCC.

I don't think it is reasonable to expect 4th or 5th place to get a bursary. If anything it should go to the kids that actually won towards another tournament like the 2012 CYCC, NAYCC or current editions of the other tournaments that were listed in the 2011 CYCC bid as expected to receive support.

Given the fact that children who fared poorly in CYCC 2010 were allowed to pay their own way to WYCC 2010 I don't see the harm that would result from allowing these kids to do the same. I presume that it is too late to get anything passed by the governors to get this decision reversed in time to allow these kids to participate this year.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

I presume that it is too late to get anything passed by the governors to get this decision reversed in time to allow these kids to participate this year.

How about a straw poll of governors to see if there is some will to reverse this decision?

[Bob Armstrong]

Motion Possible?

Hi Vlad:

As I understand it, FIDE has extended the deadline to submit the names of national team members to Sunday, Sept. 25 ( post by Governor Rob Clark on members CFC Chess Chat Forum ).

So the questions are:

1. Will someone immediately file a motion with the CFC Secretary, copying all governors, and request that it be posted immediately on the CFC Governors' Discussion Board for debate ( there would likely be a week and a half for debate and vote ), and request that it be voted on on an " urgent basis " on the Discussion Board with a short voting period, and a vote count date early enough for CFC to be able to submit the name(s) of those who might be added to the Can. WYCC team as a result of the vote?

2. Will the CFC President, as chair of the Governors' Assembly, rule the motion out of order, or allow it to proceed as requested?

Bob A

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

I do not believe that the bursaries shift to the next child in the case of number one through three not being able to take up the gauntlet. The money goes into the youth fund and is used for other tournaments and expenses as per the compromise worked out between the executive and the organizers of the 2011 CYCC.

I don't think it is reasonable to expect 4th or 5th place to get a bursary. If anything it should go to the kids that actually won towards another tournament like the 2012 CYCC, NAYCC or current editions of the other tournaments that were listed in the 2011 CYCC bid as expected to receive support.

Given the fact that children who fared poorly in CYCC 2010 were allowed to pay their own way to WYCC 2010 I don't see the harm that would result from allowing these kids to do the same. I presume that it is too late to get anything passed by the governors to get this decision reversed in time to allow these kids to participate this year.

Many commentators seem to be missing the FACT that the players whose parent chose to skip the CYCC to attend the PanAm understood and agreed that doing so would (per the current regulations passed in January) mean that they were unable to then go to WYCC.

Now, after the rules were debated endlessly (largely by many of the parents with an interest in this process) and finally passed in January, are we supposed to just bend or ignore the rules (again!!) because someone has changed their mind??? That is what caused this endless cycle of nonsense in the first place - allowing exceptions or special status is a huge mistake and has to be stopped. Claiming that the rules were bent or ignored in the past is not a reasonable argument for continuing to do so when the Exec have clearly decided to actually enforce the rules.

[Duncan Smith]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

Hi Fred:

Robert Song : " even if one of top 3 players doesn't go to WYCC, the 4th/5th place still can't get anything. "

Is Robert right on this ? - if one of the top 3 decides not to participate in the WYCC after qualifying, and winning a bursary, do the bursaries not all shift one position as a result ( ie. if # 1 declines, then # 2 becomes the " official rep " with the $ 1000 toward plane fare, etc., and # 4 then gets the # 3 bursary)?

Bob A

Bob, where were you when the CYCC only paid first place finishers, and surplus money would be funneled off into other chess projects ? That would include CFC general operations, FQE general operations, and more frequently just into the funds used to run the Canadian Open.

Honestly, it was only months ago that Bob Gillanders didn't want ANY bursaries to be handed out.

[Robert Song]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

Bob, Thanks for posting your concern here. No they don't do the bursary trickle down. My son Michael Song is U12 Boys 4th place finisher after big 2-7 tied break in CYCC, in this section 3rd place, Jason Cao doesn't go to WYCC, However Michael still doesn't get any penny for this trip to WYCC. The trip expense, almost $5,000.00 has to all come from our own pocket (Play and myself), which is really a big number for us.

The Youth coordinator Patrick's explanation is the freed money whoever doesn't go to WYCC will be still distributed between original first 3 places, which I would like to challenge here. It doesn’t make much sense for me.

Michael's CFC rating is 2120, just 4 points short of first ranked Dezheng Kong. That is why I said the bursary redistribution rule didn't encourage strong player goes to WYCC. I believe there have to be other examples for strong players who will go to WYCC this year, however didn't play well in CYCC (not first 3 places finishers) could not get any penny from these more than 18,000 CYCC surplus.

