Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 82
  1. #1
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,585

    FIDE "World Womens Champs" knockout in Nalchik

    This event is scheduled from Aug 28 - Sep 18.

    The venue is hugely contentious because of its proximity to Georgia and the recent war between Russia and Georgia.

    Ian Rogers has criticised the event in no uncertain terms (see TCG excerpts here.

    I don't think the inevitable Georgian boycott will do much to harm the credibility of the outcome - as one "Vladimir" (but I am unsure which one!) points out in comments, the Georgians are not that much of a threat on seedings despite their formidable record in the past.

    That said, I don't think the outcome will have much credibility anyway because it is yet another trashy FIDE knockout with 2-game matches up til the final which is 4 games (and even if it was more credible it would still be for #2).

    List of players here although that should be taken with considerable caution as the Georgians are expected to withdraw and it's not impossible some others will do so.
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 24-08-2008 at 09:58 PM.

  2. #2
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,154
    Again a scandal in the woman chess and again armageddon involved...

    Two females were playing K+N vs K+N until one of them lost on time. The person who lost on time did not stop the clock but rather was constantly loudly claiming a draw.

    The arbiter ruled it as a draw anyway. The unhappy female complained. The complaint was considered by the appeal committee and it looks like they changed the decision of the arbiter. As usual the appeal committee consisted of “usual suspects”. Alexei Shirov on the Russian chess chat said something like “There is this naughty animal. You kick him out from the door; it will come from the window.”

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,073
    Who was the chief arbiter who got this one so wrong? I can not find the name anywhere and some are claiming it is being deliberately withheld.

  4. #4
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,545
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Who was the chief arbiter who got this one so wrong? I can not find the name anywhere and some are claiming it is being deliberately withheld.
    I do not see how that is true given the arbiters names are quite visible on the tournament website.

    Arbiters
    Code:
    Zsuzsanna Veroci	 Hungary	 Chief Arbiter
    Mikko Markkula	         Finland	 Deputy Chief Arbiter
    Galina Strutinskaia	 Russia	         Deputy Arbiter
    Vyacheslav Khamruev	 Russia	         Deputy Arbiter
    Appeals Committee
    Code:
    Georgios Makropoulos	 Greece	         Chairman of the Appeals Committee
    Boris Kutin	         Montenegro	 Member of the Appeals Committee
    Lakhdar Mazouz	         Germany	 Member of the Appeals Committee
    The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.

  5. #5
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,585
    Quote Originally Posted by drug
    Two females were playing K+N vs K+N until one of them lost on time. The person who lost on time did not stop the clock but rather was constantly loudly claiming a draw.
    This was Monika Socko vs Sabina-Francesca Foisor. Foisor was black needing only a draw but her flag fell. It was armageddon 6 vs 5.

    Firstly FIDE have rocks in their head to be playing armageddon with no increments. (I'd say this is especially so after the Zatonskih-Krush incident but maybe the conditions were locked in before that.)

    I'd like to know more details (and ideally see a video if there is one) before commenting further but Foisor certainly did not do herself any favours by failing to stop the clock. There is actually no formal draw she can claim in a blitz game in this position (since 10.2 does not apply) but in general a player who wishes to ask an arbiter to declare a game drawn must stop the clock.

    By the way here is the list of defaults in the first round:

    Sebag, Marie FRA 2529
    Chiburdanidze, Maya GEO 2489
    Krush, Irina USA 2470
    Javakhishvili, Lela GEO 2461
    Korbut, Ekaterina RUS 2459
    Lomineishvili, Maya GEO 2414
    Khurtsidze, Nino GEO 2413
    Khukhashvili, Sopiko GEO 2408
    Bosboom Lanchava, Tea NED 2358
    Gvetadze, Sopio GEO 2355
    Zapata, Karen PER 2180

  6. #6
    CC Grandmaster Denis_Jessop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    3,333
    For interest's sake here is the text of the Appeals Committee's Ruling:

    Appeal's Committee Ruling
    August 31, 2008

    The Appeals Committee met today 31.08.2008 at 20.00 hrs to examine a protest made by the player Ms Monika Socko regarding her game with Sabina-Francesca Foisor.

    The complainant fulfilled the conditions concerning the $ 500 deposit

    The protest has been examined under the provision of Article 3.17, par. 3.17.1, point a) and d) of the Regulations for the Women's World Chess Championship.

    The protest related to the sudden death game between Ms Monika Socko (white) and Ms Sabina-Francesca Foisor (black) where, in the final position, both players had a king and a knight each.

    The flag of black fell indicating that the game was lost on time.

    However the Chief Arbiter decided that the game was drawn based on Article 9.6 of the Laws of Chess. The Chief Arbiter indicated that in order to achieve a position where white threatens to mate black in the next move, needs that black intentionally places his king and knight so that white can mate in the next move (White: Kc7,Nb6 - Black: Ka8,Na7).

