PDA

View Full Version : Doeberl Cup



MichaelBaron
18-04-2019, 03:20 PM
Someone reminded me today that Doebrl has started!
Can not see the thread for it anywhere!
Anyway, live games can be seen at:
http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/broadcast.html

Kevin Bonham
18-04-2019, 04:37 PM
Jerome Pirotais giving GM Sengupta a good fight in round 1.

MichaelBaron
18-04-2019, 05:35 PM
Jerome Pirotais giving GM Sengupta a good fight in round 1.

Yep, he was better out of the opening despite being pawn down (great position compensation). Hard to maintain high-level play against a GM though.

MichaelBaron
18-04-2019, 06:15 PM
Kayson Wang was also close to holding against a GM.

Desmond
19-04-2019, 09:23 AM
Some good matchups in Rd 3


1
IM Tao, Trevor (2) 2364
— —
GM Smirnov, A. (2) 2567

2
IM McClymont, B. (2) 2360
— —
GM Johansen, D. (2) 2364

3
IM Padmini, Rout (2) 2364
— —
IM Xie, G. W. (2) 2359

4
GM Melkumyan, H. (1½) 2658
— —
FM Puccini, Jack (2) 2261

Adamski
19-04-2019, 02:26 PM
As usual, it is a strong tournament. I shall follow it with interest.

MichaelBaron
19-04-2019, 05:32 PM
Jack Puccini drew with Melkumyan. Great tournament so far, hopefully he will end up playing enough foreigners to have a chance for an IM norm.

MichaelBaron
19-04-2019, 05:34 PM
and Song-Kunte is another nice upset ..even though technically speaking Song is not playing for Australia.

Capablanca-Fan
20-04-2019, 03:59 AM
Someone reminded me today that Doeberl has started!
Can not see the thread for it anywhere!
Anyway, live games can be seen at:
http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/broadcast.html
That's an indirect link that is having trouble for me. Instead, I recommend going directly to the Chess24 page on the 2019 Doerbel (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019).


and Song-Kunte is another nice upset ..even though technically speaking Song is not playing for Australia.
Yes. A GM playing a hedgehog would normally count on out-manoeuvring an FM (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019), but the reverse happened. The final position on Chess24 is clearly wrong, because it shows 1-0 but White's last move allows mate in 2. I presume White really played 46.Qf2 that holds everything and wins with the extra B and P.

McClymont–Johanson (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019) saw Black playing very sharply in a Sicilian, with both sides losing castling privilieges, but he had it all under control.

MichaelBaron
20-04-2019, 11:54 AM
Good to see Darryl on 4/4. With many of the top young guns missing (all missing other than Smirnov in fact) - he is carrying the flag high!

GeelongGrizzle
20-04-2019, 02:27 PM
3.5/4, now 4/5 with 5 others.

Capablanca-Fan
21-04-2019, 01:50 AM
George Xie is making a comeback into active play. Would be good to see him get the rating needed for a GM, since he has enough norms. His R4 game (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019) was elegant. Bad v good B was not an issue; the key factors were space and control of the open B-file, which enabled him to switch flanks quickly to the K-side. Unfortunately he has dropped of the pace with two losses after that.

Raymond Song is another who has been absent for a while, but is making a strong showing, outplaying GM Kunte (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019) and having much the better of a draw against GM Smirnov (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019), and sharing second place after R6 with 4.5 points.

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 03:14 AM
George Xie is making a comeback into active play. Would be good to see him get the rating needed for a GM, since he has enough norms.
\He lost rd 6 and is not playing rd 7.

Desmond
21-04-2019, 08:42 AM
3.5/4, now 4/5 with 5 others.

Melkumyan inches ahead of the pack, being the only winner from the leading group.

