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.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there normally an appeals committee at tournaments? Over here it is usually made up of GMs. What does anyone think the chances are of an appeals committee likely holding up such a ruling against their fellow players?
There is then the National Appeals Committee which is usually arbiters.
I will survive the shock of knowing that in a last round game at Superfest Sambuev and Sapozhnikov made a draw. The draw ensured a pretty significant payday for both. I have seen all kinds of Canadian stars close out many tournaments in the same manner over a long period of time. I started playing in December 1976.
The GM offers a draw and it is accepted. There is absolutely nothing going on beforehand. Hebert may have misst a newsflash; GM Sambuev is on one of his red hot streaks! IM Hebert owned GM Sambuev in some tournaments last winter when GM Sambuev was stone cold. Hebert may think that Sapozhnikov, a player over 2400, should have steped up. If Sapozhnikov was feeling lucky his chances against GM Sambuev where somewhere between underdog and road kill. Sapozhnikov decided that the test could wait. A man has to know his limitations. Sapozhnikov took the money and ran. Not a bad decision.
You must mean "cheating" instead of "teaching", don't you ? ;) But what kind of "clearer rule" do you need after all that has been said ? Are you going to let "high rated players" talk you into anything because of their "high" ratings ?
Many high rated players have come to believe that some things are legal only because many arbiters in need of ever "clearer rules" keep their mouth shut and their eyes closed.
Yes, I meant cheating not teaching of course :-)
I think that the rule that is there is not bad, although I would prefer it to be in the actual laws of chess. I think that Arbiters should start forfeiting players for pre-arranged draws in order to change the culture of that. Still, this will never truly disappear because players who really want to pre-arrange a draw will still do it even if they would be more sneaky about it.
Originally posted by Laurentiu GrigorescuView Post
While important, this type of discussion should not happen NOW. During the Olympiad.
It is not productive.
I think that it is important to not involve specific players here. We should just have a general discussion on the subject. GM Sambuev has done what many other players do, so to somehow single him out is not fair. Especially, since he normally plays very interesting and fighting chess.
In my opinion; however, those draws are created through the culture that was built up from years of ignorance and is now accepted as the norm. There are certain steps that organizers can take to avoid this.
For example in the Edmonton International, we have initiated fines (which are actually pretty small) which are placed on players who finish their game with a draw in less than 30 moves and same applies for games that are clearly pre-arranged to end in a quick perpetual.
Over the past 2 Edmonton Internationals we only had one game that ended in less than 30 moves and it was still a pretty long game (which produced an IM norm). Over the past five Internationals there were a few instances where the fines were issued but they were all for games that lasted over 20 moves and were actually quite long (some close to 4 hours). I think that there may have been a few quick draws but they were among players who were at the bottom of the table and weren't actually fighting for anything, so they couldn't be fined.
I will survive the shock of knowing that in a last round game at Superfest Sambuev and Sapozhnikov made a draw. The draw ensured a pretty significant payday for both. I have seen all kinds of Canadian stars close out many tournaments in the same manner over a long period of time. I started playing in December 1976.
The GM offers a draw and it is accepted. There is absolutely nothing going on beforehand. Hebert may have misst a newsflash; GM Sambuev is on one of his red hot streaks! IM Hebert owned GM Sambuev in some tournaments last winter when GM Sambuev was stone cold. Hebert may think that Sapozhnikov, a player over 2400, should have steped up. If Sapozhnikov was feeling lucky his chances against GM Sambuev where somewhere between underdog and road kill. Sapozhnikov decided that the test could wait. A man has to know his limitations. Sapozhnikov took the money and ran. Not a bad decision.
If what you say is true and one player has almost no chance against another player than what would Sambuev's motivation be in taking a draw on move 8. Surely he could just win easily if you are right and get the full point.
Sambuev is rated 2689 vs Sapozhnikov at 2478. Using the rating system's expected score Sambuev should win 77% of the time and Sapozhnikov 23%.
Long odds to Sapozhnikov and he took a sure thing.
The prospect of taking on 5-6 hours work for a few rating points and no financial gain by the higher rated player leads to these draws. We have all seen chess pros close out a tournament this way. No rules are broken. We would all like the chess pros to put up a fight in the last round but frankly they are not there to entertain us.
The GM offers a draw and it is accepted. There is absolutely nothing going on beforehand. Hebert may have misst a newsflash; GM Sambuev is on one of his red hot streaks!
How would you know ? You weren't even there and you think you know better than someone who was actually there looking at the players ? I had wish to keep the discussion on a general level since it is too late to act upon this particular case, but your thoughtless and uninformed comments leave me little choice. I haven't missed your "newsflash". I write about Sambuev almost every second week in HPE .
There was not even a draw offer. Unless communication occurred by telepathy... which admitedly is a possibility that I may have unduly neglected because of my own lack of capability in that field.
No, just a quick mechanical handshake without even a gaze, after playing at lightspeed a totally unusual and unnatural opening for the two players, which would normally have required at least some thinking time. The only possible explanation for such a strange occurrence is a prearranged result after an agreed opening sequence, which by "coincidence" leads to a sterile position.
If you Mr Palsson, would be in the unlikely situation of needing a draw in a last round to win a tournament, would you risk blitzing off as Black (or as White for that matter) an opening that you have never played before ? Even an amateur player like you would probably not do such a foolish thing, and certainly not a professional GM.