    Article 9.6 states that, quote "The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing this position is legal."

    In her protest, Ms Monika Socko contended that she had won the game based on the fact that the flag of her opponent had fallen.

    Having considered the arguments presented by the player in her protest and the decision of the Chief Arbiter, the Appeals Committee has decided that indeed based on the provisions of Article 9.6, playing in a most unskilled manner can result in the position indicated by the Chief Arbiter which can lead to a checkmate.

    Therefore the Appeals Committee has decided that the game is a win for white.

    Georgios Makropoulos, Chairman

    Lewis Ncube, member

    Lakhdar Mazouz, member
    DJ
    ...I don't want to go among mad people Alice remarked, "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: we're all mad here. I am mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice. "You must be," said the Cat ,"or you wouldn't have come here."

  7. #7
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,585
    Thanks Denis.

    Quote Originally Posted by Appeals Committee
    However the Chief Arbiter decided that the game was drawn based on Article 9.6 of the Laws of Chess. The Chief Arbiter indicated that in order to achieve a position where white threatens to mate black in the next move, needs that black intentionally places his king and knight so that white can mate in the next move (White: Kc7,Nb6 - Black: Ka8,Na7).
    Ah, I see what Garvin was getting at with his comment that the Chief Arbiter "got this one so wrong", as indeed she did; Article 9.6 is most certainly not applicable here and the Appeals Committee ruled correctly on that matter.

    Actually if Foisor indeed did not stop her clock then in my view the awarding of a win to Socko is correct. Or at least if the arbiter considered the game in progress to be so scandalous that a draw was required then the arbiter should have stopped the clocks and taken some action to that effect before flagfall.

  8. #8
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,190
    There is also some discussion on chessexpress here, which appears to lean to the view that Socko was being unpsorting in enforcing the rules.

    The trouble is that White doesn't have the option of saying "Well a draw is a fair thing, let's stop here." A draw is a loss and she can reasonably expect that if the boot was on the other foot her opponent would claim the win.

    More importantly though, winning on time in lightning is not unpsorting. Many games of speed chess are won by a player who has a position that they would be unlikely to win, or indeed would be almost certain to lose, at slower time limits. The purpose of the wording of the rule is to provide a clear delineation of where a game is drawn; it isn't feasible to have an arbiter make a judgement on "insufficient losing chances" in a speed game, or to have the clock stop for several minutes or even a few seconds while they think about it.

    The real problem is in using a speed game as a tie-break, or at a deeper level in using two-game knockouts to decide a major title.

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,560
    Lots of questions should be asked about Fide's way of running things. First of all they are happy to deal with anyone who can come up with the money. I can recall Men's WC being held in Libia. Compared to Libia, Nalchik is a safety heaven. Besides, I feel that majority of the refusals to come to Nalchik are motivated by political reasons rather than by genuine safety concerns.


    Regarding K+N vs. K+N. The arbiter should obviously stop the clock and declare the game a draw. Was their an arbiter around? I have a feeling that Fide's selection of arbiters and appeal committee memebers has led to too many disputes recently. Whether its world juniors, or toilet-gate in Elista or Women's WC - something always happens.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  10. #10
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,545
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron
    Regarding K+N vs. K+N. The arbiter should obviously stop the clock and declare the game a draw.
    Please quote the Article in the FIDE Laws of Chess that allows the arbiter to do this.
    The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster Denis_Jessop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    3,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout
    There is also some discussion on chessexpress here, which appears to lean to the view that Socko was being unpsorting in enforcing the rules.

    The trouble is that White doesn't have the option of saying "Well a draw is a fair thing, let's stop here." A draw is a loss and she can reasonably expect that if the boot was on the other foot her opponent would claim the win.

    More importantly though, winning on time in lightning is not unpsorting. Many games of speed chess are won by a player who has a position that they would be unlikely to win, or indeed would be almost certain to lose, at slower time limits. The purpose of the wording of the rule is to provide a clear delineation of where a game is drawn; it isn't feasible to have an arbiter make a judgement on "insufficient losing chances" in a speed game, or to have the clock stop for several minutes or even a few seconds while they think about it.

    The real problem is in using a speed game as a tie-break, or at a deeper level in using two-game knockouts to decide a major title.
    I agree. Some of the comments made seem to overlook the point you made about it being vital for Socko to win. After all, this is a World Championship knock-out event, not Saturday skittles in the park - not even a Swiss or R-R tournament where losing may not have been "final" .

    Kevin remarked that FIDE must have rocks in their head for using a sudden death game without increments. I'd go one further and say that they must have rocks in their head having a sudden death game at all. I'd even go so far as to say the same about using blitz games as tie-breakers in an event. You may just as well draw lots there and then.

