PDA

View Full Version : St George Club Championship 2005



Pages : [1] 2

The_Wise_Man
10-02-2005, 09:49 AM
The St George Club Championship will begin 22 February.

Top 2 Divisions will be FIDE rated for the first time (90min+30sec per move)

Top division looking very strong....
Confirmed entries: IM Zhao, FM Xie (defending Champion) and WIM Koshnitsky.

For further details or if you would like to play, please send me a PM....

More details to follow...

Wise

Oepty
10-02-2005, 02:18 PM
Great to see Koshnitsky is playing
Scott

Arrogant-One
10-02-2005, 02:45 PM
Where do we send the PM if we would not like further details or would not like to enter?

AO

skip to my lou
10-02-2005, 03:53 PM
Where do we send the PM if we would not like further details or would not like to enter?

AO

Just click here instead (http://chesschat.org/login.php?do=logout&u=995)

Thunderspirit
10-02-2005, 05:52 PM
Charles did suggest to me that the top two divisions of the club championship would be FIDE rated this year. This is great to see, as well as many strong players, it's super to see Zong-Yuan playing, and George defending his title.
For those players in Sydney's inner south, the Club Championship is St George's best club event. It is run in divisional RR, so most players will get games +/- 100 pt opponents, unless you are the bottom seed. It often gets 50+ players.
Entry is free, once U have become a member of the CC - $10 per year, and if U are local (5km radius), you join the St George Leagues club. U can enter with the membership of another leagues club, if U aren't so local: (Canterbury, Wests, North's etc...)
Shame I can play, I'm sure I'll get over it.... :cool:

The_Wise_Man
14-02-2005, 09:17 AM
St. George Leagues Club Chess Club

PRESENTS

THE 2005 CLUB CHAMPIONSHIP

Venue

St. George Leagues Club
124 Princes Highway Kogarah
(Easy walk from Carlton train station)
Licensed Club Rules apply

Dates and Times

Round 1 Tuesday 22 FEB 2005 7:30pm
Round 2 Tuesday 01 MAR 2005 7:30pm
Round 3 Tuesday 08 MAR 2005 7:30pm
Round 4 Tuesday 15 MAR 2005 7:30pm
Round 5 Tuesday 22 MAR 2005 7:30pm
Round 6 Tuesday 05 APR 2005 7:30pm
Round 7 Tuesday 12 APR 2005 7:30pm
Round 8 Tuesday 19 APR 2005 7:30pm
Round 9 Tuesday 26 APR 2005 7:30pm

Tuesday 29 March 2005 and Tuesday May 3 2005 are catch-up nights (for deferred games)

Time Control

Championship Division: 90 minutes each, plus 30 seconds per player from Move 1 (Fischer mode on the DGTs). FIDE rated.

Other Divisions: 40 moves in 90 minutes, then 30 minutes per player to complete
the game.

The second division may also be FIDE rated, subject to entry by at least four (4) FIDE rated players. If so, it will be run at the same time control as the Championship division.

Format

The tournament will be a round robin format, with players split into divisions (usually of 10 players) roughly corresponding to their ratings. (Players may be permitted to play up one division on request, except that the top division will be decided strictly based on ratings, and the second division too if it is FIDE rated). The number of divisions will be subject to the total entries submitted. The championship division (FIDE rated) is only open to players rated ACF over 2000. The field for this division is already nearly finalised; anyone wishing to play should contact Charles Zworestine (details below) before Monday February 21 2005.

Entry Fees

$10.00 (for 2005 St. George Chess Club Membership). Cost is zero for those players who are already 2005 St. George Chess Club members (i.e. all who played in the 2004/2005 Summer Open). Entries will be taken on the first night (22/02/2005).

Enquiries to: Charles Zworestine 95563960 (Home) or (0410)563965 (Mobile)

Lucena
14-02-2005, 10:11 AM
Where do we send the PM if we would not like further details or would not like to enter?

AO

Just click here instead (http://chesschat.org/login.php?do=logout&u=995)

:clap: I bet he clicked on the link too...

The_Wise_Man
22-02-2005, 10:23 AM
St George Club Championships start tonight!

In the Open Division,
George Xie has decided that he will not be defending his title....
It would have been great to see the Zhao-Xie match-up at St George...
Two young guns going at it....

Anyone interested in playing please either call Charles Z or be at the club at 7.30pm tonight! Expecting about 50 players in 5 divisions

Will let everyone know results tomorrow...
And may even print up a game form the top division...

Wise

The_Wise_Man
23-02-2005, 02:02 PM
Championship Division field in rating order (Dec ACF).

Zhao (IM) 2420
Koshnitsky (WIM) 2218
Kabir 2211
Bird 2176
Camer 2135
Rose 2061
Reitmans 2027
Zirdum 2019
Moylan (WIM) 1985
Zvedeniouk 1978

The_Wise_Man
23-02-2005, 02:28 PM
Overall 52 players over 6 divisions (4 divisions of 10, 2 divisions of 6)
and we managed 2 FIDE rated divisions...

The_Wise_Man
04-03-2005, 08:36 AM
ST GEORGE CLUB CHAMPIONSHIPS 2005

DRAW FOR ROUND 1

Division 1

Kabir, Ruhul 0 - 1 Reitmans, Quentin
Zirdum, Ivan ½ - ½ Zvedeniouk, Ilia
Bird, Andrew 0 - 1 Camer, Angelito
Moylan, Laura ½ - ½ Koshnitsky, Ngan
Zhao, Zong-Yuan P - P Rose, Adrian

Division 2

Vasilevski, Bozidar 0 - 1 Fell, Lloyd S
Mavroidis, Jim 1 - 0 Tomas, Tom
Jens, Henk 1 - 0 Mojanovski, Dimitar
Singaram, S 0 - 1 Radev, Nick
Reyes, Louie 1 - 0 Watson, James

Division 3

Buza, Muhamed 1 - 0 Zekic, Mirsad
Keuning, Anthony 0 - 1 Nikolaou, Chris
Soto, Leo 0 - 1 Press, Brian
Plant, John-Stuart 0 - 1 Rewais, Sarwat
Lau, Eddie 1 - 0 Escribano, Jose
Murgoski, Kole 1 - 0 Bye

Division 4

Smit, George ½ - ½ Blake, Richard
Ollivain, Thierry 0 - 1 Belz, Anthony
Taric, Omar 0 - 1 Wall, Terence
Lo, Michael P - P Munk, Leon
Tomevski, Ivan 1 - 0 Sike, Paul
Matila, Chris 1 - 0 Bye

Division 5

Sharkawy, Sam 0 - 1 Radevski, Vane
Plant, John Bruce P - P Galtsmith-Clarke, Rae
Too, Henry 1 - 0 Ansari, Andre

Division 6

Johansson, Peter 1 - 0 Matson, John
Sciberras, Reno 0 - 1 Brown, Patrick
Plant, Bruce 0 - 1 Koh, Jason

ST GEORGE CLUB CHAMPIONSHIPS 2005

DRAW FOR ROUND 2

Division 1

Reitmans, Quentin 0 - 1 Rose, Adrian
Koshnitsky, Ngan 0 - 1 Zhao, Zong-Yuan
Camer, Angelito 0 - 1 Moylan, Laura
Zvedeniouk, Ilia 1 - 0 Bird, Andrew
Kabir, Ruhul 0 - 1 Zirdum, Ivan

Division 2

Fell, Lloyd S 1 - 0 Watson, James
Radev, Nick ½ - ½ Reyes, Louie
Mojanovski, D 0 - 1 Singaram, Subramanian
Tomas, Tom 1 - 0 Jens, Henk
Vasilevski, Bozidar ½ - ½ Mavroidis, Jim

Division 3

Rewais, Sarwat 0 - 1 Lau, Eddie
Press, Brian ½ - ½ Plant, John-Stuart
Nikolaou, Chris 0 - 1 Soto, Leo
Zekic, Mirsad 0 - 1 Keuning, Anthony
Murgoski, Kole 0 - 1 Buza, Muhamed
Escribano, Jose 1 - 0 Bye

Division 4

Munk, Leon 1 - 0 Tomevski, Ivan
Wall, Terence 1 - 0 Lo, Michael
Belz, Anthony 1 - 0 Taric, Omar
Blake, Richard 0 - 1 Ollivain, Thierry
Matila, Chris ½ - ½ Smit, George
Sike, Paul 1 - 0 Bye

Division 5

Radevski, Vane ½ - ½ Ansari, Andre
Galtsmith-Clarke, Rae ½ - ½ Too, Henry
Sharkawy, Sam 1 - 0 Plant, John Bruce

Division 6

Matson, John 0 - 1 Koh, Jason
Brown, Patrick 1 - 0 Plant, Bruce
Johansson, Peter 1 - 0 Sciberras, Reno

The_Wise_Man
09-03-2005, 04:39 PM
ST GEORGE CLUB CHAMPIONSHIPS 2005

DRAW FOR ROUND 3

Division 1

Zirdum, Ivan 0 - 1 Reitmans, Quentin
Bird, Andrew 0 - 1 Kabir, Ruhul
Moylan, Laura 0 - 1 Zvedeniouk, Ilia
Zhao, Zong-Yuan 1 - 0 Camer, Angelito
Rose, Adrian ½ - ½ Koshnitsky, Ngan

Division 2

Mavroidis, Jim 0 - 1 Fell, Lloyd S
Jens, Henk 1 - 0 Vasilevski, Bozidar
Singaram, S 1 - 0 Tomas, Tom
Reyes, Louie ½ - ½ Mojanovski, Dimitar
Watson, James 1 - 0 Radev, Nick

Division 3

Keuning, Anthony 1 - 0 Murgoski, Kole
Soto, Leo 1 - 0 Zekic, Mirsad
Plant, John-Stuart 0 - 1 Nikolaou, Chris
Lau, Eddie 0 - 1 Press, Brian
Escribano, Jose P - P Rewais, Sarwat
Buza, Muhamed 1 - 0 Bye

Division 4

Ollivain, Thierry P - P Matila, Chris
Taric, Omar 0 - 1 Blake, Richard
Lo, Michael 1 - 0 Belz, Anthony
Tomevski, Ivan 0 - 1 Wall, Terence
Sike, Paul 0 - 1 Munk, Leon
Smit, George 1 - 0 Bye

Division 5

Plant, John Bruce 0 - 1 Radevski, Vane
Too, Henry 0 - 1 Sharkawy, Sam
Ansari, Andre 1 - 0 Galtsmith-Clarke, Rae

Division 6

Sciberras, Reno 1 - 0 Matson, John
Plant, Bruce 0 - 1 Johansson, Peter
Koh, Jason 1 - 0 Brown, Patrick

Thunderspirit
09-03-2005, 09:07 PM
To good to see U won R 3 wise, keep it up...

Getting any coaching!?

The_Wise_Man
10-03-2005, 09:54 AM
There was a faulty clock... and so the game went for an extra 40 minutes....
The time added to the faulty clock before we realised and got Charles to replace it! But even with the extra 40 minutes it ended in a time-scramble finish...

But lucky for us the security guards were not trying to kick us out at 12.00am.

