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.
Re: Text of NAC Ruling - From CFC Discussion Board
I just read through Lyle's and Ilia's comments in full for the first time. Looks like comments I made elsewhere in this thread were just a recap of comments Ilia had already made. Sorry Ilia, I wasn't trying to 'steal your thunder'. :) The same goes for Sid.
"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
...
Except that the FIDE-trained IAs ruled otherwise, which suggests to me that the narrow one is the FIDE-approved interpretation.
Can we say, then, that we have a de facto precedent for Canadian chess?; namely: so long as the violation of 11.5 is not flagrant (i.e. distracting or annoying the opponent contemporaneously) then 11.5 is not to be enforced. For example, so long as my opponent doesn't see me do it (because that would probably be annoying or distracting for her/him), it is perfectly alright for me to spirit away my opponent's captured queen to a place where it can't be seen? (no comment, fred harvey :) )
Or would it be more correct to say that Canadian chess players, not to mention Nikolay Noritsyn, deserve a more detailed explanation as to why 11.5 should not be applied in the case of Nikolay's appeal?
"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
Can we say, then, that we have a de facto precedent for Canadian chess?; namely: so long as the violation of 11.5 is not flagrant (i.e. distracting or annoying the opponent contemporaneously) then 11.5 is not to be enforced. For example, so long as my opponent doesn't see me do it (because that would probably be annoying or distracting for her/him), it is perfectly alright for me to spirit away my opponent's captured queen to a place where it can't be seen? (no comment, fred harvey :) )
Or would it be more correct to say that Canadian chess players, not to mention Nikolay Noritsyn, deserve a more detailed explanation as to why 11.5 should not be applied in the case of Nikolay's appeal?
The answer is found in the arbiter report:
"You could easily argue that GM Sambuev behaviour is a disturbance as in Article 11.5, but this would not change the result because, in the last FIDE seminar that I took, Takis Nikolopoulos has made it very clear that disturbances are punished by adding more time to the victim, not by forfeiting the perpetrator. With a queen against a rook, time is irrelevant, the position remains lost for Black."
"You could easily argue that GM Sambuev behaviour is a disturbance as in Article 11.5, but this would not change the result because, in the last FIDE seminar that I took, Takis Nikolopoulos has made it very clear that disturbances are punished by adding more time to the victim, not by forfeiting the perpetrator. With a queen against a rook, time is irrelevant, the position remains lost for Black."
If the penalty was imposed several move before a promotion, the results might have been different.
"You could easily argue that GM Sambuev behaviour is a disturbance as in Article 11.5, but this would not change the result because, in the last FIDE seminar that I took, Takis Nikolopoulos has made it very clear that disturbances are punished by adding more time to the victim, not by forfeiting the perpetrator. With a queen against a rook, time is irrelevant, the position remains lost for Black."
A question that comes to mind is: do we trust the recollections of an arbiter whose competence has been called into question? Second question: why, in a game that could decide a national championship, would an experienced and supposedly competent arbiter not have asked himself, several moves before the incident, when it first became apparent that pawn promotions were imminent, are there queens available? Third question: why can 11.5 not be applied as of the instant prior to the upside-down rook promotion? If Denommee had been on the ball none of this should have happened. I mean, he had one game to watch - what the hell was he doing? There is no question here that Nikolay got screwed by an incompetent arbiter and the Sammy Reshevsky of Canadian chess. This mess is an embarrassment for Canadian chess.
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Monday, 17th July, 2017, 07:03 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
Second question: why, in a game that could decide a national championship, would an experienced and supposedly competent arbiter not have asked himself, several moves before the incident, when it first became apparent that pawn promotions were imminent, are there queens available?
If it's not written in the laws of chess that the arbiter should provide extra queens, you can bet your ass that some of them won't even think about it. It takes a special mind to blindly apply the rules.
If it's not written in the laws of chess that the arbiter should provide extra queens, you can bet your ass that some of them won't even think about it. It takes a special mind to blindly apply the rules.
Quite a few Canadian IA's are grandmasters at pandering to CFC's leadership ... the FIDE ass kissing Chess Federation of Canada leadership.
Re: Re : Re: Text of NAC Ruling - From CFC Discussion Board
There seems to be a consensus building that Denomme is incompetent. Why doesn't CFC revoke his arbiter designation, and inform FIDE he is out? As he was a Canadian nomination, I rather doubt you will get any argument from FIDE.
