PDA

View Full Version : Gibraltar 2017



Kevin Bonham
23-01-2017, 03:53 PM
Gibraltar 2017 is starting soon (tonight I think). Field includes Caruana, Vachier-Lagrave, Nakamura, Ivanchuk, Adams, Svidler etc. Australians Bobby Cheng and Zachary Loh are playing.

lost
24-01-2017, 08:59 PM
Gibraltar 2017 is starting soon (tonight I think). Field includes Caruana, Vachier-Lagrave, Nakamura, Ivanchuk, Adams, Svidler etc. Australians Bobby Cheng and Zachary Loh are playing.

It also should be noted that FM Shaun Press is playing as well even though he plays under the PNG flag.

lost

George Morgan
27-01-2017, 08:33 AM
Great win by Zachary Loh today over a GM

Kevin Bonham
27-01-2017, 09:17 AM
Yes he beat GM Victor Mikhalevski (2504). I don't think the game's online yet but it shouldn't be too far away.

OnetoOneHundred
27-01-2017, 04:13 PM
Bobby Cheng gets a rare opportunity of playin GM Vassily Ivanchuk today!

MichaelBaron
27-01-2017, 04:53 PM
Bobby Cheng gets a rare opportunity of playin GM Vassily Ivanchuk today!

And Ivanchuk must be in bad mood as in rd2, he lost on time when he thought 40 moves have been played already!

Kevin Bonham
27-01-2017, 08:55 PM
And Ivanchuk must be in bad mood as in rd2, he lost on time when he thought 40 moves have been played already!

Yes. He missed the bottom line (move 24) on his scoresheet and then flagged in a winning position. Pretty typical Ivanchuk loss really.

Thebes
28-01-2017, 07:07 AM
Both aussies lost today, but next round is Bobby Cheng v Zachary Loh

ER
28-01-2017, 07:08 AM
Nigel in good form!!


https://youtu.be/yNPLcTmf1qA

but will his social media followers fill the Lord's???

The way he goes he might be able to fill the Lord's twice! :)

Adamski
28-01-2017, 08:31 AM
Nigel seems to play well after a night drinking! A revealing interview.

Tom M
30-01-2017, 09:33 AM
Bobby beats Ganguly after the Indian GM incorrectly sacced an exchange to avoid a repetition. A tremendous result!

Kevin Bonham
30-01-2017, 09:55 AM
Here it is

Cheng - Ganguly

1. Nf3 c5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 e5 4. g3 g6 5. Bg2 Bg7 6. d3 Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. a3 d6 9. Rb1 a5 10. Bd2 h6 11. Ne1 Be6 12. Nc2 d5 13. cxd5 Nxd5 14. Ne3 Nde7 15. Na4 b6 16. b4 cxb4 17. axb4 b5 18. Nc5 Ba2 19. Rc1 axb4 20. Qe1 b3 21. Bc3 Rc8 22. Bh3 Rc7 23. Qd2 Kh7 24. Bg2 Qc8 25. Bb2 Rd8 26. h4 Nd4 27. Ba3 Nef5 28. Nb7 Rdd7 29. Nc5 Rd8 30. Nb7 Rdd7 31. Nc5 Bf8 32. Nxd7 Bxa3 33. Nf6+ Kh8 34. Rxc7 Qxc7 35. Nxf5 Nxf5 36. g4 Qd8 37. gxf5 Qxf6 38. Qxh6+ Kg8 39. Bd5 Qxf5 40. Qg5 Qxg5+ 41. hxg5 Be7 42. f4 exf4 43. Rxf4 Bxg5 44. Rf1 Be3+ 45. Kg2 g5 46. Bxf7+ Kg7 47. Bd5 b4 48. Kf3 Bd2 49. Kg4 Bf4 50. Bc4 Kg6 51. Rf3 Bd2 52. Rf5 Be3 53. Rb5 Bd2 54. Rb6+ Kg7 55. Kf5 1-0