Ian Rout
21-04-2019, 11:25 AM
\He lost rd 6 and is not playing rd 7.
According to Shaun's blog, George was defaulted in Round 6 for possession of a mobile phone (not for using it), and subsequently withdrew as he was too far behind.

http://chessexpress.blogspot.com/2019/04/2019-o2c-doeberl-cip-day-3.html

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 12:23 PM
According to Shaun's blog, George was defaulted in Round 6 for possession of a mobile phone (not for using it), and subsequently withdrew as he was too far behind.

http://chessexpress.blogspot.com/2019/04/2019-o2c-doeberl-cip-day-3.html

To be frank I was not even aware that possession (if phone is switched off) leads to forfeight. :(

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 12:30 PM
According to Shaun's blog, George was defaulted in Round 6 for possession of a mobile phone (not for using it), and subsequently withdrew as he was too far behind.

http://chessexpress.blogspot.com/2019/04/2019-o2c-doeberl-cip-day-3.html

I had a look at the blog post. George's reasoning for withdrawing (as stated in the blogpost - not sure its true or not) is: little chance of winning a prize given that forfeit. I find it a bit unusual since I would not think winning prizes is main motivation for playing such events not to mention that if we all withdraw when there is little chance for a prize then...

Desmond
21-04-2019, 01:13 PM
George Xie is making a comeback into active play. He also played in the 2018 Australian Champs (http://chess-results.com/tnr324102.aspx?lan=1)

Capablanca-Fan
21-04-2019, 01:16 PM
To be frank I was not even aware that possession (if phone is switched off) leads to forfeight. :(

Probably what Xie thought as well. It's likely that the last time he played in a serious tournament, only if the phone rang was there a forfeit. A few years ago, the main issue was disturbance, but now it's security theatre against cheating.

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 01:45 PM
Probably what Xie thought as well. It's likely that the last time he played in a serious tournament, only if the phone rang was there a forfeit. A few years ago, the main issue was disturbance, but now it's security theatre against cheating.

The arbiters usually remind players before start of each round to switch phones off. I wonder if announcement was made before the round to ''keep phones away''.
Or may be it is not a common practice outside Victoria to remind players :).

Ian Rout
21-04-2019, 03:16 PM
To be frank I was not even aware that possession (if phone is switched off) leads to forfeight. :(This appears to be the latest rule:

1.3.2.1

During a game, a player is forbidden to have any electronic device not specifically approved by the arbiter in the playing venue.

However, the regulations of an event may allow such devices to be stored in a player’s bag, provided the device is completely switched off. This bag must be placed as agreed with the arbiter. Both players are forbidden to use this bag without permission of the arbiter.

11.3.2.2

If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The regulations of an event may specify a different, less severe, penalty.

I say "appears" because I recall there being some additional instructions or interpretation being issued at some point. These may have since been superseded by the current rule.

Adamski
21-04-2019, 03:48 PM
All very sad for George. Mobile phone forfeit of any kind is always a horrible way to lose.

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 04:10 PM
This appears to be the latest rule:

1.3.2.1

During a game, a player is forbidden to have any electronic device not specifically approved by the arbiter in the playing venue.

However, the regulations of an event may allow such devices to be stored in a player’s bag, provided the device is completely switched off. This bag must be placed as agreed with the arbiter. Both players are forbidden to use this bag without permission of the arbiter.

11.3.2.2

If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The regulations of an event may specify a different, less severe, penalty.

I say "appears" because I recall there being some additional instructions or interpretation being issued at some point. These may have since been superseded by the current rule.

This is why arbiter announcements are so critical - players like George who are not regular competitors find it hard to keep up with every-changing rules.
P.S. So were the relevant arbiter announcements made prior to the start of the tournament/rounds?

Patrick Byrom
21-04-2019, 05:06 PM
This is why arbiter announcements are so critical - players like George who are not regular competitors find it hard to keep up with every-changing rules. P.S. So were the relevant arbiter announcements made prior to the start of the tournament/rounds?I believe that it's the responsibility of the players to know the FIDE rules, which don't change that often (approximately every four years). However, he may have been confused by the tournament rules, which has the following policy on mobile phones (http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/rules.html):
Mobile Phone Usage
We will be enforcing a strict No Mobile Phone usage during the event policy. All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions. A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator).
For players, the policy is actually much stricter.