The_Wise_Man
17-03-2005, 10:03 AM
ST GEORGE CLUB CHAMPIONSHIPS 2005

DRAW FOR ROUND 4

Division 1

Reitmans, Quentin 0 - 1 Koshnitsky, Ngan
Camer, Angelito P - P Rose, Adrian
Zvedeniouk, Ilia 0 - 1 Zhao, Zong-Yuan
Kabir, Ruhul P - P Moylan, Laura
Zirdum, Ivan P - P Bird, Andrew

Division 2

Fell, Lloyd S 0 - 1 Radev, Nick
Mojanovski, D 0 - 1 Watson, James
Tomas, Tom P - P Reyes, Louie
Vasilevski, Bozidar 0 - 1 Singaram, Subramanian
Mavroidis, Jim ½ - ½ Jens, Henk

Division 3

Press, Brian 0 - 1 Escribano, Jose
Nikolaou, Chris 0 - 1 Lau, Eddie
Zekic, Mirsad 1 - 0 Plant, John-Stuart
Murgoski, Kole 1 - 0 Soto, Leo
Buza, Muhamed ½ - ½ Keuning, Anthony
Rewais, Sarwat 1 - 0 Bye

Division 4

Wall, Terence P - P Sike, Paul
Belz, Anthony ½ - ½ Tomevski, Ivan
Blake, Richard 1 - 0 Lo, Michael
Matila, Chris 0 - 1 Taric, Omar
Smit, George 0 - 1 Ollivain, Thierry
Munk, Leon 1 - 0 Bye

Division 5

Too, Henry 0 - 1 Radevski, Vane
Ansari, Andre 1 - 0 Plant, John Bruce
Galtsmith-Clarke, Rae 0 - 1 Sharkawy, Sam

Division 6

Plant, Bruce 0 - 1 Matson, John
Koh, Jason 1 - 0 Sciberras, Reno
Brown, Patrick 0 - 1 Johansson, Peter

ursogr8
17-03-2005, 10:48 AM
ST GEORGE CLUB CHAMPIONSHIPS 2005

DRAW FOR ROUND 4

Division 1

<snip>
hi TWM.........if you added the ratings to your pairing list I will calculate the CI as promised.

regards
starter

Paul S
17-03-2005, 09:26 PM
hi TWM.........if you added the ratings to your pairing list I will calculate the CI as promised.

regards
starter

Dear Starter

Thats why The Wise Man did NOT include them! ;)

He is a WISE man, after all, and we all know that wise men are not intersted in your Competitive Index!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

The_Wise_Man
08-05-2005, 02:18 PM
All rounds have now been completed....

10 Adjournments left though....

Will post final results soon.

Wise

jase
06-06-2005, 04:35 PM
All rounds have now been completed....
10 Adjournments left though....
Will post final results soon.
Wise

A crosstable when available would be great if you could link it.
I found the following news item, from the ACF Newsletter, somewhat cryptic:


IM Zong-Yuan Zhao (2420) was in a class of his own winning every game he actually played in the world-rated St George Leagues Club Championship. Final scores (10 players, 9 rounds) IM Z.Zhao 7.5 ...

What was the outcomes of these adjournments? And how does one score 7.5/9 having won every game played? If there were games unplayed, the following, from the FIDE Handbook, is applied:


5.0. Unplayed games
5.1 Whether these occur because of forfeiture or any other reason, they are not counted.

The_Wise_Man
09-06-2005, 07:07 PM
I have the results on my computer at work.... the tournament was concluded just before I left for overseas.

I will post the crosstable as soon as I get back from overseas on 20 June 2005....

Wise

eclectic
09-06-2005, 07:35 PM
I have the results on my computer at work.... the tournament was concluded just before I left for overseas.

I will post the crosstable as soon as I get back from overseas on 20 June 2005....

Wise

is this an example of an information systems bottleneck?

:hmm:

eclectic

Lucena
10-06-2005, 04:17 PM
I have the results on my computer at work.... the tournament was concluded just before I left for overseas.

I will post the crosstable as soon as I get back from overseas on 20 June 2005....

Wise

Look forward to it Wise. If at any time in the future you have the scores of any games from the tournament, or can get hold of some, maybe some of Zong-Yuan's, for the ACF bulletin, would you be able to post them at the above thread? http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=60865#post60865

Cheers,

Gareth

jase
16-06-2005, 07:22 PM
is this an example of an information systems bottleneck?
Seems so, given that the crosstable would probably be available from the arbiter, several players, the ratings officer, and our FIDE rep, most of whom use this forum.

This was not quite what I was alluding to, however it seems we will have to wait until June 20.

The again, perhaps not. According to the FIDE website no tournaments have been submitted for rating from Australia for the next list, due out at the end of the month:
http://www.fide.com/ratings/rcvd.phtml?moder=fnem&country=AUS

jase
25-06-2005, 12:31 PM
I have the results on my computer at work.... the tournament was concluded just before I left for overseas.

I will post the crosstable as soon as I get back from overseas on 20 June 2005....


Back into the swing of things Wise? June 20 has come and gone ... hope your break was pleasant.

The FIDE website is still listing no tournament submissions from Australia. The new list is due out next week, there are several tournaments that have been advertised as FIDE rated in Australia in the last few months (eg. this St.George event, the Doeberl Cup), however it seems these events may not be rated, if the FIDE website is correct.

Bill - do you know if our events have been submitted?

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 12:39 PM
The FIDE website is still listing no tournament submissions from Australia. The new list is due out next week, there are several tournaments that have been advertised as FIDE rated in Australia in the last few months (eg. this St.George event, the Doeberl Cup), however it seems these events may not be rated, if the FIDE website is correct.

Bill - do you know if our events have been submitted?I dont know. You would need to check with Gary Bekker.
Gary is normally very good at ensuring they are submitted.

jase
25-06-2005, 12:54 PM
I dont know. You would need to check with Gary Bekker.
Gary is normally very good at ensuring they are submitted.

Agreed. Sent Gary an email earlier this month, and tried to call him this week, but haven't had a response or been able to speak with him.

jase
25-06-2005, 01:03 PM
Bill, is there any reason you can't post the cross-table for the tournament here? Obviously Wise has been unable to as he's been away.

As the Ratings Officer I would presume you have the SP files and are able to post the data.

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 01:39 PM
Bill, is there any reason you can't post the cross-table for the tournament here? Obviously Wise has been unable to as he's been away.

As the Ratings Officer I would presume you have the SP files and are able to post the data.Do you want just the top division or all divisions?

jase
25-06-2005, 01:49 PM
It was the top division that aroused my interest, but if it doesn't eat up too much of your attachments quota, the other divisions might be interesting also. Thanks.

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 01:58 PM
Championship Division

No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Zhao, Zong-Yuan NSW 2420 7.5 * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1
2 Rose, Adrian P NSW 2061 6 ½ * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 ½ ½
3 Moylan, Laura A NSW 1985 5.5 ½ ½ * ½ ½ 0 1 1 1 ½
4 Koshnitsky, Ngan NSW 2216 5.5 0 ½ ½ * ½ 1 1 1 1 0
5 Kabir, Ruhul NSW 2211 4.5 ½ 0 ½ ½ * 1 0 0 1 1
6 Zvedeniouk, Ilia NSW 1978 4.5 0 ½ 1 0 0 * ½ 1 ½ 1
7 Zirdum, Ivan NSW 2019 3.5 0 0 0 0 1 ½ * 0 1 1
8 Reitmans, Quentin NSW 2027 3.5 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 * ½ 1
9 Camer, Angelito NSW 2135 2.5 0 ½ 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ * 1
10 Bird, Andrew NSW 2176 2 0 ½ ½ 1 0 0 0 0 0 *

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 01:59 PM
Division 2

No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Jens, Henk W NSW 1904 6.5 * 1 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 0 1
2 Fell, Lloyd S NSW 1787 6 0 * 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 Reyes, Louie A NSW 1999 5.5 0 1 * ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½
4 Radev, Nikola NSW 1923 5.5 0 1 ½ * ½ 1 ½ 0 1 1
5 Mavroidis, Jim NSW 1787 5 ½ 0 ½ ½ * 1 ½ 0 1 1
6 Singaram, Subramanian NSW 1772 5 ½ 0 ½ 0 0 * 1 1 1 1
7 Vasilevski, Bozidar OS 1906 4.5 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 * 1 1 1
8 Watson, James NSW 1793 3.5 ½ 0 0 1 1 0 0 * 0 1
9 Tomas, Tom NSW 1729 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 * 1
10 Mojanovski, Dimitar NSW 1830 .5 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 0 *

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 02:01 PM
Division 3

No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Lau, Eddie NSW 1772 10 * 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 Rewais, Sarwat NSW 1710 10 0 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 + 1 1
3 Nikolaou, Chris NSW 1568 8 0 0 * 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
4 Press, Brian J NSW 1615 6.5 1 0 0 * 0 1 1 1 0 1 ½
5 Keuning, Anthony V NSW 1600 6.5 0 0 0 1 * 0 ½ 1 + 1 +
6 Soto, Leopoldo NSW 1665 6 0 0 1 0 1 * 1 0 0 1 1
7 Buza, Muhamed NSW 1683 5.5 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 * 1 + 1 1
8 Murgoski, Kole NSW 1764 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 * 1 1 -
9 Escribano, Jose NSW 1611 3.5 0 - 0 1 - 1 - 0 * ½ -
10 Zekic, Mirsad NSW 1605 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ½ * 1
11 Plant, John Stuart NSW 1540 2.5 0 0 0 ½ - 0 0 - + 0 *

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 02:02 PM
Division 4

No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Munk, Leon NSW 1557 9.5 * 1 1 1 1 1 ½ - 1 1 +
2 Wall, Terence NSW 1448 9 0 * 1 ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 1 +
3 Tomevski, Ivan NSW 1599 7.5 0 0 * 0 1 ½ 1 1 1 + 1
4 Ollivain, Thierry NSW 1423 7 0 ½ 1 * ½ 0 1 0 1 1 1
5 Sike, Paul NSW 1443 7 0 ½ 0 ½ * 1 1 1 0 1 +
6 Belz, Anthony NSW 1407 6.5 0 0 ½ 1 0 * 1 0 1 1 +
7 Blake, Richard R NSW 1442 5 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 * 1 1 ½ +
8 Lo, Michael NSW 1414 4.5 - 0 0 1 0 1 0 * 0 ½ 1
9 Taric, Omar NSW 1461 4.5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 * ½ 1
10 Smit, George NSW 1555 3 0 0 - 0 0 0 ½ ½ ½ * ½
11 Matila, Chris NSW 1.5 - - 0 0 - - - 0 0 ½ *

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 02:20 PM
Division 5

Swiss Perfect has a problem displaying results where a player played the same person twice. Therefore since this was a 10 round event I will show the results after the first 5 rounds and then again at the end. The second crosstable shows the players results from the last 5 rounds but the score shown is the total score.


