How to become a CFC governor?

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??

Bob, please don't speak on behalf of juniors all across Canada. A vast majority of them give up so I doubt they will care and the few that stay dedicated to the game will definitely become strong enough that all those Class titles will become meaningless to them soon enough. And what exactly did I say that is offensive to juniors? I said if they like the game enough or they have a coach forced upon them, most of them will probably get to master rating provided they actually play chess in their spare time.

Bindi, I do not speak on behalf of all juniors, where do you get that?
We obviously have different definitions of "rating snob". Enough said.

To quote you: "if they like the game enough or they have a coach forced upon them, most of them will probably get to master rating provided they actually play chess in their spare time."

Maybe that is what you meant to say, but it is not even close to what you actually posted. Go back and read what you actually said.

[Bob Armstrong]

Ability of Serious Juniors to be Masters

I said if they like the game enough or they have a coach forced upon them, most of them will probably get to master rating provided they actually play chess in their spare time.

Hi Bindi:

I'm not sure you realize how hard chess is for many people, including juniors. Perhaps because you had the talent to build on with some serious study. Not all have that talent. I think reaching "master" level is not as easy as you portray.

Let's look at the active Canadian FIDE rating list:

Canada (Active players)

# Name Title Fed Rating G B-Year
1 Spraggett, Kevin g CAN 2577 0 1954
2 Hansen, Eric g CAN 2576 18 1992
3 Sambuev, Bator g CAN 2513 0 1980
4 Charbonneau, Pascal g CAN 2505 0 1983
5 Tyomkin, Dimitri g CAN 2486 0 1977
6 Gerzhoy, Leonid m CAN 2469 0 1987
7 Hambleton, Aman m CAN 2465 9 1992
8 Noritsyn, Nikolay m CAN 2456 0 1991
9 Quan, Zhe m CAN 2431 0 1990
10 Porper, Edward m CAN 2418 0 1963
11 Krnan, Tomas m CAN 2416 0 1988
12 Samsonkin, Artiom m CAN 2410 0 1989
13 Cheng, Bindi m CAN 2409 0 1990
14 Panjwani, Raja m CAN 2407 0 1990
15 Hebert, Jean m CAN 2387 0 1957
16 Wang, Richard m CAN 2376 0 1998
17 Pechenkin, Vladimir f CAN 2357 0
18 O'Donnell, Tom m CAN 2354 0 1965
19 Thavandiran, Shiyam f CAN 2338 0 1992
20 Doroshenko, Maxim f CAN 2336 0 1978
21 Cummings, David H. m CAN 2326 0 1961
22 Jiang, Louie f CAN 2324 0 1993
23 Yoos, John C. f CAN 2313 0 1969
24 Kleinman, Michael f CAN 2302 0 1994
25 Sapozhnikov, Roman f CAN 2292 0 1994
26 Laceste, Loren Brigham f CAN 2290 0 1993
27 Milicevic, Goran f CAN 2287 0
28 Qin, Zi Yi Joey CAN 2284 0 1996
29 Piasetski, Leon m CAN 2282 0 1951
30 Baragar, Fletcher f CAN 2280 0 1955
31 Leveille, Francois f CAN 2279 0 1961
31 Peredun, Andrew f CAN 2279 0 1980
33 Miller, Evgeny CAN 2276 0 1985
34 Yam, Alex CAN 2275 0 1985
35 Hamilton, Robert f CAN 2269 0 1961
36 Calugar, Arthur m CAN 2267 9 1994
36 Gentes, Kevin f CAN 2267 0 1967
38 Moore, Harry CAN 2261 0
39 Stevens, Christian f CAN 2259 0 1987
40 Khassanov, Marat f CAN 2256 0 1956
41 Reeve, Jeff CAN 2245 0 1959
42 Voskanyan, Vahagn f CAN 2241 0 1944
43 Ochkoos, Jura f CAN 2239 0
44 Martchenko, Alexander CAN 2236 0 1993
45 Kraiouchkine, Nikita CAN 2232 0 1995
46 Gordon, David c CAN 2229 0 1973
47 Voloaca, Mihnea CAN 2225 0 1981
48 Chabot, Roland CAN 2220 0 1956
49 Gardner, Robert CAN 2217 0 1964
50 Plotkin, Victor f CAN 2214 0 1968
51 Awatramani, Janak CAN 2212 0 1999
51 Jiganchine, Roman CAN 2212 0 1982
53 Masse, Hugues CAN 2210 0 1983
54 Levkovsky, Alexandre CAN 2201 0

So we have a grand total of 54 masters!