And from a few rounds back, Loh-Mikhalevski

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 b6 7. Bd3 Bb7 8. Nf3 Nbd7 9. O-O O-O 10. Qc2 c5 11. h3 Rc8 12. Ne5 cxd4 13. Nxd7 Nxd7 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. exd4 g6 16. Qd2 Qf6 17. Bb5 Nb8 18. Rfe1 Rfd8 19. Re5 Bc6 20. Be2 Nd7 21. Nxd5 Bxd5 22. Rxd5 Nf8 23. Rxd8 Rxd8 24. d5 Ne6 25. Bf1 Nd4 26. Bc4 Nf5 27. Re1 Kg7 28. b3 Nd6 29. Re3 Rc8 30. Be2 Qa1+ 31. Kh2 Rc1 32. Bd3 Rh1+ 33. Kg3 Qd4 34. Re2 h5 35. Bc2 h4+ 36. Kf3 Nb5 37. Qg5 Qc3+ 38. Kg4 Nd4 39. Qe5+ Kh7 40. Qh5+ Kg7 41. Qe5+ Kh7 42. Bxg6+ Kxg6 43. Qg5+ Kh7 44. Re8 Qxh3+ 45. gxh3 Rg1+ 46. Kf4 Rxg5 47. Kxg5 Nb5 48. Kf6 1-0

Kevin Bonham
30-01-2017, 10:02 AM
Bobby beats Ganguly after the Indian GM incorrectly sacced an exchange to avoid a repetition. A tremendous result!

It is not as if the incorrect sac was the only way to avoid the repetition either!

MichaelBaron
30-01-2017, 10:14 AM
That sac looked good as the b3 pawn was hard was appearing to be hard to stop. May be the GM did not realize that N on f5 was shaky and after this, h6 may fall.
RE Loh game...very erratic yet very entertaining to play through.

ER
30-01-2017, 10:41 AM
Nigel seems to play well after a night drinking! A revealing interview.

Here's another Nigel interview following his smashing victory over Fabiano Caruana earlier this morning.

(bzzt - I don't think he was exactly sober the previous night during and / or after the boys vs girls (battle of the sexes) encounter



https://livestream.com/gibchess/events/6892970/videos/148069784

Don't miss the collective crack - up when Kasparov's message appear on screen!

Thebes
30-01-2017, 11:21 AM
It is not as if the incorrect sac was the only way to avoid the repetition either!

How are his norm chances looking?

Kevin Bonham
30-01-2017, 11:55 AM
How are his norm chances looking?

He can get a norm with 1.5/3 from here if the average rating of his last two opponents is 2606.5 or higher, which is a good chance if he doesn't lose to Kapcer. Failing that 2/3 should be enough.

Thebes
31-01-2017, 04:07 PM
He can get a norm with 1.5/3 from here if the average rating of his last two opponents is 2606.5 or higher, which is a good chance if he doesn't lose to Kapcer. Failing that 2/3 should be enough.

What are Zachary Loh's chances looking for IM norm?

Kevin Bonham
01-02-2017, 07:30 AM
What are Zachary Loh's chances looking for IM norm?

Gone now at least.

Bobby has to win with black against Istratescu in the final round.

Kai
01-02-2017, 08:14 AM
Gone now at least.

Bobby has to win with black against Istratescu in the final round.

It's a 10 round tournament, so if he draws this round, I think he can still get a 9-round norm if he wins the last round, depending on the R10 op's rating (and dropping the R1 win).

Kevin Bonham
01-02-2017, 08:47 AM
It's a 10 round tournament, so if he draws this round, I think he can still get a 9-round norm if he wins the last round, depending on the R10 op's rating (and dropping the R1 win).

Whoops! Thanks, I just assumed it was nine rounds. I'm a bit distracted at the moment.

Thebes
02-02-2017, 09:05 PM
Hou Yifan plays 1. g4 and resigns on move 5, apparently some form of protest. Did hear something about it possibly having to do with her believing the pairings are rigged for her to play 7/9 female opponents but she hasn't come out and openly said that

edit: apparently has to do with a female in contention for the womens prize playing her husband in the final round

Thebes
02-02-2017, 10:09 PM
3372

Agent Smith
02-02-2017, 11:17 PM
Hou Yifan plays 1. g4 and resigns on move 5, apparently some form of protest. Did hear something about it possibly having to do with her believing the pairings are rigged for her to play 7/9 female opponents but she hasn't come out and openly said that

edit: apparently has to do with a female in contention for the womens prize playing her husband in the final round

Here is her earlier amazing win.