No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 Radevski, Vane NSW 1406 4 * 1 ½ ½ 1 1
2 Sharkawy, Sam NSW 1383 4 0 * 1 1 1 1
3 Ansari, Andre NSW 1210 2.5 ½ 0 * 1 0 1
4 Galtsmith-Clarke, Rae NSW 1386 2 ½ 0 0 * ½ 1
5 Too, Henry NSW 1290 1.5 0 0 1 ½ * -
6 Plant, John Bruce NSW 1204 0 0 0 0 0 - *



No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 Sharkawy, Sam NSW 1383 7.5 * 1 0 ½ + 1
2 Radevski, Vane NSW 1406 6.5 0 * 0 ½ + +
3 Ansari, Andre NSW 1210 6.5 1 1 * 0 1 1
4 Galtsmith-Clarke, Rae NSW 1386 6 ½ ½ 1 * 1 +
5 Too, Henry NSW 1290 1.5 - - 0 0 * -
6 Plant, John Bruce NSW 1204 1 0 - 0 - + *

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2005, 02:22 PM
Division 6

This is the same situation as decribed in the Division 5 post


No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 Johansson, Peter NSW 5 * 1 1 1 1 1
2 Koh, Jason NSW 4 0 * 1 1 1 1
3 Brown, Patrick NSW 589 2 0 0 * 1 0 1
4 Sciberras, Reno NSW 637 2 0 0 0 * 1 1
5 Matson, John NSW 953 2 0 0 1 0 * 1
6 Plant, Bruce NSW 0 0 0 0 0 0 *


No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 Johansson, Peter NSW 10 * 1 1 1 1 +
2 Koh, Jason NSW 8 0 * 1 1 1 1
3 Matson, John NSW 953 5 0 0 * 1 1 1
4 Sciberras, Reno NSW 637 4 0 0 0 * 1 1
5 Brown, Patrick NSW 589 3 0 0 0 0 * 1
6 Plant, Bruce NSW 0 - 0 0 0 0 *

antichrist
25-06-2005, 07:01 PM
Championship Division

No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Zhao, Zong-Yuan NSW 2420 7.5 * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1
2 Rose, Adrian P NSW 2061 6 ½ * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 ½ ½
3 Moylan, Laura A NSW 1985 5.5 ½ ½ * ½ ½ 0 1 1 1 ½
4 Koshnitsky, Ngan NSW 2216 5.5 0 ½ ½ * ½ 1 1 1 1 0
5 Kabir, Ruhul NSW 2211 4.5 ½ 0 ½ ½ * 1 0 0 1 1
6 Zvedeniouk, Ilia NSW 1978 4.5 0 ½ 1 0 0 * ½ 1 ½ 1
7 Zirdum, Ivan NSW 2019 3.5 0 0 0 0 1 ½ * 0 1 1
8 Reitmans, Quentin NSW 2027 3.5 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 * ½ 1
9 Camer, Angelito NSW 2135 2.5 0 ½ 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ * 1
10 Bird, Andrew NSW 2176 2 0 ½ ½ 1 0 0 0 0 0 *

Mr Zhao was in a drawie mood

The_Wise_Man
26-06-2005, 01:26 AM
Sorry that I didn't post them up earlier...
First week back at work has been abit frantic...
also I was trying to get over my jet lag among other things

I wanted to have a chat to Charles Z to get the SP files for the bulletin board instead of the word document that they were in.

But nevertheless thank you Bill for posting!

Wise

jase
26-06-2005, 07:07 PM
You say that

Mr Zhao was in a drawie mood
The crosstable indicates a few draws.
The ACF Newsletter says he did not concede any draws.


10 Adjournments left though....
Wise, can you inform the house how many of these 10 games were actually played, and how many were figments of the arbiter's imagination, creatively recorded as draws?

Terrific performance by Laura Moylan, by the way - holding the three top seeds to draws and beating up most of the rest.

Bill Gletsos
26-06-2005, 07:28 PM
You say that

The crosstable indicates a few draws.
The ACF Newsletter says he did not concede any draws.If you check the newsletter report you can see it was taken from a Parr column in the SMH.


Wise, can you inform the house how many of these 10 games were actually played, and how many were figments of the arbiter's imagination, creatively recorded as draws?I've never know Charles Z to suffer from figments of the imagination.

arosar
26-06-2005, 07:30 PM
I've never know Charles Z to suffer from figments of the imagination.

There is always a first time for everything.

Even the insane were once sane.

AR

antichrist
26-06-2005, 07:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
Wise, can you inform the house how many of these 10 games were actually played, and how many were figments of the arbiter's imagination, creatively recorded as draws?

A/C
I think exactly the same concerning those minutes recording my attendances at JCL meetings (sorry to be off topic)

BG
I've never know Charles Z to suffer from figments of the imagination

A/C
exactly the same and similar respect towards minute keeper in my above-mentioned case. (again sorry to be off topic)

antichrist
27-06-2005, 04:10 PM
Many of these draws were arranged by DOP as time restraints, will that effect ratings?

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 04:17 PM
Many of these draws were arranged by DOP as time restraints, will that effect ratings?The event was rated in the June period as submitted by Charles Z.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 04:21 PM
The event was rated in the June period as submitted by Charles Z.

You mean Zhao could lose hundreds?

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 04:32 PM
You mean Zhao could lose hundreds?I never said nor even implied that. I simply said that the event was processed for rating in the June period. As such the event is reflected in the June ratings.

However what you have speculated makes absolutely no sense at all and you have severely failed the logic test.
You seemingly dismissed the option that pehaps his rating could increase. Not an unreasonably assumption given all his draws were against players he outrated.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 04:42 PM
I never said nor even implied that. I simply said that the event was processed for rating in the June period. As such the event is reflected in the June ratings.

However what you have speculated makes absolutely no sense at all and you have severely failed the logic test.
You seemingly dismissed the option that pehaps his rating could increase. Not an unreasonably assumption given all his draws were against players he outrated.

I certainly have, do you mean you can draw with players below oneself and not lose points? I thought if I drew with higher players I would pick up some points?

antichrist
27-06-2005, 04:48 PM
Bill, admit it that you blundered

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 04:51 PM
I certainly have, do you mean you can draw with players below oneself and not lose points?No.

I thought if I drew with higher players I would pick up some points?You do.


How did I blunder?

arosar
27-06-2005, 04:52 PM
Which games, recorded as draws, did not actually take place?

AR

antichrist
27-06-2005, 04:53 PM
Which games, recorded as draws, did not actually take place?

AR

Quite a few I think, maybe all even.

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 04:55 PM
Quite a few I think, maybe all even.On what do you base this claim.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 04:57 PM
Is there a third path between answers in posts 45 & 48, aren't you contradicting yourself there?

That claim of many draws (maybe) was hearsay

antichrist
27-06-2005, 05:03 PM
Bill, are you feeling all right?

You have not had a knock on the head like Basil did and you wake up all anti-Lebo?

The Lebos had a war too which you are not allowed to mention.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 05:06 PM
Bill's on the phone to CZ: What is all this bullsh.. that Hanna is on about???????????

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 05:39 PM
Is there a third path between answers in posts 45 & 48, aren't you contradicting yourself there?No. posts #45 and #48 are consistent based on your post #44.

Your post #44 used the word could, thus implying that the event had not yet had an effect, however as post #43 clearly indicated it had already been rated. Hence the only conclusion to be drawn from your post #44 was that you had not understood the situation. Therefore if the draws were eliminated from the event, then his rating would increase as he would not have drawn with players rated lower than himself.

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 05:40 PM
Bill, are you feeling all right?I'm fine.

You have not had a knock on the head like Basil did and you wake up all anti-Lebo?I'm only anti-stupidity.

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 05:42 PM
Bill's on the phone to CZ: What is all this bullsh.. that Hanna is on about???????????Nope. The delay was due to me leaving work to head home.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 05:58 PM
Now I get it, because they were unplayed draws they are not rated. It that it?

So as rating officer you were informed that those draws were unplayed?

So you knew all the time that there were unplayed draws but did not let on?

You so and so

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 06:15 PM
Now I get it, because they were unplayed draws they are not rated. It that it?

So as rating officer you were informed that those draws were unplayed?

So you knew all the time that there were unplayed draws but did not let on?

You so and soWhat part of english do you not understand. As I said in post #43 the event was rated as submitted.

Lucena
27-06-2005, 06:29 PM
I guess the question I have is what the following actually implies:


"IM Zong-Yuan Zhao (2420) was in a class of his own winning every game he actually played in the world-rated St George Leagues Club Championship. Final scores (10 players, 9 rounds) IM Z.Zhao 7.5..."

Wise doesn't seem to have addressed this, which hasn't helped clarify things. I'll have a talk to Peter Parr at some point about his above statement.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 06:35 PM
I think I get it, any rating change due to these games has already occured because June ratings (at least for these games) are already processed.

June rating period may or may not include games played up to 12 midnight 30th June, 2005.

The drawn games were not entered for rating.

Also what was submitted and rated is not necessarily what is shown as crosstable in this thread.

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 06:48 PM
I think I get it, any rating change due to these games has already occured because June ratings (at least for these games) are already processed.Correct.

June rating period may or may not include games played up to 12 midnight 30th June, 2005.Wrong. The June ratings come into effect from the 1st June. Therefore they include all events submitted for rating prior to that date.

The drawn games were not entered for rating.

Also what was submitted and rated is not necessarily what is shown as crosstable in this thread.There is no reason for you to assume that the crosstables shown in posts #30-#36 are different from what was submitted.

I suggest you re-read post #43.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 10:50 PM
from post 45 ..
You seemingly dismissed the option that pehaps his rating could increase. Not an unreasonably assumption given all his draws were against players he outrated.

Here you are agreeing with me that his rating could have or rather did go down? (or would have gone up more)

I will test your patience!

antichrist
27-06-2005, 11:00 PM
I will even make friends with my enemy over this one.

Jase, do you know if the draws, that were not played, were rated or not?

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 11:17 PM
from post 45 ..
You seemingly dismissed the option that pehaps his rating could increase. Not an unreasonably assumption given all his draws were against players he outrated.

Here you are agreeing with me that his rating could have or rather did go down? (or would have gone up more) Your post #43 says could in reponse to my post about the event being rated in the June ratings and you are thus referring to a future event. I pointed out yopuir asumption of said future event was flawed as the event had already been rated.


I will test your patience!I wont hold my breath waiting for you to finally comprend what I said.

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 11:20 PM
I will even make friends with my enemy over this one.

Jase, do you know if the draws, that were not played, were rated or not?The answer to that is abundantly clear to anyone with an ounce of intelligence, if they read the posts above.

jase
27-06-2005, 11:26 PM
Jase, do you know if the draws, that were not played, were rated or not?

Bill has already stated that the tournament was rated as submitted. Therefore I assume all results, as per the crosstable posted on this thread, have been rated. Bill has also stated that he believes all games were played and that nothing untoward has taken place.

Who is running that arbiters training course the NSWCA has been spruiking lately? :uhoh:

Bill Gletsos
27-06-2005, 11:43 PM
Bill has already stated that the tournament was rated as submitted. Therefore I assume all results, as per the crosstable posted on this thread, have been rated.Correct.

Bill has also stated that he believes all games were played and that nothing untoward has taken place.I dont think I have commented on this one way or the other, except to say the event was rated as submitted by the DOP.


Who is running that arbiters training course the NSWCA has been spruiking lately? :uhoh:Gary Bekker and/or Charles Z depending on timing and availability.

antichrist
27-06-2005, 11:51 PM
I know when to keep my big mouth shut.

