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.
as to "fair", that is something that depends on one's point of view which is frequently one sided.
I'm pretty sure that if FIDE came and said "we now have a FIDE membership and EVERY CFC member down to the last junior rated 200 must pay our annual membership fee or we will cut you off international events" that many people would not call that "fair". Notwithstanding FIDE saying, "Oh, but Canada must pay it's fair share of the world championship".
We don't need to use Quebec as an example. I know there are lots of people who feel that the CMA is somehow in "competition" with the CFC and it is "unfair" that the CFC isn't getting a cut of all junior activity. Vlad runs active events with his own rating system as do I, as does Luc Poitras and that includes non CFC members playing chess. Horrors.
Come to terms with the fact that the CFC does not have a monopoly on chess in Canada. It neither has the moral right nor the practical ability to enforce a monopoly.
As a side note, before the CFC became obsessed with the idea of "fairness" in collecting from every last FQE member, about 30-50% of Quebec chess players were also CFC members. Top sections of all tournaments were CFC rated. Now, with enforcing "fairness" we have something like less than 5% of those as CFC members and no CFC activity and correspondingly less revenue. As a purely practical matter, apart from it's moral questionability, demanding "fairness" has been a complete failure for the last 30 years.
You surprise me with your tone Roger, and I don't see anything here that resembles another proposal. The FQE can and does submit FIDE tournaments for rating. Those who play have to be CFC members, just like FIDE rated play anywhere else in the country. That's where we are now. Yes, this is all about money. The CFC is funded my members and rating fees.
The CFC does not have a monopoly on chess - I don't know where that came from. Maybe you are confusing Canada with India, where players are stripped of their rating and FIDE ID for even playing in an unsanctioned, unrated tournament - that's a horror.
But we should and do have control over FIDE tournaments in Canada. This goes hand in hand with being a paying member of FIDE. Quebec tried to become a member on its own and FIDE would not even discuss it officially. I believe it was either Thessaloniki 1988 Novi Sad in 1990. FIDE's position on this matter has not changed.
There doesn't appear to be the will to create a reaffiliation agreement at this time. As Jean points out, the organizations co-operate on matters of mutual interest. FQE President Marc Poulin has been helpful and approachable.
Member/players should get FIDE rated tournaments.
Bob A
I happen to believe that for 95% of all players, national ratings (CFC or FQE) is the way to go. For masters and above, FIDE ratings start to make sense. So FIDE rated tournaments should concern only the top events, Cdn closed, Quebec and Canadian Open (top section) and of course international norm events. To FIDE rate ordinary weekenders and such is a waste of money.
I happen to believe that for 95% of all players, national ratings (CFC or FQE) is the way to go. For masters and above, FIDE ratings start to make sense. So FIDE rated tournaments should concern only the top events, Cdn closed, Quebec and Canadian Open (top section) and of course international norm events. To FIDE rate ordinary weekenders and such is a waste of money.
I have 23 FIDE rated games over the years, and not even a provisional rating from FIDE. That is not very player friendly towards the average player if you ask me. I am quite happy with my CFC rating thank you, were I can get my weekly fix.
There doesn't appear to be the will to create a reaffiliation agreement at this time.
This is the kind of line used by politicians at all levels to keep their feet dry and sit on their a... Of course, the ordinary member does not care about reaffiliation, he is not touched by the consequences of the current situation. That does not mean that nothing should be done.
I happen to believe that for 95% of all players, national ratings (CFC or FQE) is the way to go. For masters and above, FIDE ratings start to make sense. So FIDE rated tournaments should concern only the top events, Cdn closed, Quebec and Canadian Open (top section) and of course international norm events. To FIDE rate ordinary weekenders and such is a waste of money.
The point Spraggett was making in his article (that I linked to in another thread), is that those strong players are not playing in a lot of tournaments anymore, so this would just reinforce that.
Most strong players can't travel to many of those events anyway. 2-3 tournaments a year isn't a great offering for someone over 2200. The risk is that not providing incentives for these players to keep playing is a way to lose them and that just hurts everyone.
For me, I've already reached the highest title I can achieve in the Canadian system, I'd like to reach an international title, and playing 3 international rated events a year is not a good way to do that.
This is the kind of line used by politicians at all levels to keep their feet dry and sit on their a... Of course, the ordinary member does not care about reaffiliation, he is not touched by the consequences of the current situation. That does not mean that nothing should be done.
Re: Why did the CFC and FQE relationship fall apart?
I share the frustration of those posting on this topic. It is regrettable that we cannot get our act together.
That said, the issues that keep us apart are intractable and not unique to chess. By its failure to reach out, in French, to players from Quebec the CFC forfeited the opportunity to be a truly united Canadian organization. That said, the overlay of the "question nationale" led to unhelpful posturing by the Quebec federation and the divisive bid to be represented independently at FIDE. One is inclined to say a plague on both our houses.:)
In typically pragmatic Canadian style, however, we seem to have worked out a reasonable modus vivendi. Quebec players represent Canada in international competitions while their federation continues to benefit from provincial subsidies the CFC can only envy.
Perhaps instead of bemoaning the situation and resurrecting the sorry history we should simply continue to try to make it work for everybody.:D
What are these annual fees to FIDE exactly ? Would the CFC be happy with the FQE paying a per capita share of these (around 25%) in exchange to have normal access to FIDE ratings and a formula to recognize the FQE ratings (for national championships purposes) and give Quebec players equal chances ?
While I can't speak for the CFC, my first reaction to that is "how is this a good deal for the CFC?"
Lastly, I don't think it's an unreasonable compromise to accept FQE FIDE events, don't rate them as CFC, and charge an extra $2 rating fee for the lack of affiliation. That way the CFC will get $5 just for submitting a player's result to FIDE. When that's multiplied by 10 players in a tourney, that's an extra $50, versus the $0 that the CFC is currently willing to accept (for not providing an easy service) out of pride.
Denton
You can already do that. The fee is $23 per player ($20 tournament playing fee + $3 rating fee).
While I can't speak for the CFC, my first reaction to that is "how is this a good deal for the CFC?"
If the CFC makes more money with this deal than it does actually, then it's a good deal isn't it?
I mean, if we have two scenarios :
1 (the actual) : The CFC makes x money, and the FQE has very few FIDE rated tournaments.
2 : The CFC receives 1,25 x money, and the FQE have more FIDE rated tournaments.
This is just a possibility, and I've no idea of what amount it really represents... There are also other possibilities. For instance, the FQE has subsidies which are used for administration tasks. In exchance of FIDE rating, the FQE could help the CFC to rate their own tournament or to do any other administrative tasks.
These are ideas, and I have no idea of whether or not they are reasonable, but there's surely something to work out.
The question should be: what is the benefit for chess in Canada to do this? The CFC should be just a tool to move forward. It should not be the goal in itself. When chess is the goal answers are found much more easily.
And where was this opinion of yours when people asked you to help out with promotion while you were Canadian Champion, may I ask?
Tweet
Comment