2017 Canadian Championship

[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.

[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 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.

[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

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.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

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

[Fred Harvey]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Not a wonder you didn't see the queen, Bator had it in his hand

What an unholy mess! Surely if the player announces the queen promotion, but can't find the queen because his opponent is "hiding" it, there's a forfeit here?

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

I just got this from an anonymous source.

It was the arbiters responsibility to have the queens available if needed. Since they were not there the arbiter had no business enforcing the rule that the pawn is promoted to a rook. He should have stopped the clock and it should have been Nicholas's prerogative as to which piece the pawn is promoted to. If Bator was withholding or hiding the queen he should forfeit the game.

[Bernie Prost]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

Not a wonder you didn't see the queen, Bator had it in his hand

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

So, who took the Queens? If they were exchanged earlier in the game, why were they not there when needed?

I just got this from an anonymous source.

[Eric Gedajlovic]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

So, who took the Queens? If they were exchanged earlier in the game, why were they not there when needed?

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: byes x 5 for rounds 6-9 inclusive

Back in the 70s in Toronto, Montreal master Leo Williams had a P marching down the board...he found his Q in the pile of captured pieces and placed it in front of him. His opponent - GM Walter Browne - tossed the Q across the room. :-)

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

***

Several thoughts:

The standard set does not include a spare queen or other piece as I read in this FIDE document: "Standards of Chess Equipment and tournament venue for FIDE Tournaments" http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/St...ment_venue.pdf
Though the general practice is to have spare queens on the table. However placing a queen during the game might considered a help to a player to what promote, even in general a promotion to a queen happens 99.99999%.

Though this rule would have saved the day: "6.11.2 A player may stop the chessclock only in order to seek the arbiter’s assistance, for example when promotion has taken place and the piece required is not available." It's pity that you've learned it hard way :/

There was a joke that a blitz player threw opponents queen far far away. Though it was in days when a reversed rook was good for queen too. The story did not tell what happened in that game. :)

[David Gordon]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

I am not sure I could have reconciled that situation in an unviolent manner.

[Rene Preotu]

Re: 2017 Canadian Championship

- the queens were exchanged about 15-20 moves before the incident

In this case I'm wondering who took the original queens from the table.
Being such an important game the arbiter should be watching it and make sure the players have spare queens available if necessary. It is very clear that the arbiter dropped the ball here. I'm not saying that the ruling was wrong or that Nikolay did the correct thing promoting to an upside-down rook. Under time pressure any top player can make mistake.