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 07:29 PM
I believe that it's the responsibility of the players to know the FIDE rules, which don't change that often (approximately every four years). However, he may have been confused by the tournament rules, which has the following policy on mobile phones (http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/rules.html):
Mobile Phone Usage
We will be enforcing a strict No Mobile Phone usage during the event policy. All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions. A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator).
For players, the policy is actually much stricter.

It is obviously responsibility of the players. However, friendly reminders never hurt. We know that many players do not know the rules well.

MichaelBaron
21-04-2019, 07:32 PM
Looks like Raymond Song is close to scoring a GM norm!

ElevatorEscapee
21-04-2019, 08:29 PM
Let's hope HIS mobile phone doesn't suddenly go off!

Zelgiusfan5000
21-04-2019, 11:32 PM
This is why arbiter announcements are so critical - players like George who are not regular competitors find it hard to keep up with every-changing rules.
P.S. So were the relevant arbiter announcements made prior to the start of the tournament/rounds?

I remember Shaun making the mobile phone rules very clear at the start of each round.

Capablanca-Fan
22-04-2019, 03:05 AM
I believe that it's the responsibility of the players to know the FIDE rules, which don't change that often (approximately every four years). However, he may have been confused by the tournament rules, which has the following policy on mobile phones (http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/rules.html):
Mobile Phone Usage
We will be enforcing a strict No Mobile Phone usage during the event policy. All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions. A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator).


Yes, because according to the blog, "While the phone was switched off (this being checked by the arbiting team), this is still ground for an instant loss." But it is NOT grounds according to the above tournament rules, where merely specifies that the phones are switched off, which is what Xie DID!


11.3.2.2

If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The regulations of an event may specify a different, less severe, penalty.[/COLOR][/I]

I say "appears" because I recall there being some additional instructions or interpretation being issued at some point. These may have since been superseded by the current rule.

Yes, Xie violated the first sentence of 11.3.2.2. But the last sentence allows for tournament rules to be less severe and thus to overrule the first sentence, and they clearly were. All they specified was no device being switched on. Not the slightest evidence has been presented that Xie had his phone on during any game.

Capablanca-Fan
22-04-2019, 03:30 AM
Looks like Raymond Song is close to scoring a GM norm!

And well deserved. The computer thought that he was objectively worse against IM Tao in R 8 (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019) after his attacking move 26... Qg5, if White had made the defensive 27. Nf3. But White underestimated the strength of ... Bxg3 and went down quickly. Song won a devastating miniature against IM/WGM Padmini Rout in R7 (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019).

On the leader board, GM Sengupta looked to have a slightly better endgame with RB v RN in an open board against GM Melkumyan, but then overpressed to get the worst of it, then blundered outright on his last move allowing a mating attack with RNP.

Desmond
22-04-2019, 08:33 AM
Looks like Raymond Song is close to scoring a GM norm!

Does anyone know if he's already got it, or what he needs?

Ian Rout
22-04-2019, 10:23 AM
Does anyone know if he's already got it, or what he needs?
According to this source he already has it:

http://chessexpress.blogspot.com/2019/04/2019-o2c-doeberl-cup-day-4.html

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 11:00 AM
Yes, Xie violated the first sentence of 11.3.2.2. But the last sentence allows for tournament rules to be less severe and thus to overrule the first sentence, and they clearly were.

The last sentence allows for a "different, less severe, penalty." for the offence of a player having a device on their person in the playing area. It does not allow for there to be no penalty (though there could be a token penalty, such as a warning for the first offence and a trivial time deduction for the second, for instance). The "Mobile Phone Usage" section in the Doeberl rules does not specify any "different, less severe, penalty" for having a device that is switched off on one's person in the playing area, therefore the penalty is the same as it usually is, ie loss of game.

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 11:01 AM
I say "appears" because I recall there being some additional instructions or interpretation being issued at some point. These may have since been superseded by the current rule.

Yes, those additional instructions are no longer relevant.

