Life In 19x19

There is an old saying, Be careful you don't get what you wish for. I think that sums up some of the angst in the western go world.

Some Europeans wished they didn't have to compete with Orientals or put up with Oriental ways, then they feign surprise if some Orientals start to feel unwelcomed and Oriental patronage starts to dry up.

Some Europeans wish to be treated as a separate corps of professionals or trainee professionals, then express disappointment when big prizes culled from amateur entry fees, or free tickets from sponsors, dry up and they are expected to pay for their own access to tournaments.

Maybe some Americans have had the same feelings, but few, I think. At any rate, hyperpape's "intemperate" adjective about Europeans - "whiney" - is often accurate.

When I went to southern South America I was astonished at how European it felt. FWIW Conanbatt's plaint (essentially, "I deserve a chance of a free ticket because I am South American" without telling us what he or South America has done to deserve it) also sounds European to me.

There is an alternative for all those fretting wannabe pros. They can try their luck in the Oriental open tournaments such as the Samsung.

daniel_the_smith wrote:the European bruhaha over strong Koreans winning the European Open a year or two ago, seems a bit odd

What are you referring to? I think you are confusing the European Open Champion title with the European Champion title. There have been no or hardly any objections by Europeans about Koreans winning the European Open Champion title. Objections were related to the European Champion title. (There were, among Europeans, politically small minority opinions suggesting to abadon the European Champion title. This your statement does not seem to address though because, in it, you write "Open".)

South America

Wasn't the SportsAccord American exclusion problem larger - Latin America and Carribean countries?

If someone is a US citizen, they can represent the US in anything they want as far as I'm concerned.

Mingjiu and Feng Yun are Americans. They are also Chinese. Why should we care who they want to represent? In fact, I think we should be happy that they live here and choose to compete with us.

Your country may handle things differently, but as far as I know, this is how we handle US representation in international events.

John Fairbairn wrote:There is an old saying, Be careful you don't get what you wish for. I think that sums up some of the angst in the western go world.

Some Europeans wished they didn't have to compete with Orientals or put up with Oriental ways, then they feign surprise if some Orientals start to feel unwelcomed and Oriental patronage starts to dry up.

Some Europeans wish to be treated as a separate corps of professionals or trainee professionals, then express disappointment when big prizes culled from amateur entry fees, or free tickets from sponsors, dry up and they are expected to pay for their own access to tournaments.

Maybe some Americans have had the same feelings, but few, I think. At any rate, hyperpape's "intemperate" adjective about Europeans - "whiney" - is often accurate.

When I went to southern South America I was astonished at how European it felt. FWIW Conanbatt's plaint (essentially, "I deserve a chance of a free ticket because I am South American" without telling us what he or South America has done to deserve it) also sounds European to me.

There is an alternative for all those fretting wannabe pros. They can try their luck in the Oriental open tournaments such as the Samsung.

I have nothing to say about Europeans in this discussion, not only because i dont know much but they are not involved in my current dilemma.

I resent your comment about the free ticket, like if i participated for that. I have spent my fair share of money in Baduk schools in korea and i have payed for my own ticket for the international tournaments that didnt have sponsoring and to go to KBC. And i was about to go to the EGC paying my own ticket without asking anyone for anything. And bear in mind that a ticket from south america to korea costs over 2000 dollars, and our average salary is like a third or fourth of USA's average, so its like 6 times more expensive for us just to purchase a ticket. The first time i purchased my ticket i spent 3 full month salaries for it.

I have this representation issue regardless of the sponsoring, because its about representation, but even more when there is money involved. Just participating at this tournament earns you like 2k dollars (as i deduce from the prizes, i might be wrong).
If you think the FIG had to do more to earn a place, i can tell you that the argentinian go club, that barely gathers 400 dollars a month, has a limit to what they can do, and they still arranged a whole event with Enda Hideki to come and teach lots of people. I have personally hosted Vic1000 here in argentina and spent my fair share of time and money making the accomodations. I gave free courses, teachings all the time, and i have helped the few international activities i could ever assist, like KBC, recently BIBA, and other initiatives.

And even with all that, i think its irrelevant if the south american countries were absolutely selfish. I deserve a chance to participate because its a world tournament, and now my country was left unrepresented in favour of someone that represented china many many times.

And i also cannot agree with your "Samsung" comment.
Thats a totally different subject, the differenciation between amateurs and professionals. I dont know why you think euro players should devote their energies to open pro tournaments like samsung, and u wouldnt demand the same of the chinese pros that actually can play many more tournaments because of their title.

One last thing, awesome job on Kato's Attack and Kill, Direction of play and Appreciating famous games. Top notch books!

Wasn't the SportsAccord American exclusion problem larger - Latin America and Carribean countries?

You are right, we should say Ibero-america with the correspondent FIG (Federacion Iberoamericana de Go). i have raised my complaints to them when the sports accord announcement was made. As i was told, it was too late to change anything and there was no will to do so.

