FIDE is in CHARGE

[Vlad Dobrich]

The organizers of this magnificent candidates-level tournament are having a problem getting FIDE cooperation in avoidance of scheduling conflicts. The 6-player double round-robin is about to start in Sao Paolo for the first half and in Bilbao for the second half.
Round one pairings>>>>

Caruana : Carlsen
Aronian : Karjakin
Anand : Vallejo

One would expect that FIDE would encourage independent elite tournament sponsorship. But it seems that FIDE does not want competition. FIDE wants a monopoly! This is also evident from their move to compete against the Live Ratings site - they now publish rating updates on a monthly basis (weekly next?) FIDE wants to be in charge!
Instead, FIDE should lend their financial support to excellence in chess organizing such as the above mentioned groups as well as others - the publication New in Chess, the web sites " Tournament Results" and "Chess Bomb live games" come to mind.
But FIDE wants to 'be in CHARGE!'

The following is the organizers lament that they get no cooperation from FIDE>>>

"The Grand Slam Masters Final considers essential for the future of the professional chess to agree on a calendar between FIDE and the private tournaments
02.02.12 Bilbao. The organization of the Grand Slam Masters Final in Bilbao proposes a meeting between FIDE and the organizers of the main private tournaments to elaborate together a calendar of competitions for the coming years, as it happens in other professional sports. The Bilbao organizers, who are working on th fifth Masters Final, emphasize “the great contribution of the private tournaments, which are doing so much, year after year, to promote chess all over the world”.

FIDE and the top tournaments should work together and harmoniously to decide the tournaments yearly calendar. We are already in March, and FIDE has still not announced officially the dates for the Candidates Tournament. In this respect, several Grand Masters, like current number one Magnus Carlsen and former World Champion Vladimir Kramnik, have already declared his preference for playing the Candidates in the first half of 2013, when there are enough dates to place it without affecting the top tournaments.

Although the Candidates has not been officialy announced yet, the FIDE president, Kirsan Iliumzhinov, said in a recent interview that it will be played between October 23 and November 13 in London. It is true that those dates would not coincide directly with another very relevant chess event. However, the Bilbao organizers announced months ago that the V Grand Slam Masters Final will take place between September 24 and October 13. Sao Paulo, almost with complete certainty, will host again the first half, as in 2011. It is very difficult to persuade any top player to play the Masters Final in two continents, and then the Candidates with only ten days in between.

The organization of the Bilbao Grand Slam Masters Final considers not realistic to block three entire and consecutive months (October, November and December) for the Candidates, like FIDE did in his announcement on November 2011. According to that argument, Bilbao, Moscow and London should be forced to move their traditional dates (as, actually, Moscow did) to some time before the Olympiad in August. It is not so easy to do that, and for Bilbao is just impossible, because if you want to play the Masters Final you have to qualify first by winning one of the Grand Slam tournaments. It is also true that FIDE has changed (delayed) its dates announcements a lot of times during the last 20 years.

The Bilbao Grand Slam Masters Final Bilbao offers its best cooperation spirit in order to place the very top FIDE tournaments (World Championship, Candidates, World Cup and Chess Olympiad) on the best possible dates along the coming years. And expects the same spirit from FIDE to solve the current problem, regarding the 2012 Candidates Tournament."

In Canada we have a similar problem with the CFC failing to support worthy initiatives by their members. The 'Chess in the Libraries' program comes to mind - the CFC should set aside an annual grant for equipment to facilitate the growth of this program. Annual grants to the most successful tournaments also would not be a bad idea. The CFC should support good projects, not compete with them. But then, the CFC wants to be in CHARGE!

[David Ottosen]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

In Canada we have a similar problem with the CFC failing to support worthy initiatives by their members. The 'Chess in the Libraries' program comes to mind - the CFC should set aside an annual grant for equipment to facilitate the growth of this program. Annual grants to the most successful tournaments also would not be a bad idea. The CFC should support good projects, not compete with them. But then, the CFC wants to be in CHARGE!

