George Trundle Masters 2019

[MichaelBaron]

The player getting the norm needs to score all their points over the board rather than by forfeit, and the number of games credited for the norm is only the number of games they play over the board. So 6/8 plus a forfeit would have been valid but only an 8-game norm. (In that case a player can claim the title based on 26 rather than 27 games.) 5/8 plus a forfeit is not a norm.

Forfeits in games not involving the norm-seeker are irrelevant. In this case Hague forfeited rounds 7 and 9 but played Stojic in round 8 and Clarke in round 6.

Forfeits affect the rating rules. A round robin with any forfeits is reported for rating as if a Swiss.

Mobile phone defaults once a game has started are treated as normal losses for both norm and rating purposes.

If the reason for the forfeits was purely ''lost of motivation'' (as suggested by Alex in his blog) then I wonder if NZ chess Federation has something to say about it.

[Kevin Bonham]

Rather a lot of short draws in this tournament.

[Vlad]

Rather a lot of short draws in this tournament.

Well, the average age in this tournament is 45. Just for comparison, in the Leonid's tournament it is 28.

[Narelle]

Congratulations Dusan on your norm!

[Metro]

Congratulations Dusan on your norm!

Yes to both Brandon and Dusan

[Metro]

And a word from Aleks:

This was indeed the strangest tournament I can think of right now. There are many things to think about, not only about the incident but how I let it affect me, but how tournaments should handle such situations in future.

I spoke to Izzat at length after our very short draw. It was a way to put this whole mess behind us, which affected both of us badly. One thing we agree on completely is that it is up to the governing bodies of chess to regulate in such a manner that ambiguity is eliminated.

http://doubleroo.blogspot.com/

[Desmond]

The player getting the norm needs to score all their points over the board rather than by forfeit, ...

Thanks

[Capablanca-Fan]

If the reason for the forfeits was purely ''lost of motivation'' (as suggested by Alex in his blog) then I wonder if NZ chess Federation has something to say about it.

Presumably.

Does anyone know if there is a set penalty if he had failed to turn up against Stojić and thus destroyed norm eligibility, instead of doing the fight thing as he did? Does it ever happen that a player extorts a norm aspirant for money, threatening a no-show if not paid, and what sanctions are imposed on such a lowlife?