Talking about the back:
Could we turn back to Igor's controversial report?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.What do you think about the proposal to switch to a longer circle and to (partly) abandon the comcept of determine the World champion in am match?
In my mind that should be done at least for the Women's title.
We should remember that the match format was chosen as standard in the time of stake matches, which are gone.
Today it makes not much sense to keep it in my mind, as a tounament vicory is always a greater merit then a match win over only one single opponent, and the current system also holds priviliges for the title holder, which spoils the idea of fair paly to some extend.
One should only imagine if the last olympic champion is "seated" for the final, and has at least a silver medal secure..., and a gold medal if he draws his challenger, who only gets a silver medal then...
Or, we could continue play a QT each year, which means that organizers have little time to make a bid, and as we have less events, the chance of a higher turnout might be good, as Jan explained that she , like almost any checker player, could not afford to play a QT each year.
And what would be the "optimum" duration of one circle?
If the WMSG could be established with a "Checkers" event, then 2 or 4 years may be a good duration.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. And what about his idea to skip GAYP?
As I said, in my mind it makes more sense to skip the current 3-move system, as it offers chance too many chances if one might say so, by not providing equal opening opportunities to all players in the tournament, which GAYP does.
I would recommend either to switch to a totally new system like 11 men with GAYP and one opening in the whole round for all, or a system similar to the Italian system.
So throw away the rubbish of the 156 openings, and play only those that offer
fair chances.
In that case it would be possible to swicth to rounds with one game, allowing big round robin events.
BTW: for lower sections, GAYP should always be used, as 3-move scares many casual players that we have to win for the game!
I think Igor, being a master, has not considered this aspect.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. my own proposal:
fix the maximum time limit for one game and prohibit draw offers before the 1st time control.
A problem in Beijing as well as in Dublin were the uncalculabe game/round durations ,as the games had no fixed limit and could last "forver"...
Or the referee stops it to secure at least a fixed round duration , which gives the referee too much power, and forces a short 2nd game if the 1st was long.
I would suggest to play 40 moves in one hour and 15 Minutes for the rest of the game.
that means any game can only last 2,5 hours, and time saved by a closer 1st
or 2nd game gives the players more freetime.
in contrast to the current system, in which some reknown grandmasters are also unfamously reknown in playing rest games in the 2nd game in order to save energy.
That is also the purpose to prohibit short drwas before time control.
Under the current rules, a short 1st game does not mean that the round is shorter, while a quick 2nd game (restgame) makes the round shorter.
That is clearly a quite unfair system!
Why has nobody ever tried to change it?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think a new system can be established 2011 or 2012, but after the WMSG the time could have come, maybe even starting with the WMSG 2012, provided they hold a "Checkers" event at all, which I hope they will do.
But as that event will only be for a few players, it would make sense to ask the WC's and the top placed of the last QT's to play there for the "new" World Championship.
The time frame for this switch I think is manageable.
But do you think it is desirable at all?
Or are you safisfied with the current system?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Promotion:
Here a lot has to be done.
I. Internal communication:
A)the WCDF needs to have a website which is up to date.
May I say a big
THANK YOU
to Shane McCosker who began his work as the new WCDF webmaster right after the QT?
Here is it:
http://wcdf.wz.cz/index.htm
Also the website of the FMJD, which contains a "Checkers" section must be updated regularly, which I began after Dublin:
http://www.fmjd.org/
FMJD-Forum, "Checkers" section:
http://laatste.info/bb3/viewforum.php?f ... f8e99202bf
B) a regular newsletter by the WCDF in electronic format should be done, and I am currently working on that.
That newsletter should be sent to each federation (not just WCDF, but also FMJD) and organizers, and also be of intersest to each individual player.
II. external communication:
C) news agencies, TV stations and newspapers should be contacted by either the WCDF of the organizing federation prior to the event, as soon as the event hasd been given away.
The organizing federation has to provide a press officer, that has to arrange the media coverages by those media that show interest, as this can not be done by an official from abroad.
The WCDF PR officer and the local PR officer should be in close contact.
D) The WCDF should produce flyers, badges etc.
So far we have no material for playing (boards, pieces, clocks) and no material for promotion at all!
Greetinx from Dortmund, Germany
Ingo Zachos
or maybe in that way the kids are more concentrated?...or maybe to have a girl champ and a boy champ in this way girls and boy get more encourage?...or maybe because is more fair????......hmmmmm we should ask organizers or psicologists....