And our Lleyton is putting up another beautiful effort tonight.

antichrist
28-06-2005, 07:27 AM
No I don't.

Quote:
"IM Zong-Yuan Zhao (2420) was in a class of his own winning every game he actually played in the world-rated St George Leagues Club Championship. Final scores (10 players, 9 rounds) IM Z.Zhao 7.5..."

No need for further investigations - this tells it all.

And you Bill could have been more helpful with a simple explanation to my first post on this topic. But as a typical Basil you have wound a web which may entangle many flies including yourself.

ursogr8
28-06-2005, 08:27 AM
<snip>
I dont think I have commented on this one way or the other, except to say the event was rated as submitted by the DOP.

<snip>

Bill
I have to admit that when I read your post (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=61975&postcount=39) >


If you check the newsletter report you can see it was taken from a Parr column in the SMH.

I've never know Charles Z to suffer from figments of the imagination.
I formed the impression that you were commenting (in the negative) on the possibility that there were some phantom draws.

starter

antichrist
28-06-2005, 09:00 AM
I think we are beginning smell a bit like Thailand or was it Burma?

antichrist
28-06-2005, 09:35 AM
Bill, I am very sorry that I asked you the wrong questions before but "I'm only a boy whose intentions are good..."

What I should have been asking was:

a) did Mr Zhao's rating go down because of these draws? (asked in post 63 which you did not reply to)

b) Did his rating go down sufficiently to effect his standing in the ratings list?

c) could this effect his being chosen to represent Aussie in the future?

I think this thread shows you as fillibustering again as I have accused you of before. Why attract enemies unnecessarily? I am only lowly ranked and you could not throw me off and there are a lot bigger heavyweights than me around.

Bill Gletsos
28-06-2005, 09:45 AM
No I don't.

Quote:
"IM Zong-Yuan Zhao (2420) was in a class of his own winning every game he actually played in the world-rated St George Leagues Club Championship. Final scores (10 players, 9 rounds) IM Z.Zhao 7.5..."

No need for further investigations - this tells it all.

And you Bill could have been more helpful with a simple explanation to my first post on this topic. But as a typical Basil you have wound a web which may entangle many flies including yourself.Post #43 and my previous ones were self explanatory. Your failure to comprehend isnt my problem.

Bill Gletsos
28-06-2005, 09:48 AM
Bill
I have to admit that when I read your post (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=61975&postcount=39) >

I formed the impression that you were commenting (in the negative) on the possibility that there were some phantom draws.

starterThen your impression was wrong. I was simply defending a friend of mine against the claim that he must be suffering from figments of the imagination.

Bill Gletsos
28-06-2005, 09:51 AM
Bill, I am very sorry that I asked you the wrong questions before but "I'm only a boy whose intentions are good..."

What I should have been asking was:

a) did Mr Zhao's rating go down because of these draws?

b) Did his rating go down sufficiently to effect his standing in the ratings list?

c) could this effect his being chosen to represent Aussie in the future?

I think this thread shows you as fillibustering again as I have accused you of before. Why attract enemies unnecessarily? I am only lowly ranked and you could not throw me off and there are a lot bigger heavyweights than me around.Your failure to comprehend what was said isnt my problem. As for your questions the answers to them are obvious and easily deteremined. As such I wont be wasting any more time answering you.

antichrist
28-06-2005, 09:56 AM
Your failure to comprehend what was said isnt my problem. As for your questions the answers to them are obvious and easily deteremined. As such I wont be wasting any more time answering you.

A/C 1 BG 0

You have answered a whole lot of rubbish earlier on due to your filibustering, now that we are at the business end you clam up. I am sure that we have not heard the end of this.

So the big questions is did you rate games that you knew not to have being played?

or that

games that you had already rated, you subsequently found out were unplayed yet you did nothing to correct the ratings and somebody could lose being chosen to represent Aussie over it?

That is the not necessarily best person representing Aussie.

Kerry Stead
28-06-2005, 11:43 AM
Peter ... 15 seconds research could answer many of your questions for you ... Zhao was 2420 before the tournament ... on the June rating list, he's now 2414 from 9 games ... net result -6 points ...
As for your questions about if he would lose points for drawing games to lower rated players ... of course he would ... but he would also gain points for winning games ... that's the basis of the rating system ...

antichrist
28-06-2005, 11:54 AM
Peter ... 15 seconds research could answer many of your questions for you ... Zhao was 2420 before the tournament ... on the June rating list, he's now 2414 from 9 games ... net result -6 points ...
As for your questions about if he would lose points for drawing games to lower rated players ... of course he would ... but he would also gain points for winning games ... that's the basis of the rating system ...

Thanks, see, Bill could have told me that in one minute just as you have instead of filibustering.

I thought for defeating players a few hundred points below him he would not gain any points and thereby only lose, and I thought more than 6.

Don't you regret that you didn't enter?

ursogr8
28-06-2005, 12:02 PM
Then your impression was wrong. I was simply defending a friend of mine against the claim that he must be suffering from figments of the imagination.

Thanks for the response Bill.

I started following this thread when (the usually late) Wise mentioned 10 adjournments (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=57137&postcount=18) .
On the top shelf of our storage-compactus we have a box full of adjournment envelopes which are now regarded as relics. I can't recall an adjournment in our Club in the past 5 years, and certainly not since DGTs have been used.
So, to hear St George had 10 adjournments was intriguing.
St George had a 7.30pm start advertised and presumably the premises (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=48926&postcount=14) still open at midnight, which makes those 10 games probably longer than 90 moves per-player.

I think I will just sit back and wait for our mate Wise to shed some light on a/c's questions.
Over and out, from me.

regards
starter

Bill Gletsos
28-06-2005, 12:13 PM
Thanks for the response Bill.

I started following this thread when (the usually late) Wise mentioned 10 adjournments (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=57137&postcount=18) .
On the top shelf of our storage-compactus we have a box full of adjournment envelopes which are now regarded as relics. I can't recall an adjournment in our Club in the past 5 years, and certainly not since DGTs have been used.
So, to hear St George had 10 adjournments was intriguing.
St George had a 7.30pm start advertised and presumably the premises (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=48926&postcount=14) still open at midnight, which makes those 10 games probably longer than 90 moves per-player.

I think I will just sit back and wait for our mate Wise to shed some light on a/c's questions.
Over and out, from me.

regards
starterI suspect he really meant postponements rather than adjournments.

antichrist
28-06-2005, 12:19 PM
And lo and behold, Zhao's drop of 6 points has put him 4 points under Smerdon. His generosity cost him dearly, like me giving queen starts.

antichrist
28-06-2005, 03:54 PM
Listen mate, when Steinitz(?) the first world champion said that not even God could give him a queen start, God was too gutless to take up the challenge. So I have more guts than God. Then again maybe God did not know how to play.

Lucena
30-06-2005, 11:35 AM
I think we are confusing the issue by talking about ratings before it is established what actually happened in the games concerned. I think we need to come to an agreement regarding the nature of the games first.

ursogr8
30-06-2005, 12:16 PM
I think we are confusing the issue by talking about ratings before it is established what actually happened in the games concerned. I think we need to come to an agreement regarding the nature of the games first.

gbc
a/c did not sound confused to me.
He enquired as to whether the games were played; and in the absence of feedback on this point, he introduced the ratings aspect to highlight the ramifications of agreeing to draws against lower rated players.
I think a/c is waiting for someone to clarify if the games were played.
starter

arosar
30-06-2005, 12:19 PM
Highly placed and very prominent figures have suggested that they were not played at all. So you see, it seems valid to describe those as figments of the imagination.

AR

arosar
04-07-2005, 02:12 PM
Has this been resolved yet? Or are the mates in questions just going to cover this up? I mean, here we criticise those shonky Cambodians but we have here a bit of sleight of hand ourselves recording as draws games that never actually took place.

C'mon Bill. Call Dr Z and get the story straight. I know youse blokes are still looking for a way to spin this in your favour - but the gallery demands an answer now.

AR

arosar
04-07-2005, 10:56 PM
Bump.

Let's not have a kiwi save your butts.

AR

PHAT
04-07-2005, 11:00 PM
WOW! I didn't know that this thread had turned "interesting." I wonder if someone will be expelled from the NSWCA over this. Probably not - it is important to stick together in public while secretly murdering heathens.



[... what on earth is Sweeney going on about ... the plot thickens ...]

arosar
04-07-2005, 11:08 PM
WOW! I didn't know that this thread had turned "interesting." I wonder if someone will be expelled from the NSWCA over this. Probably not - it is important to stick together in public while secretly murdering heathens.

Eh?

AR

Lucena
07-07-2005, 01:53 AM
Yeah, I was thinking that too! :eh: What's this about murdering heathens?

arosar
07-07-2005, 05:53 AM
Bill is trying to get Matt banned it seems.

AR

Bill Gletsos
07-07-2005, 11:03 AM
Bill is trying to get Matt banned it seems.The action was instigated by others without any prompting by me.

arosar
07-07-2005, 11:06 AM
Yeah, sure...sure. With a bit of a nudge-nudge wink-wink, I reckon.

What's it all about anyways?

AR

Bill Gletsos
07-07-2005, 11:22 AM
Yeah, sure...sure. With a bit of a nudge-nudge wink-wink, I reckon.Incorrect. I never suggested nor implied instigating any action against Matt. The matter was raised by others of their own volition.

What's it all about anyways?I'm not going to discuss the matter here on the BB except to say that he has been sent a letter asking him to show cause why action shouldnt be taken over content he posted on UCJ.

antichrist
07-07-2005, 11:59 PM
Incorrect. I never suggested nor implied instigating any action against Matt. The matter was raised by others of their own volition.
I'm not going to discuss the matter here on the BB except to say that he has been sent a letter asking him to show cause why action shouldnt be taken over content he posted on UCJ.

In a way it is unfair for yourself, as an organiser and official, to have to see him at comps after those posts.

antichrist
08-07-2005, 06:08 PM
Has this been resolved yet? Or are the mates in questions just going to cover this up? I mean, here we criticise those shonky Cambodians but we have here a bit of sleight of hand ourselves recording as draws games that never actually took place.

C'mon Bill. Call Dr Z and get the story straight. I know youse blokes are still looking for a way to spin this in your favour - but the gallery demands an answer now.

AR


At the wrong end of a tourney if I give a new player or junior a rook start I am on notice I will be barred from tournaments.
Fair enough we may say. But at the top end games may have been rated which maybe should not have been and effect who may represent the nation.

Which is more serious?

Bereaved
10-07-2005, 02:32 AM
Hi everyone,

I guess the question arises as to why the players could not arrange to play the games, and if so how the results are being allocated. If this were a FIDE rated event, a full set of game scores is required, and upon request, the organiser must also provide the scoresheets. Perhaps, if the organisers wished to reassure us of the legitamacy of these results, they should simply post a copy of the game scores for us to play through and all the doubts should disappear; failing that, all the previously raised points are to be considered unanswered, perhaps with the exception of the games having been rated with these results, as BG has confirmed that they have been rated as per the crosstable.

As I understand it, the initial request by FIDE regarding scoresheets was based on a game that went something like 1.d4 Nf6 2.Qd3 e6 3.Qxh7 Nxh7 0-1???

and as such, one can understand their questions.