Capablanca-Fan
22-04-2019, 12:25 PM
The last sentence allows for a "different, less severe, penalty." for the offence of a player having a device on their person in the playing area. It does not allow for there to be no penalty (though there could be a token penalty, such as a warning for the first offence and a trivial time deduction for the second, for instance). The "Mobile Phone Usage" section in the Doeberl rules does not specify any "different, less severe, penalty" for having a device that is switched off on one's person in the playing area, therefore the penalty is the same as it usually is, ie loss of game.

I can see why Xie could be confused if all he saw were the tourney rules (http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/rules.html):


All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions.

A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator).

"This rule" could only mean the rule of switching the phone off. Xie could easily argue that he obeyed this rule. The tourney rules should have been more explicit that mere possession of a phone was grounds for automatic loss.

Capablanca-Fan
22-04-2019, 12:34 PM
Does anyone know if he's already got it, or what he needs?

Can a GM norm be used as a required norm for an IM title, without losing the right to use it as a norm for the GM title?

MichaelBaron
22-04-2019, 12:40 PM
I can see why Xie could be confused if all he saw were the tourney rules (http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/rules.html):


All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions.

A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator).

"This rule" could only mean the rule of switching the phone off. Xie could easily argue that he obeyed this rule. The tourney rules should have been more explicit that mere possession of a phone was grounds for automatic loss.

Well, based on this - switched of = legit

Ian Rout
22-04-2019, 12:55 PM
Can a GM norm be used as a required norm for an IM title, without losing the right to use it as a norm for the GM title?
Apparently it can:

1.52 If a norm is sufficient for more than one title, then it may be used as part of the application for both.

MichaelBaron
22-04-2019, 02:29 PM
Draw on board 1 so Song did the get GM norm!

MichaelBaron
22-04-2019, 02:31 PM
Final Standings: http://chess-results.com/tnr428312.aspx?lan=1&art=1&rd=9&fed=AUS

MichaelBaron
22-04-2019, 02:40 PM
Final Standings for Major (Many Victorian Juniors performed credibly!): http://chess-results.com/tnr431650.aspx?lan=1&art=1&rd=7&fed=PHI
Minor: http://chess-results.com/tnr431768.aspx?lan=1&art=1&rd=7&fed=AUS
U1200: http://chess-results.com/tnr433431.aspx?lan=1&art=1&rd=6&fed=AUS

U1200 joint winner Mohanakrishnan Sharath is regular at our MCC allegro events!

Adamski
22-04-2019, 02:42 PM
5.5/9 For IM Gary Lane. Not too bad. Another Rooty Hill player Jordan Brown, finished top equal in his supporting tournament.

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 03:59 PM
I can see why Xie could be confused if all he saw were the tourney rules (http://www.doeberlcup.com.au/rules.html):

Those rules also stated that all players are required to obey the FIDE Laws of Chess. The Tournament Rules should have been clearer that players would be defaulted as per the FIDE laws if found to have a phone on their person (even if switched off), but even as they were a player who was defaulted wouldn't have had a leg to stand on in an appeal.

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 04:07 PM
Well, based on this - switched of = legit

No. Even ignoring the FIDE Laws of Chess, the Tournament Rules do not explicitly say that switched off is OK under all circumstances. They just say that switched on is not OK under any circumstances.

Bob1
22-04-2019, 05:30 PM
No. Even ignoring the FIDE Laws of Chess, the Tournament Rules do not explicitly say that switched off is OK under all circumstances. They just say that switched on is not OK under any circumstances.

This is definitely NOT good for Australian Chess! (bad enough to make me want to take up Darts again!)

George is a player with some credentials (IM with 3 GM Norms!)

The advertised conditions of play:
"Mobile Phone Usage
We will be enforcing a strict No Mobile Phone usage during the event policy.
All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions.
A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator)."
I believe George met these conditions!

