2017 Canadian Championship

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Controversial Finish

    I've posted a story about this on the CFC Newsfeed:

    http://chess.ca/newsfeed/node/972

    It includes:
    • screencaps from the video
    • an annotated version of the game, where the annotations describe what happened to the pieces after they were captured
    • links to FIDE rules and to the video

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

      Hi Vlad,

      Just a thought. Can they play a rematch? Something this important shouldnt be decided like this.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

        Originally posted by Jonathan Yu View Post
        Hi Vlad,

        Just a thought. Can they play a rematch? Something this important shouldnt be decided like this.
        In general, I don't think chess politicians should be deciding this. We have arbiters for a reason. We have tournament appeals committees for a reason. We have a National Appeals Committee for a reason. We have rules for a reason. I already learned a few things about chess rules from this situation.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

          For those who know such things, under FIDE rules / the Arbiters Handbook, are arbiters supposed to intervene immediately when they see a promotion to an inverted rook, or should they wait until the opponent makes a claim?

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

            Originally posted by Eric Gedajlovic View Post
            For those who know such things, under FIDE rules / the Arbiters Handbook, are arbiters supposed to intervene immediately when they see a promotion to an inverted rook, or should they wait until the opponent makes a claim?
            Regarding "immediately" - there is no such word in this sentence: "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." Though, it sounds that there is no need to wait for opponents reply.
            You can compare with this specific one (the text is not a rule just explanation what the arbiter should do): "If an arbiter observes a violation of Article 4 he must always intervene immediately. He should not wait for a claim to be submitted by a player." Article 4 - mostly about touch move, also this "d. promotes a pawn, the choice of the piece is finalised, when the piece has touched the square of promotion."

            Though the main rule is "12.1 The arbiter shall see that the Laws of Chess are strictly observed," with the explanation: "The Arbiter must be present and control the games. In case the arbiter observes an infringement, he may interfere. He must not wait for a claim from the opponent. Example: A player touches a piece and makes a move with another one. The arbiter shall force the player to play the touched piece."

            Now - Is it holding/hiding/chewing a captured piece an infringement? Rules do not say anything what should be done with captured pieces, they are just removed from the board. There are no Geneva Conventions for them yet.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

              Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
              Example: A player touches a piece and makes a move with another one. The arbiter shall force the player to play the touched piece."
              What if the other player decides it was an accident and let his opponent play the other piece? See my previous post with the Navara-Moiseenko game from the 2011 World Cup.
              With the queen in his hand Bator probably realized that it was his fault that Nikolay promoted to an upside-down rook and should tell the arbiter he's OK with the queen promotion, replace the rook with the queen and continue the game.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
                What if the other player decides it was an accident and let his opponent play the other piece? See my previous post with the Navara-Moiseenko game from the 2011 World Cup.
                With the queen in his hand Bator probably realized that it was his fault that Nikolay promoted to an upside-down rook and should tell the arbiter he's OK with the queen promotion, replace the rook with the queen and continue the game.
                What is wrong with this picture is the arbiters point out that a queen was available and Bator does not correct them..

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                  Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
                  What if the other player decides it was an accident and let his opponent play the other piece? See my previous post with the Navara-Moiseenko game from the 2011 World Cup.
                  The rule is "if the player having the move touches on the chessboard, with the intention of moving or capturing". I have not seen the Navara-Moiseenko video (does it even exist?) Can you deny that it was not shaking fingers what touched a king while passing to a bishop?

                  Bator could tell his side of story himself.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
                    What is wrong with this picture is the arbiters point out that a queen was available and Bator does not correct them..
                    In addition, from the FIDE Laws of Chess which took effect on July 1, 2017:

                    Article 11: The conduct of the players:

                    11.1The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute. ...
                    and

                    Article 12: The role of the Arbiter (see Preface):

                    12.1The arbiter shall see that the Laws of Chess are observed.

                    12.2 The arbiter shall:

                    12.2.1ensure fair play,

                    12.2.2act in the best interest of the competition...
                    Is a player, whether acting intentionally or not, who hides a piece required by his opponent potentially (i.e. dependent on exact circumstances) bringing the game into disrepute? I would say yes.

                    The arbiter, in an absolutely critical game, failed to observe that a) Bator had Nikolay's queen concealed, b) that Nikolay could not find a queen for promotion because there wasn't a queen in plain sight, c) that Bator put the queen back on the table as the arbiter was intervening. If an arbiter screws up this many times then how can it be fair to expect Nickolay, with mere seconds remaining, to remember rules and procedures?

                    Since there is a video record of the game, the final position, and the times on the clocks, I think the game should play on from where it left off with the exception that Nikolay is allowed to promote to a queen.
                    Last edited by Peter McKillop; Tuesday, 4th July, 2017, 01:02 PM.
                    "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
                    "Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
                    "If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                      It is a good thing (and an amazing thing) that there is a video of the entire game... Now all that is missing is any sort of statement from Bator Sambuev. On the chess.com report that is referenced in a separate thread, it was noted that the arbiter was IA Pierre Dénommée - in that report he is quoted as saying that "... due to contractual obligations, he cannot comment on the specifics of the incident."

                      It would be VERY useful to hear from Sambuev and Denommee but perhaps that will never happen?

                      I also note in the chess.com article it is stated:

                      "Noritsyn confirmed to Chess.com that he has filed an appeal to the Chess Federation of Canada, which has a National Appeals Committee for such cases. He referenced his queen being hidden and said FIDE rule 12.1 is a bit of a 'catchall' and states: 'The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.'

                      He said he is 'agnostic' as to whether he thinks Sambuev was hiding the queen deliberately."

                      Of course only one person can know whether Sambuev was hiding the Queen deliberately.
                      ...Mike Pence: the Lord of the fly.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                        Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post
                        Since there is a video record of the game, the final position, and the times on the clocks, I think the game should play on from where it left off with the exception that Nikolay is allowed to promote to a queen.
                        Hi Peter,

                        It is absolutely impossible to restart the game as if nothing happened. You can recreate the time on the clocks and the final position alright, but recreating the players involved is not possible as time machines don't exist. If the game was played today instead, the result might have been completely different - after rest, analysis, calming down, and a thousand other factors.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                          Thanks for the explanation and citing of the rules.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                            Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
                            Now - Is it holding/hiding/chewing a captured piece an infringement? Rules do not say anything what should be done with captured pieces, they are just removed from the board. There are no Geneva Conventions for them yet.
                            Perhaps the CFC's FIDE rep could bring forth a motion for adding such a rule?

                            I think the playoff should be replayed at the CFC's expense ...with the same Arbiter.
                            Last edited by Neil Frarey; Tuesday, 4th July, 2017, 03:21 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                              Originally posted by Nikolay Noritsyn View Post
                              Hi Peter,

                              It is absolutely impossible to restart the game as if nothing happened. You can recreate the time on the clocks and the final position alright, but recreating the players involved is not possible as time machines don't exist. If the game was played today instead, the result might have been completely different - after rest, analysis, calming down, and a thousand other factors.
                              Yes, I see your point, Nikolay. I won't ask what you'd like to see happen - you'd probably prefer to keep that private until your appeal has been dealt with. I am sorry that your good tournament was marred in this way and I hope your appeal will yield a just result.
                              "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
                              "Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
                              "If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

                                Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post
                                Yes, I see your point, Nikolay. I won't ask what you'd like to see happen - you'd probably prefer to keep that private until your appeal has been dealt with. I am sorry that your good tournament was marred in this way and I hope your appeal will yield a just result.
                                Thank you, Peter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X