Chess Scotland Adult Selection Criteria

[robin moore]

Congratulations Andy M on being asked to select the Glorney team.

[andyburnett]

https://www.chessscotland.com/international/
Adult selectors – IM Andrew Muir, GM Colin McNab, IM Douglas Bryson. (Update Dec 2013)
Adult selectors (Seniors) – IM Andrew Muir, GM Colin McNab. (Update March 2016)
By this sleight of hand Andy B takes over the role of all three adult selectors.
It's too late to apply to the 2018 Olympiad since players who work may have used up their holidays playing in the summer and have none left for the critical months of October 2017- March 2018.
Perhaps it should be tried in Senior Chess first to see if works rather than the most important tournament. How about starting with European Senior Team 2019 and see if it improves position?
I have also been asked to select Glorney team. Are my hands tied on that too ?

Hi Andy M,

To qualify for the selection committee you have to have completed 15 posts in the last 6 months without offending people, 8 of them to be internationally-rated. From checking the records I believe you still have about, oh, 15 to go?

Good luck with choosing the Glorney team all by yourself - I'm sure your tremendous support for them over recent campaigns has not gone unnoticed and they will be delighted by this news.

Regards,

Andy B.

[robin moore]

Andy M,

Will you be selecting all the other junior international squads? The next one is the U16 Olympiad in December 2017.

[Jim Webster]

Robin.

No, Fiona Petrie is the Junior Director and she will be responsible for putting together the selectors from a panel of Selectors for the events that CS will be entering.

Let's keep this thread on subject. and not digress into Junior selection here - start another one if you like but lets keep this thread for the Adult selection topic please.

[robin moore]

Jim,

I think you will find that it was Andy M that digressed with his news that he will be selecting the Glorney team and asking if his hands would be tied in selecting it.

[amuir]

Jim,

I think you will find that it was Andy M that digressed with his news that he will be selecting the Glorney team and asking if his hands would be tied in selecting it.

i have had a quick look at the grading lists to see possible team changes under andy b scenario:            
olympiad- mcnab & shaw replaced by tate & mannion
women - arakhamia & bamber replaced by smith & durno
senior - pritchett & jamieson replaced by mckerracher & webster
european - muir & morrison replaced by burnett & grant
given lower grades of replacements we might finish above seedings for a change and the object will be achieved.
my glorney comments look like wishful thinking.

[David Deary]

Andy, 
I think this is relatively simple.  Walter is trying to get the strongest possible team to represent Scotland at the next Olympiad.  You are effectively trying to get the strongest possible team in ten years time.  I think it is important that people recognise that distinction and understand that those noble aims are often in conflict.  I hope people see the sense in your argument.

Wow, what a thread this is! Matt's post above is an important one, its the reason behind my support for this proposal.

My two cents for what they are worth as one of the many wood pushers who won't be challenging for international honours.

Representing your country should be a privilege and represent the pinnacle of hard work and dedication to the game. To this end, Andy B's number of games requirement seems too tame to me. Although it is definitely the right way to go. Its also common place in other sports for there to be an activity requirement (in one form or another) in order to be considered for selection.

That said, I have some sympathy with the arguments if someone has a legitimate reason for perceived inactivity - ie family member is ill etc. and in these circumstances I feel there should be wiggle room or selectors should be able to apply common sense. Is waiting for the next cycle too punitive in extenuating circumstances? I feel it probably is although its entirely subjective. I still support what you are proposing Andy, on balance, even as is its better than where we currently are.

Andrew Green made a good point regarding top juniors not knowing who our top players are. I think this demonstrates the real disconnect at the moment. Its also true for adult players too, other than Roddy & Steve, I can't recall the last titled player I saw at a tournament. Admittedly, I don't go to as many these days so probably not representative. 

Another couple of points:
1) I'm fed up of measuring our success by achieving seeding we should be targeting to exceed seeding. I also love the irony that Andy M measures the Olympiad team by seedeing but consistently lambasts the Glorney team for performing to seeding. 

2) Given CS's financial position anyone seeking an appearance fee to play for their country should not be selected. For the record - travel & expenses is totally acceptable.

[Jim Webster]

 
I think that a lot of people seem to underestimate the activity of our top players over the years, particularly with FIDE rated games


Name,  Grade, Fide games played in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014 
 (most recent 6 months of 2017 in brackets)

 Turner, Matthew J (GM) 2545  22(18), 36, 44, 42
 Aagaard, Jacob (GM) 2488  4(3), 10, 26, 24
 Greet, Andrew N (IM)  2460  25(18), 36, 29, 26
 Shaw, John (GM) SCO2425  5(2),  20, 12, 20
 McNab, Colin A (GM) 2420  21(16), 20, 32, 38
 Sreeves, Clement (FM) 2405  24(20), 20, 62, 43
 Gourlay, Iain (FM) 2377  18(14), 32,27,2
 Arakhamia-Grant, Ketevan (GM) 2369  40(39),89,29,32
 Tate, Alan (FM) 2366  41(30),68,51, 49
 Bryson, Douglas M (IM) 2345   3(3) 9 8 0
 Mannion, Stephen R (IM) 2320  19(1) 27 21 28
 Abdulla, Murad (FM) 2316  28(23) 46 38 38

..... and given that the proposal is 8 Fide games from 15 played that looks like a pretty strong team could be selected. It also shows who need to get a few more games played to meet the selection criteria Andy is proposing.

By the way these numbers are taken from the FIDE ratings website.

So are the proposals offered by our International Director that onerous? 

[John Watkins]

Perhaps we should consider other published selection criteria:

Singapore
http://singaporechess.org.sg/images/Form...202017.pdf

English juniors
http://englishchess.org.uk/Juniors/junio...on-policy/

US chess federation
http://www.uschess.org/content/view/11958/689/
Note team captain and coach selected by the players!!

New Zealand
http://www.newzealandchess.co.nz/Olympia...d2016.html

To name but a few. We should adapt from there given the resources we have to hand. Interesting to note a lot of them have cut off dates for inviting applications from interested players before selection process starts. Some very clear on funding available, which is pertinent to current CS financial predicament.

Would love to see old school flow charts in any formal selection criteria.

[WBuchanan]

Thanks John - interesting.

A quick summary of the chess requirements as I read them:

US, uses a system of 'Invitational Rating Points'

Operates a minimum games system with built-in deductions for fewer than 30 games in 12 month period (that ends 120 days before invitation) against strong opposition - 2200 mens team, 2000 womens (I think this may mean minimum strength not average). Players are
penalized one 'invitational point' per game short of the 30.

It seems like an explicit formula is used for selection, with even a formal tie break formula, the first breaker being the number of games.

New Zealand. Players must apply to be considered.
No specific activity rule requiring a minimum number of tournament games. Selectors interpret everything and take activity into account.

Singapore operates a National Squad from which players are picked but to be in it they must have played 27 Fide-rated games in the previous 12 months.
Players in the national squad must have standard ratings of  2300+ (men) and 2100+(women). Players must also be at least 20 years old. Other than that there is little reference to ratings. Players must send in all their games!

Players have to have played in the last two championships.
Olympiad: Top two ranked players in the each of the last two National Championships
Remaining positions decided by SCF on grounds of form, consistency  and potential.

It seems like scrutinizing the last two championships is an important part of all selections, and players' games too.

Sorry if I missed anything important