Had George challenged the arbiters decision - he had a pretty high chance of winning the appeal. (If I was on the appeals committee - this is an easy yes!)
(players are not lawyers - so there is a good chance they would actually make common sense decisions)

SO WHAT EXACTLY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE OUTCOME OF A SUCCESSFUL APPEAL?

Replay the game? (and from the start or the actual position?)
Refund his entry fee? (Oh - that's right - IM's free entry!)

btw: I believe George has a valid reason for abandoning the event at this point - he has been screwed by stupidity.
(I also think he has a claim on the organisers for travel and accommodation costs!)

As I said STUPID!

Thoughts?

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 06:11 PM
This is definitely NOT good for Australian Chess! (bad enough to make me want to take up Darts again!)

George is a player with some credentials (IM with 3 GM Norms!)

That is completely irrelevant. All players must be treated equally, rather than taking titles into account in deciding who has been hard done by, and furthermore there have been many cases of ignorance of the Laws by world-class GMs. For instance Wesley So making notes during his game and Nakamura castling with both hands.


The advertised conditions of play:
"Mobile Phone Usage
We will be enforcing a strict No Mobile Phone usage during the event policy.
All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions.
A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator)."
I believe George met these conditions!

There was also a condition that players must abide by the FIDE Laws of Chess. The FIDE Laws of Chess absolutely do not allow a player to have a mobile phone on their person during a game at all. There is no discretion for organisers to override that even assuming they wished to (of which there is no evidence); they can only use the tournament rules to alter the penalty.

If a tournament rule is clearly inconsistent with the FIDE Laws and a player is misled by that condition and appeals they would have a case. But it's not. The rule is clearly there to supplement the FIDE laws, not to downgrade them. It makes it clear the organisers would, for instance, default a player who has left their phone in their bag but switched on (which is against the rules but not an automatic loss otherwise.)

Bob1
22-04-2019, 06:47 PM
That is completely irrelevant. All players must be treated equally, rather than taking titles into account in deciding who has been hard done by, and furthermore there have been many cases of ignorance of the Laws by world-class GMs. For instance Wesley So making notes during his game and Nakamura castling with both hands.



There was also a condition that players must abide by the FIDE Laws of Chess. The FIDE Laws of Chess absolutely do not allow a player to have a mobile phone on their person during a game at all. There is no discretion for organisers to override that even assuming they wished to (of which there is no evidence); they can only use the tournament rules to alter the penalty.

If a tournament rule is clearly inconsistent with the FIDE Laws and a player is misled by that condition and appeals they would have a case. But it's not. The rule is clearly there to supplement the FIDE laws, not to downgrade them. It makes it clear the organisers would, for instance, default a player who has left their phone in their bag but switched on (which is against the rules but not an automatic loss otherwise.)

while I totally agree with your evaluation!

I do stand by my statement:
THIS IS NOT GOOD FOR AUSTRALIAN CHESS!

Chess is an over the board encounter.
It should not be decided by rules trying to cover all contingencies! (Rather the spirit of these rules)

I still think an appeal had a good chance of the decision being overturned. (by 3 random? players) {and what if they were wife, mistress and brother to the arbiter?}

[Luckily the penalty was loss of game - not instant execution. (only to be over turned by appeal!)]

Again I ask - what if a successful appeal had overturned the decision?

MichaelBaron
22-04-2019, 07:15 PM
This is definitely NOT good for Australian Chess! (bad enough to make me want to take up Darts again!)

George is a player with some credentials (IM with 3 GM Norms!)

The advertised conditions of play:
"Mobile Phone Usage
We will be enforcing a strict No Mobile Phone usage during the event policy.
All mobile phones and other communication devices are to be switched off in the tournament hall. This includes tablet computers, PDAs, MP3 players and any other devices that can receive external transmissions.
A breach of this rule will result in the automatic loss of the game in the case of a player (if a game is in progress), or the exclusion from the tournament hall until the start of the next round (in the case of player who has finished their game), or for the rest of the day (in the case of a spectator)."
I believe George met these conditions!