[Event "Gibraltar Masters 2017"]
[Site "Caleta ENG"]
[Date "2017.01.30"]
[Round "7.20"]
[White "Ider, Borya"]
[Black "Hou, Yifan"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2463"]
[BlackElo "2651"]
[ECO "A47"]
[EventDate "2017.01.24"]
[WhiteTitle "IM"]
[BlackTitle "GM"]
[Opening "Queen's Indian defence"]
[WhiteFideId "4901134"]
[BlackFideId "8602980"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 b6 3. Bf4 Bb7 4. e3 g6 5. h3 Bg7 6. Be2 d6 7. c4 Nbd7 8. Nc3 O-O 9. O-O e6 10. Qc2 Nh5 11. Bh2 f5 12. d5 e5 13. g4 fxg4 14. hxg4 Nhf6 15. Ng5 Nxd5
( 15. ... Nc5 16. f4 a5 17. Na4 Nxa4 18. Qxa4 Bc8 19. Ne6 Bxe6 20. dxe6 )
16. Ne6 Nxc3 17. Nxd8 Nxe2+ 18. Qxe2 Bf3 19. Qd3 Nc5 20. Qa3 Rfxd8 21. e4 Rf8 22. Rae1 Bh6 23. b4 Ne6
( 23. ... Nxe4 24. Rxe4 Bxe4 25. f3 Bb7 26. c5 Rf7 27. cxd6 cxd6 28. Qd3 )
24. c5 Nd4 25. Qd3 b5 26. Bg3 Bg5 27. a4 a6 28. Qa3 Bxg4 29. Rd1 Nf3+ 30. Kg2 dxc5 31. bxc5 h5 32. Qa2+ Kh7 33. Qd5 Rae8 34. Qc6 Re7 35. Rd3 h4 36. Bh2 bxa4 37. Qxa4 Kh6 38. Qa3 Ref7 39. Qb2 Re7 40. c6 a5 41. Rb3 Kg7 42. Rb5
( 42. Ra1 Ref7 43. Ra2 Kh7 44. Bxe5 h3+ 45. Kh1 Nd2 46. Rg3 Nxe4 )
42. ... h3+ 43. Kh1 Nxh2 44. Rxe5 Bf3+ 45. Kg1 Nxf1 46. Rxe7+ Kh6 47. Qg7+ Kh5 48. Qh7+ Kg4 49. Re8 Rxe8 50. Qd7+ Kh4 51. Kxf1 Rd8 52. Qh7+ Kg4
( 52. ... Kg4 53. Qd7+ Rxd7 54. cxd7 h2 55. e5 h1=Q# )
0-1

Bill Gletsos
03-02-2017, 12:25 AM
Hou interview.

OsV4Pf-1U0s

Andrew Hardegen
03-02-2017, 07:32 AM
Hou is complaining about the pairings: seemingly not that they were wrong, just that they were not suitable for her.

Her complaint is about being paired with 7 female opponents in 10 rounds. She protests this by throwing her final round game ... against a male opponent.

Neither the game nor the interview are to her credit. As a professional player she ought to be setting a better example.

Kevin Bonham
03-02-2017, 09:34 AM
It should be a simple matter for someone with the right software to run a replication test of the pairings and establish whether they were correct. It is conceivably just a bizarre coincidence that Hou had so many leading female players as opponents.

Jesper Norgaard
03-02-2017, 10:25 AM
According to chessbase article somebody checked the pairings right until the last round, and notably confirmed round 10 given pairings until round 9. The pairing can be seen on chess-results.com. I don't know how to set a test up, but I sincerely doubt something was rigged. Simply coincidences, they do happen.

In the last round Anna Zatonskih was paired against her husband (draw). Ju Wenjun was paired against Chinese Yu Yangui (Yu won duly). Hou was paired against a male. Wasn't she trying to protest being paired against female players?

... but had a mental fit and played 1.g4 2.f3 3.d3 4.Kd2 and resigned a move later.

Not a very convincing argument nor a prudent way to demonstrate it. Not very typical of Hou either, who was acting very normal and smiling through that bizarre game.

Nakamura made a formal protest about the pairing in the last round, he probably thought he should have played new star David Anton Guijarra, but this was rejected by Stewart Reuben if I understand it correctly. David was on 7˝ and due black so he was difficult to pair against 7 other players on 7 p. who were all due black I think. I probably have details wrong in that summary.

Kevin Bonham
03-02-2017, 10:43 AM
Very generous and diplomatic response from the Chief Organiser there. File under "stuff happens" and move on so long as it doesn't happen again. She is only hurting herself by carrying on.

We get a similar issue in Tasmanian chess oddly enough - sometimes a player travels from one end of the state to the other then ends up just by chance playing a bunch of their clubmates in a row. A while ago (I think it was around 2000) we had one rather volatile player actually withdraw from a tournament over it so we put him on a warning for unauthorised withdrawal.

