Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 614151617 LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 251
  1. #226
    Account Permanently Banned PHAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    4,254
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Wise_Man
    The captains and players agreed to play the game beforehand as is permissable in the Grade Match rules.
    They could have agreed to a draw over the telephone.

  2. #227
    Account Shoutbox Banned antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    They could have agreed to a draw over the telephone.
    we will have to make up a term for doing that - maybe the initials of the person who made it famous in this fiasco? In the meantime "phone-draw"

  3. #228
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist
    we will have to make up a term for doing that - maybe the initials of the person who made it famous in this fiasco?
    Which Z is it?

    I rather like, "you got Zhaod!"

    AR

  4. #229
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    399
    so what's the status with the sydney interclub? still being worked out.

  5. #230
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    648
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    When a player withdraws early in a tornament it is usual, for the sake of the tornament scores, to reclassify all their games as forfiets.
    Not quite. In a (FIDE) round robin if a player withdraws before 50% of their games have been played, their score is annulled. Games that were actually played are still submitted for ratings however.

    Since the finals in this teams event are a round robin, the unplayed games would be four 1 point byes.

    Thus, all games against SCE become 4-0 wins - and that means nobody is disadvantaged.

    ... well, that's how I see it.
    Or points scored for and against SAC don't count towards the final standings. Which has the same effect.

  6. #231
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    Quote Originally Posted by kb
    One post has been deleted from one of the Sydney grade matches threads. While the basic point it made (that the SAC team's withdrawal from the event could create negative publicity for the SAC as a business) was fine I reckon it went too far and became a bit legally dodgy. Post's still under review but be surprised if it returns.
    Who was the poster?

    AR

  7. #232
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    762
    Grade Matches

    Four teams qualified for the round robin final. Sydney Academy caught up St. George with two matches (8 games) remaining. St. George contacted the NSWCA with their suggestions for a better way to pair the teams in the last two rounds. The NSWCA agreed.

    Sydney Academy appealed the decision to amend the pairings. The council dismissed the appeal. Sydney Academy withdrew. What went wrong?

    1) In my opinion the pairings for the last two rounds should only be amended as suggested by St. George on agreement by the arbiter and the four team captains involved.

    2) When Sydney Academy appealed we have reached Code Red

    3) A problem has arisen between 3 people – the arbiter and two captains. Each of the 3 have a long history (at least 17 years each) of serving the chess community – NSWCA President, NSW Junior League President and President of the Sydney Chess Academy. Each of the 3 has a mobile phone.

    4) The arbiter should contact by phone the 4 team captains – Canterbury were also upset with the new pairings.

    5) The arbiter should determine from the appeal and Canterbury’s and St.George’s suggestion the best option in the circumstances. Telephone gets results (not emails) A compromise could easily have been reached – the most sensible idea being to return to the original pairings (as one round was already played).

    6) If agreement could not be reached the arbiter should suggest to the captains an independant arbiter (not on the NSWCA council) acceptable to each captain to decide the pairings – the decision to be final. All captains would agree.

    7) An arbiter has to consider was the request to amend the pairings based on certain players being available (2 games on board 1) or unavailable in each of the two weeks. The idea that the top two teams play in the last round are a good reason to amend the pairings is of course incorrect and not in accordance with FIDE practice.

    8) The decision to allow the council to handle the appeal is clearly incorrect. History proves time and time again that a council will back up a major office – bearer. Did any member of the NSWCA council speak to the captain of SAC who lodged the appeal before voting on a decision? Did any member of the NSWCA council consider that this process was unfair to SAC?

    9) The SAC team agreed to have the decision made by an independent appeal process. They had an excellent chance of winning the competition but withdrew on grounds of unfair treatment. SAC stood by their principles.

    10) The NSWCA sees fit to advise SAC that their withdrawal is unauthorised and disciplinary action maybe taken. SAC have suffered enough.

    11) The last time the NSWCA set up a Commission of Enquiry into the grade matches the commissioner gave a scathing attack on the grade match secretary, the council and it’s appeal process. The game that had decided the competition in favor of one club was drawn by agreement by telephone with neither player attending a venue, The commissioner pointed out in no uncertain terms that the NSWCA council had acted in an inappropriate manner and the game was finally correctly recorded in accordance with FIDE regulations OF-OF and a letter of apology was sent by NSWCA on recommendation of the commissioner to the offended club. Do we learn nothing from our history?


