PDA

View Full Version : Draconian rule forfeits



Jesper Norgaard
26-10-2009, 10:37 AM
In the EU team ch. we have several draconian rule forfeits already. Laznicka came 5 seconds too late to his game and was forfeited. Delchev from Bulgaria played 1.d4 and his mobile phone rang leading to an instant forfeit. As I understand it both games are not rated because they didn't contain both a white move and a black move.

What would have have happened if Stuart Conquest (Delchev's opponent) at the moment of hearing the ringtone frantically (or maybe just in a simultaneous movement) had launched out 1...Nf6 or 1...d5. Would he have gotten his free 6 rating points then? As it were he got nothing I suppose. I wonder if he can now score a performance rating prize (at 3/3 he had a good start).

In retrospect I think that these forfeits that clearly does nothing to enforce discipline or avoid swindling are in fact just a disgrace for chess. You can't really argue that coming 5 seconds too late is a gross negligence - nor can you suspect Delchev of getting advice on what to play next in the mobile phone when his first move is yet unanswered (well nowadays a GM-GM game leaving theory before move 10 is unusual).

Adamski
26-10-2009, 12:13 PM
In the EU team ch. we have several draconian rule forfeits already. Laznicka came 5 seconds too late to his game and was forfeited. Delchev from Bulgaria played 1.d4 and his mobile phone rang leading to an instant forfeit. As I understand it both games are not rated because they didn't contain both a white move and a black move.

What would have have happened if Stuart Conquest (Delchev's opponent) at the moment of hearing the ringtone frantically (or maybe just in a simultaneous movement) had launched out 1...Nf6 or 1...d5. Would he have gotten his free 6 rating points then? As it were he got nothing I suppose. I wonder if he can now score a performance rating prize (at 3/3 he had a good start).

In retrospect I think that these forfeits that clearly does nothing to enforce discipline or avoid swindling are in fact just a disgrace for chess. You can't really argue that coming 5 seconds too late is a gross negligence - nor can you suspect Delchev of getting advice on what to play next in the mobile phone when his first move is yet unanswered (well nowadays a GM-GM game leaving theory before move 10 is unusual).Why on earth is any tournamant enforcing a 0 minutes forfeit time when they can choose 30 minutes?

Igor_Goldenberg
26-10-2009, 01:38 PM
I agree that 5s forfeit is a bit too much (must be at least 10s:D ).
However, mobile phones must be off before the start of the game. It might be draconian, but I think it's fair.

Capablanca-Fan
26-10-2009, 01:42 PM
Why on earth is any tournamant enforcing a 0 minutes forfeit time when they can choose 30 minutes?
Nunn talks about the sad state of world chess in his book Grandmaster Chess Move by Move (written before that zero default time):


Under Ilyumzhinov's leadership, FIDE has made a number of poor decisions which have had a negative impact on chess The first bad decision was the introduction of the so-called 'Fide time-limit'

This effectively makes a well-played endgame an impossibility and a quick look at games played in events using the FIDE time-limit shows the destruction wrought on endgame play. It is indeed a pity to see grandmasters who are undoubtedly capable of playing an excellent endgame having their talents crippled by the need to make a move every 30 seconds. Had Rubinstein, Capablanca and Smyslov been forced to play so quickly, we would have been deprived of many of the endgame masterpieces which have delighted generations of chessplayers.

Most grandmasters dislike the FIDE time-limit and its only benefit is to arbiters, since players are obliged to keep score throughout their games. Unfortunately, arbiters are much better represented in FIDE than players (the lack of genuine representation of players within FIDE is one of the organization's main structural failings). Judging by the number of arbiters who fall asleep during the games, they are not exactly overburdened with duties, and to save themselves one of the few tasks they have to perform, they appear willing to seriously damage the game of chess.

Well, it's about a different issue, but the problem is the same: arbiters want an easy life, so they force through this draconian zero default time, and stuff what the players want.

Nunn discusses two other major blunders by FIDE: the "world championship" knockouts, which have devalued the official title by making it a lottery. He also points out that knockouts have been disastroust anyway, e.g. the Interpolis Tilburg tourney was once one of the most prestigious, but interest in it waned when it went knockout and disappeared within a couple of years. Wijk aan Zee tried it, but realized its mistake, and it is now recognized as a leading event.

The third Nunn regards as absurd: introducing drug testing. Supposedly it's in the vain hope of becoming an Olympic sport, but there is no drug that's been shown to improve chess performance:


Am I alone in thinking that all proportion has been lost in this matter? In other professions you have to do something really serious before you are disqualified from practising; why should chessplayers be disqualified for using a cold cure?