[Ken Craft]

Re: Concerning extra players representing CANADA at 2011 WYCC in Brazil

Kerry, the rules allow for this individual to go with Executive's blessing. The executive are refusing to grant their blessing. The rules do not have to be bent to allow this individual to attend the WYCC.

[Mikhail Egorov]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

Many commentators seem to be missing the FACT that the players whose parent chose to skip the CYCC to attend the PanAm understood and agreed that doing so would (per the current regulations passed in January) mean that they were unable to then go to WYCC.

Now, after the rules were debated endlessly (largely by many of the parents with an interest in this process) and finally passed in January, are we supposed to just bend or ignore the rules (again!!) because someone has changed their mind??? That is what caused this endless cycle of nonsense in the first place - allowing exceptions or special status is a huge mistake and has to be stopped. Claiming that the rules were bent or ignored in the past is not a reasonable argument for continuing to do so when the Exec have clearly decided to actually enforce the rules.

Hi Kerry,

I completely agree with you, that parents chose to skip the CYCC to attend the PanAm games and agreed that doing so would mean that they were unable to then go to WYCC. There are emails to prove this.

The real reason I brought this issue up before the executives and governors on chesstalk, is because I believe there is a flaw in a new rule, that was passed in 2010. The flaw was revealed, after both tournaments were organized on same dates. I am not blaming anyone here, I just want to make this right and what is best for our juniors. Most parents were speaking on behalf of their kids. Our juniors are the victims in this case. That is all I am trying to accomplish here.

Non of this would have happened, if both tournaments would be organized on different days and 3 mentioned juniors: Dora, Jackie, and Dezheng would of participated in both: CYCC and Pan-Am games.

I believe there was a flaw in the new rule that was passed. It was revealed after 2 tournaments were organized on same dates.

Mikhail

[Ken Craft]

Re: Concerning extra players representing CANADA at 2011 WYCC in Brazil

The individuals in question should not have been forced to choose between the Pan Ams and the WYCC. Being forced to make this choice is where the problem started.

[Sanjiv Kalra]

Re: Concerning extra players representing CANADA at 2011 WYCC in Brazil

We are trying to follow our own rules, Peter.

Even if the rules made would put some kids participation at WYCC in jeopardy. What would have happened if this rule was not there? The surplus would have gone down by a 1000? However Canada would still have a their top players participating at Pan AM and WYCC.

There were other players who decided not to go to the Pan-Am's, as they preferred to go to the WYCC this year (and therefore attend the CYCC).

Are you sure it was not because of the cost of going to Pan AM?

What we have here is a situation where all sides understood the rules, but one party now has had a change of heart.

This rule should have not been there in the first place. CFC should recognize the mistake and correct it ASAP instead of arguing about it.

Let the kid go.....

[Sanjiv Kalra]

Re: Bursary Trickle Down ?

Bob, Thanks for posting your concern here. No they don't do the bursary trickle down. My son Michael Song is U12 Boys 4th place finisher after big 2-7 tied break in CYCC, in this section 3rd place, Jason Cao doesn't go to WYCC, However Michael still doesn't get any penny for this trip to WYCC. The trip expense, almost $5,000.00 has to all come from our own pocket (Play and myself), which is really a big number for us.

The Youth coordinator Patrick's explanation is the freed money whoever doesn't go to WYCC will be still distributed between original first 3 places, which I would like to challenge here. It doesn’t make much sense for me.

Michael's CFC rating is 2120, just 4 points short of first ranked Dezheng Kong. That is why I said the bursary redistribution rule didn't encourage strong player goes to WYCC. I believe there have to be other examples for strong players who will go to WYCC this year, however didn't play well in CYCC (not first 3 places finishers) could not get any penny from these more than 18,000 CYCC surplus.

I agree with this. The surplus should have been given out wisely. According to Patrick, who does not agree with the way it was given out, CFC was forced by CYCC organizers to give it out this way or they do not get it. (Please correct me Pat if I misunderstood, when we last spoke about this)

[Bob Armstrong]

Handbook s. 1012 Seems to Cover Situation

Hi Ken:

This problem situation may well arise again and again. I think the Handbook is sufficient to deal with these situations:

1012.Participation in the World Events:

[Motion 2011-B moved by Vladimir Birarov, seconded by Valer Demian

INVITED PLAYERS

(a) Canadian Youth Chess Championship (CYCC) is a qualifier to international youth chess competitions.