    Summary

    In my opinion the pairings should not have been amended after round 1 of the final.

    After altering the pairings and an appeal is lodged we have code red.

    Arbiter pick up the telephone and resolve it.

    Finally and importantly I first captained a chess team in 1959 – if I ever saw a fellow captain being unfairly treated I would assist. St. George could have solved the problem by agreeing to the original pairings as published.

    Peter Parr (OAM)
    FIDE International Arbiter 27 years
    Member of FIDE Rules Commission 1982-1986
    Member of FIDE Arbiters Commission 1990-1994
    Member of FIDE CHIPS Commission 1982-1990
    Member of FIDE Computer Commission 1990-1994

  8. #233
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    509

    Grade Match Pairings...

    Charles never suggested that the pairings be changed. He informed Bill of an error and that it shouldn't happen next year, as it made the Home and Away side of the pairings wrong.

    The pairings shouldn't have been changed, this is absolute... but it wasn't Charles' fault that they were...

    It's is ok... to make suggestions to the DOP if pairings are incorrect...
    Last edited by Thunderspirit; 28-07-2005 at 04:01 PM. Reason: Typo and Update
    Lee Forace

    Forace´s Legacy - Swap off when you are down.

    It's better to set goals that one cannot acheive than to settle for mediocrity.

  9. #234
    CC FIDE Master Duff McKagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    711

    Commonsense and sportsmanship

    Peter Parr raises good points here:

    Quote Originally Posted by peter_parr
    1) In my opinion the pairings for the last two rounds should only be amended as suggested by St. George on agreement by the arbiter and the four team captains involved.
    Absolutely... any proposed changes otherwise can wait until the next season.

    Quote Originally Posted by peter_parr
    4) The arbiter should contact by phone the 4 team captains – Canterbury were also upset with the new pairings.
    Yes, this is being fair to all involved. If one of these captains objects to the changes, then unlucky... they can wait until the next season to change (correct?) any mistakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by peter_parr
    9) The SAC team agreed to have the decision made by an independent appeal process. They had an excellent chance of winning the competition but withdrew on grounds of unfair treatment. SAC stood by their principles.
    Standing by their principles means more than winning a biased or unfair competition.

    Quote Originally Posted by peter_parr
    Finally and importantly I first captained a chess team in 1959 – if I ever saw a fellow captain being unfairly treated I would assist. St. George could have solved the problem by agreeing to the original pairings as published.
    So true. Even if St.George hadn't suggested the changes to the draw, they should have shown more sportsmanship and assisted to keep the competition fair for all.
    Overall, changing the rules halfway is just a ridiculous idea; this could have waited until the next season.

  10. #235
    Mr Bulldogs Paul S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    758
    Congratulations to St George on winning the Open Division (unless the NSWCA decided to uphold Charles Z's appeal ,in which case the result is "on hold"). St George finished with 22.5 points ahead of Canterbury and Asquith (both 21.5 points). Might be worth mentioning that it looks like St George will win all 5 divisions this year - a great effort (they already have won 4 divisions and they have a 2.5 point lead going into the last round of the U1600 division).

    Anyway, back to the Open Division......................

    St George came first after the preliminary 7 rounds. Due to SAC's withdrawal, Canterbury and Asquith were disadvantaged in the finals series. Instead of 3 matches (12 games) there were only 2 matches (8 games), making it much more difficult for Asquith or Canterbury to catch St George. With only 2 matches it kind of defeats the purpose of a finals series - may as well just have declared the competition finished after the preliminary rounds of 7 round robin matches (which by the way I would have been happy with and is probably a fairer system - certainly it would create a lot less hassles!).

    No doubt Bill will mention that SAC beat Canterbury 2.5-1.5 in their (now annulled) match, meaning that Canterbury winning the Open division was unlikely. So I will pre-empt this (and mention another problem with this years Open Division finals series). On the day of the SAC versus Canterbury match (about 5-6 hours before it was due to start), the Grade Matches Secretary could not get hold of Canterbury's Open Captain so he rang me and told me that the board order would be reversed for tonight's SAC versus Canterbury match. Being a typical U1600 player (eg I do not study chess books or prepare in advance for games), it did not enter my head at the time that Open Division players prepare for their games. As such I thought it sufficient just to contact Henk Jens (a Canterbry Open Division player) and let him know the situation and ask him to pass on this information when he got to tonight's match. The next week I had a chat with George Xie who told me that a major factor (but not the sole one) in the loss of his SAC game was that he was thrown off his game and unsettled as a result of the colour switch (which he only found out about just before his game started). If George had been warned about the colour switch a few hours beforehand, it is possible that SAC's 2.5-1.5 win may have been 2-2 or maybe even 2.5-1.5 to Canterbury.