Jesper Norgaard
26-10-2009, 01:48 PM
Why on earth is any tournament enforcing a 0 minutes forfeit time when they can choose 30 minutes?
Why on earth is FIDE default 0 minutes when it could be 30 minutes and leave tournaments to choose 0 minutes or 60 minutes as they see fit? :eek:

What has common sense come to in our world? An unfortunate flight passenger used the b-word in an American airline, and according to standing orders when a passenger uses the b-word (bomb) they have to "handcuff him, give him a big fine, and take him off the plane", well I'm really inventing the details here, what I know for certain is they gave him the big roll-over and he lost his flight. And all because asked about the device in his luggage he explained it was a "penis bomb" (pump) but it got "lost in translation". Poor chap.

What get's me is that we have standing orders to set the brain function out by default in employees because the (airline) leaders have been so intelligent that they can foresee that the situation needs maximum alert. Jesus!

If a terrorist would really go raving mad and against his own interest hint at that his bomb was actually a bomb without using the b-word, I am sure the personnel would be smart enough to take action whether or not the (stupid) standing order existed or not. Geez, who invents these orders?

The zero tolerance on coming late to chess games quite clearly comes from Ilyumzhinov himself. His aids were suggesting something different and he cut through to make it zero minutes - at least that is my understanding.

Desmond
26-10-2009, 02:00 PM
If the game was scheduled to start at, say, 3pm then I wonder if one could argue that they are still on time if they show up at 3:00.05. If it's not 3:01 then it's still 3:00 isn't it?

Jesper Norgaard
26-10-2009, 02:14 PM
If the game was scheduled to start at, say, 3pm then I wonder if one could argue that they are still on time if they show up at 3:00.05. If it's not 3:01 then it's still 3:00 isn't it?

There is some logic to what you say, Boris. After all the rule 6.6(a) is "Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game. Thus the default time is 0 minutes." But it doesn't say 0 seconds.

Also I find it hard to understand how they could default Hou Yifan. She came before the session to the chessboard, but then realized she was missing a pen, and then went to find a pen, when returning with the pen was defaulted. Again common sense is completely lacking.

Capablanca-Fan
26-10-2009, 06:06 PM
Why on earth is FIDE default 0 minutes when it could be 30 minutes and leave tournaments to choose 0 minutes or 60 minutes as they see fit? :eek:
The Kraut bosses of the last Olympiad just loved it.


What has common sense come to in our world? An unfortunate flight passenger used the b-word in an American airline, and according to standing orders when a passenger uses the b-word (bomb) they have to "handcuff him, give him a big fine, and take him off the plane", well I'm really inventing the details here, what I know for certain is they gave him the big roll-over and he lost his flight. And all because asked about the device in his luggage he explained it was a "penis bomb" (pump) but it got "lost in translation". Poor chap.

What get's me is that we have standing orders to set the brain function out by default in employees because the (airline) leaders have been so intelligent that they can foresee that the situation needs maximum alert. Jesus!
Mark Steyn's book America Alone points out that the 11-9 terrorists exploited this culture of cowering obedience to the airplane staff. They had all been instructed to do as the terrorists said, since the bureaucrats thought that all that terrorists wanted was a destination or hostages. They didn't think about using the planes as missiles. But meanwhile, the staff would have done the terrorists' bidding at enforcing compliance.


The zero tolerance on coming late to chess games quite clearly comes from Ilyumzhinov himself. His aids were suggesting something different and he cut through to make it zero minutes - at least that is my understanding.
Nunn also argues that many sponsors pulled out because of his shady reputation. But he has little hope that national federations will pull FIDE into line.


Also I find it hard to understand how they could default Hou Yifan. She came before the session to the chessboard, but then realized she was missing a pen, and then went to find a pen, when returning with the pen was defaulted. Again common sense is completely lacking.
Of course, but Nunn's point that FIDE is run by and for arbiters, not players, explains a lot of the crappy new rules.

Kevin Bonham
27-10-2009, 12:28 AM
Nunn talks about the sad state of world chess in his book Grandmaster Chess Move by Move (written before that zero default time):

What we have since seen is a move away from the too-fast 90/+30 towards more realistic time controls that allow for continual scoring.

Ditto with the knockout WC blunder - this is now reduced to being just one part of the WC qualification process with many other routes to the title.

What is concerning is that there is a pattern of FIDE introducing dumb changes, persisting with them for some time before abandoning them, when those changes should never have been introduced in the first place.

Unfortunately Nunn sometimes opposes proposed changes that are good (eg in the area of ratings) so as far as I'm concerned he is part of another problem. Indeed my general impression is that FIDE are not only too rash in making bad changes but too slow in making good ones.