CEGO Qualification

[Bantari]

I have to agree with Robert about the age limit. It's completely arbitrary and serves no purpose.

Same here.
There are not that many strong players in Europe. Why lower the available count (and possibly skill) even more?

[Bantari]

If we start from the standpoint that the aim is to produce players who will benefit European go, then most of the conditions make some sort of sense. You want somebody young enough to be around long enough to deliver on the investment. You want a guy whose roots are firmly in Europe so that he doesn't up sticks and leave that fair continent. You want someone who belongs to a country that supports the EGF because it's the EGF that is both the most supportive environment and also can benefit most from professional input.

I don't know whether that was the thinking, but it does seem much more likely than a simple plan to find the best player and cart him off the Orient.

But if that sort of thinking was behind it, it is absurd to call it discrimination. Nevertheless, the end result (in any circumstances) is much more likely to be a teaching pro rather than a tournament pro, and so Robert's point that teachers are excluded has some weight.

The real problem as I see it in that putative scenario is the continued wilfulness of the would-be pros and/or their backers not to engage with the wider base of people it is supposedly designed to help eventually. Of course we all know management and democracy don't mix very well, but this is not about managing a project to make a profit or a controversial change. It's about delivering benefits to the masses. A bit of consultation about which flavour lollipops we get would not go amiss. After all, we may not like lollipops at all.

Good points. I have to admit I did not really followed this issue, so having tons of questions...

For example - what is the purpose of such EuroPro organization?
If it is, as you say, to generate mostly-teaching pros, then why limit yourself by possibly excluding some very good teachers? If the objective is to gather the very strong into a tight and coherent organization, then why limit yourself by excluding some of the strongest players by age and/or other affiliations? Does not make sense to me.

I guess the main issue here is - what *is* an EuroPro other than a title? I have asked this question before, but never got any answer. I am away from European scene so possibly I have missed something, but anybody knows?

Anyways - if the purpose is to have "somebody young enough to be around long enough to deliver on the investment" - then how will it work, in practice? Is the EuroPro title for life? And what benefits is the organization providing for all those youngsters to prevent them from eventually quitting Go in order to work and earn and support their families?

Also, I don't understand the point about "precedence for paid work only for European Professionals". What does it mean? Organizers will be forbidden to allow non-EuroPro teachers teach at their events? Or give simuls, or whatever? The EGF will no longer support any efforts to teach or publish from anybody else but EuroPro people? What if those EuroPro players are not interested in teaching or publishing? And how will it be enforced? The organizers who allow Robert's teaching, for example, will not get any EGF help?

This whole thing looks really bizzare to me, and sort-of desperate, like somebody tries to push a concept without really understanding it.
Anybody knows where most of the ideas come from and what are the underlying reasons?

I mean - somebody must know. Who is behind this EuroPro thing?
I have lots of other questions, but all the above is puzzling me the most.

[Javaness2]

I suppose clearer information will emerge from the EGF in the next few months. Right now, there are still some points I am unclear on.

By the way, I bet on Pavol Lisy taking the first place.

[Connection]

Cheering for Pavol Lisy his story http://www.eurogofed.org/proqualification/ sounds really inspiring too.
One of my other favorites would be Andrii, mostly because of what I read on Benjamin Teuber's blog.

[hyperpape]

Someone has done quite the infodump on senseis: http://senseis.xmp.net/?1stEuropeanProQualification2014.

[Matti]

So it is not the strongest Europeans that can become European Professionals, but it is those not being discriminated, e.g., by

I think there is practically very little chance to initiate a professional system in Europe in a way that, you can't find elements of discrimination. When a system starts, there is relatively small money available. I would not expect anyone to toss a million Euro yearly to get the system started. Maybe after a generation that could happen. Dividing the money to many players would leave each such a small share that it is not worthwhile. When selecting a small number of players it is hard to avoid discriminating some unless you make a lottery.

[RobertJasiek]

Why? It is possible to qualify the same number of players per year without setting additional restrictions for age, number of years of residence of holders of a European citizenship etc.

***

BTW, the system has also good aspects:

- Using a maximal rating per period much relaxes uncertainties in the rating system, which would be significant if rating on a fixed date were used. (The German Championship also uses a maximal rating per period.)

- The Chinese Rules are pretty good (although not perfect and although it is a sponsorship accident that such rules are used).

