Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

[Taylor Waite]

https://www.chess.com/news/view/cont...mpionship-5047

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

https://www.chess.com/news/view/cont...mpionship-5047

I am not remotely a Noritsyn fan.

But fair play is something I am a big believer in - and a lot of people think that is just another avenue to use to cheat against. I have two questions (since I'm not going to go through the already large thread about this - I apologize if someone hit on these already).

1. How much money was decided by this one game?
2. Does anybody think its relevant that the only time Bator kept his hand under the table the whole game was for several minutes while holding the queen?

I think if there are other recorded games you could look at if Bator keeps his hands under the table with pieces to check if this is unusual or just par for the course.

What amazes me about the arbiter is he was so very fast to interrupt Nikolai's promotion to a queen/rook, but not fast enough to bring forth an extra queen.

Unfortunately, imaging Bator is an evil mastermind (unlikely), I still don't know if intent means anything here.

Evil, actually. Dr. Sambuev Evil.

Mavros

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

I am not remotely a Noritsyn fan.

But fair play is something I am a big believer in - and a lot of people think that is just another avenue to use to cheat against. I have two questions (since I'm not going to go through the already large thread about this - I apologize if someone hit on these already).

1. How much money was decided by this one game?
2. Does anybody think its relevant that the only time Bator kept his hand under the table the whole game was for several minutes while holding the queen?

I think if there are other recorded games you could look at if Bator keeps his hands under the table with pieces to check if this is unusual or just par for the course.

What amazes me about the arbiter is he was so very fast to interrupt Nikolai's promotion to a queen/rook, but not fast enough to bring forth an extra queen.

Unfortunately, imaging Bator is an evil mastermind (unlikely), I still don't know if intent means anything here.

Evil, actually. Dr. Sambuev Evil.

Mavros

I am not remotely a Noritsyn fan.

But fair play is something I am a big believer in - and a lot of people think that is just another avenue to use to cheat against. I have two questions (since I'm not going to go through the already large thread about this - I apologize if someone hit on these already).

1. How much money was decided by this one game?
2. Does anybody think its relevant that the only time Bator kept his hand under the table the whole game was for several minutes while holding the queen?

I think if there are other recorded games you could look at if Bator keeps his hands under the table with pieces to check if this is unusual or just par for the course.

What amazes me about the arbiter is he was so very fast to interrupt Nikolai's promotion to a queen/rook, but not fast enough to bring forth an extra queen.

Unfortunately, imaging Bator is an evil mastermind (unlikely), I still don't know if intent means anything here.

Evil, actually. Dr. Sambuev Evil.

Mavros

Your second point is incorrect. I didn't count the number of moves but Bator held a black bishop in his left hand, below table level, for a long time, and then he held a pawn and the bishop for two or three moves before placing both of them on the table. Lots of people, including me, absent-mindedly hang onto captured pieces. I think where Bator went wrong was in 'pulling a Sammy Reshevsky' and not speaking up to let the arbiter know that Nikolay couldn't find his queen because he (Bator) had it in his hand.

As for "evil" - what are you talking about?

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

Your second point is incorrect. I didn't count the number of moves but Bator held a black bishop in his left hand, below table level, for a long time, and then he held a pawn and the bishop for two or three moves before placing both of them on the table. Lots of people, including me, absent-mindedly hang onto captured pieces. I think where Bator went wrong was in 'pulling a Sammy Reshevsky' and not speaking up to let the arbiter know that Nikolay couldn't find his queen because he (Bator) had it in his hand.

As for "evil" - what are you talking about?

Look at the whole video Peter. From 9:49-12:46 Bator has only one piece in his hand and it is the Black Queen. It is hidden under the table in his hand. Everything else is above the table and visible.

I'm not going to give out the pop culture reference if you haven't seen it regarding "evil" :)

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

Further to this, sadly watch Bator calmly put the Queen back down after the arbiters had already jumped in. He puts it back very carefully, very gingerly.

I think Sid and some others correctly point this out as the most damning point of evidence. Regardless if it is on purpose or not, it does not seem fair. It also seems like the arbiters failed terribly.

I think between the hiding of the queen, intentional or not, plus only putting it back after the fact is bad news for Sambuev.