Had George challenged the arbiters decision - he had a pretty high chance of winning the appeal. (If I was on the appeals committee - this is an easy yes!)
(players are not lawyers - so there is a good chance they would actually make common sense decisions)

SO WHAT EXACTLY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE OUTCOME OF A SUCCESSFUL APPEAL?

Replay the game? (and from the start or the actual position?)
Refund his entry fee? (Oh - that's right - IM's free entry!)

btw: I believe George has a valid reason for abandoning the event at this point - he has been screwed by stupidity.
(I also think he has a claim on the organisers for travel and accommodation costs!)

As I said STUPID!

Thoughts?

1) While I agree the incident is unfortunate and is obviously due to misunderstanding ..I do not think Title/credentials should be considered in such cases. Law is one of all.
2) I believe that if proper announcements/clarifications have not been made by the arbiters - they did not do it right given the ever changing nature of the rules...but still the rule is a rule :(. ''Ethically'' the arbiters may be partially responsible but legally...not quite.
3) I do not think abandoning an event is a good call irrespectively even though I can understand how frustrating it could be particularly if the person was having phone switched off and confident that he is following the rules.

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 07:44 PM
I'd expect that if there had been an appeal and it had succeeded (I would have dismissed it on the information available to date), the outcome would have been the game continuing from the point of the incident.

Adamski
22-04-2019, 08:37 PM
Just wondering- was the Doeberl situation that all players handed phones to the arbiters or could players not even take a phone to the venue? The latter is too hard on juniors who need to be picked up by parents when their game is over.

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2019, 09:47 PM
Shaun Press, in the capacity of Chief Arbiter, has advised me as follows:


The rules regarding mobile phones were announced at the start of every round, the options for storage of mobile phones were given as part of that announcement (at desk or switched of and in a bag that could not be carried by the player), and the penalties for breaking these rules were clearly stated (loss of game). George Xie was present when these announcements were made, including for the round where he was defaulted.

MichaelBaron
22-04-2019, 10:24 PM
Shaun Press, in the capacity of Chief Arbiter, has advised me as follows:


The rules regarding mobile phones were announced at the start of every round, the options for storage of mobile phones were given as part of that announcement (at desk or switched of and in a bag that could not be carried by the player), and the penalties for breaking these rules were clearly stated (loss of game). George Xie was present when these announcements were made, including for the round where he was defaulted.

In this case - all clear now!

Michael_D'Arcy
23-04-2019, 01:55 AM
Shaun Press, in the capacity of Chief Arbiter, has advised me as follows:


The rules regarding mobile phones were announced at the start of every round, the options for storage of mobile phones were given as part of that announcement (at desk or switched of and in a bag that could not be carried by the player), and the penalties for breaking these rules were clearly stated (loss of game). George Xie was present when these announcements were made, including for the round where he was defaulted.

I can attest to this - Shaun was careful to make frequent reminders of the current mobile phone rules and the ramifications if they are breached. It's certainly unfortunate for George, who I am not sure has played a FIDE-rated event with the mobile phone rules in their current version, but indicative of chess's anti-cheating age.

While I am here, congratulations to Hrant, Jaime Joshua, and Jordan (on count back from Jason Pan) for their respective tournament victories, and to Raymond Song for a very well-deserved GM norm. I would also like to thank Charles Bishop, Shaun Press, and the rest of the organising committee for their efforts in providing a top-class event, again - I can certainly say that the Doeberl has earned a place of high esteem amongst Queensland players, and we look forward to coming back each year.

I should also give a shout-out to Graeme Gardiner, who broke a FIDE-rated playing absence of almost thirty years to contest the Doeberl Blitz. Graeme made a mockery of any self-proclaimed rust to score a highly commendable 5/9.