How many active Canadians do we have in our CFC database ( the CFC active membership of some 1,800 is much lower, I think)? Can someone provide me with that figure? Once we have it, we can calculate the % of masters in all active chess players in Canada. Even using the CFC membership number, the % of masters is only 3% (which is high compared to the right figure).

I believe that the percentage is going to be very low - the vast majority of Canadian chess players are not masters.

Is this going to be significantly different among improving juniors? I agree that it is likely to be somewhat higher. But I think it is still going to be low.

Is it going to be significantly higher among "serious improving juniors" (= "if they like the game enough or they have a coach forced upon them")? I don't think so. I still believe a certain degree of talent must be present, for "work" to build on. I just don't believe all serious juniors have that degree of talent to build on, sufficient to bring them to a master level in most cases.

Bob A

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??

Hi Adam:

Here is my recent post in the currently happening Spring Governors' On-line Meeting, concerning the motion to introduce lesser Canadian Women's titles:

As many of you know, I think the current separate women's parallel system is in fact now detrimental to women's chess, and is retarding its progress. I would abolish the whole separate rating system, and women's titles. However, in my attempts to discuss this option, I have been amazingly, to me, alone.

So given that the separate system exists, I do not understand the women players complaining about "cheap" titles. The whole system is "cheap". The Women's World Championship system is patently inferior to the World Chess Championship cycle.

But the argument is that it is needed to attract/keep women in chess, even if it is by diluted titles. Since we have diluted titles already, and a diluted system, it seems to me that the extension of diluted titles, as in this motion, complies with the whole logic behind this system.

Why would you not create low level targets as "rewards" if you believe it attracts/keeps women players. If that is right, then by all means the motion should pass.

But I personally will abstain, because I don't believe in the whole separate system, and so, on some occasions, like this, I decide not to participate in tinkering with it. I'll let those who believe in the system decide what "improves" it.

Bob Armstrong, GTCL/Ont CFC Governor

At the online meeting you've mentioned Bob, I opined that once the % of female players worldwide (and the % of females in the top tier of players of both genders put together) reached roughly parity with the % of male players, the seperate system of women's chess might be done away with at that point.

Looking on the internet today, I found out that in Bridge there are seperate all women's Bridge tournaments. I assume the reason may be to accomodate a social need that at least some women have, as in Bridge I would assume there's long been a rough parity of male and female players. However, so far I have not come across a seperate set of Bridge 'titles' (or master points?!) designated for just female players. Bridge can obviously be compared with chess in this regard, in that it is a game of skill that is (basically :) ) non-physical.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??

I call it as it is. When there's a chess system that rewards Class E titles equivalent to 1400 in strength, there must be something wrong with the idea in entirety.

I agree with that.

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

A class E title is like a Grade 1 diploma. It's not worth much, but there's nothing wrong with having it. It by no means cheapens the master title, and is completely irrelevant to any discussion because it simply doesn't matter.

(Wording issue: The system awards Class E titles. It doesn't reward titles.)

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

A class E title is like a Grade 1 diploma. It's not worth much, but there's nothing wrong with having it. It by no means cheapens the master title, and is completely irrelevant to any discussion because it simply doesn't matter.

(Wording issue: The system awards Class E titles. It doesn't reward titles.)

Certainly true, so long as there are no free entries or other perks for class E players at any events. Probably not many would get plenty of students after receiving such a title if they taught chess, either.

"Amateur" tournaments (event entries entirely restricted to U2200 players perhaps) so far are not so common, at least in Canada anyway.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??