Recently, events in Alushta, Ukraine have been critiqued as at least one previously played game was repeated move for move and the same result registered, and there was also some mention of two players in perhaps the same event, but perhaps a different one, following a line of analysis in a given opening that had appeared in informator to its conclusion, and then agreeing on that as that the result of the game??

I know that we are supposed to follow the book recommendations, but I didn't know that this extended to game collections!!

In any case, the participants in the tournament themselves may have some productive things to say on the matter, either directly here, or through a friend who may post here,

In any case, just more questions???

take care, God Bless, Macavity

PS A/C: Purdy himself recommended both time and material handicaps as good ways for players of unequal strength to get a good game against each other, though he favoured time as the first measure of handicap, perhaps you could try that by turning up late for the game?? I personally could not imagine throwing a game, though I understand it has happened during the time that I have been an active tournament player; I did throw a game to a junior I was teaching once, as he had tonsilitis that day and was feeling miserable...he never let me forget it, and he then also developed the strange idea that having tonsilitis was a dead cert recipe for winning one's game!?

Who's phone number( cross pollination) anyway??
(of which we are both guilty: position looks equal; shall we call it a draw?? :D :owned: )

antichrist
10-07-2005, 06:21 PM
Thanks for all that info. I was half guessing that they were FIDE-rated games.

Bill did state quite earlier that he was not commenting anymore but then chose to re-enter when convenient, but it seems is not responding to any controversy.

The only game I am guilty of throwing is to my boy a few years back. I much prefer give material start.

At least we are enjoying a Bill Gletsos-free zone.

ursogr8
10-07-2005, 08:55 PM
<snip>

At least we are enjoying a Bill Gletsos-free zone.

But not the only one a/c.
I have noticed quite a few recent threads where Bill initially showed an interest and then has gone cold turkey, so to speak. ;)

Btw, in answer to your question on frilly knickers, elsewhere,,,,no.

regards
starter

Bereaved
10-07-2005, 11:19 PM
A/C, I was not suggesting that the tournament was FIDE rated, but that if it was those are FIDE's requirements. Does it suggest on their website that they were planning to FIDE Rate the event? Barring that, they are not obliged to collect game scores for ACF events.

I was merely stating that the collection of game scores was FIDE's way of eliminating this form of problem,

Do you know if it was FIDE rated, or intending to be?

All the best, God Bless, Macavity

PS I will be posting re a conversation with G. Bekker today on event's not rated in rating's thread

antichrist
11-07-2005, 12:14 PM
A/C, I was not suggesting that the tournament was FIDE rated, but that if it was those are FIDE's requirements. Does it suggest on their website that they were planning to FIDE Rate the event? Barring that, they are not obliged to collect game scores for ACF events.

I was merely stating that the collection of game scores was FIDE's way of eliminating this form of problem,

Do you know if it was FIDE rated, or intending to be?

All the best, God Bless, Macavity

PS I will be posting re a conversation with G. Bekker today on event's not rated in rating's thread

In Peter Parr's SMH chess column this morning he states that the ST George comp was "world rated", so I was presuming FIDE rated. He also stated that Zhao won 6/6 - all the games he played.

So he obviously got draws for games he did not play which I was not happy about because it effects ratings and I have been warned that I will be barred from tourneys for doing anything generous at the lowest level yet this happens at the highest level.

I recall some years back (Burma?) sudddenly had junior grandmasters because of "arranged" games and FIDE (I think) undone them.

I don't mind arranged draws but they should not be rated and Bill has enough knowledge on this or to at least ask questions.

auriga
11-07-2005, 04:27 PM
In Peter Parr's SMH chess column this morning he states that the ST George comp was "world rated", so I was presuming FIDE rated. He also stated that Zhao won 6/6 - all the games he played.

So he obviously got draws for games he did not play which I was not happy about because it effects ratings and I have been warned that I will be barred from tourneys for doing anything generous at the lowest level yet this happens at the highest level.

I recall some years back (Burma?) sudddenly had junior grandmasters because of "arranged" games and FIDE (I think) undone them.

I don't mind arranged draws but they should not be rated and Bill has enough knowledge on this or to at least ask questions.

it was the rangoon open.
fide made it that you can't increase by more than 150 points a list.

Lucena
13-07-2005, 10:21 AM
I contacted Charles recently and can confirm the following:

1)No moves were made in the games in question

2)The games were agreed drawn by the players involved.

I'm not sure what the rules are on this, but from what I remember a draw can be agreed with no moves made.

Obviously 0-move draws are not a desirable outcome, however from what I can gather of the situation, an outcome such as this was difficult to avoid.

I have found speaking to the arbiter personally to be very useful, and I encourage anyone interested in discussing this issue further to contact him.

Garvinator
13-07-2005, 11:31 AM
1)No moves were made in the games in question

2)The games were agreed drawn by the players involved.

I'm not sure what the rules are on this, but from what I remember a draw can be agreed with no moves made.

These rule sections seem to be relevant:

5.2.3 The game is drawn upon agreement between the two players during the game. This immediately ends the game. (See Article 9.1)

12.1 The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.

I could not find a section or article on pre arranging results, which is surprising, i thought there was one.

I believe that the players have pre arranged the result of each game and double forfeit should be the result.

I am dismayed that Charles has allowed this situation to occur. Australian Chess doesnt need stuff like this. The players who didnt play their games but has draws awarded anyway deprived other players of a spot in the top section.

arosar
13-07-2005, 11:58 AM
I am dismayed that Charles has allowed this situation to occur. Australian Chess doesnt need stuff like this. The players who didnt play their games but has draws awarded anyway deprived other players of a spot in the top section.

I also contacted Charles. I am satisfied that there were no underhanded fix-ups happening. He found himself in a particular situation and had to make a call. Whether that call was correct or not is what in question. There should be no suggestion of improper conduct by him. I've known him for a while. He is highly ethical.

Today's entry in my blog is exactly about this issue.

Cheers,

AR

ursogr8
13-07-2005, 12:19 PM
Today's entry in my blog is exactly about this issue.

Cheers,

AR

This cross-reference is sort of like a link to UCJ, or a BUMP?

;)

arosar
13-07-2005, 12:34 PM
This cross-reference is sort of like a link to UCJ, or a BUMP?

Yeah, I thought about that. But I don't mean it to be a discussion board.

AR

antichrist
13-07-2005, 01:44 PM
I also contacted Charles. I am satisfied that there were no underhanded fix-ups happening. He found himself in a particular situation and had to make a call. Whether that call was correct or not is what in question. There should be no suggestion of improper conduct by him. I've known him for a while. He is highly ethical.

Today's entry in my blog is exactly about this issue.

Cheers,

AR

But these "results" has altered the ratings and standings of a few of our top players and could effect who represents Aussie. Do we do fund-raising and donate whilst we feel that the selection has been compromised and not necessary the "best" players are representing Aussie.

As a result for the St George tourney GGray has brought up objections and as well should the "games" have been rated?

If Peter Parr's "world rated" means FIDE rated surely we are showing disrespect to other FIDE-rated players and the process.

No one really cares who wins St George (but GGray's objections do hold up) but at least get Bill to unrate them. And don't send them to FIDE.

arosar
13-07-2005, 02:24 PM
I don't disagree with you.

AR

arosar
20-07-2005, 11:25 PM
Peter -

Did you receive any replies from the NSWCA yet? From the ACF? Why in the world are we rating games that never happened?

Bill? Is this actually too hard for you? Answer already!!

AR

Bill Gletsos
20-07-2005, 11:27 PM
Peter -

Did you receive any replies from the NSWCA yet? From the ACF? Why in the world are we rating games that never happened?

Bill? Is this actually too hard for you? Answer already!!

ARWith regards ACF ratings I answered it previously in the shoutbox. As for FIDE ratings that is Gary Bekkers responsability.

arosar
20-07-2005, 11:33 PM
You took the time to bully people in PMs. Now how about you take the time to repeat your shout. That's not too hard is it? There is a big, big question mark over the rating of these so-called games. We demand answers here, where it can stay permanently (unless you exercise your powers that you shouldn't have to delete).

AR

antichrist
21-07-2005, 01:09 AM
AR, I can't send Gary Bekkers a message due to technical problems, can you send him a message asking him not to rate the games or to unrate them?

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 01:38 AM
You took the time to bully people in PMs. Now how about you take the time to repeat your shout. That's not too hard is it? There is a big, big question mark over the rating of these so-called games. We demand answers here, where it can stay permanently (unless you exercise your powers that you shouldn't have to delete).I assumed if I jogged your memory about the shoutbox you would remember. I guess I gave you too much credit. :hmm:

Effectively what I said is that if the games were not actually played I would treat them as double forfeits and rerun the June period prior to running the September ratings.

antichrist
21-07-2005, 01:42 AM
I assumed if I jogged your memory about the shoutbox you would remember. I guess I gave you too much credit. :hmm:

Effectively what I said is that if the games were not actually played I would treat them as double forfeits and rerun the June period prior to running the September ratings.

Somehow I missed that one too.

Do you accept that the games were not actually played and so will rerun the June period?

And if is the case will you notify Gary Bekkers?

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 01:47 AM
Somehow I missed that one too.

Do you accept that the games were not actually played and so will rerun the June period?

And if is the case will you notify Gary Bekkers?I answered ythe questions above. I will not be repeating myself just to satisfy you.

antichrist
21-07-2005, 02:22 AM
I answered ythe questions above. I will not be repeating myself just to satisfy you.
___________________________________________
Post 68 of this thread:

27-06-2005, 11:43 PM #68
Bill Gletsos
Community Leader






Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,424 Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
Bill has already stated that the tournament was rated as submitted. Therefore I assume all results, as per the crosstable posted on this thread, have been rated.

BG:
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
Bill has also stated that he believes all games were played and that nothing untoward has taken place.

BG:
I dont think I have commented on this one way or the other, except to say the event was rated as submitted by the DOP.
__________________________________________________ ____
Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
I assumed if I jogged your memory about the shoutbox you would remember. I guess I gave you too much credit.

Effectively what I said is that if the games were not actually played I would treat them as double forfeits and rerun the June period prior to running the September ratings
______________________________________________
A/C:
I don't think you have stated anything clearly as to whether you accept the games as actually played or not. Though your actions in rating them speaks volumes that you did accept them as being played.

I, and I think many others, would consider that it is your duty as ratings officer to follow up any leads to questions as to whether games were played or not. Not to sit on your hands and accept what is being fed to you 3 wise monkey-wise.

It is common knowledge (backed up by Peter Parr) that these games were not played (backed up by info that I have not disclosed which of course you do not know about - previously I only answered heresay).

So I think it is still approp to ask:

Do you accept that the games were not actually played and so will rerun the June period?

You can filibuster but surely by now you realise that you are not just dealing with myself.

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 02:25 AM
___________________________________________
Post 68 of this thread:

27-06-2005, 11:43 PM #68
Bill Gletsos
Community Leader






Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,424 Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
Bill has already stated that the tournament was rated as submitted. Therefore I assume all results, as per the crosstable posted on this thread, have been rated.

BG:
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
Bill has also stated that he believes all games were played and that nothing untoward has taken place.