Thebes
03-02-2017, 11:57 AM
According to chessbase article somebody checked the pairings right until the last round, and notably confirmed round 10 given pairings until round 9. The pairing can be seen on chess-results.com. I don't know how to set a test up, but I sincerely doubt something was rigged. Simply coincidences, they do happen.

In the last round Anna Zatonskih was paired against her husband (draw). Ju Wenjun was paired against Chinese Yu Yangui (Yu won duly). Hou was paired against a male. Wasn't she trying to protest being paired against female players?

... but had a mental fit and played 1.g4 2.f3 3.d3 4.Kd2 and resigned a move later.

Not a very convincing argument nor a prudent way to demonstrate it. Not very typical of Hou either, who was acting very normal and smiling through that bizarre game.

Nakamura made a formal protest about the pairing in the last round, he probably thought he should have played new star David Anton Guijarra, but this was rejected by Stewart Reuben if I understand it correctly. David was on 7˝ and due black so he was difficult to pair against 7 other players on 7 p. who were all due black I think. I probably have details wrong in that summary.

Didn't nakamura and Anton already play in round 7?

Bill Gletsos
03-02-2017, 12:19 PM
Didn't nakamura and Anton already play in round 7?Yes they did.

Bill Gletsos
03-02-2017, 12:20 PM
Nakamura made a formal protest about the pairing in the last round, he probably thought he should have played new star David Anton Guijarra, but this was rejected by Stewart Reuben if I understand it correctly. David was on 7˝ and due black so he was difficult to pair against 7 other players on 7 p. who were all due black I think. I probably have details wrong in that summary.The following is from chess.com


Among the "interesting" pairings for the final round is that the leader will take White, giving him six Whites and four Blacks despire opening with Black in the first round. Also, IM Anna Zatonskih, still in contention for a top women's prize, has to face her husband, GM Daniel Fridman.

The pairings are so interesting that FM Sunil Weeremantry, stepfather of Nakamura, filed an appeal. Appeals Committe Chairman Stewart Reuben said the appeal was denied. He explained that nearly every player on 7/9 was due Black, but Anton was due White. Reuben said the pairings maximize the number of correct colors, and the fact that Anton is the sole leader is immaterial to this maximization.

MichaelBaron
03-02-2017, 12:35 PM
Yes they did.

Hou's protest was far more spectacular...allowing herself to get mated in 5 moves.

Garvinator
03-02-2017, 02:06 PM
I have followed the last few posts. From the arbiters following the thread, do you think there is any point doing a check of the pairings? I am willing to go through the pairings, if I know the program being used, what 'conditions' are being placed for pairings ie acceleration etc.

If there is any point that is?

Kevin Bonham
03-02-2017, 08:18 PM
I have followed the last few posts. From the arbiters following the thread, do you think there is any point doing a check of the pairings? I am willing to go through the pairings, if I know the program being used, what 'conditions' are being placed for pairings ie acceleration etc.

If there is any point that is?

Possibly by the time you do all that somebody else will have done so!

Pairing program was Swiss Manager. Presumably latest build. I don't know if the tournament file is useful, if so you can get it off the chess-results link:

http://www.chess-results.com/tnr257693.aspx?lan=1&art=25

No acceleration but I do see half-point byes.

These days two programs won't always get the same pairings even if they are both approved (there is some tolerance for error rate if it isn't too high), so using any different program or build might give slightly different outcomes.

Kevin Bonham
04-02-2017, 12:38 AM
Possibly by the time you do all that somebody else will have done so!

One Chessbase poster writes:


TheJackpot 2/2/2017 11:44
I see a lot of remarks saying "well, let them show the machine, so someone can check it", "It must be manipulated, this is so unlikely", etc.

The FIDE Swiss Dutch rules are on the FIDE website, in the handbook. There is pairings.fide.com which has a list of endorsed pairing software, meaning it was tested by FIDE to follow those rules. Why is nobody doing the checks?

Guess what? I did :)

Took the SwissManager tournament file from chess-results.com, created a TRF / FIDE rating report file, imported it, verified the pairings.

Round 1: differences, which is to be expected: people show up late, ratings get corrected, mistakes fixed, etc.
Round 2, 3, 4: equal to the pairing in Gibraltar
Round 5: a few differences in the group of people with 1.5 and 1 out of 4, nowhere near Hou. My educated guess: results of previous rounds were corrected after round 5 was paired
Round 6, 7, 8: equal to pairing in Gibraltar
Round 9: in the lower echelons 2 pairings were adjusted (the black players exchanged), due to (probably) israeli not playing irani
Round 10: equal to pairing in Gibraltar.

