If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
1) Was there an Appeals Committee selected (or available) for this tournament?
2) If so - was an appeal made to the Appeals Committee? (the CFC Handbook makes no mention of a timeframe, but at one time an appeal had to be made in writing within 30 minutes of the game's completion or incident/interruption).
3) The "National Appeals Committee" chapter in the Handbook http://chess.ca/handbook#section-12 refers regularly to the (tournament) "Appeals Committee", so I'm not sure what happens if the appeal has not gone through this initial process. (I was at times a member of the NAC, and I'm fairly sure that all appeals sent to us had already gone through a tournament Appeals Committee procedure).
1) Was there an Appeals Committee selected (or available) for this tournament?
2) If so - was an appeal made to the Appeals Committee? (the CFC Handbook makes no mention of a timeframe, but at one time an appeal had to be made in writing within 30 minutes of the game's completion or incident/interruption).
3) The "National Appeals Committee" chapter in the Handbook http://chess.ca/handbook#section-12 refers regularly to the (tournament) "Appeals Committee", so I'm not sure what happens if the appeal has not gone through this initial process. (I was at times a member of the NAC, and I'm fairly sure that all appeals sent to us had already gone through a tournament Appeals Committee procedure).
After the playoffs, I asked about the appeals process. I was told to appeal to the CFC, not to the tournament appeal committee.
I know for sure that the stakes were very high: a trip to Tbilisi for the World Cup in September and another one to Batumi for the 2018 Chess Olympiad. To show good sportsmanship Bator should have allowed Nikolay to continue the game with a queen instead of the rook. A player can overrule the touch move rule if he wants. http://www.fide.com/component/conten...fair-play.html
I watched the video and it provides definitive proof that Nikolay had no access to a queen.
I can see how such a mistake by the Arbiter could easily happen given the speed of which events occurred (he thought the queen was accessible to Nikolay when in actuality it was in Bator's hand and only put back with capture pieces after promotion).
Since we have the video review like in hockey or any professional sports, isn't it just a simple measure of appealing, analyzing video and overturning an erroneous decision? In my opinion, it's not even a close call.
I really hope that those in charge make the correct decision to preserve the integrity of our noble game. This is our national championship with thousands of dollars and chess opportunities on the line for our players.
P.S. I would also put zero blame on Bator. It isn't his duty to "help" his opponent in the heat of the moment. People shouldn't attack his integrity. He's playing to win like Nikolay and they are both fabulous chess players.
I watched the video and it provides definitive proof that Nikolay had no access to a queen.
I can see how such a mistake by the Arbiter could easily happen given the speed of which events occurred (he thought the queen was accessible to Nikolay when in actuality it was in Bator's hand and only put back with capture pieces after promotion).
Since we have the video review like in hockey or any professional sports, isn't it just a simple measure of appealing, analyzing video and overturning an erroneous decision? In my opinion, it's not even a close call.
I really hope that those in charge make the correct decision to preserve the integrity of our noble game. This is our national championship with thousands of dollars and chess opportunities on the line for our players.
P.S. I would also put zero blame on Bator. It isn't his duty to "help" his opponent in the heat of the moment. People shouldn't attack his integrity. He's playing to win like Nikolay and they are both fabulous chess players.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Yu
Bator stood silent as his opponent is forced to under-promote. Perhaps in the heat of the moment Bator was unaware that he denied his opponent his queen but one thing we know 100 Percent for sure is that he did and if he see's the video he should be offering his resignation. It should go without saying that integrity is worth more then a victory, even an important one and the game of chess is bigger then that.
The position at first glance appears to be winning for Nikolay where he effectively ends up in a two pawns up queens on the board ending if allowing the game to take it's normal course.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Monday, 3rd July, 2017, 10:43 PM.
Bator captured the queen and it's his possession. Nikolay promoted a pawn and it's his headache to get a queen or other piece. The rule is clearly in favor to a promoting person - stop the clock and ask the arbiter to bring the required piece. The arbiter shall deal with the player withholding the piece or look for other set.