Nikolai has a very serious argument here.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

Look at the whole video Peter. From 9:49-12:46 Bator has only one piece in his hand and it is the Black Queen. It is hidden under the table in his hand. Everything else is above the table and visible.

I'm not going to give out the pop culture reference if you haven't seen it regarding "evil" :)

Yes, you're absolutely right about the queen. I was simply trying to point out that he had also held a bishop below table level for a lengthy period. As I see it, the fact that he held the queen is not sufficient, by itself, to justify a negative allegation against Bator. Where Bator falls down is when the arbiter intervenes and Bator fails to do the right thing by telling the arbiter that he (B.) had been holding Nickolay's queen. Only Bator knows whether he was acting innocently/absent-mindedly while he was holding the queen. The only thing that is crystal clear is that he did not act with integrity when he was presented with the opportunity to give the arbiter the facts. Add that to the arbiter's failures and it's obvious that Nikolay was treated very unfairly.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

Further to this, sadly watch Bator calmly put the Queen back down after the arbiters had already jumped in. He puts it back very carefully, very gingerly.

I think Sid and some others correctly point this out as the most damning point of evidence. Regardless if it is on purpose or not, it does not seem fair. It also seems like the arbiters failed terribly.

I think between the hiding of the queen, intentional or not, plus only putting it back after the fact is bad news for Sambuev.

Nikolai has a very serious argument here.

I should have read both of your posts before replying to your first one. I agree with you.

[John Upper]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

1. How much money was decided by this one game?

The money for 1st and 2nd was combined and split evenly.
But not all the $$ gets split: the winner gets a $1,000 subsidy for the 2018 Continental and qualification and airfare to the World Cup, which is worth a minimum of $6000 US for losers in first round (more $$ if player advances).

2. Does anybody think its relevant that the only time Bator kept his hand under the table the whole game was for several minutes while holding the queen?

I think that would be relevant if it were true. Peter McKillop was correct to point out that this claim is incorrect, since it was not the "only time" Bator kept his hand under the table, he also did so when holding a Bishop.

I think if there are other recorded games you could look at if Bator keeps his hands under the table with pieces to check if this is unusual or just par for the course.

That would be interesting.
I didn't take videos, but I did take a photo of Bator holding a piece in his left hand; his hand is not under the table, but the piece would not be seen by his opponent. That photo was taken during a postmortem, which suggests to me that holding captured pieces is a habit Bator has.

(see CFC Newsletter facebook page, or the Chess.com story which reproduced the photo).

Look at the whole video Peter. From 9:49-12:46 Bator has only one piece in his hand and it is the Black Queen. It is hidden under the table in his hand. Everything else is above the table and visible.

Again, the word "only" is a problem.

No, there was not "only one piece" for that whole time. At 12:26 Bator captures a Rook and places it in his left hand with the Queen.

Yes, it is "under the table in his hand", but not for the full time you quote: after Bator captures the R at 12:26 his hands come up on the table top, including when he captures a pawn and adds it to his left hand at 12:48.

This is not to say that the pieces in his left hand would have been visible to Norisyn (if he had been looking for them with so little time and so many moves before promotion), just that the way you have described it makes Bator's actions seem guiltier than they were.


I agree that Bator deserves criticism for being silent when the TD/Arbiters intervened. He is not the only chess player I know who has kept quiet rather than speak up when that might cost him something; but they deserve criticism too.

AFAIK, by the letter of the FIDE laws, anything Bator said there should not have changed the ruling -- the promoted piece is a Rook -- but the TD/Arbiters might have decided differently, which would make a difference for any appeal.

And if the TD/Arbiters had decided that the played piece must be a Rook, then Bator could have made the sporting gesture to offer Nikolay a draw.


Anyone who is interested can find the timing and capture details on the CFC Newsfeed:
http://chess.ca/newsfeed/node/972

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

An interesting story told to me by Michael Kleinman about this game: http://chess.ca/newsfeed/node/326

"He wanted to promote to a queen, couldn't find one, and promoted to an upside down rook. He reasoned with the arbiter and they let him place a queen and Sambuev resigned the next move."
"apparently the arbiter just changed it to a queen immediately" , "Saw I was looking for a queen but couldn't find one" , "Without stopping clocks".