Does that count as sticking to the facts?

Kevin Bonham
04-02-2017, 01:03 AM
By a quick count of the thread on Chessbase I found 28 intelligent comments, 40 idiotic ones and 24 that were neither. Anyway I hope I improved the average IQ of the thread by adding this:


Some of the posts here about probability, Bayesian reasoning etc ignore that this wasn't a predetermined experiment. If you know nothing about a coin and throw it 20 times and get 19 heads, having only tested this with a few coins before, you might be suspicious about the fairness of the coin. But if you do the same experiment thousands of times with different coins then sooner or later a coin that is actually fair will throw 19 heads in 20 goes. Hundreds of prominent chessplayers play in multiple tournaments each every year - sooner or later a scenario like this, however improbable, will happen randomly.

For a given person to win the lottery is hugely unlikely, yet in a given lottery quite often someone's numbers come up because there are so many entries. Does that prove the lottery is rigged in that person's favour? A post hoc observation of something very improbable happening in one of so many such tournaments isn't reason for suspicion at all. Indeed if pairings so improbable never occurred that would be more remarkable!

MichaelBaron
04-02-2017, 02:36 AM
Should also be mentioned that one of the reasons she was unhappy was that one her main competitors for the women's prizes was playing in the last round...against her husband! :). They drew though.

losboba
04-02-2017, 12:26 PM
Possibly by the time you do all that somebody else will have done so!
These days two programs won't always get the same pairings even if they are both approved (there is some tolerance for error rate if it isn't too high), so using any different program or build might give slightly different outcomes.

That's true. But only theoretically. Because a tournament with 255 players is very easy to manage (by a program or even by a human being), and I have just checked that every FIDE-approved program gets the same pairings. Even when using the so-called 2017 rules (which are not official yet).

The majority of the discrepancies happen when there are tournaments with a low number of players and many rounds. Not many in the real world (luckily:-).

Kevin Bonham
04-02-2017, 01:10 PM
That's true. But only theoretically. Because a tournament with 255 players is very easy to manage (by a program or even by a human being), and I have just checked that every FIDE-approved program gets the same pairings.

Excellent news and thanks for posting. That should be the end for the conspiracy theories, but I'm sure it won't be.

Kaitlin
04-02-2017, 03:31 PM
If the pairings were fair, every match would be a draw !

Agent Smith
04-02-2017, 03:51 PM
Ok... but i sympathise with Hou.
It's a big coincidence she got so many female matches, and her rival drew (her) husband in the last round.
You're in another country... who has time to check program pairings.

Garvinator
04-02-2017, 07:03 PM
Ok... but i sympathise with Hou.
It's a big coincidence she got so many female matches, and her rival drew (her) husband in the last round.
You're in another country... who has time to check program pairings.
I do not sympathise with Hou at all. In title tournaments, fide are very clear that pairings can not be changed/manipulated or even to improve the chances of one or more players chasing norms, even if it is has no other effect on the event. Doing this could stop the event being rated and call into question the impartiality of the chief arbiter and cost them their title.

To add further information, Shaun Press on this blog has also added further information, confirming most of what has been said here, and confirming that a pairing was most likely changed to avoid an Israel v Iran clash.

A player has the right to question if the pairings are correct, before the next round starts, and preferably by showing how they believe they are wrong. But not by slagging off the arbiting team and organisers near the end of the event, with no evidence.

The issue of same family pairings in the last three rounds is probably something that should be looked at, to avoid the conspiracy theories that seem to crop up now and again.

Ian Rout
04-02-2017, 09:02 PM
The issue of same family pairings in the last three rounds is probably something that should be looked at, to avoid the conspiracy theories that seem to crop up now and again.You could possibly allow an arbiter discretion in extreme cases, but a general rule would become a major can of worms pretty quickly and cause more trouble than the supposed problem it would seek to address. How close a personal or family relationship applies? What if two people have a relationship of some sort but aren't married - do they have to declare it to the arbiter? What about cousins, or step-relatives or in-laws? Or players from the same country? How about two players winning prizes precisely because they don't have to play each other in the last round and both win. Supposing your rival for a prize is paired with someone who doesn't like you. Etc.

On the issue itself, I'm still confused about whether the perpetrator thought that the pairings were fiddled and didn't feel an obligation to produce evidence, or that they weren't fiddled and should have been to suit her. Though arguably it doesn't really matter.