Best wishes to all,

Michael D'Arcy

Capablanca-Fan
23-04-2019, 03:42 AM
Meanwhile, I commend the Doerbel organizer for abandoning their ‘stick’ approach to short draws and offering a ‘carrot’ instead:


Policy on Short Draws
To be eligible for the ‘Fighting Fund’ prize (in the Premier Tournament), players must not have agreed to draws in under 30 moves during any round of the tournament. The aim of this rule is to encourage a competitive, fighting tournament, and we trust all players will adhere to this in a sportsmanlike manner. (N.B. This does not include claims of ‘draws by repetition of position’)

Almost all games available online were hard fought. The only short draw was the surprising last round game of GM Kunte vs IM Bjelobrk (12 moves), but in this case Kunte achieved only a share of third prize with this, so losing a chance for share of second.

Capablanca-Fan
23-04-2019, 03:44 AM
I can attest to this - Shaun was careful to make frequent reminders of the current mobile phone rules and the ramifications if they are breached. It's certainly unfortunate for George, who I am not sure has played a FIDE-rated event with the mobile phone rules in their current version, but indicative of chess's anti-cheating age.
Yes, this additional information makes it clear.


I should also give a shout-out to Graeme Gardiner, who broke a FIDE-rated playing absence of almost thirty years to contest the Doeberl Blitz. Graeme made a mockery of any self-proclaimed rust to score a highly commendable 5/9.
Excellent.

GavinM
23-04-2019, 08:42 AM
My first post on chesschat!

[Date "2019.04.22"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Marner, Gavin"]
[Black "yu, michael"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B78"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "2019.04.22"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "7"]
[SourceVersionDate "2019.04.23"]




1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Bg7 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be3 Nf6 7. f3 O-O 8.
Qd2 d6 9. O-O-O Bd7 10. Bc4 a6 11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Bh6 Qc7 13. h4 Rfb8 14. Bxg7
Kxg7 15. h5 Nxh5 16. g4 Nf6 17. Qh6+ Kg8 18. g5 Nh5 19. Rxh5 gxh5 20. g6 hxg6
21. Qxg6+ Kh8 22. Qxh5+ Kg7 23. Rg1+ Kf6 24. Qg5# 1-0


Attached my last round game.
Gav.

Capablanca-Fan
23-04-2019, 09:09 AM
My first post on chesschat!

[Date "2019.04.22"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Marner, Gavin"]
[Black "yu, michael"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B78"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "2019.04.22"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "7"]
[SourceVersionDate "2019.04.23"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Bg7 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be3 Nf6 7. f3 O-O 8.
Qd2 d6 9. O-O-O Bd7 10. Bc4 a6 11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Bh6 Qc7 13. h4 Rfb8 14. Bxg7
Kxg7 15. h5 Nxh5 16. g4 Nf6 17. Qh6+ Kg8 18. g5 Nh5 19. Rxh5 gxh5 20. g6 hxg6
21. Qxg6+ Kh8 22. Qxh5+ Kg7 23. Rg1+ Kf6 24. Qg5# 1-0


Attached my last round game.
Gav.

Hey Gav

Long time no see. Good to see you here. To have a play-through board, put [ pgn] and [ /pgn] tags around the moves (with no spaces after the brackets), as above. A nice Dragon-slaying in your best style, and against a higher–FIDE-rated player.

Vlad
23-04-2019, 09:43 AM
I would like to thank the organizers for a well run tournament.

Regarding the phone accident, I agree with the majority - organizers did everything they possibly could.



Meanwhile, I commend the Doerbel organizer for abandoning their ‘stick’ approach to short draws and offering a ‘carrot’ instead:


I have to agree that the `stick' approach does not always work unfortunately (there is a different degree of stickness:)). Anton had a nice win against fellow GM in the last round but was not eligible for the fighting fund prize. In his earlier game against Raymond, Anton was completely lost in the middle game and was very fortunate that Raymond let him escape. So when Anton was offered a draw on move 25 in a completely drawn position (opposite color bishops), he felt relieved and immediately agreed.

Maybe as a suggestion, organizers could give an option to players to appeal the 30 move rule. An appeal committee of 3 GMs would spend less than a minute to agree that the position at the end was dead drawn.

