2017 Canadian Championship

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

I uploaded the full game video which I just got from Richard Berube.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

https://chess.stackexchange.com/ques...tion-procedure



FIDE rules 6.12.b:

A player may stop the clocks only in order to seek the arbiter’s assistance, for example when promotion has taken place and the piece required is not available.
This should solve all issues regarding to having promotion pieces available.

Sometimes players take the queen from the opponent's pile of captured pieces many moves before a possible promotion just as a psychological trick to signal his opponent that he has won the game already and should be able to promote soon.

An upside down rook looks like a rook and quacks like a rook, thus it is a rook in official games. There is no reason not to use a queen, and for example the opponent wouldn't know whether you accidentally put the rook upside down or meant to promote a queen. Of course, if a queen cannot be found anywhere, the arbiter may decide to allow exceptions.

And as to deliberately hiding your captured pieces from the opponent, there's always Rule 12.1:

The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

https://chess.stackexchange.com/ques...tion-procedure



FIDE rules 6.12.b:

A player may stop the clocks only in order to seek the arbiter’s assistance, for example when promotion has taken place and the piece required is not available.
This should solve all issues regarding to having promotion pieces available.

Sometimes players take the queen from the opponent's pile of captured pieces many moves before a possible promotion just as a psychological trick to signal his opponent that he has won the game already and should be able to promote soon.

An upside down rook looks like a rook and quacks like a rook, thus it is a rook in official games. There is no reason not to use a queen, and for example the opponent wouldn't know whether you accidentally put the rook upside down or meant to promote a queen. Of course, if a queen cannot be found anywhere, the arbiter may decide to allow exceptions.

And as to deliberately hiding your captured pieces from the opponent, there's always Rule 12.1:

The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.

In the first video posted at 9 second/25 the players hand opens to reveal your queen. Deliberate or not he withheld it from you, as for psychological tricks he should be holding only his queen, not your's. Bator should of told the arbiter that it was his fault that you did not have access to a queen and given you the choice of a rook or queen. So under rule 12.1 he should forfeit the game in the name of proper sportsmanship.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

In the first video posted at 9 second/25 the players hand opens to reveal your queen. Deliberate or not he withheld it from you, as for psychological tricks he should be holding only his queen, not your's. Bator should of told the arbiter that it was his fault that you did not have access to a queen and given you the choice of a rook or queen. So under rule 12.1 he should forfeit the game in the name of proper sportsmanship.

Yes, Bator puts the queen back on the table right before the arbiter stops the clock.
Re. psychological tricks - I just copied the full post, most of it is indeed irrelevant. Rule 12.1 is.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

In the first video posted at 9 second/25 the players hand opens to reveal your queen. Deliberate or not he withheld it from you, as for psychological tricks he should be holding only his queen, not your's. Bator should of told the arbiter that it was his fault that you did not have access to a queen and given you the choice of a rook or queen. So under rule 12.1 he should forfeit the game in the name of proper sportsmanship.

In the second video, the queens are exchanged around the 8:30 mark. Bator holds onto the queen after the exchange and appears to do so for the remainder of the game (in his left hand, frequently below the table edge). I have no idea if Bator did this deliberately or not. (Many players will fidget with captured pieces.) But it's clear that the queen was not available for Nikolay to use because of Bator's actions, and there was no second queen available.

Steve

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

In the second video, the queens are exchanged around the 8:30 mark. Bator holds onto the queen after the exchange and appears to do so for the remainder of the game (in his left hand, frequently below the table edge). I have no idea if Bator did this deliberately or not. (Many players will fidget with captured pieces.) But it's clear that the queen was not available for Nikolay to use because of Bator's actions, and there was no second queen available. I don't understand why the arbiter, in the course of intervening because of the upside-down rook, didn't attempt to find out why no queen was available.

Steve

Presumably because the queen returned to the table right before the arbiter intervened. Everybody assumed it was always there..spectators also said they did not see the queen, but later saw it already after the conflict.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Well, we do elect a National Appeal Committee every year.
Let's give them something to do.
Nikolay, you should formally lodge an appeal with the CFC.
Just my 2 cents.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Well, we do elect a National Appeal Committee every year.
Let's give them something to do.
Nikolay, you should formally lodge an appeal with the CFC.
Just my 2 cents.

Richard Berube emailed me that, "with this new information, i Will ask the arbiter of his décision star the same."
I am not sure about the legalities and procedures I (they) should follow. Is it the arbiter's decision, or the CFC appeal committee?

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Richard Berube emailed me that, "with this new information, i Will ask the arbiter of his décision star the same."
I am not sure about the legalities and procedures I (they) should follow. Is it the arbiter's decision, or the CFC appeal committee?

First, it is the arbiters decision. Then you may appeal the decision to the CFC appeals committee.
But I would send the appeal to CFC right away. Just send an email to CFC office.

[Bernie Prost]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

13.3 *The arbiter shall observe the games, especially when the players are short of time, enforce decisions he has made and impose penalties on players where appropriate. 

14.1 Member federations may ask FIDE to give an official decision about problems relating to the Laws of Chess.

[Fred Harvey]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Bator only realized what he was doing when all hell broke loose, and replaced the queen where it should have been all the timel He probably didn't appreciate that there was a known prat as referee, who royally screwed up?

However he stayed conspicuously silent throughout the mess, and in my opinion lost all rights......he should be forfeited.

[Aman Hambleton]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Whether Bator withheld the Queen intentionally or not is not the question here. He was holding the Queen that Nikolay needed and that's already enough information to rule in Nikolay's favour. There is no way that you punish the person who 1) doesn't have his own Queen to promote to 2) doesn't have an extra one provided by the tournament.

Comical that our national championship didn't have arbiters who would think to place extra Queens on the table :D

[Steve Douglas]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Presumably because the queen returned to the table right before the arbiter intervened. Everybody assumed it was always there..spectators also said they did not see the queen, but later saw it already after the conflict.

Yeah, I re-watched the first video right after posting. Bator puts the queen back on the table right after you promote and the hubbub is beginning. I agree with Bob G. that making an appeal to the NAC would be a good idea. I'm not sure you would be successful, but it won't hurt to try. I don't think the outcome of that game is fair.

Steve

[David Begoray]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

I would like to Believe that the Mighty Bator would not intentionally Queen-napp his opponent's Queen. But we all know that Chess Players are devious.
Here i would like to state the Arbiters were Dunces and should have made sure that at least Two Extra Queens were available ( I think they should have had 16 extra Queens just in case they queened all of their pawns during the game). Err "every Russian School Boy Knows.....[add appropriate stereotype rule here]." David Begoray

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Yeah, I re-watched the first video right after posting. Bator puts the queen back on the table right after you promote and the hubbub is beginning. I agree with Bob G. that making an appeal to the NAC would be a good idea. I'm not sure you would be successful, but it won't hurt to try. I don't think the outcome of that game is fair.

Steve

Hi Steve,
Yes, I just sent an email to the CFC.

David Begoray - I was kicking myself for not getting a queen while I still had time. "every russian school boy knows you should get a queen 20 moves before promoting, or even for a psychological trick" Its too bad I am not a russian school boy, and even if I was - there would be no queen on the table.