Andrew Hardegen
04-02-2017, 10:51 PM
I do not sympathise with Hou at all. In title tournaments, fide are very clear that pairings can not be changed/manipulated or even to improve the chances of one or more players chasing norms, even if it is has no other effect on the event. Doing this could stop the event being rated and call into question the impartiality of the chief arbiter and cost them their title.

To add further information, Shaun Press on this blog has also added further information, confirming most of what has been said here, and confirming that a pairing was most likely changed to avoid an Israel v Iran clash.

A player has the right to question if the pairings are correct, before the next round starts, and preferably by showing how they believe they are wrong. But not by slagging off the arbiting team and organisers near the end of the event, with no evidence.

Agreed. I think it is reasonable to ask the arbiter in person to explain the reasoning behind a particular pairing. But I think that there are too many publicity stunts nowadays. If a player claims that the pairings are wrong, then they should produce some kind of argument, by reference to the pairing rules, to support their claim.


The issue of same family pairings in the last three rounds is probably something that should be looked at, to avoid the conspiracy theories that seem to crop up now and again.

If a husband and wife are not paired with each other in the final three rounds, then they both have an opportunity to win all of their games: both might win significant prizes.

On the other hand, if a husband and wife are paired against each other, then they will drop 1 point between them, which is likely to hurt at least one of these players' prize chances. So it can be argued that, as a family unit, the husband and wife that were paired in Round 10 were actually disadvantaged.

Conspiracy theories will abound if family members are paired together in the final rounds. Conspiracy theories will abound if the pairings are changed to avoid pairing of family members. The conspiracy theorists win in all variations. I don't think the arbiter should have any discretion when determining the pairings.

Personally I don't support the decision to avoid the Israeli - Irani pairing.

Garvinator
04-02-2017, 11:22 PM
Personally I don't support the decision to avoid the Israeli - Irani pairing.
The reason for changing this pairing is that in an individual tournament is that Arabic countries that have bans on their players from competing against players from Israel. If a player from these 'set' countries participate in the games, they can be sanctioned by the Arabic Government, and banned from representing their country, or even denied being able to leave their country of origin when they return back home.

And in all, in an individual competition where the player is not actually playing under the flag of their country. Therefore, most organisers decide it is rather unfair and unjust, to place the Arabic player in such a position where they have to forfeit the game, or risk sanctions from their Government, when all they have done is just wanted to play as an individual in a tournament.

The forfeiting of the game, can also affect the norm chances of the Israeli player, especially in a nine round event.

At the Olympiad, no such concessions are made and pairings are not altered because the Arabic teams are representing their countries. If such a pairings occur, it is left to the Arabic countries, their sporting organisations and Government representatives to decide whether to play or not. In almost all circumstances, the end result is a match forfeit win to Israel.

Andrew Hardegen
04-02-2017, 11:40 PM
The reason for changing this pairing is that in an individual tournament is that Arabic countries that have bans on their players from competing against players from Israel. If a player from these 'set' countries participate in the games, they can be sanctioned by the Arabic Government, and banned from representing their country, or even denied being able to leave their country of origin when they return back home.

And in all, in an individual competition where the player is not actually playing under the flag of their country. Therefore, most organisers decide it is rather unfair and unjust, to place the Arabic player in such a position where they have to forfeit the game, or risk sanctions from their Government, when all they have done is just wanted to play as an individual in a tournament.

The forfeiting of the game, can also affect the norm chances of the Israeli player, especially in a nine round event.

At the Olympiad, no such concessions are made and pairings are not altered because the Arabic teams are representing their countries. If such a pairings occur, it is left to the Arabic countries, their sporting organisations and Government representatives to decide whether to play or not. In almost all circumstances, the end result is a match forfeit win to Israel.

Iran is not part of the Arab world.

Players should be prepared to play the opponent that they would ordinarily be paired with. International sporting events are supposed to be about friendship and one of the potential benefits is improving international relations.

Imagine a situation where 1 of the top 2 seeds is from Israel, the other is from a country that bans its players from competing with Israel, and both players are 100 rating points stronger than the rest of the field.

What happens if my government bans me from competing against anyone named "Kasparov"?

ER
05-02-2017, 12:08 AM
What happens if my government bans me from competing against anyone named "Kasparov"?

Hey Andrew, you don't want to cause another diplomatic incident with Byelorussia now do you? :P :)

Ian Rout
05-02-2017, 09:36 AM
Personally I don't support the decision to avoid the Israeli - Irani pairing.
I don't like it either, but it's not unknown or even unusual. It's also, while similar in relating to the over-riding of correct pairings, different in that there was no suggestion that the players would collude if paired.

