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.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff
All talk and no action. I thought Bator Sambuev had a match vs Eric Hansen in the cards.
This looks like a cheap shot, Andy. I don't know why the Sambuev - Hansen match didn't happen but I'll bet the reason(s) had absolutely nothing to do with a lack of effort on Brian's part. An apology is in order.
"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
I am the member of the NAC that voted against the denial of the appeal. I consider the denial of the appeal as a failure of NAC to ensure a fair play.
The unfortunate situation stemmed from incorrect actions (to put it mildly) of all parties involved: Mr. Sambuev, Mr. Denommee (arbiter) and Mr. Noritsyn, in this order of incorrect actions. It is unfair to make one party (that erred the last) be responsible for the whole complicated situation.
Interesting that Vlad Drkulec considers your reasoning to be 'emotional' rather than 'logical' ... and also that Vlad was worried that Bator's lawyers would have a field day. Maybe Bator can hire Ben Daswani as his lawyer? That would make for some interesting times... :)
Vlad was worried that Bator's lawyers would have a field day.
Kind of a ridiculous fear. The decision could have gone either way, as the rules are vague and don't cover this particular situation. No one's lawyers could have had a "field day." It's an absurd notion that a judge would say, "I know how to interpret 12.1 better than a bunch of chess arbiters." It's simply a cop-out to suggest that there's some higher authority to whom the NAC has to answer, at least if that higher authority is the common law.
Maybe Bator can hire Ben Daswani as his lawyer?
No, I only fight on the side of righteousness. You know, like that liberal legend Christ.
everytime it hurts, it hurts just like the first (and then you cry till there's no more tears)
I haven't read all the posts so perhaps someone has already answered this question: if this was a zonal championship, can Nikolay appeal the NAC's decision to FIDE? Just curious about where the buck stops.
I believe that it can be appealed to FIDE but I believe that the people you would be appealing to have weighed in on their opinion of this case.
Interesting that Vlad Drkulec considers your reasoning to be 'emotional' rather than 'logical' ... and also that Vlad was worried that Bator's lawyers would have a field day. Maybe Bator can hire Ben Daswani as his lawyer? That would make for some interesting times... :)
I doubt that Daswani can practice law in Canada. I would love to oppose Daswani in court but not in a slam dunk case like this one.
Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff
This whole situation is indeed unfortunate, but it does show that you should know the rules. I have known for a few months thanks to Vlad Rekhson, that if you promote to an upside down rook, it is a rook. However, it is very sad that there was not an extra queen nearby. Also, one should know the rule that you can stop the clock to get a queen (but not press the clock, which is an illegal move). Of course when you have seconds left, you better know the rules!
Since this tournament was ended July 1, I can only assume that the new FIDE rules that came into effect on July 1st, would be in effect. See article on chess.com
In the new Laws of Chess, in effect since 1 July 2017, making a move with two hands is considered to be an illegal move. Two brand new paragraphs have been added to the regulations:
7.7.1 If a player uses two hands to make a single move (in case of castling, capturing or promotion), it shall be considered as an illegal move.
If we watch the replay, Nikolay Noritsyn clearly uses 2 hands to promote to an upside down rook. According to the new rules, the arbiter, should have stopped the game at that point declaring it an illegal move. See 14:18 mark of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBNEcRgHkvE
I am not saying I agree with rules, or that someone should grab an opponent's queen, but the rules are the rules. As much I would vote with my heart to say there should be a playoff, my brain is telling me that the NAC made the right decision.
I would strongly suggest that whoever our team captain is for the next Olympiad, not only learn the rules thoroughly, but also pass on to the players all of these new rules. For example, the new rule with displaced pieces, promotions, using 2 hands, etc., you practically have to be a lawyer. I love the rule, that if you capture a piece on the last rank with a pawn, that you have to capture it first, then change the pawn to the promoted piece of your choice, using only 1 hand!
Interesting that Vlad Drkulec considers your reasoning to be 'emotional' rather than 'logical' ... and also that Vlad was worried that Bator's lawyers would have a field day. Maybe Bator can hire Ben Daswani as his lawyer? That would make for some interesting times... :)
If I was in Ilia's position, I would feel insulted if my reasoning was being called emotional. I would like to second Sid Belzberg's opinion. Thank you Ilia.
Brian Hartman,
I would of course rather be playing chess. I don't think this match is likely to happen though. Under current circumstances, I have nothing to lose - you can't say the same about my opponent.
Ian Findlay,
I have learned a lot from our games in 2002-2003, and losing motivated me to do better. This controversy is absolutely not motivating though, quite the opposite.
If cheating has occured, but evidence was only found out the next day (lets say, an a7 pawn was promoted on b8, or plain old phone in the washroom) - should the result of a game be reversed?
In my case, there is no proof of deliberate cheating. Like I said on chess.com, I am quite "agnostic" as to whether I think queen was hidden deliberately. What do you think about:
This is Bator Sambuev's statement to chess.com.
"I didn't know that I was holding a queen in my hand," Sambuev said. "There were some pieces but I was focused on the game and had no idea what exactly was there. I learned there was a queen only from the video."
After reading a message from a very observant chess.com member:
"Eseles
At 14:20, when the clock is stopped, Sambuev has the white Queen in his right hand. and he is leaving the black Queen on the table with his left one.