[Matti]

Why? It is possible to qualify the same number of players per year without setting additional restrictions for age, number of years of residence of holders of a European citizenship etc.

If you care to propose a system for that, I bet I can find some form of discrimination there. for example one could play qualification in his home twon while another player might have to travel 400 km to the tournament.

[RobertJasiek]

Discrimination and disadvantages that can be avoided must be avoided. Such that cannot be avoided continue to exist. Those I have mentioned can be avoided easily by dropping the related conditions (it would have been even easier not to create those conditions). Concerning travel disadvantages, they cannot be avoided for real world tournaments, but they could be minimised, e.g., by minimising the number of qualification sites or mutually compensating the players' excess travel expenses compared to a player's average travel expenses.

[deja]

I agree with the age restrictions. It wouldn't be fair for those 40 and under. Just consider the embarrassment of watching a 50 year-old Master destroy an 18 year old upstart who still lives at home with her mother - women are allowed, right?

And to John's point about productive investments in the future, longevity, and those who are of any true value (aka "benefit") to European Go, we could only expect 5 maybe 7 years tops of productive play with the 40+ crowd, especially with life expectancies and longevity as they are in developed countries these days. Can you imagine the spectacle of a 20-something having to sit across a table facing a 40-something on a gurney, hooked up to life support? That alone would clear the room.

Besides, Japan does it. What further justification is needed?

[oren]

Besides, Japan does it. What further justification is needed?

Sponsorship is the main one. They're putting a lot of effort to train a younger generation to raise the level of go in Europe. In some ways, since they did an age limit at all, I'm surprised it was that high.

Japan, Korea, and China all have significantly lower age limits to become professional. Of course the competition is also much higher there.

[deja]

Besides, Japan does it. What further justification is needed?

Sponsorship is the main one. They're putting a lot of effort to train a younger generation to raise the level of go in Europe. In some ways, since they did an age limit at all, I'm surprised it was that high.

Japan, Korea, and China all have significantly lower age limits to become professional. Of course the competition is also much higher there.

I'm perfectly aware of the [discriminatory] reasons for the age limit...

Addendum: Is there any evidence that a sponsor has or would revoke their sponsorship if someone 45 or 50 years of age were included in such European tournaments? And if that evidence does exists, what were the reasons? Why exactly would a potential sponsor of a European Go tournament not sponsor the event because some participants might be over the age of 40?

I'm guessing the age discrimination thingy is a cultural carryover, the supposed effect of which has no empirical justification here in the West and is simply assumed without question like any myth. I could be wrong.

[Connection]

So it is not the strongest Europeans that can become European Professionals.

Why do you think that not the strongest Europeans can become European Professionals? Many of those qualified are the best players in their home countries, winning their national Championship, and in Europe. The strongest invited player was Ilya Shikshin and he is the top 5 in Europe after some asian players, the next strongest is already Lisy Pavol as top 9 (between him and Ilya Shikshin again some players from asia), then there is Antti Tormanen who also was invited but refused too, as top 12 in europe. Followed directly by Cornel Burzo as top 13 who accepted the invitation. The next one would be Zejist as top 14, but who refused it, followed by Thomas Debarre as top 16 in europe who accepted the invitation and so on. So I don't understand what you mean by the strongest europeans can't become european professionals? The only persons that come to mind are Alexandr Dinerstein and Catalin Taranu but both are already professionals.

[RobertJasiek]

1) Today's situation need not be tomorrow's. E.g., in future, there could be lots of very strong 40+ years old players.

2) Rating is no 1:1 mapping for strength in very important tournaments, such as championships or qualifications.

3) With the given system, we will not find out whether Europeans with non-European pro ranks (Juan, Dinerstein, Taranu etc.) are weaker or stronger than Europeans in the qualification tournament.

4) Excluding the most successful live European tournament player, Dinerstein, 7 times European Champion, makes it especially hard to determine whether he or those that may play in the qualifications are stronger.

The system is designed to keep the number of games between eligible and non-eiligble players small. Do you recall very frequent complaints about old European Championships - that there would be too few top European - European games? Now it becomes too few top eligible European - top non-eligible European games. Great mistake!

[Uberdude]

I think the last few EGCs let us know Dinerstein is no longer the dominant European player he once was.