Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

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

  • Ian Findlay
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Andy Shaw View Post
    All talk and no action. I thought Bator Sambuev had a match vs Eric Hansen in the cards.
    All talk and no action? I am assuming you do not know all the things that Brian Hartman has done for Canadian chess over the years?

    Also, my condolences to Nikolay, who played great. I hope this will only motivate him to greater things in the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ian Findlay
    replied
    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • Vlad Drkulec
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Kerry Liles View Post
    More commentary from the CFC president here:

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

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vlad Drkulec
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Daswani
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Kerry Liles View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kerry Liles
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Ilia Bluvshtein View Post
    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.

    Ilia Bluvshtein.
    More commentary from the CFC president here:

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

    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... :)

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Andy Shaw View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alan Baljeu
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    I took 'denied' to mean 'We affirm the arbiter's decision, therefore the request to overturn that is denied'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Egidijus Zeromskis
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    the national appeals committee has rendered a decision to deny Nikolay Noritsyn's appeal
    Originally posted by Ilia Bluvshtein View Post
    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.
    Sorry, but I don not understand what really happened.

    After the receiving the appeal, the NAC simply threw it out without even going what happened, what should be done for future, didn't?

    I needed to look into wiki to see what outcomes might be from appeal courts: " Generally, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals courts as to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified." But not denied. WTF?

    My crystal ball says the next thread will be " N.N. vs CFC in FIDE Ethics Court"

    Leave a comment:


  • Andy Shaw
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Brian Hartman View Post
    Regardless of my opinion, I suggest a subsequent match, with GM Sambuev putting his Canadian title on the line vs IM (obviously GM) Noritsyn. I am happy to organize the match, and provide a portion of the funds, assuming others join (Sid? Larry? Ian? Alex? etc.)...I fully understand that there is a timeline (I have a venue in mind), and we can all get passed the controversial situation with a traditional method of resolution. The players and others can email me or post here as to acceptance.


    Brian.
    All talk and no action. I thought Bator Sambuev had a match vs Eric Hansen in the cards.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hugh Brodie
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Brian -

    Hasn't the timeline passed? I thought the CFC had to name their representative by July 10 - wasn't that why there was such a rush to decide on the appeal? If I'm mistaken - I'm in favour of such a match (I assume "slow" games - let's say four games), and would be willing to help with the prize fund.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan Scoones
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    “Managers do things right. Leaders do the right thing.” -- Warren G. Bennis

    The NAC has followed its interpretation of the rules. It has not done the right thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Hartman
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Regardless of my opinion, I suggest a subsequent match, with GM Sambuev putting his Canadian title on the line vs IM (obviously GM) Noritsyn. I am happy to organize the match, and provide a portion of the funds, assuming others join (Sid? Larry? Ian? Alex? etc.)...I fully understand that there is a timeline (I have a venue in mind), and we can all get passed the controversial situation with a traditional method of resolution. The players and others can email me or post here as to acceptance.

    Brian.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Originally posted by Ilia Bluvshtein View Post
    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.

    Ilia Bluvshtein.
    I was hoping you were the dissenting member. I liked you from the first time i met you and my instincts were good. Thank you for having the decency to do the right thing. It is not always easy to be the odd man out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Neil Frarey
    replied
    Re: Resolution of appeal to NAC on the matter of Canadian Closed playoff

    Thanks for sharing, Ilia!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X