BG:
I dont think I have commented on this one way or the other, except to say the event was rated as submitted by the DOP.
__________________________________________________ ____
Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
I assumed if I jogged your memory about the shoutbox you would remember. I guess I gave you too much credit.

Effectively what I said is that if the games were not actually played I would treat them as double forfeits and rerun the June period prior to running the September ratings
______________________________________________
A/C:
I don't think you have stated anything clearly as to whether you accept the games as actually played or not. Though your actions in rating them speaks volumes that you did accept them as being played.

I, and I think many others, would consider that it is your duty as ratings officer to follow up any leads to questions as to whether games were played or not. Not to sit on your hands and accept what is being fed to you 3 wise monkey-wise.

It is common knowledge (backed up by Peter Parr) that these games were not played (backed up by info that I have not disclosed which of course you do not know about - previously I only answered heresay).

So I think it is still approp to ask:

Do you accept that the games were not actually played and so will rerun the June period?

You can filibuster but surely by now you realise that you are not just dealing with myself.I answered the question. Waste someone elses time.

arosar
21-07-2005, 08:13 AM
Gee Bill, when something's in the too hard basket and Peter sends you reeling to the canvass, your usual response is one of the following: to confuse, stay silent, suffocate the readers with quote tags, or if none of that works, threaten legal action.

It is a fact that said "games" never took place. The results were arranged by phone. Can we help you somehow in coming to some sort of decision on what to do?

AR

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 11:03 AM
Gee Bill, when something's in the too hard basket and Peter sends you reeling to the canvass, your usual response is one of the following: to confuse, stay silent, suffocate the readers with quote tags, or if none of that works, threaten legal action.

It is a fact that said "games" never took place. The results were arranged by phone. Can we help you somehow in coming to some sort of decision on what to do?All that needs to be done is for you and A/C to put your brains in gear to be able to work it out. I'll help you both out with some hints.

I previously stated in the thread that the event was rated as submitted.
I stated above that if the games were not played then I would rerun the june rating period.
It has been established that the games were not played.

You, A/C and others should therefore be able to work out what will happen.

arosar
21-07-2005, 11:05 AM
Now that wasn't too hard, was it?

No thanks to you.

AR

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 11:07 AM
Now that wasn't too hard, was it?

No thanks to you.It was easy for you to have worked that out for yourself.

ursogr8
21-07-2005, 12:37 PM
Gee Bill, when something's in the too hard basket and Peter sends you reeling to the canvass, your usual response is one of the following: to confuse, stay silent, suffocate the readers with quote tags, or if none of that works, threaten legal action.

It is a fact that said "games" never took place. The results were arranged by phone. Can we help you somehow in coming to some sort of decision on what to do?

AR

hi Amiel
You left this one (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=42345&postcount=32) off your list.
His two coaches perhaps would be miffed to be left out.
But a good list nevertheless.

starter

antichrist
21-07-2005, 01:00 PM
After about three weeks of filibustering and at long last - and it could all have been prevented by one phone call and one sentence at day one.

THAT'S OUR BILL.

Thanks KB by the way, I suspect that you had something causing the Berlin Wall to fall over.

Now for the next battle - so that members (without special permission) can attend council and committee meetings that effect them directly.

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 01:23 PM
After about three weeks of filibustering and at long last - and it could all have been prevented by one phone call and one sentence at day one.

THAT'S OUR BILL.

Thanks KB by the way, I suspect that you had something causing the Berlin Wall to fall over.KB's comments had no bearing on the matter. I stated back on the July 6th in the shoutbox that if the games had not been played I would rerun the ratings and garethcharles said back on July 13th that the games were not played.
As such it has been obvious since July 13th what would occur.

antichrist
21-07-2005, 03:09 PM
KB's comments had no bearing on the matter. I stated back on the July 6th in the shoutbox that if the games had not been played I would rerun the ratings and garethcharles said back on July 13th that the games were not played.
As such it has been obvious since July 13th what would occur.

You fool nobody - you would not do anything unless it was shoved down your throat!

And to prove otherwise concede that you will now contact Gary Bekkers and tell him not to FIDE rate those games! And notify the thread that you have.

Bill Gletsos
21-07-2005, 03:38 PM
You fool nobody - you would not do anything unless it was shoved down your throat!

And to prove otherwise concede that you will now contact Gary Bekkers and tell him not to FIDE rate those games! And notify the thread that you have.Do it yourself.

antichrist
21-07-2005, 09:40 PM
Do it yourself.

I have been informed that the rules state that competition organisers must notify Gary Bekkers not to FIDE rate or to unrate these games.

As it obviously was not me (I only organise SEC) your advice as ratings officer and NSW president for me to do it was incorrect.

Filibustering again you so and so.

So I refer to Post 75 from this thread:


Then your impression was wrong. I was simply defending a friend of mine against the claim that he must be suffering from figments of the imagination.

Seeing the organiser is your friend and maybe fellow official, who does not post here as far as I know, would you like to inform him to inform Gary not to rate the games?

I expect you to filibuster again for ages on this but it is up to yourself how much time you have to waste and how much of a fool you want to appear to be.

ursogr8
21-07-2005, 09:59 PM
I have been informed that the rules state that competition organisers must notify Gary Bekkers not to FIDE rate or to unrate these games.

<snip>.

a/c

The forms that Gary gives us to fill in require certification by the DOP/Arbiter and/or the Promoter, if different. We also put similar detail on the SP file.
Not sure if this helps as I don't know who gets allocated this job at the Dragons Lair.

regards
starter

gbekker
24-07-2005, 03:53 AM
I have amended the FIDE tournament report as follows:

Plyr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 Tot
1 ZZ x = 1 = 1 = 1 1 1 1 7.5
2 AR = x ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 ½ ½ 6
3 NK 0 ½ x ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 0 5.5
4 LM = ½ ½ x 0 ½ 1 1 1 ½ 5.5
5 IZ 0 ½ 0 1 x 0 1 ½ ½ 1 4.5
6 RK = 0 ½ ½ 1 x 0 0 1 1 4.5
7 QR 0 0 0 0 0 1 x 1 ½ 1 3.5
8 IZ 0 0 0 0 ½ 1 0 x 1 1 3.5
9 AC 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 x 1 2.5
0 AB 0 ½ 1 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 x 2

1. The players are listed in tiebreak order.
2. The tournament Ra = 2160. Quentin Reitmans is expected to gain a FIDE rating from the tournament.
3. [Three games indicated as “=” in the crosstable were agreed drawn without play. Gary Bekker]

The failure to play the three games which were agreed drawn means that these games should not be counted for FIDE ratings purposes.

Regards,

Gary Bekker
gbekker@mira.net

antichrist
24-07-2005, 09:23 AM
It is terrific that Gary has done the right thing but it could have been done a lot earlier considering the controversy that has taken place for weeks, which he may have known of and could have enquired into. Maybe he could enlighten us.

Otherwise we will be left to speculate that it was only the threat of FIDE action that brought results.
__________________________________________________ ___
Bill's action, if based on his own arguments referred to in post 126 below as claimed, also leaves something to be desired. Why he should he take the word of a person (Gareth) who is in no way connected with the competition in question?

Surely he should have a written directive from the DOP of the comp. when there is such controversy raging, at least to protect his own and the NSWCA/ACF's backside.

In all those weeks of speculation/controversy why didn't the NSWCA have had their own inquiry? They have time to debate for 30 minutes if I should be allowed to borrow chess equipment! Note, I am only directing criticism at the president here.

So I will ask the question of Bill and Gary, were amended results obtained from the DOP, and if not, why not?





BG post 126 this thread:
KB's comments had no bearing on the matter. I stated back on the July 6th in the shoutbox that if the games had not been played I would rerun the ratings and garethcharles said back on July 13th that the games were not played.
As such it has been obvious since July 13th what would occur.
21-07-2005 01:00 PM (refers to post 104 ed.)

(I hope I don't have to issue any apologies after this post)

ursogr8
24-07-2005, 10:33 AM
It is terrific that Gary has done the right thing but it could have been done a lot earlier considering the controversy that has taken place for weeks, which he may have known of and could have enquired into. Maybe he could enlighten us.


__________________________________________________ ___
<snip>

hi a/c

I notice you and macavity draw attention to the possible need for Gary Bekker to confirm the accuracy/actuality of results presented to him for processing to FIDE. The need for this task came as a complete surprise to me, but as this thread shows, it needs consideration by him. His role as FIDE Oceania Zone President therefore becomes much more onerous. For the current rating period he would be checking the veracity of 7 tournaments from around Australia.
It is now obvious how we can assist this volunteer in the future.


Otherwise we will be left to speculate that it was only the threat of FIDE action that brought results.

Plus the transparency that came via the postings of 3 key Welshers on this thread.

regards
starter

Bill Gletsos
24-07-2005, 02:26 PM
Bill's action, if based on his own arguments referred to in post 126 below as claimed, also leaves something to be desired. Why he should he take the word of a person (Gareth) who is in no way connected with the competition in question?I never said I took the word of Gareth. In post #121 I said it had been established the games were not played. I never commented how it had been established for any given individual. Now for Gareth it was established by talking to Charles which he stated in post #106. As such for those who had not spoken directly to Charles, Gareth's post should have been sufficient. Certainly people reading the BB had no reason to not believe him. Therefore for the majority of people reading this thread it was established in post #106 by Gareth.

Now I had previously said that if the games were not played I would rerun the June period. Since it had been established that was the case then anyone even you should have been able to work out that the games would not count and I would rerun the June period.
It did not require me to spell it out.


Surely he should have a written directive from the DOP of the comp. when there is such controversy raging, at least to protect his own and the NSWCA/ACF's backside.

In all those weeks of speculation/controversy why didn't the NSWCA have had their own inquiry? They have time to debate for 30 minutes if I should be allowed to borrow chess equipment! Note, I am only directing criticism at the president here.I never stated I hadnt spoken to the DOP. I consistently told you and others if you wanted an answer then you should talk to the DOP. Gareth did that and got an answer as did AR. You could have done the same thing.


So I will ask the question of Bill and Gary, were amended results obtained from the DOP, and if not, why not?Well I certainly wouldnt be rerunning the June ratings based on results from anyone else now would I.

antichrist
24-07-2005, 03:27 PM
B1 from When to Resign thread:

I don't like players who resign too early. Some players get a kick out of resigning early thinking it shows their chess prowess. Others do it thinking it shows their sportmanship or something. Others resign early simply out of spite. Personally, I admire a fighting to the finish attitude, whether I'm the one doing it, or it's my apponent. Fair enough if you're a grandmaster, or are absolutely confident you can alway read the intracacies of a position and never make mistakes, but otherwise, set your Resign-o-Meter to the "never say die" setting, and fight on, even if it's just so you can get some much needed endgame practice in.

And there's no point to resigning in a Blitz game unless it's dead obvious it's over. If there are ever going to be major blunders it'll be in a Blitz game, and it would only be a few seconds of wasted time anyway.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill, you seem to have learnt B1's lesson above very well. And Margaret Thacher's advice of never to apologise!

I shall return.

antichrist
24-07-2005, 03:55 PM
............
I never stated I hadnt spoken to the DOP. I consistently told you and others if you wanted an answer then you should talk to the DOP. Gareth did that and got an answer as did AR. You could have done the same thing...........