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

An interesting story told to me by Michael Kleinman about this game: http://chess.ca/newsfeed/node/326

"He wanted to promote to a queen, couldn't find one, and promoted to an upside down rook. He reasoned with the arbiter and they let him place a queen and Sambuev resigned the next move."
"apparently the arbiter just changed it to a queen immediately" , "Saw I was looking for a queen but couldn't find one" , "Without stopping clocks".

Nikolay,

If I may ask, have you filed an appeal or appeals and if so, to which groups? It seems from the other descriptions that there was not a specific appeals committee for the Canadian Championship (ie: a tournament appeal) so one wonders what avenues of appeal are there?

[John Upper]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

An interesting story told to me by Michael Kleinman about this game: http://chess.ca/newsfeed/node/326

"He wanted to promote to a queen, couldn't find one, and promoted to an upside down rook. He reasoned with the arbiter and they let him place a queen and Sambuev resigned the next move."
"apparently the arbiter just changed it to a queen immediately" , "Saw I was looking for a queen but couldn't find one" , "Without stopping clocks".

That's the reasonable thing I'd want an Arbiter to do in any tournament I'm a part of, even if it is not strictly following the rules.

Not that you need reminding, but it might be of interest for those following the discussion to note that there is some wiggle room for Arbiters in the FIDE Articles:

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

12.2
The arbiter shall:

a) ensure fair play.
b) act in the best interest of the competition.
c) ensure that a good playing environment is maintained.
d) ensure that the players are not disturbed.
e) supervise the progress of the competition.
f) take special measures in the interests of disabled players and those who need medical attention.

I think this is a case where 12.1 and 12.2 (a and b and maybe c) are in conflict.

12.1 entails that the Arbiter strictly enforce the rules, which include the following rules relevant to the case in question:

4.4 d
"If a player having the move:... promotes a pawn, the choice of the piece is finalised when the piece has touched the square of promotion."

4.7 c
The move is considered to have been made in the case of... promotion, when the player's hand has released the new piece on the square of promotion and the pawn has been removed from the board.

6.12 b
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.


Personally, I would want 12.2 b to trump 12.1, as happened in the Sambuev - Sturt game you linked to.

OTOH, I know a lot of chess players who are... "fastidious" is the polite word... about following precise rules rather than the more general goal of acting in the best interest of the competition.

[Mike Ivanov]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

Tragic situation for Nikolay and I hope the appeals committee can come up with something both players are satisfied with
(perhaps a blitz rematch? Charge $20 per entry and donate to a worthy chess cause XD).
Seems like a zero-sum solution is forced unfortunately...
This comment from the linked article just killed me though: "Do not try and bend the queen, that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth...there is no queen".
- Misquote from The Matrix

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

That's the reasonable thing I'd want an Arbiter to do in any tournament I'm a part of, even if it is not strictly following the rules.

That's not how Pierre Dénommée operates. That guy is kind of anal about rules being strictly followed.

Here he made a ruling about a specific event (the upside down rook), but did so in complete isolation of the whole situation, thereby leading to unfair conditions for Nikolay.

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

just that the way you have described it makes Bator's actions seem guiltier than they were.

I will recheck the video, but missing twenty seconds on the hidden queen is hardly a big deal.

It was still (minus your twenty seconds) under the table for almost three minutes. That is a key piece of information. I will see if he ever hides a different piece under the table - I didn't see that the first time around, but it did look very curious with his face planted onto the table at one point while hiding the queen.

As for your argument, the minutia you extoll could be more easily summed up in that you believe Bator had no real intent. At least that's what your abbreviated statement above speaks to me. I am not so sure you are correct here. In fact without knowing Bator's thoughts, you are just guessing. I never said he had intent. But it almost does not matter here, as he has taken away the piece from reach and sight.

Mavros

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Controversial Finish To Canadian Championship

It is amazing that here Nikolay (sorry I've been using an I instead of y so far) is pointing out that there might be a pattern or precedent.

Then John Upper goes on to somewhat blindly start going through the rules, trying to shift the focus to the arbiter again.

I think this storey most importantly highlights that the queen went missing in another Sambuev game. That the arbiter was more able to handle the incident is less relevant.