Top 3 finishers in each section are qualified to become official representatives for:

1) World Youth Chess Championship (WYCC);

2) Pan American Youth Chess Championship;

3) North American Youth Chess Championship.

..........

(b) .....

ADDITIONAL PLAYERS

(c) .....

(d) ..........

(e) 3 top CFC rated players in each category (by January 1st of the current year) if not able to participate at CYCC due to extraordinary circumstances, and wishing to participate at WYCC, are eligible to submit to CFC their applications for participation at WYCC before the start of CYCC. CFC Executive has the right to reject the application at their discretion if applicant's circumstances are not valid and/or exceptional. All players whose applications are approved will be eligible to participate at WYCC using their own funds plus paying extra fee of $300 to CFC Youth Program fund.

The application should have been submitted, despite Michael Barron's ( and other exec? ) indications that the application would be rejected. This would have forced the discussion into a " quasi-legal " format, and the executive would have had to be quite careful, and perhaps even give reasons for decision. After that, it is up to the executive to decide. And others may or may not agree as to what should constitute " extraordinary circumstances ". Also, the decision would, if a rejection, have raised at that time a hue and cry, and the executive would have had to defend their decision in the court of public opinion. There would still then have been the possibility of a motion to the governors to overrule the exec. on the issue ( not sure of the legal powers here ).

Finally, the facts are that the problem was explained to a large no. of players who were interested in the Pan-Americans. They were all clearly told that the consequence of not playing in the CYCC was ineligibility for the team going to the WYCC. In fact, apparently Dora’s mother, Anna, wrote a letter setting out why the CYCC/WYCC didn’t matter to Dora. The result was that only three players decided to skip the CYCC to go to the Pan-Ams. There were numbers of players interested in going to the Pan-Am’s who stayed in Canada and played in the CYCC, due to the interpretation of the Handbook presented to them – they wanted to be eligible for the WYCC team.

It is now unfair to single out one player for exceptional treatment, when numbers of players followed the rule, and gave up their desire to play in the Pan-Am. They would have every right to claim the CFC is untrustworthy if now someone who didn’t stay, got to play on the team anyway.

So I support the executive here.

Bob A

[Ken Craft]

Re: Concerning extra players representing CANADA at 2011 WYCC in Brazil

I think you are wrong, Bob. The executive's decision prior to the CYCC to inform players would not be provided WYCC exemptions if they chose to play in the Pan Ams instead of the CYCC was A) Coercive, and B) prejudiced any applications before they were even made.

Neither of those behaviours is defensible. I'd love to see some form of judicial review of this behaviour.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Handbook s. 1012 Seems to Cover Situation

...

It is now unfair to single out one player for exceptional treatment, when numbers of players followed the rule, and gave up their desire to play in the Pan-Am. They would have every right to claim the CFC is untrustworthy if now someone who didn’t stay, got to play on the team anyway.

So I support the executive here.

Bob A

For as long as I can remember, the CFC has been chastised for not following their own rules. As soon as they do, they are now hammered for doing so. One can argue the rule is:
a) poorly worded
b) open to interpretation
c) subject to Executive/Governor/Youth Coordinator whims
d) stupid
e) needing overhaul - wait, that is what happened already...

People who draft some of these motions and many who vote in favour seem to not understand that many other people will nit-pick their way through every single word and bit of punctuation.

It likely is not possible to indicate INTENT as clearly as anyone would like, but perhaps these sections ought to indicate overall principles that are desirable: for example: The CFC indicates that the CYCC is the sole qualification path for play in the WYCC (just an example).

It would be easy now to say, what the hell, let whoever go who wants to go or has parents who can afford to go ... what does that say to the parents and children who actually went along with the (possibly flawed) rules? It says "the rules are the rules unless we decide otherwise" and we are back to the traditional lawlessness of the CFC we are all familiar with.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Handbook s. 1012 Seems to Cover Situation

(e) 3 top CFC rated players in each category (by January 1st of the current year) if not able to participate at CYCC due to extraordinary circumstances, and wishing to participate at WYCC, are eligible to submit to CFC their applications for participation at WYCC before the start of CYCC. CFC Executive has the right to reject the application at their discretion
Bob A

What is "extraordinary circumstances" ? What is "extraordinary" to someone may well seem "ordinary" to someone else. This type of discretionary powers should never be given to an organisation such as the CFC. It is bound to create big problems... for players and for the CFC. Rules have to be clearer, easier to understand and to apply.
The mere costs implied in playing in a CYCC is to me ample reason not to play in it, along with many other "ordinary" circumstances such as the weak competition in many categories.