    Some more unsatisfactory aspects about the Grade Matches:
    1) Rule 1.5 states that a player must be a permanent resident of NSW in order to play in the Grade Matches, but then it goes on to say that the NSWCA Council can give permission for non-NSW residents (such as Bjelobrk and Gil who played this year) to play. What is the point in having this rule if the NSWCA Council can override it at its whim?
    2) I have been told that St George gets Ian Rogers to play as many matches as possible in advance (before he goes to play in tournaments overseas). Other clubs do this sort of thing too (eg the Bjelobrk-Xie match was played in advance before Igor headed back to Melbourne). St George, Asquith or any other club is quite entitled to do this, as rule 8.2 states that games can be played in advance. Much like with "agreed draws", I think this sort of thing is poor practice for a teams competition, but the fault for this lies with the NSWCA's rule 8.2, not with the clubs. I tend to agree with a couple of earlier posters in this thread that in a teams competition all games should be played on the scheduled night at the scheduled venue - in a teams competition the unavailability of a player on a particular night should be treated like an injured football player - just put in a replacement!
    3) The fines for the clubs regarding non-NSWCA members are too severe. Preesently it is $10 per non-member per game up to a maximum of $25 per player. For non-members a fine structure of no charge for one game, $10 for 2 games and $25 for 3 or more games seems more reasonable. This year Canterbury U1600 had one of its 4 players pull out just before the competition started. Because of this I had to use 3 "reserves" to make up the 4th player during the competition and I know that other teams have been in similar positions over the years. The present structure of fines discourages clubs from using "emergency fill-in players" in situations such as what happened with this year's Canterbury U1600 team.
    Last edited by Paul S; 02-08-2005 at 04:22 PM.

  11. #236
    Account Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,680
    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist
    But I was not wrong in St George thread and that is where it matters!

    And where were you when people were trying to get the right thing done - certainly not helping!
    a/c

    Could you keep us up-to-date on this live issue too. (I presume this will also appear in the NSWCA Council minutes).

    starter

  12. #237
    Account Shoutbox Banned antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,896
    Quote Originally Posted by starter
    a/c

    Could you keep us up-to-date on this live issue too. (I presume this will also appear in the NSWCA Council minutes).

    starter
    I am waiting a reasonable time for the minutes to be completed, say two weeks. I don't expect anything radical to have occurred.

  13. #238
    Account Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,680
    Originally Posted by Matthew Sweeney
    They could have agreed to a draw over the telephone.
    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist
    we will have to make up a term for doing that - maybe the initials of the person who made it famous in this fiasco? In the meantime "phone-draw"
    Would ratings puffery be a suitable name for a change of ratings without the need to play games?

  14. #239
    Account Shoutbox Banned antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,896
    Quote Originally Posted by starter
    Would ratings puffery be a suitable name for a change of ratings without the need to play games?
    or just doing a "St George", I know they are pretty sensitive about it by the way - they did not like my jumb135 stint at all.

  15. #240
    Account Shoutbox Banned antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,896
    ...
    Sydney Chess Academy and St George shared the lead with two rounds to play in the open division finals. The NSWCA agreed with a suggestion regarding the pairings of the last two rounds by the St. George Leagues Club Captain. Sydney Chess Academy appealed the pairings - the appeal was rejected and the Sydney Chess Academy withdrew from the event - a very sad state of affairs.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sydney Grade Matches 2005
    By Rincewind in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 14-10-2005, 07:15 PM
  2. NSW Teams Challange
    By 1min_grandmaster in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 29-04-2005, 01:53 PM
  3. Sydney Grade Matches: a couple of questions
    By Javier Gil in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 09-08-2004, 09:01 PM
  4. NSW Grade Matches
    By Lucena in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 09-06-2004, 11:49 AM
  5. Desperate and dateless: NSW Club Teams
    By PHAT in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 13-04-2004, 06:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •