We have lost our direction.

Lets start today by stating a goal. A goal that should be obvious and beyond dispute. Lets say our goal is to find the strongest possible chess players we have to represent Malaysia. Lets say this is because we want medals, we want our own GM and we are tired of being trashed and relegated in the International circuit.

Are we agreed on that?

If yes, then let us examine one of the arguments presented by Jimmy and his backers that the active rating is an indication of fighting strength. Let us see if this premise holds water. Apart from the results of Jimmy that I have used to dispute this assumption, lets also try to reason this out. So the results have been submitted as evidence. Ref: Here. Agreed? Look to the other posts for the details.

Now let us try reasoning and logic. Would I be correct if I am to say that the Fide rating is related to the number of Fide tournaments you are given the opportunity to attend? If so then what happens to a strong player who does not have that exposure to give him a high rating? Does that make him a weaker player? Have you heard of players with no rating that can beat our "Masters"? Players from Indonesis, The Philippines etc.

Let us now try to see if the training strategy also affect rating numbers. If say the training strategy is to first learn how to win before you learn how to draw, would that also affect the numbers? To learn how to win, you can lose too. And that affects rating in the short term. But maybe the coach thinks that this is a very important lesson to learn for it will take you further in the longer term. Possible yes? Learning to draw would give you a higher rating in the shorter term but you may hit a wall later. Make sense?

So there are reasonable causes for a lower fide rating that has nothing to do with fighting strength.

Now if that makes sense and we want the strongest fighting players to represent Malaysia then the best tool we have should be a clean and fair selection. Yes?

So how did we lose our way? Is it possible that when the considerations are about "my chess friends", my chess academy, my cari makan etc etc then we may lose sight of the goal? Too many conflicting considerations yes?

I think that is what has happened to us. And they say that if we have lost our way, then the best thing to do is to go back to our starting goal.

And the starting goal is that we want the best possible players to represent Malaysia. And the best way to do that is to have a proper selection without fear or favour. Hence the criteria for National Close this year should be top 8 from NC vs top 8 from active list. Or a close variation. But straight down the line, yes?

Then we will win medals again, then we will have our own GM.

Note: To get a GM norm you need to fight above your rating. Ergo, you need to be a fighter well versed in the art of competition. It cannot be done just by showing your fat numbers and hoping your opponent will collapse from fright. Have you seen many high rated IM's that cannot get even one GM norm? The reason is probably because they fight for ratings and not fight to win.

Does that also make sense?

So we have a chance to change our direction during this coming NC. Is anyone willing to step up to the plate and fight for the progress of Malaysian chess within MCF? From our State Associations? 

Lets get a good criteria for selection and close the back doors for good.