What money is the CFC expected to use to make all these grants?

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

Forget about the grant thing. Focus on the point of the FIDE debate. Promote good organizers by simply recognizing them. Suppose the CFC's primary mandate were to maximize awareness of and participation in Canadian chess. Suppose memberships and rating were very secondary.

If that were the goal, then the CFC might become an information hub for Canada, telling about the all the organizations that organize chess. So Chess in the Library would be advertised. The regional and national chess challenges, and the international one. Along with the major open and closed events organized by the provinces, and the Swiss tournaments organized by clubs. And schools that run chess programs or classes. And Universities. And notable Canadian participation in foreign events.

Wouldn't that be a marvelous picture if all these were included? It's not about being in charge. It's about being inclusive.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

So Chess in the Library would be advertised.

No good deed goes unpunished.
http://chesstalk.info/forum/showpost...04&postcount=1

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

What money is the CFC expected to use to make all these grants?

That's where the membership money should go. Not $18,000 on a website which is no better than the old one. If that was how the money was spent even I would pay for a membership!

[David Ottosen]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

That's where the membership money should go. Not $18,000 on a website which is no better than the old one. If that was how the money was spent even I would pay for a membership!

You understand that a program like Chess in Libraries is of extremely limited scope (in terms of service to the full membership) compared to a well functioning web site? To turn your phrase, why should someone from BC or Alberta buy a membership to contribute to an Ontario library project?

If you want to complain that the execution of the web site project was no good, that's perfectly fine. However, that is exactly the type of project the CFC should support - not small regional projects.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

You understand that a program like Chess in Libraries is of extremely limited scope (in terms of service to the full membership) compared to a well functioning web site? To turn your phrase, why should someone from BC or Alberta buy a membership to contribute to an Ontario library project?

If you want to complain that the execution of the web site project was no good, that's perfectly fine. However, that is exactly the type of project the CFC should support - not small regional projects.

Right on. Maybe the OCA should support the Chess in the Library project? Wait, the OCA has no money either ...

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

To turn your phrase, why should someone from BC or Alberta buy a membership to contribute to an Ontario library project

FYI: the program became INTERNATIONAL when Washington, DC joined the course. Though it is on a federal scale too with AB, BC, ON participating. Yes, it is dominated by Ontario libraries, does it hurt? :D

[Peter McKillop]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

Right on. Maybe the OCA should support the Chess in the Library project? Wait, the OCA has no money either ...

And let's keep it that way. :) You may recall the incredible bungling mess that resulted from the last occasion when the OCA had some real money to work with. And then successive presidents never took any steps to reasonably ensure that such a splat of financial vomit wouldn't recur. Lesson: OCA not to be trusted with money.

[Bob Armstrong]

CFC Chess Promotion

Hi Alan:

Your point is a good one.

I can only say that as CFC Public Relations Coordinator, I have over the last few years, tried to highlight goings on in chess - organizations, tournaments, results, etc. It has not been as inclusive as you would like, but that is to some extent because the information has not reached me through the traditional sources I check. If I see something interesting, I try to promote it.

You can see what has been highlighted in the last while in the CFC " News " Forum :http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=11

I welcome anyone giving me a heads up on what might be " newsworthy " ( bobarm@sympatico.ca )

Bob, CFC Public Relations Coordinator

[Gary Ruben]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

What money is the CFC expected to use to make all these grants?

Maybe try here.

http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/sh...ess+foundation

The CFC and their foundation are not destitute.

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

You understand that a program like Chess in Libraries is of extremely limited scope (in terms of service to the full membership) compared to a well functioning web site? To turn your phrase, why should someone from BC or Alberta buy a membership to contribute to an Ontario library project?

If you want to complain that the execution of the web site project was no good, that's perfectly fine. However, that is exactly the type of project the CFC should support - not small regional projects.