It occurs to me that I don't recall any direct quote from Hou Yifan that she suspected a husband would throw a game against his wife, either in general or in this case - did somebody tack that on afterwards to breathe a bit of life into the story? (Not sure which the pairing was or who won the women's prize, but apparently it was a draw.)

Completely off-topic - yes, as AH notes, Iranians are (mostly) not Arabs.

Patrick Byrom
05-02-2017, 03:21 PM
By a quick count of the thread on Chessbase I found 28 intelligent comments, 40 idiotic ones and 24 that were neither. Anyway I hope I improved the average IQ of the thread by adding this:

...A post hoc observation of something very improbable happening in one of so many such tournaments isn't reason for suspicion at all. Indeed if pairings so improbable never occurred that would be more remarkable!That's a good point. Although I'd explain it slightly differently. Probability relies on random events, but once an event has occurred there's no randomness. So the chance of getting heads after tossing a fair coin is 50%, but once the coin shows heads, the probability of heads is 100%. And the chance of getting all heads after tossing a fair coin ten times is 0.1% (approx), but once this has happened, the probability of that outcome is 100%. The only correct way to determine if the outcome was random is to do the ten tosses again.

junior
06-02-2017, 04:44 PM
interesting

Vlad
06-02-2017, 05:59 PM
https://www.facebook.com/emil.sutovsky/posts/10154634682724681?notif_t=comment_mention&notif_id=1486328190130799

Some interesting discussions on Sutovsky's blog. GM Sergey Shipov produced a video related to the accident with Hou Yufan. Now he is being attacked for being a sexist. All what he suggested to Hou Yufan half-joking was to find a husband. It would be interesting to find out what Australian people think about this.

Is it really such a big difference in culture? - I personally did not find his video abusive at all.

ER
06-02-2017, 05:59 PM
I found a completely false statistical outcome in one discussion forum.

The person based his assumption on the initial ratio of male/female initial participants in the Gibraltar Open producing a probability
of 0.000674% of Hou Yifan to face 7 women in a 10 round tournament.

When I pointed out to him that this ratio varied from round to round,
depending on number of points accumulated by participants at the time
he still insisted that "due to the male superiority in chess ability the
probability would have resulted in an even smaller percentage!

According to my simple counting here's the ratio of male to female per round
(I have left out the first two rounds due to the huge no. of entries).

Round 3

30 / 7

Round 4

26/3

Round 5

13 / 1

Round 6

22 / 6

Round 7

28 / 5

Round 8

18 / 3

Round 9

22 / 9

Round 10

18 / 5

Vlad
06-02-2017, 06:07 PM
Elliott, I think what you are not taking into account, what was discussed in GM Sergey Shipov's video, is that Hou's rating of about 2650 fits in very well to play against other females who are rated somewhere between 2400 and 2550. This is the way swiss draw is done that higher rated play against lower rated.

So you can't just apply uniform distribution.

MichaelBaron
06-02-2017, 06:19 PM
https://www.facebook.com/emil.sutovsky/posts/10154634682724681?notif_t=comment_mention&notif_id=1486328190130799

Some interesting discussions on Sutovsky's blog. GM Sergey Shipov produced a video related to the accident with Hou Yufan. Now he is being attacked for being a sexist. All what he suggested to Hou Yufan half-joking was to find a husband. It would be interesting to find out what Australian people think about this.

Is it really such a big difference in culture? - I personally did not find his video abusive at all.

If you are referring to his suggestion that ''Hou must get married'' ...well I am pretty sure that in virtually all Western/Westernized country such a comment would be regarded as at very least rude if not offensive.

ER
06-02-2017, 06:24 PM
https://www.facebook.com/emil.sutovsky/posts/10154634682724681?notif_t=comment_mention¬if_id=14 86328190130799

Some interesting discussions on Sutovsky's blog. GM Sergey Shipov produced a video related to the accident with Hou Yufan. Now he is being attacked for being a sexist. All what he suggested to Hou Yufan half-joking was to find a husband. It would be interesting to find out what Australian people think about this.

Is it really such a big difference in culture? - I personally did not find his video abusive at all.

Hey Vlad, the discussion in Sutovsky's blog reminds one of the golden days of Chess Chat! :P :)

Quite a few personalities including well known GMs views are indicative of the level of intensity the WWC's action has produced!


Is it really such a big difference in culture?