Capablanca-Fan
23-04-2019, 10:02 AM
I have to agree that the `stick' approach does not always work unfortunately (there is a different degree of stickness:)). Anton had a nice win against fellow GM in the last round but was not eligible for the fighting fund prize. In his earlier game against Raymond, Anton was completely lost in the middle game and was very fortunate that Raymond let him escape. So when Anton was offered a draw on move 25 in a completely drawn position (opposite color bishops), he felt relieved and immediately agreed.
You're right there. When I was thinking of ‘short draws’, that game (https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/doeberl-cup-2019/5/1/1) didn't even occur to me because it was a real fight, where Anton extricated himself from what turned out to be an on-super-form Raymond.


Maybe as a suggestion, organizers could give an option to players to appeal the 30 move rule. An appeal committee of 3 GMs would spend less than a minute to agree that the position at the end was dead drawn.
Yes, there should be some flexibility when it comes to a set minimum number of moves. The abovementioned battle is hardly the sort of game a ‘fighting fund’ was meant to discourage, if we go by the spirit of the rule rather than the letter.

PS: when I first read "Anton", for some reason I thought "Antić", the most prominent victim of the previous unfair stick approach.

BlairMandla
23-04-2019, 03:51 PM
The George Xie situation is the exact reason why I have quit playing large scale FIDE events in Australia.
Having had a phone "misplaced" from the absolutely garbage insecure arbiters desk, it is clearly evident to me that this isn't a reliable option.
Carrying a backpack to only house my mobile phone is completely idiotic and the bag still needs to be left attended additionally given that I generally catch public transport, not having a phone also isn't an option.

I really considered playing the SIO, but because of this mobile phone rule I've opted to give it a miss.
I'm just glad that all the Sydney club arbiters ignore this archaic rule as they acknowledge that it isn't suitable to the masses.

Kevin Bonham
23-04-2019, 06:49 PM
Posts moved

Posts concerning the Steiner medal have been moved to a new thread in Australian Chess.

Posts concerning the mobile phone rule may be moved to Arbiters Corner in the near future.

If anyone wants to discuss these post-moves they can do so in the Help and Feedback section only.

Bob1
23-04-2019, 07:45 PM
The George Xie situation is the exact reason why I have quit playing large scale FIDE events in Australia.
Having had a phone "misplaced" from the absolutely garbage insecure arbiters desk, it is clearly evident to me that this isn't a reliable option.
Carrying a backpack to only house my mobile phone is completely idiotic and the bag still needs to be left attended additionally given that I generally catch public transport, not having a phone also isn't an option.

I really considered playing the SIO, but because of this mobile phone rule I've opted to give it a miss.
I'm just glad that all the Sydney club arbiters ignore this archaic rule as they acknowledge that it isn't suitable to the masses.

Google search" Today there are 19.76 million mobile phone services in Australia. A decade and a half ago there were 635,000 mobile phones in Australia. Today mobile services in operation as a proportion of the Australian population is 96%."
The initial FIDE mobile phone rules came about (about a decade and a half ago) because of the annoying noise they created at tournaments.
It was quickly realised that people could use the devices to cheat. (And we all have seen many examples)
I believe at the last Olympiad players were not even able to bring pens into the venue - where will this stop? (and let's face it people can now get implants so they can tap & go!)
This issue is not going away! - and I repeat - I do not believe this is good for chess (in Australia)

If we have a set of rules that drive people away from chess - then it cannot be good for chess overall.
(I'm happy to exclude cheats and scammers - and not sure of any drugs that enhance the performance of a player - well except speed to keep someone awake for reaaallly long game - but hopefully those games are a thing of the past)

Thanks for the posts both for and against (particularly those that had the facts from the event)

kelesis
23-04-2019, 08:34 PM
I think that mobile phones will become obsolete and superfluous in the near future. Likely we will have brain computer implants to greatly augment brain function. The only problem in achieving this right now is heat dissipation. But once this problem is solved, a human – computer interface will be created, which contains a ‘memory link’ to the world’s database so one can “remember” everything and the computational implant performs all calculations and numerical simulations on the “fly”.