The DOP's number or email address is not listed on NSWCA's site nor ACF site that I could see. Though a member of NSWCA I have not received any correspondence in last 2 years with his contact nos. Previous to that period my stuff is packed up.

I think it is rude and invasive for ordinary members to contact IA's querying their decisions. It is much better coming from an official.

When Gareth and AR reported their conversations with the DOP they did not relate that the results would be re-submitted to the ratings officers so what is there to gain?

A DOP could tell an ordinary member anything (not saying this DOP would) it is what is sent to ratings officers that is important.

FINALLY, I DID NOT NEED TO GO TO THE DOP BECAUSE I ALREADY KNEW FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH WHAT HAD OCCURRED BUT I WAS NOT LETTING ON JUST YET - I WANTED IT TO SEE IF IT WOULD BE FIXED UP WITHOUT ORDINARY MEMBER PRODDING AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN!

Bill Gletsos
24-07-2005, 04:45 PM
The DOP's number or email address is not listed on NSWCA's site nor ACF site that I could see. Though a member of NSWCA I have not received any correspondence in last 2 years with his contact nos. Previous to that period my stuff is packed up.Charles's email address was on a number of NSWCA tournament adverts sent out to members last year. Also Charles is President of the NSWJCL. His contact details are available on their web page. On top of that you could easily have asked for his email adress from others on this BB.


I think it is rude and invasive for ordinary members to contact IA's querying their decisions. It is much better coming from an official.You and others were making accusations against Charles. It was reasonable you spoke to him directly about them. At least Gareth and AR chose to do so.


When Gareth and AR reported their conversations with the DOP they did not relate that the results would be re-submitted to the ratings officers so what is there to gain?There was no reason that they should. I had made it clear that if the games were not played I would rerun the June rating period. It was established the games were not played. Therefore it was clear I would re-run the June rating period.
Perhaps I gave you to much credit for being able to work that out.


A DOP could tell an ordinary member anything (not saying this DOP would) it is what is sent to ratings officers that is important.I stated that if the games were not played the June ratings would be rerun. It was established the games did not take place. Therefore I see no reason for you to assume that the june rating period would not be rerun.


FINALLY, I DID NOT NEED TO GO TO THE DOP BECAUSE I ALREADY KNEW FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH WHAT HAD OCCURRED BUT I WAS NOT LETTING ON JUST YET - I WANTED IT TO SEE IF IT WOULD BE FIXED UP WITHOUT ORDINARY MEMBER PRODDING AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN!I stated in the shoutbox on July 6th exactly what would happen if the games had not taken place.

antichrist
24-07-2005, 06:53 PM
BG:
Charles's email address was on a number of NSWCA tournament adverts sent out to members last year. Also Charles is President of the NSWJCL. His contact details are available on their web page. On top of that you could easily have asked for his email adress from others on this BB.

A/C: I did not receive any but I am not complaining. I did not know he was president of NSWJCL and I do not normally visit their site. Again I think it is a bit over the top and rude to bring this up.

BG:
You and others were making accusations against Charles. It was reasonable you spoke to him directly about them. At least Gareth and AR chose to do so.

A/C:
Yes they did but did they relate that you and him had already agreed to re-do the ratings which would have laid everything to rest? It makes it suspicious that you had not discussed it with him. Also I did not need to because I speak to horses. I already knew there were extraneous conditions for his action and note I never mentioned him by name and because I appreciate all his work for chess.

Unfortunately it is not possible to discuss such issues without people maybe wondering who may be the figures at the centre, but I don't think I deliberately tried to implicate anyone - just the situation.

BG:
There was no reason that they should. I had made it clear that if the games were not played I would rerun the June rating period. It was established the games were not played. Therefore it was clear I would re-run the June rating period.
Perhaps I gave you to much credit for being able to work that out.

A/C: As this was posted on shoutbox which can quickly get snowed under both AR and myself missed it. At this period I was paying dearly for internet cafe use and just whizzing in and out - expecting anything to be in St George thread where it should be.

BG:
I stated that if the games were not played the June ratings would be rerun. It was established the games did not take place. Therefore I see no reason for you to assume that the june rating period would not be rerun.

BG:
I stated in the shoutbox on July 6th exactly what would happen if the games had not taken place.

A/C: Both answered above as you to chose to answer them out of thread - your fault.

Bill Gletsos
24-07-2005, 07:30 PM
I did not receive any but I am not complaining. I did not know he was president of NSWJCL and I do not normally visit their site. Again I think it is a bit over the top and rude to bring this up.You seem to have taken a keen interest in the NSWJCL in the past. Perhaps it slipped your mind he was the President. Yes i can imagine you think its rude to bring it up as it shows you could have easily determined his contact details from a number of sources. Least of being post #6 in this thread.


Yes they did but did they relate that you and him had already agreed to re-do the ratings which would have laid everything to rest? It makes it suspicious that you had not discussed it with him. Also I did not need to because I speak to horses. I already knew there were extraneous conditions for his action and note I never mentioned him by name and because I appreciate all his work for chess.You may not have directly mentioned it but it was clear to all who the arbiter was.


As this was posted on shoutbox which can quickly get snowed under both AR and myself missed it. At this period I was paying dearly for internet cafe use and just whizzing in and out - expecting anything to be in St George thread where it should be.jase asked the question in the shoutbox. As such that is where I responded.

antichrist
24-07-2005, 08:01 PM
You seem to have taken a keen interest in the NSWJCL in the past. Perhaps it slipped your mind he was the President. Yes i can imagine you think its rude to bring it up as it shows you could have easily determined his contact details from a number of sources. Least of being post #6 in this thread.

A/C
How many times must I say that I had already spoken to the horse so no need for any more investigation. I did try to find his contact address when you told me to notify him myself very late in the piece. NOTE THAT YOU DID NOT STATE THAT YOU HAD ALREADY DISCUSSED WITH HIM. MAKES ONE JUSTLY OR UNJUSTLY SUSPICIOUS.

BG
You may not have directly mentioned it but it was clear to all who the arbiter was.

A/C
Other people mentioned by name and were more descriptive in implying things than I was.

BG
jase asked the question in the shoutbox. As such that is where I responded.

A/C
I will let any audience judge your responses - not necessarily implying anything.

peter_parr
25-07-2005, 12:00 PM
The amended score table for the 2005 St. George Open was submitted by the ACF to FIDE on July 24th.

The NSWCA President should immediately advise the ACF that the tournament report as submitted is incorrect and FIDE should disregard the report with apologies from the ACF.

FIDE should be advised that the correct report will be submitted within a few weeks.

FIDE in it’s Presidential Board Meeting in Doha, QATAR in May 2005 unanimously agreed that “there will be severe punishments for players, arbiters, officials, organisers and federations in proven cases of malpractice, up to a ban for life.” (see FIDE minutes on web page)

One player in the St. George Open won his first six games but was unable to play his other three games.

FIDE defines this as “withdrawn”.

FIDE requires the results to be submitted as 0-1 forfeit for each of the three games not played by this player.

The correct amended score table has the results ½ - ½ for each of the three games showing a final score of 7.5/9. This is incorrect according to FIDE regulations.

Games not played cannot be counted by FIDE or ACF. He scored 6 points (not 7.5) from the six games he played. The three games were in fact agreed drawn by telephone as now acknowledged by the arbiter with no requirement for either player to attend any venue – This is not permitted by FIDE or by ACF.

The other games in the event that were also agreed drawn by telephone with no requirement of either player to attend any venue should also not be recorded as draws. FIDE regulations require these games to be recorded as forfeits (0f) for each player.

I would recommend that the amended score tables duly signed by the arbiter, and checked by the NSWCA President be submitted to the ACF for FIDE rating. The event will be processed by FIDE as a Swiss system event due to the forfeited games.

I suggest the amended score table be sent to the NSW Ratings officer so the ACF ratings can be amended to reflect the actual games played.

All FIDE regulations appear on the FIDE web page and if any clarification is required expert advise is always available a phone call away in Sydney.

Players who enter FIDE rated events are required to play their games at the venue and times appointed for the tournament.

The game of chess is brought into disrepute if arbiters and players agree to the results of unplayed games.

It took 139 messages and 3000 views on this bulletin board to correct the 3 unplayed games – what about the other unplayed games?

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

PHAT
25-07-2005, 04:03 PM
Four hours have elapsed since Parr executed checkmate. And the opponents are still staring at the board. :clap:

arosar
25-07-2005, 04:12 PM
Four hours have elapsed since Parr executed checkmate. And the opponents are still staring at the board. :clap:

Nah, there's still wondering is it's already their move. The powers that be are running around like headless chooks looking for how to spin this.

AR

antichrist
25-07-2005, 05:41 PM
From what I gather a list was sent to FIDE for June rating period, another sent 24th July with amendments for 3 games.

But if P. Parr's objection that there were more than 3 unplayed "draws" holds up, thus meaning a third result list will have to be sent to FIDE, we are going to look very sick.

I really can't believe it after all what has taken place the past 3 weeks.

You people are lucky I don't put my swearing into print - it is very rich.

Someone tell me that I have it wrong - Bill, you will do!

Vlad
25-07-2005, 06:57 PM
It took 139 messages and 3000 views on this bulletin board to correct the 3 unplayed games – what about the other unplayed games?

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

Hi Peter, sorry to bother you, just wondering if I could talk to you at some point regarding the grade match fiasco. You can think I am biased because I am involved, but I strongly believe that what happened in the grade matches is far worse than what happened in the St George club. In any case, in my view these two reasons should be enough to suck anybody involved.

The_Wise_Man
25-07-2005, 09:47 PM
I have yet to comment on the tournament in an official capacity.

I have been quiet working away gathering advice and assessing the situation.
This issue will be talked about at the committee meeting on Wednesday night.

As such, I will then post about this issue (within a few days after our committee meeting on Wednesday night!)

Wise

ursogr8
25-07-2005, 09:58 PM
I have yet to comment on the tournament in an official capacity.

I have been quiet working away gathering advice and assessing the situation.
This issue will be talked about at the committee meeting on Wednesday night.

As such, I will then post about this issue (within a few days after our committee meeting on Wednesday night!)

Wise

I navigated via the NSWCA links page and could not find the St George web-site. Can you help us....and does it list who is on the Committee?
It was not in your thread initiator post#1?

regards
starter

arosar
25-07-2005, 10:28 PM
As such, I will then post about this issue (within a few days after our committee meeting on Wednesday night!)

As I sort of wondered in my blog, can you please explain how your club can manage to find itself in two controversies that threaten to destroy the good name of Australian chess?

AR

The_Wise_Man
25-07-2005, 10:53 PM
its Sydney Academy of Chess controversy... just incase you didn't notice they are doing all the jumping up and down making accusations etc...

but there is a also Tall Poppy Syndrome at work here...

and past grievances and political interests at work here...

But Amiel i do not see it as threatening the good name of Australian chess only a few individuals.

For Starter, we have just in the last week bought the domain name stgeorgechess.org .... As such, the website is still under construction. i can give you the names of the main committee members though:

President: Chris Nikolaou; Vice-President: Ngan Koshnitsky; Treasurer: Paul Sike; Secretary Anthony Belz and Club Captain: Charles Zworestine.
There are another 6-8 committee members with lesser positions.