Originally Posted by Bindi Cheng
I call it as it is. When there's a chess system that rewards Class E titles equivalent to 1400 in strength, there must be something wrong with the idea in entirety.

I agree with that.

Why would you agree with that? The martial arts for kids has been using a colored belt system for decades, and the children's progress is marked by the color of belt they wear. Here is one example:

Shorin-Ryu Okinawan style, there are 3 different classes for juniors- 5-13 year old.

Beginner/Intermediate:
White
Yellow
Orange
Orange and White
Blue

Lower Advanced:
Blue and White
Green and White
Purple
Purple and White
Brown and White
Red

Upper Advanced:
Red and White
Jr.Black Belt (Black and White)
Jr. Black Belt 1 orange loop
Jr. Black Belt 2 orange loops
Jr. Black Belt 3 orange loops
Jr. Black Belt 4 orange loops
Red and Black
Red and Black 1 loop
Red and Black 2 loops
Red and Black 3 loops
Red and black 4 loops
Probational Black Belt- Black and Gold (if under 15)

Are you going to go to all the martial arts teaching institutions across Canada and tell them there's "something wrong" with them awarding these colored belts? Are you agreeing with Bindi that once a kid achieves a basic level (in this case, a belt), that kid will lose the hunger to achieve any more?

There's general pronouncements being made by Bindi without a shred of evidence.

Show us the kids that have achieved Class E and have then "lost the hunger" and dropped out of chess because they're happy with Class E. Kids drop out of chess all the time, but the reason(s) likely have nothing to do with achieving a class level, "losing the hunger", where they would have stayed in chess if the lowest title they could achieve was Expert or Master.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

(Wording issue: The system awards Class E titles. It doesn't reward titles.)

A title is a reward for achieving a level of competence. To award is simply the act of delivering the reward.

If Class titles are a big deal for you then go with it. It doesn't change Bindi being right about Class E titles.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??

Paul, keep boring posts to one screen if you want them read.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??

Why would you agree with that? The martial arts for kids has been using a colored belt system for decades, and the children's progress is marked by the color of belt they wear.

Adult progress is also marked by the colour of belt they wear but in most martial arts that use belts you aren't considered a serious student until you achieve the black belt.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

There are also low to high level certificates awarded for passing different tests of swimming skills, from beginner level on up. A beginner would I assume not even be considered to be hired as a life guard.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

There are also low to high level certificates awarded for passing different tests of swimming skills, from beginner level on up. A beginner would I assume not even be considered to be hired as a life guard.

I would think there must be some such similar testing awards for chess skill (as opposed to rating criteria achieved) that have been devised at some point, besides in chess books (via self-quizzes). One such test of skill level could be on delivering basic mates - though B+N vs. K ought to be part of a higher level test. Surely this has been tried at kids' camps.

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

CMA has certificates that are supposed to be awarded for "knowing" various aspects of chess. I personally never used them for that purpose, but from my experience many teachers put a lot of stock in the students' ability to solve exam problems.

I would think there must be some such similar testing awards for chess skill (as opposed to rating criteria achieved) that have been devised at some point, besides in chess books (via self-quizzes). One such test of skill level could be on delivering basic mates - though B+N vs. K ought to be part of a higher level test. Surely this has been tried at kids' camps.

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

Let's go back to the old Soviet way of doing things (maybe it's still done that way in eastern Europe):

Have a round-robin tournament of any number of Class "x" players. Those who score above a certain percentage move up a class - irregardless of rating. The others try again next tournament. When one series of tournaments (one for each class - however many classes you want) is complete, another series begins.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How to become a CFC governor?

Let's go back to the old Soviet way of doing things (maybe it's still done that way in eastern Europe):

Have a round-robin tournament of any number of Class "x" players. Those who score above a certain percentage move up a class - irregardless of rating. The others try again next tournament. When one series of tournaments (one for each class - however many classes you want) is complete, another series begins.

Interesting. That might somehow make a class title arguably easier to achieve, at least at times, than the way the CFC awards class titles currently.

On the other hand, I suppose such special class RR events would need to be organized by any number of people in any number of places in Canada, and on a regular basis.