Then the hand gets in front of the camera lens, and when we can look again, the white Queen is standing next to the Black one."
I consider Bator Sambuev's statement to be absolutely incorrect. Its very hard to imagine a person holding a queen for three minutes, putting it on the table right before the arbiter intervened, later also putting the white queen right beside the black one - and never acknowledging the fact that there was indeed a black queen, and he was the one holding it.
Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff
Regarding castling with two hands - this has been written about by others earlier. I will quote Serge Archambault:
"Rewatching the video, it could be argued that because he reached his right arm over the board (to grab the white queen), first of all he didn't give you full access to all the pieces (the video shows that while bending over, you don't have access to all the pieces, moreso to the queen because his left hand is covering it (and other pieces) on the table. Secondly, because his harm is there, it almost forces you to play with 2 hands to be able to complete your move"
Regarding castling with two hands - this has been written about by others earlier. I will quote Serge Archambault:
"Rewatching the video, it could be argued that because he reached his right arm over the board (to grab the white queen), first of all he didn't give you full access to all the pieces (the video shows that while bending over, you don't have access to all the pieces, moreso to the queen because his left hand is covering it (and other pieces) on the table. Secondly, because his harm is there, it almost forces you to play with 2 hands to be able to complete your move"
I see a different picture (video)
Simple make in a slow motion 0.25 on youtube.
You try to get a queen but it's not there, thus you grab a rook and with LEFT hand remove a pawn and place with the right hand an upside-down rook. You moved your left hand almost at the same moment as Bator started to reach a queen too. I would say you had same view as the Bator's hand was quite high.
You had some troubles with a rook in the first place - were pieces weighted? It is possible to see that you banged other captured pieces while grabbing a rook.
The second more interesting moment - after you clicked a clock your hand tries to reach something - have you noticed your queen in the Bator's hand? But the arbiter jumps with stops... Your memory maybe failed to retrieve that later and shout loudly that the queen was not on the table but in the hand...
Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff
Nikolay, the whole situation makes me sick to my stomach. I think the idea of blitz games deciding our National Championship is sad to begin with. I am not an arbiter, only a fan. These situations are very difficult to rule on and unfortunately, it does not sound like you got a fair chance to express yourself. 1) Since the tournament started before July 1, not sure if the new rule would have been in effect for that tournament. 2) Promoting to an upside down rook was a violation but there was no queen available and to make matters worse, the opponent had it in his hands. The other part of the rule which I don't like, is that if you stop the clock and the arbiter does not think it was justified you would also could lose. You only had 7 seconds left and it might have taken 2 or 3 seconds to find the button to stop the clock, since it is never used during the game. Yes, definitely, not a clear cut decision and I feel bad for you Nikolay, although sadly, the rules are the rules imho -- but I am just a fan stating my opinion. Anand clearly used 2 hands to promote to a knight against Kramnik, and no one said a word, so the rules are not always the rules.
Thanks for the kind words btw Nikolay. Good luck in the future. I am sure you will be a GM soon.
Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff
I have a question. If an opponent was caught using a computer to feed him moves only after the game was over under the current FIDE rules is the result of that game immutable?
I have a question. If an opponent was caught using a computer to feed him moves only after the game was over under the current FIDE rules is the result of that game immutable?
if you remember, there was a cheating case at the Canadian Open a number of years ago that involved the perpetrator taking back his move illegally which was discovered only after the victim resigned (a few hours or perhaps even a day later - my memory is fuzzy on the details).
The initial ruling by the arbiter was that the game is over and the result stood. This was upheld by a tournament appeals committee. The national appeals committee overturned the ruling relying on the "does not bring the game of chess into disrepute" clause.
I don't think the matter went up to FIDE but judging by that ruling - ex post discoveries of cheating can be used to overturn the game result.
Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff
Egis,
Perhaps you are right, perhaps not. I can not explain why I was using two hands to promote - the above is Serge's opinion. Since it was never in question (just like Bator trying to grab a queen before I complete my move) I find it quite irrelevant. Yes, I had some "memory revelations" about seeing a black queen - but I can not be sure, and during the arbiter's confrontation I said that I did not see the queen - I didn't know what to say when he pointed at the queen on the table, I was shocked at the whole incident. I might have lost on time if they did restart the clock correctly. This is all quite irrelevant though, I think.
Ian,
Thanks for the best wishes. You did not answer my question about cheating though, and about the quote from my playoff opponent. Just like in chess, a two bishop advantage can be more important than an extra pawn. In FIDE, there are rules..and there are other rules. It would be silly of me to dispute that the current rule about promotion was followed correctly by me - It wasn't. Arbiters have made different rulings on these cases though (so even here, there are rules..and other rules about common sense for arbiters in the FIDE laws), like the before-mentioned Sambuev-Sturt game. But that is also irrelevant. My playoff opponent having the queen in his hands and not mentioning the fact to the arbiter's during the confrontation - and now denying his knowledge of the queen's whereabouts - that is relevant, and there are FIDE laws for such cases ("does not bring the game of chess into disrepute").
Sid,
I see Roger Patterson just mentioned a Canadian case I was thinking of. I also know that in recent computer cheating cases, ratings were adjusted, medals were returned, results overturned (Borislav Ivanov, French Olympiad case, etc).
Tweet
Comment