While it is not in the rules, the case of upside down rook is in the Arbiter's Manual. A.Peredun cited the text. One more time:
""When a player places an inverted (upside‐down) Rook in the promotion square and continues the game, the piece is considered as a Rook, even if he names it as a “Queen” or any other piece. To put an inverted Rook on the promotion square is not considered as an illegal move. The Arbiter has to intervene and put the Rook in its correct position on the square and he may penalize the player according to the Article 12.9." http://arbiters.fide.com/images/stor...anual-2016.pdf
Maybe we need to re-design the Rook in standard sets so that it will not stand up if inverted. :-) Some of those plastic sets have Bishops with such flat tops that they can be inverted and remain standing. :-)
Maybe we need to re-design the Rook in standard sets so that it will not stand up if inverted. :-) Some of those plastic sets have Bishops with such flat tops that they can be inverted and remain standing. :-)
Bator captured the queen and it's his possession. Nikolay promoted a pawn and it's his headache to get a queen or other piece. The rule is clearly in favor to a promoting person - stop the clock and ask the arbiter to bring the required piece. The arbiter shall deal with the player withholding the piece or look for other set.
While it is not in the rules, the case of upside down rook is in the Arbiter's Manual. A.Peredun cited the text. One more time:
""When a player places an inverted (upside‐down) Rook in the promotion square and continues the game, the piece is considered as a Rook, even if he names it as a “Queen” or any other piece. To put an inverted Rook on the promotion square is not considered as an illegal move. The Arbiter has to intervene and put the Rook in its correct position on the square and he may penalize the player according to the Article 12.9." http://arbiters.fide.com/images/stor...anual-2016.pdf
The rule does not make sense to even consider all of this in the heat of a time scramble. Secondly based on article 12.1 it is clear that the game could suffer reputational damage if a player is rewarded for concealing his opponents queen... knowing that almost no one would have the presence of mind to stop the clock in the middle of a time scramble in order to avoid declaring a piece a queen. Especially after playing a lifetime of casual speed games where one simply declares what the promoting piece is or turn's the rook upside down. A player refusing to recognize that his action of concealing the Queen caused his opponent's demise else he would have surely lost also does not help the reputation of the game. This type of activity should never be rewarded.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Monday, 3rd July, 2017, 11:04 PM.
You do need to know the rules. Placing a rook upside down was a mistake. It seems to me that the first line of appeal should have been to the tournament appeals committee. I would certainly want to do some research before rendering an opinion and anyone associated with the CFC should ixnay on the editorializing. It can come back to bite. I am sure that the national appeals committee will consider the rules of chess and come to the correct decision.
Bator stood silent as his opponent is forced to under-promote. Perhaps in the heat of the moment Bator was unaware that he denied his opponent his queen but one thing we know 100 Percent for sure is that he did and if he see's the video he should be offering his resignation. It should go without saying that integrity is worth more then a victory, even an important one and the game of chess is bigger then that.
The position at first glance appears to be winning for Nikolay where he effectively ends up in a two pawns up queens on the board ending if allowing the game to take it's normal course.
Hi Sid,
I posted too hastily and am not sure what the correct action is actually. I just read the stackexchange post and by letter of the law, it seems the onus is on Nikolay to stop the clocks and find a queen even if theres no queen available (6.12b) since an upside down rook cannot be a queen by touch promotion square rule as Egis and others mentioned.
So the appeal would probably deal with whether Bator brought the game into disrepute with his actions like Sid thinks and he has a case based on Bator's non-reaction to the arbiter ruling. (nb. the rule doesnt say that the game must intentionally be brought into disrepute)
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.
Of course in spirit of the game they should have let Nikolay promote a queen considering there was none readily available but the arbiter didnt know that. Just a bad situation all around and I feel badly for Nikolay and Bator and especially the poor arbiter who probably feels awful.
I didnt really look at the position but it also seems super unfair to Bator to just award Nikolay the win.
Theres really no good solution. Good luck appeals commitee :-)
Tweet
Comment