    DJ
    ...I don't want to go among mad people Alice remarked, "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: we're all mad here. I am mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice. "You must be," said the Cat ,"or you wouldn't have come here."

  12. #12
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    Please quote the Article in the FIDE Laws of Chess that allows the arbiter to do this.
    This is simply common sense...how can one play K + N vs K + N?
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  13. #13
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    39
    Bill,

    Looking through the rule book on Article 10: Quickplay Finish, 10.2 states that:

    "If the player, having the move, has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may claim a draw before his flag falls. He shall stop the clocks and summon the arbiter.

    1. If the arbiter agrees the opponent is making no effort to win the game by normal means, or that it is not possible to win by normal means, then he shall declare the game drawn. Otherwise he shall postpone his decision or reject the claim.

    2. b. If the arbiter postpones his decision, the opponent may be awarded two extra minutes and the game shall continue in the presence of an arbiter, if possible. The arbiter shall declare the final result later in the game or after a flag has fallen. He shall declare the game drawn if he agrees that the final position cannot be won by normal means, or that the opponent was not making sufficient attempts to win by normal means."


    I'm rather confused on the definition of "normal means", perhaps you can clarify them? What if one day in a similar situation, my opponent claims that his interpretation of "normal means" also includes a win on time? After all, in a sudden death game, wins on time are not uncommon or abnormal rulings.

  14. #14
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,569
    Quote Originally Posted by tanc
    I'm rather confused on the definition of "normal means", perhaps you can clarify them? What if one day in a similar situation, my opponent claims that his interpretation of "normal means" also includes a win on time? After all, in a sudden death game, wins on time are not uncommon or abnormal rulings.
    FWIW my interpretation of "normal means" in that rule is "by some means other than time". The provision is specifically there to prevent players playing on when their opponent is short or time from obviously drawn positions or from position where the win is difficult and they themselves do not know or lack the time to win on the board. Therefore you cannot classify a win on time as a win by normal means, however common it may become.

    The point of that rule is of course the player must make a claim and the arbiter shouldn't intervene and stop the clock as suggested earlier by another poster.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  15. #15
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,073
    Hello tanc,

    10.2 does not apply in blitz.

    The game in question was played with white having 6 minutes (no increment) and black having 5 minutes (no increment) and black only had to draw to move to the next round.

    C. Blitz

    C1. A ‘blitz’ game is one where all the moves must be made in a fixed time of less than 15 minutes for each player; or the allotted time + 60 times any increment is less than 15 minutes.
    C2. Play shall be governed by the Rapidplay Laws as in Appendix B except where they are overridden by the following Laws of Blitz.

    The Articles 10.2 and B6 do not apply.(my bolding and underline)

    C3. An illegal move is completed once the opponent's clock has been started. The opponent is entitled to claim a win before he has made his own move. However, if the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible
    series of legal moves with the most unskilled counterplay, then the claimant is entitled to claim a draw before he has made his own move.
    Once the opponent has made his own move, an illegal move cannot be corrected


    Quote Originally Posted by tanc
    Bill,

    Looking through the rule book on Article 10: Quickplay Finish, 10.2 states that:

    "If the player, having the move, has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may claim a draw before his flag falls. He shall stop the clocks and summon the arbiter.

    1. If the arbiter agrees the opponent is making no effort to win the game by normal means, or that it is not possible to win by normal means, then he shall declare the game drawn. Otherwise he shall postpone his decision or reject the claim.

    2. b. If the arbiter postpones his decision, the opponent may be awarded two extra minutes and the game shall continue in the presence of an arbiter, if possible. The arbiter shall declare the final result later in the game or after a flag has fallen. He shall declare the game drawn if he agrees that the final position cannot be won by normal means, or that the opponent was not making sufficient attempts to win by normal means."


    I'm rather confused on the definition of "normal means", perhaps you can clarify them? What if one day in a similar situation, my opponent claims that his interpretation of "normal means" also includes a win on time? After all, in a sudden death game, wins on time are not uncommon or abnormal rulings.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. soft titles (sf Zonal threads, bumped with new posts)
    By Brian_Jones in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 1053
    Last Post: 10-02-2019, 03:12 AM
  2. St George unplayed draws rehash (was "FIDE to Investigate")
    By peter_parr in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 307
    Last Post: 27-07-2010, 06:11 PM
  3. Surfers Paradise Open to World 2008
    By Kings of chess in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 218
    Last Post: 02-10-2008, 05:39 PM
  4. Youth Chess Olympiad
    By pax in forum Overseas Tournament News and Results
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 16-08-2007, 03:44 PM
  5. From the Fide VP
    By Garvinator in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-02-2007, 12:04 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
  •