Conanbatt wrote:I dont know of any invitation from the AGA to anything, which i think its natural. AGA is for USA, and they shouldnt be in charge of what happens below. which is why i say that if the AGA decided that the reps were going to be USA or Canada, they didnt do the best but its Sports Accord's fault for allowing such scenario. AGA is not representative for whole America, only for USA.

That's right. The AGA and CGA usually work together when the sponsors are limiting the participants. And the AGA has tried to extend courtesy invitations to the Mexican Go Association (to be included in the "North Americian" representation). But at one point they've declined in favor of participating with the South Americians (primarily due to having a common language, as I've understood it).

I'm sure we would have been happy to extend the invitation to Argentina or even all of South America if we had known you guys wouldn't have a chance to represent otherwise. Mr Hsiang has already commented (post #14 above) that your IGF representative was already aware of the sponsor's restrictions.

But if you don't want to compete against our "US Pros", then we can't help you. We're not likely to change our position there any time soon. They are US citizens, and we're proud to have them represent us.

Conanbatt wrote:AS a side note, one of the discussions i had here below on representatinos was for a continennt wide tournament (the student OZa championship, where i actually also met Jie Li). I was once denied by Argentina to participate and represent in the south-american level selection, which caused me great anguish (it was because iadnt been a club member in the past year, some silly local rule). WHy would the country tell me that im not fit to represent the continent? I was upset at that too. Fortunately, the tournament organizors changed the tournament method and made it absolutely open, and i went ahead, won the tournament and was representative, by-passing the local assocaition restriction.

The AGA has similar rules such as these in place also, and there have been long discussions on this fourm both for and against such rules.

I, personally, have no sympathy for anyone who want to represent their region without being a member of and working with the acknowledged governing organization.

Your issue is really with the sponsor, SportAccord, and perhaps also with your country's IGF representative -- and maybe even with your national organization (where I'm sure your local club is a member).

Laman wrote:it is shame that South America didn't get a chance to play at the "World" games

http://www.eurogofed.org/calendar/sawmgec.htm
calls it "SportAccord World Mind Games". Therefore also Middle America, Africa, rest of Asia, Australia and Oceania (all oceans) were missing. This looks like a systematic mistake by SportsAccord (or possibly also the IGF?). I guess that SportsAccord refers itself to the IGF in matters of Go. Therefore at the very least it must allow direct (such as citizenship-like criteria) or indirect (such as, e.g., continent- or region-wide criteria) representatives of players from all IGF member countries.

Conanbatt wrote:[ I have spent my fair share of money in Baduk schools in korea...

Well, if you have been trained in Korea - doesn't that place your ability to represent Argentina in some doubt?

John Fairbairn wrote:Some Europeans wished they didn't have to compete with Orientals or put up with Oriental ways, then they feign surprise if some Orientals start to feel unwelcomed and Oriental patronage starts to dry up.

Some Europeans wish to be treated as a separate corps of professionals or trainee professionals, then express disappointment when big prizes culled from amateur entry fees, or free tickets from sponsors, dry up and they are expected to pay for their own access to tournaments.

"some Europeans" and "they" need not be the same people.

FWIW Conanbatt's plaint (essentially, "I deserve a chance of a free ticket because I am South American"

The "free ticket" are not his words.

without telling us what he or South America has done to deserve it) also sounds European to me.

European? There are, as has been reported on rec.games.go, also Asian professionals spending most their time for studying and hardly any time for teaching. This possibility looks more like a world-wide phenomen.

There is an alternative for all those fretting wannabe pros.

It is a discussion about a World Minds event - not about a Professional Accociation Members Only World Mind event.

They can try their luck in the Oriental open tournaments such as the Samsung.

Sure. This does, however, NOT solve apparent great unfairness in the seeding of the SportAccord event in contrast to its event title.

@RobertJaseik, Yes, I'm probably conflating the two.

Conanbatt wrote:... But the pros end up representing me, or i have to fight them for it. ...

It seems clear enough that in this case, anyway, the team is specifically from the US, and so it is *not* representing you. I guess the ideal solution, for you, would be for a team from Argentina to also compete?

In a hypothetical future tournament where you compete with US players for a chance to represent both north and south america (has such a thing ever happened? could it?), then I guess you would feel our rules for who will represent us would be unfair. But I think it is hard for us to be sympathetic. Americans, for better or ill, in my experience usually do not appreciate it when they perceive foreigners to be telling them how they should be doing things-- I think you triggered that sentiment.

How does your own country/go association do things? If they use your criteria (which do make some sense, even if they are unconventional and perhaps hard to apply fairly), and that works well, then maybe you do have some grounds for wanting us to change.

But it seems to me that what is making you unhappy at the moment has little or nothing to do with the US. Am I missing anything?

The AGA has a VP of international relations--Hsiang, who started this thread!--who probably worked hard to see that the US was represented in this tournament. Do you have someone in Argentina doing the equivalent for your country?

Conanbatt wrote:I have nothing to say about Europeans in this discussion, not only because i dont know much but they are not involved in my current dilemma.

Are you sure? If it was created by SportsAccord or IGF, then also Europeans in those organizations contributed to making (or failing to contribute to making) the decision that hurts Argentina. I, as a European, would be interested in avoiding that situation (because a tournament called world tournament should be world-wide). I.e., I would support possibly other Go politicians, which would more actively avoid repetition of excluding too many countries.

Horibe wrote:

Conanbatt wrote:[ I have spent my fair share of money in Baduk schools in korea...

Well, if you have been trained in Korea - doesn't that place your ability to represent Argentina in some doubt?

Yes i do believe such studies make me a little less representative than say, Aguilar who never spent considerable time in Asian countries, and also makes me a little representative of Korea in that matter. So in many ways most players are hybrids, so as i said there is a line somewhere, which i dont think i cross.

I do think pros cross it.

The issue here is larger than what AGA does. This is about continental representation, and the AGA shouldnt have the final word about who is representative continentally, just as much as the Argentine go association shouldnt be able to tell me im not representative for Ibero-america. This is about a very unfair criteria being applied to an international tournament and the difficulty of making one criteria.

And such criteria should be applied by the IGF in accordance to the sponsors. Of course if the sponsors only want americans, or canadiands ,there is not much to discuss, its not about fairness, its about resources.

I have put the belief that pros can be representative at a test before. If argentina allows 10 korean pros to participate on any tournament, im pretty sure noone in the rest of the continent would like to lose all years forever to those players.

All that said, i think we all agree that Sports accord would have been better handled by giving all willing countries a chance to fight their place, even south africa, or other asian countries like Thailand.

I think the only remaining "issue" is if there is a difference between being representative of a country or a continent. You can believe that being representative of the first makes you rep of the second: i disagree.

-I was once denied country representation yet i was able to represent the continent.
-I find it totally possible to have a country representation and not a continental one. For example, a country could accept a nationalized immigrant but if he doesnt have European passport he cant participate in certain Euro tournaments.

The question is, can a professional be representative of the Americas? And how would you decide that in case of disagreement?

daniel_the_smith wrote:@RobertJaseik, Yes, I'm probably conflating the two.

Conanbatt wrote:... But the pros end up representing me, or i have to fight them for it. ...

It seems clear enough that in this case, anyway, the team is specifically from the US, and so it is *not* representing you. I guess the ideal solution, for you, would be for a team from Argentina to also compete?

In a hypothetical future tournament where you compete with US players for a chance to represent both north and south america (has such a thing ever happened? could it?), then I guess you would feel our rules for who will represent us would be unfair. But I think it is hard for us to be sympathetic. Americans, for better or ill, in my experience usually do not appreciate it when they perceive foreigners to be telling them how they should be doing things-- I think you triggered that sentiment.

How does your own country/go association do things? If they use your criteria (which do make some sense, even if they are unconventional and perhaps hard to apply fairly), and that works well, then maybe you do have some grounds for wanting us to change.

But it seems to me that what is making you unhappy at the moment has little or nothing to do with the US. Am I missing anything?

The AGA has a VP of international relations--Hsiang, who started this thread!--who probably worked hard to see that the US was represented in this tournament. Do you have someone in Argentina doing the equivalent for your country?

I said before that i believed it was a representation of the Americas, instead of US. That said the whole business has a funky smell, because canadians "pledging" for the flag to participate sounds deviant.

I just believe this is not a matter for the US to decide on. Who is representative continentally has to be the responsibility of a higher level organization like the FIG. But as it stands, such organizations delegate power of decision to the national associations which in turn can do whatever they want. So contries can decide for continents. Thats how its usually done, i dont know the specifics of the Sports accord because i simply have no access to that information.

When i read in the AGA E-J that the eliminatories were to be held online on KGS, i felt my heart ripped off my chest.

Alledgedly there are representatives for south-america in the FIG, but during the whole decision process i didnt hear anything from them, and when i said something it seemed to be too late. I believe the FIG has very little strength as a representational organization.

Conanbatt wrote:When i read in the AGA E-J that the eliminatories were to be held online on KGS, i felt my heart ripped off my chest.

I do feel bad for you, but it's not clear what could be done.

Conanbatt wrote:Alledgedly there are representatives for south-america in the FIG, but during the whole decision process i didnt hear anything from them, and when i said something it seemed to be too late. I believe the FIG has very little strength as a representational organization.

I think looking further into this and trying to improve things for next time may be the most productive thing you could do about it.

Conanbatt wrote:
The question is, can a professional be representative of the Americas? And how would you decide that in case of disagreement?

They are citizens of the Americas, so they will always be allowed to be a representative.

oren wrote:

Conanbatt wrote:
The question is, can a professional be representative of the Americas? And how would you decide that in case of disagreement?

They are citizens of the Americas, so they will always be allowed to be a representative.

well, to Conanbatt's point... I think it depends on who is spearheading the group "The Americas". If only Canada and US are in "The Americas", then I don't think either of them has a problem with it. But as other countries are included in the larger group of "The Americas", then the group collectively should need to decide. But there'll be a pretty strong vote from el norte to include them