Life In 19x19

AGM 2017
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Javaness2 [ Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:37 am ]
Post subject:  AGM 2017

Yes, this is unlikely to interest many people, but here is the agenda for the AGM

Not much to see yet. There is a new proposal about how to decide the cost of membership fees, and another design for the European Championship.

Author:  RobertJasiek [ Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: AGM 2017

The most terrible aspect of the proposal is the two wildcards. Go is a mind sport game - not a political power game! Wildcards devalue the European Championship.

Author:  John Fairbairn [ Fri Mar 17, 2017 10:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: AGM 2017

The most terrible aspect of the proposal is the two wildcards. Go is a mind sport game - not a political power game! Wildcards devalue the European Championship.

Why? And where's the source of this so-called political power?

As I see it, the two wildcards take the place of the people 15th and 16th on the rating list, so they are not likely to be depriving people likely to win the championship. On the other hand, a wildcard reserves a slot for a top player who has been out of action in Europe for acceptable reasons (e.g. illness or training in the Far East). Since he would make the event stronger it adds value to the championship.

The one given to the home country is also sensible on the grounds that they can use it to attract local sponsors, if they have a suitable player.

Wildcards like this are common in chess and seem to work well and usually don't attract opprobrium, unlike some invitation-only events. Maybe the secret is moderation - 2 out 16, where those two have to be rated highly anyway - seems modest.

And there seems to be a case for giving the European pros, whose pet project it is, extra weighting in this decision.

Author:  RobertJasiek [ Fri Mar 17, 2017 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: AGM 2017

Ealier wildcards for European Go Championships have not been chosen wisely but prevented better performing players in the EC / EGC main tournament mix.

It started with up to 2 of 32; such can be neglected. 2 of 16 is an entirely different thing. Among the ca. 16 highest rated, present candidates, everybody has a chance to win the tounament. Not the greatest chance but a realistic chance. Like Greece becoming European soccer champion - unexpected but possible.

Whoever wants to play in the EC must be present in Europe and prove his skill in Europe and be not ill for an entire year preventing current proof of strength.

It does not matter how and which politicians choose wildcards. Negotiation by political power must not replace go skill as cause of qualification.

Objectives unrelated to the purpose of the championship must not spoil its nature. E.g. the objective of host country benefit. If you really think that a congress was not enough benefit, there are others means, such as requiring EC participants to teach local players during the period of the event. There is no need to lower the playing strength and quality of the EC by giving a wildcard to a host country player. Besides, such player's impact on host country observers is very greatly exaggerated. (In 2000, I could have been an EC wildcard player but I had sufficient rating anyway. Wildcard, so my feeling then, would just have been a cause for laziness of proving playing strength. I felt much better about having been qualified by proven playing strength, if we presume rating as evidence for the moment.)

Author:  dfan [ Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: AGM 2017

Wild card entrants have recently been introduced into the chess world championship cycle and I hate it. There are always plenty of players who are just as deserving as the one who is chosen. In my opinion the entry requirements for top tournaments should be entirely deterministic. If you're a great player but didn't manage to meet the requirements, sorry, try again next year.

Author:  Javaness2 [ Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: AGM 2017

2 wildcards to 14 seeds doesn't sound like a terrible ratio to me. Since their system had a clear diagram and simple rules I liked it. However, at the back of my mind I can't help thinking about just how many different systems there have been.

On a pernickety point of order, the motion is proposed by the EGF Pro Commission, but we cannot be sure who is on that because is not updated. Who's actually on the Commission?
Sort of likewise, is missing Aldo Podvani and Manja Marz from the Other Officers section

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group