LOL I won't comment before I read Gary Kasparov's and Pussy Riot's point of view on the matter! j/k :P :)

Vlad
06-02-2017, 06:32 PM
If you are referring to his suggestion that ''Hou must get married'' ...well I am pretty sure that in virtually all Western/Westernized country such a comment would be regarded as at very least rude if not offensive.

So far your comment fits in well my theory, but I need to see more data...:)

Agent Smith
06-02-2017, 06:38 PM
In any society with aspirations of gender equality, saying "to find a husband" is totally offensive.

Kaitlin
06-02-2017, 07:00 PM
In any society with aspirations of gender equality, saying "to find a husband" is totally offensive.

"rich" :)

ER
06-02-2017, 07:18 PM
Elliott, I think what you are not taking into account, what was discussed in GM Sergey Shipov's video, is that Hou's rating of about 2650 fits in very well to play against other females who are rated somewhere between 2400 and 2550. This is the way swiss draw is done that higher rated play against lower rated.

So you can't just apply uniform distribution.

Hi Vlad, I didn't see the video I only read the comments! :) as for the ratio male / female, as I said in my post it was only a simple counting without suggesting anything further than that. I only counted players who had the same number of points in every round, without examining rating differences! :)

ER
06-02-2017, 07:20 PM
"rich" :)

rich husband?? :eek: :P :lol:

MichaelBaron
06-02-2017, 10:04 PM
In any society with aspirations of gender equality, saying "to find a husband" is totally offensive.

The reality is that on paper yes. However, in countries like Russia, India, Brazil...etc...unfortunately such comments are regarded by ''general public'' as acceptable.

Ian Rout
07-02-2017, 11:04 AM
In any society with aspirations of gender equality, saying "to find a husband" is totally offensive.Sexism cuts both ways. If a male player complained about the sex ratio of his opponents (in either direction) he would be laughed at. What would happen if he incorrectly accused arbiters of dishonestly adjusting pairings on no evidence other than that ratio, and subsequently threw a game, would, I suspect, not be nearly as benign.

Garvinator
07-02-2017, 01:56 PM
Completely off-topic - yes, as AH notes, Iranians are (mostly) not Arabs.Apologies for taking a while to get back to you. Yes, Iran are Persia. My mistake, but the ban on playing people from Israel is still correct.

Garvinator
07-02-2017, 02:02 PM
As for the rest of the discussion, people can discuss sexism and other topics as much as they want, in my opinion it does not matter much. The main factor is- did the pairings in each round conform to the announced pairing rules at the start of the event? The announced pairing rules were the Dutch pairing rules and the pairing program to be used was swiss manager.

Multiple independent arbiters have checked and re-checked the pairings and confirmed that the pairings produced were the same as the pairing program, or been able to explain a difference ie Israel v Iran.

Hou Yifan can complain all she likes about getting 7 females in the event, but the pairing program has been validated.

ER
08-02-2017, 05:13 AM
The Official Press Release

Organisers Press Release - 6 February 2017

In view of the incident in Hou Yifan's last-round game at this year's Tradewise Gibraltar Chess Festival, and the consequent speculation over the reasons she gave for her actions, the Organisers wish to make the following statement.
*
All Masters pairings were made by computer using the Swiss Manager pairing programme, approved by FIDE (the World Chess Federation). Nothing was done to increase (or decrease) the number of female opponents that Miss Hou had to face - her pairings were at all times the correct ones, and the gender of her opponents was therefore a chance event.
*

*
Round 10: The moment Hou Yifan resigned, after just 5 moves.
*
To give just one other example of an "unusual" pairing sequence from this year's Masters: Grandmaster Nikita Vitiugov was paired against four female opponents in the last five rounds. (He played five women in total.)
*
That Miss Hou's pairings were entirely correct has since been independently verified by at least three FIDE International Arbiters. Chief Arbiter of the Masters, Laurent Freyd (Chief Arbiter of the French Chess Federation, and member of FIDE's Anti-Cheating Commission) discussed the pairings with Miss Hou a few days before the incident, after she had expressed concern. From her action on the last day it must be concluded that she did not accept his explanations.
*
The Organisers of the Tradewise Gibraltar Chess Festival firmly reject the suggestion of any "fixing" of pairings. That the Women's World Champion chose to react in the way she did is a matter of considerable regret, both for us and also, we feel, for the global chess community.

Adamski
08-02-2017, 11:10 AM
A good press release.

MichaelBaron
08-02-2017, 11:56 AM
A good press release.

Yes, very good press release.