There seems to be a consensus building that Denomme is incompetent. Why doesn't CFC revoke his arbiter designation, and inform FIDE he is out? As he was a Canadian nomination, I rather doubt you will get any argument from FIDE.
I haven't followed this very closely, so correct me if I am wrong, but I haven't seen anyone with FIDE arbiter experience say that PD is incompetent. The biggest criticism would seem to be Lyle Craver saying that PD's performance was below what would be expected at a national championship. If there is a mechanism to strip someone of their IA title surely that person should face a jury of their peers (other IAs) and have a chance to defend themselves.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
I haven't followed this very closely, so correct me if I am wrong, but I haven't seen anyone with FIDE arbiter experience say that PD is incompetent. The biggest criticism would seem to be Lyle Craver saying that PD's performance was below what would be expected at a national championship. If there is a mechanism to strip someone of their IA title surely that person should face a jury of their peers (other IAs) and have a chance to defend themselves.
While I have no opinion on whether IA Pierre Dénommée should be declared incompetent, I did note this that he wrote in his Arbiter Report (post # 3 in this thread):
At the speed that those games move, I have to keep my eyes on the chessboard and on the clock at all time. I had very little opportunity to look elsewhere, such as at the captured pieces stack. This would actually have been a very serious error. Three times there has been the beginning of a touch piece violation, a piece has been touched and placed back on its starting square or kept in the hand of the player. With my eyes squarely fixing the touched piece, the players knew that I have seen the touch and they did not try anything. My first duty was to watch the chessboard for violations, I did not let what was exterior to the chessboard distract me. After video review, we found that all arbiters and the organiser have failed to notice GM Sambuev putting back the captured pieces on the board, everybody was convinced that the queen has always been there. The core question is, does it change the decision? The quick answer is no. If a queen is not available, as it was, it is the player who promotes responsibility to stop the clock and to ask the arbiter
So let's summarize what he's saying:
First, that in Blitz / Armaggedon games, the speed of the moves prevents an arbiter -- ANY arbiter -- from being able to track whether promotion pieces are available. An arbiter can only focus on one thing, and that is the playing area itself, checking for touch move violations. I wonder what other IAs think of this -- is it part of an IA's training / certification to demonstrate that s/he can spot ALL of these things even in a Blitz / Armageddon time pressure scenario?
Second, he's saying that ALL the arbiters and the organizer missed Sambuev putting the Black Queen back on the table. That seems to be true, but I don't know how many arbiters were viewing the board directly, nor whether the organizer was there viewing the board directly.
Finally, he's saying Bator's actions don't really matter, Nikolay should have known to stop the clock. The question does arise: what would Nikolay have done if Queens were still on the board and no promotion Queen was at the table? Of course, no promotion Queens at the table is the fault of the arbiter, but the rule does state the clock must be stopped.
I would argue the rule itself is nonsensical in the context of Blitz / Armaggedon games, just as Pierre is implying that it is nonsensical to expect an arbiter to be able to see things outside of the playing area (such as one player hiding the other player's captured Queen). The rule is nonsensical because in the time taken to stop the clock, one could lose on time. But it is also nonsensical because it isn't necessary at all, and any stopping of the clock is very bad for the game.
If both players had the promotion pieces they need right at the table, verified before the start of any game, then there's no need to stop the clock to get promotion pieces. Ever.
So that's what the rule should be: all promotion pieces at the table, including Queen, Knight, Bishop, Rook, for each player before the game starts. THAT is what arbiters should verify, before the clocks have even started (no time pressure), and that should be the written rule.
Nikolay is the unfortunate victim of bad rules. Fingers of blame can be pointed at Bator, or at Pierre, or at Nikolay, but the REAL blame lies with FIDE.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I haven't followed this very closely, so correct me if I am wrong, but I haven't seen anyone with FIDE arbiter experience say that PD is incompetent. The biggest criticism would seem to be Lyle Craver saying that PD's performance was below what would be expected at a national championship. If there is a mechanism to strip someone of their IA title surely that person should face a jury of their peers (other IAs) and have a chance to defend themselves.
There is not much can be criticized. His decision was based on the manual commentary.
However, it could have been quite different with other arbiter or organizer: a bunch of promoting pieces in advance. Observing magic hands and sneaking spare queens (black and white) during the game. Even declaring an upside down rook a queen contrary to a book. I think the Preface of Laws overrule other clauses: "The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors."
Tweet
Comment