Body language is also extremely telling. When both players behaviours show a pronounced lack of interest for what is potentially a tough and financially important game, you know there must be something going on. At the very least, some serious questions should be asked by the arbiter. It could go like this :
- Was that prearranged ?
- Euh... No. (one can't expect the truth right away but the player's face instantly turns red hot... ;))
- How come you both played so fast ?
- Euh... (embarassed smile... :o)
- Do you have a flight to catch or something ?
- No... (embarrassed laugh)
- In that case I have little choice but to double default you. If you wish to appeal my decision you can ... etc.
-
If you Mr Palsson, would be in the unlikely situation of needing a draw in a last round to win a tournament, would you risk blitzing off as Black (or as White for that matter) an opening that you have never played before ?
The final position is well known.
I found in my limited database 16 games with that position and all ended in draws. Some short. A known draw line and it's not forbidden to play that opening and line.
1. Alekhine - Capablanca 1914 Petersburg
2. Bohatirchuk, F - Romanovsky, P 1925 Moscow
3. Vidmar - Capablanca 1927 New York
4. Maroczy - Vidmar 1929 Karlovy Vary
5. Maroczy - Kmosh 1930 San Remo
6. Nimzovich - Vidmar 1930 San Remo
7. Maroczy - Vidmar 1931 Bled
8. Nimzovich - Vidmar 1931 Bled
9. Aronian - Botvinnik 1952 USSR Championship
10. Stein - Geller 1964 Moscow
11. Spassky - Hort 1983 Linares
12. Spassky- Timmin 1986 Bugojno
13. Spassky - Timmin 1966 Bekford (This time they only played 13 moves.
14. Alekhine - Vidmar 1931 Prague
I found in my limited database 16 games with that position and all ended in draws. Some short. A known draw line and it's not forbidden to play that opening and line.
What is your point ? The issue is not about the right to play one line or another, or the right to make a draw. It is about prearranged draws. To me, playing at lightspeed a known draw line that doesn't belong to either player's opening repertoire is a dead giveaway that it has been agreed beforehand. But Gary, you haven't told us if in your twisted mind prearranged draws are OK or not ? :)
1. Alekhine - Capablanca 1914 Petersburg
2. Bohatirchuk, F - Romanovsky, P 1925 Moscow
3. Vidmar - Capablanca 1927 New York
4. Maroczy - Vidmar 1929 Karlovy Vary
5. Maroczy - Kmosh 1930 San Remo
6. Nimzovich - Vidmar 1930 San Remo
7. Maroczy - Vidmar 1931 Bled
8. Nimzovich - Vidmar 1931 Bled
9. Aronian - Botvinnik 1952 USSR Championship
10. Stein - Geller 1964 Moscow
11. Spassky - Hort 1983 Linares
12. Spassky- Timmin 1986 Bugojno
13. Spassky - Timmin 1966 Bekford (This time they only played 13 moves.
14. Alekhine - Vidmar 1931 Prague
Could you provide the context of each one of these games (what round, what prize at stake if any, time used by both players, body language, players' opening repertoire, etc.) so that we could draw some useful conclusions from them ? :)
Sambuev is rated 2689 vs Sapozhnikov at 2478. Using the rating system's expected score Sambuev should win 77% of the time and Sapozhnikov 23%.
Long odds to Sapozhnikov and he took a sure thing.
The prospect of taking on 5-6 hours work for a few rating points and no financial gain by the higher rated player leads to these draws. We have all seen chess pros close out a tournament this way. No rules are broken. We would all like the chess pros to put up a fight in the last round but frankly they are not there to entertain us.
Yes but you were suggesting that Sambuev is on a hot streak which normally should mean that his chances should be better than statistically indicated; to me that's the definition of a hot streak. Whether it is chess or poker or team sports.
Yes but you were suggesting that Sambuev is on a hot streak which normally should mean that his chances should be better than statistically indicated; to me that's the definition of a hot streak. Whether it is chess or poker or team sports.
What is statistically indicated is the overall chances long term; temporary hot or cold streaks are just substrings of results within longer strings of results. Just because you get 3 (or 40) heads in a row in a coin toss doesn't mean your chances change for the next throw.
I greatly respect Jean Hebert's passion for the game of chess. In this case, however, I believe he overreaches. The question is whether a pre-arranged draw is contrary to the rules of chess and I believe the answer has been shown to be No.
A separate question is whether the rule should be changed. There does not appear to be a consensus on this. The Sofia rules could simply result in longer prearranged draws, well within the memory capabilities of any strong player.
Going to a three-point soccer system is an option but looks rather artificial as the results must finally be entered in the traditional format for ratings purposes.
I would be in favour of setting up a separate prize for the most combative player, based on a three-point system, independent of the official results. But I appreciate that this is a pragmatic answer which does not definitively resolve the question.
As a final note, I believe it is unfortunate that Jean has raised a legitimate question in such a personal manner, targeting the Canadian champion. GM Sambuev is not the first, nor will he be the last, to play strictly according to the current rules and should not be singled out in this manner.
What is statistically indicated is the overall chances long term; temporary hot or cold streaks are just substrings of results within longer strings of results. Just because you get 3 (or 40) heads in a row in a coin toss doesn't mean your chances change for the next throw.
Coin tosses are a random event. Hopefully Sambuev's chess playing is not. In any case I'm not the one suggesting there is a hot streak happening.
Tweet
.
Comment