The Chess in the Libraries has also gone west somewhat. I believe they have some participation from Calgary, if I'm not mistaken.
And FURTHERMORE, I did not say the money should only go to C in the L project.
I would also be in favour of an annual grant to the Paul Keres Memorial tournament, for example. In other words, ANY group in Canada that created a beneficial event for chess should be supported. This would encourage local and regional initiatives to benefit chess. The Governors or a sub-committee could allocate the funds as they saw fit.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

The Chess in the Libraries has also gone west somewhat. I believe they have some participation from Calgary, if I'm not mistaken.
And FURTHERMORE, I did not say the money should only go to C in the L project.
I would also be in favour of an annual grant to the Paul Keres Memorial tournament, for example. In other words, ANY group in Canada that created a beneficial event for chess should be supported. This would encourage local and regional initiatives to benefit chess. The Governors or a sub-committee could allocate the funds as they saw fit.

I was not happy with the way the website was implemented but that's crying over spilt milk and a decent website is a must. Recently the responsiveness of the website has improved substantially so we can probably live with this for a while.

I think it would be dumb to increase membership fees so that the governors would have more money to spread around. There is nothing preventing you or anyone else from supporting chess initiatives out of their own pockets. You can even convince other chess players to donate and pool your resources. The CFC charges members enough right now and I don't see a compelling argument for charging more. Perhaps the focus should be on charging less. Our costs are rather fixed and as we grow the federation can look at more initiatives. The national federation should support national and international initiatives and not local initiatives that support only a small subset of the chess playing populace. By all means recognize the local initiatives but I don't see how $500 dropped here and there will make any real difference.

Windsor has had chess in the library for 40 years or close to it. You don't see us asking for donations. Buy some tournament quality chess sets and donate them. Spend some time teaching kids to play at the library. You don't need the CFC for that.

[Roger Patterson]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

......
I would also be in favour of an annual grant to the Paul Keres Memorial tournament, for example. In other words, ANY group in Canada that created a beneficial event for chess should be supported. This would encourage local and regional initiatives to benefit chess. The Governors or a sub-committee could allocate the funds as they saw fit.

Essentially, you are proposing that the CFC act as a tax on small stuff so that money can be distributed to big existing events. In terms of financial viability, the equation is actually the other way around. The larger events are just fine - it's smaller or new events that have the financial problems.

Some other points:

1) the sum of the budgets of weekend tournaments across Canada is substantially larger that the gross budget of the CFC. It's not clear how the CFC could redistribute a meaningful amount to tournaments.

2) It's not clear that you would accomplish anything by giving money to tournaments. You would need a much clear goal in mind to justify the activity.

3) Local organizers are probably in the best position to figure what events need support and how to do that.

4) tax the masses so that the CFC can redistribute with an even hand across the land? Functionally speaking, all that this would accomplish is putting an extra layer of bureaucracy and cost between organizers and their clients - the players.

5) Surely, the point of a national organization raising money is to use it for national projects - things like national championships, the Olympiad team, costs relating to international activities, the rating system. (and surely, those must be it's priority) - projects which it not really doing an adequate job of supporting now. As an organization, it is not proper to use the CFC to fund local activity.


You are right that tournaments are the lifeblood of the CFC and that they and the people who make them possible should be recognized but doling out grants to individual tournaments is not the way to do it.


I'll note that the BCCF automatically considers someone who organizes or directs a BCCF tournament (i.e. anything that contributes to the BCCF) a member of the BCCF.

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: FIDE is in CHARGE

And let's keep it that way. :) You may recall the incredible bungling mess that resulted from the last occasion when the OCA had some real money to work with. And then successive presidents never took any steps to reasonably ensure that such a splat of financial vomit wouldn't recur. Lesson: OCA not to be trusted with money.

I take great exception to that comment. I brought in the reform of having a regional Vice-President from each League on the Executive, thus ensuring that a) each League is being kept informed and b) it is now almost impossible for a single club to hold a majority on the Executive. The individual involved is also now banned for life from being elected to any position.

As for those who followed after me, the OCA now has public online AGMs which even further increases transparency.

That's not good enough for you? Okay, let's make you OCA President for a day. What more would YOU have done that could possibly prevent something like that from happening again?