(note while there are some reports that Kerry Stead, Lee Forace and Ian Rogers are committee members, I can assure you that whilst they are members of the St George club, they are not comitttee members).

Wise

arosar
26-07-2005, 12:05 AM
its Sydney Academy of Chess controversy... just incase you didn't notice they are doing all the jumping up and down making accusations etc...

Your statements are careless.

I have highly reliable information that makes your statement unfair. I would be more careful if I were you.

You must choose absolutely correctly who your enemy is.

AR

The_Wise_Man
26-07-2005, 12:39 AM
Your statements are careless.

I have highly reliable information that makes your statement unfair. I would be more careful if I were you.

You must choose absolutely correctly who your enemy is.

AR

Careless? without undue care? I believe not...

but to keep the peace with you Amiel, I will continue to apply due care in all of my statements...

"Highly Reliable Information"... do please tell... (PM me the info if you wish) I can then consider it at committee on Wednesday.

I choose no enemies... but I have an obligation to protect the reputation of the St George Chess Club to the best of my abilities. I have a fudiciary duty to our members and the chess community at large.

Wise

Dozy
26-07-2005, 07:00 AM
For Starter, we have just in the last week bought the domain name stgeorgechess.org .... As such, the website is still under construction.
Wise

Congrats! The single page the the Leagues Club gave you was a shocker. When you get the web site up and running let me know and I'll link to it from Rooty Hill and Fairfield.

arosar
26-07-2005, 07:24 AM
I choose no enemies...

But you did: the SAC.

Now you are about to make them the evil-doers.

No matter how you say it, the fact is your club is at the very centre of these two highly damaging controversies. Why is that?


"Highly Reliable Information"... do please tell... (PM me the info if you wish) I can then consider it at committee on Wednesday.

Mate, I treat my sources with the highest confidentiality. That's why they trust me mate. I'm a trustworthy bloke.

AR

gbekker
26-07-2005, 01:20 PM
Dear Peter Parr,

You wrote:


The NSWCA President should immediately advise the ACF that the [amended] tournament report as submitted is incorrect and FIDE should disregard the report with apologies from the ACF.
...
It took 139 messages and 3000 views on this bulletin board to correct the 3 unplayed games – what about the other unplayed games?

Peter Parr (OAM)

The report is still incorrect? There are other unplayed games? If you knew that there were other unplayed games, then why didn't you report that at the time? By your own account, you have had ample opportunity to do so.

I was not made aware of this previously and would kindly ask that you post what you believe to be the correct crosstable to this thread. I do not want to submit any further corrections, only to find out that there is still more information that has been withheld from me in relation to this event.


The correct amended score table has the results ½ - ½ for each of the three games showing a final score of 7.5/9. This is incorrect according to FIDE regulations.

No, the score table has the results as "=" indicating that they were not played and should not be rated. The report also included the comment: 3. Three games indicated as “=” in the crosstable were agreed drawn without play. Gary Bekker.
As a result, these games will not be rated, and the event will be treated as a Swiss tournament in which the player scored 6 points.

Please post any further corrections you are aware of.

Regards,

Gary Bekker
gbekker@mira.net

antichrist
26-07-2005, 03:08 PM
Dear Peter Parr,

You wrote:



The report is still incorrect? There are other unplayed games? If you knew that there were other unplayed games, then why didn't you report that at the time? By your own account, you have had ample opportunity to do so.

I was not made aware of this previously and would kindly ask that you post what you believe to be the correct crosstable to this thread. I do not want to submit any further corrections, only to find out that there is still more information that has been withheld from me in relation to this event.



No, the score table has the results as "=" indicating that they were not played and should not be rated. The report also included the comment: 3. Three games indicated as “=” in the crosstable were agreed drawn without play. Gary Bekker.
As a result, these games will not be rated, and the event will be treated as a Swiss tournament in which the player scored 6 points.

Please post any further corrections you are aware of.

Regards,

Gary Bekker
gbekker@mira.net

Gary,

I can understand your frustration with everyone if there are more that 3 games in question.

If this was the case surely the amended results you received (presuming you did like I take BG on his word that he did - fool I am?) shows amendments for more than 3 games.

In all my early posts on this thread I was looking thick in response to Bill's posts - the reason being that I thought it incredulous that such an event had occurred! It was out of my square of thinking.

It may have been out of your square of thinking as well - sorry mate, join the queue.

But showing frustration at Peter P is really just shooting the messenger...

In my last post I took Peter P at face value that there are more than 3 games, that is why I was swearing - even profusely!

I am going to temporarily become a Christian so I can pray that it will all disappear.

arosar
26-07-2005, 03:12 PM
Also, let's not forget, this action by the ACF is clearly a slap in the face for the people involved: the Club, the players, and DOP. What other action will the ACF take in terms of expressing their unhappiness? Is there a breach of Ethics here?

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 03:26 PM
If this was the case surely the amended results you received (presuming you did like I take BG on his word that he did - fool I am?) shows amendments for more than 3 games.Events being FIDE rated dont go through me. They are between the arbiter and Gary in his role as ACF FIDE Ratings Officer.

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 04:04 PM
In my capacity as ACF Ratings Officer I received all divisions of the St. George Championship prior to the ACF June rating period and processed them exactly as they were coded in the June ratings.

Allegations were made as to whether Zhao's games were played or not. I said that as the arbiter didnt post here those making the allegations they should talk directly to the arbiter. I also said from a ratings perspective if I am satisified the games did not take place they will be coded as double forfeits and the June period rerun prior to calculation of the September ratings.
As such I reran the June period with Zhao's "drawn" games coded as double forfeits.

I mentioned this to Parr last Tuesday when he raised the St. George Championships with me and he informed me at that time that he believed that other games apart from Zhao's also had not actually been played.
This was the first I had heard about it.

I followed this up via email with the arbiter on Wednesday and asked him if there were any other games other than the Zhao games that had not actually been played.
I received a reply late Thursday evening. I sent a response to the arbiter on the weekend informing him that I intended to publish the names of the players involved on the bulletin board but that I would await his reply before doing so.
I am currently waiting for a reply.

arosar
26-07-2005, 04:13 PM
Bill, if these allegations are proven correct, will there be some sort of punishment against that club?

(Btw, Bill, there's a kiwi reading this thread. It's all a bit embarassing!)

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 04:17 PM
Bill, if these allegations are proven correct, will there be some sort of punishment against that club?I suspect the matter will be raised at the next NSWCA Council meeting.

antichrist
26-07-2005, 04:23 PM
Bill, if these allegations are proven correct, will there be some sort of punishment against that club?

(Btw, Bill, there's a kiwi reading this thread. It's all a bit embarassing!)

AR

We have emus in Aussie who have their head in the sand - beat that!

antichrist
26-07-2005, 04:34 PM
In my capacity as ACF Ratings Officer I received all divisions of the St. George Championship prior to the ACF June rating period and processed them exactly as they were coded in the June ratings.

Allegations were made as to whether Zhao's games were played or not. I said that as the arbiter didnt post here those making the allegations they should talk directly to the arbiter. I also said from a ratings perspective if I am satisified the games did not take place they will be coded as double forfeits and the June period rerun prior to calculation of the September ratings.
As such I reran the June period with Zhao's "drawn" games coded as double forfeits.

I mentioned this to Parr last Tuesday when he raised the St. George Championships with me and he informed me at that time that he believed that other games apart from Zhao's also had not actually been played.
This was the first I had heard about it.

I followed this up via email with the arbiter on Wednesday and asked him if there were any other games other than the Zhao games that had not actually been played.
I received a reply late Thursday evening. I sent a response to the arbiter on the weekend informing him that I intended to publish the names of the players involved on the bulletin board but that I would await his reply before doing so.
I am currently waiting for a reply.

Bill, I can almost accept at face value all what you have stated.

But I only had a geek at those crosstables for one moment and alarm bells started ringing.

I would have thought that for you, digesting them whilst data-entering, bells would also have rang.

I will keep smart comments to myself at this stage.

Is it necessary to post the players concerned - we can guess from the crosstables. Maybe you don't want to smear the innocent who had real draws.

But as all was meant in good faith I don't think there is any need for witch-hunting. I think there were other mitigating factors.

I am sure everyone has learnt any lessons to be learnt.

But if you got an official list with only 3 amendments and there are more well maybe heads deserve to roll.

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 04:47 PM
Bill, I can almost accept at face value all what you have stated.

But I only had a geek at those crosstables for one moment and alarm bells started ringing.

I would have thought that for you, digesting them whilst data-entering, bells would also have rang.I dont do any data entry. The rating program reads the SP files directly.


Is it necessary to post the players concerned - we can guess from the crosstables. Maybe you don't want to smear the innocent who had real draws.If nothing else posts #11 and #12 would seem to indicate that there were some games that were actually played and drawn.

arosar
26-07-2005, 05:00 PM
But if you got an official list with only 3 amendments and there are more well maybe heads deserve to roll.

A horse cannot learn its lesson unless it gets slapped every now and then.

AR

antichrist
26-07-2005, 05:02 PM
I dont do any data entry. The rating program reads the SP files directly.

If nothing else posts #11 and #12 would seem to indicate that there were some games that were actually played and drawn.
__________________________________________________ ____
Post 38 by Jase

Quote:
Originally Posted by antichrist
Mr Zhao was in a drawie mood


The crosstable indicates a few draws.
The ACF Newsletter says he did not concede any draws.(Jase)


Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Wise_Man
10 Adjournments left though....


Wise, can you inform the house how many of these 10 games were actually played, and how many were figments of the arbiter's imagination, creatively recorded as draws? (Jase)

Terrific performance by Laura Moylan, by the way - holding the three top seeds to draws and beating up most of the rest.(Jase) (was he being sarcastic? - A/C ed 26/7/05)
_____________________________________
Post 162 today:
BG:
I mentioned this to Parr last Tuesday when he raised the St. George Championships with me and he informed me at that time that he believed that other games apart from Zhao's also had not actually been played.
**************This was the first I had heard about it.**********
_________________________________________

Bill, I am a bit suspicious!


____________________________________

arosar
26-07-2005, 05:07 PM
The report is still incorrect? There are other unplayed games?

Mr Bekker, I think that what Mr Parr was pointing to were the totals. For e.g., for Zhao, his total is still 7.5 in your table. In fact, is it not more correct to say 6 points?

A similar adjustment is required for the other affected players.

Thank you for your kind attention. And you are always welcome here as well as on my blog. If the heat is too hot for you here, you'll find that my blog is more civilised.

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 07:37 PM
Bill, I am a bit suspicious!You can think what you like.
I'm telling you I only believed it involved Zhao's games.
The first I knew about games other than Zhao's not being played was when Parr told me about it last tuesday. I followed it up the next day.

ursogr8
26-07-2005, 08:34 PM
You can think what you like.
I'm telling you I only believed it involved Zhao's games.
The first I knew about games other than Zhao's not being played was when Parr told me about it last tuesday. I followed it up the next day.

Bill

I am glad you posted this so clearly. If you say so, then that is good enough for me.
I do have to say that since I read post #38, and you responded at #39, and continued right through to #80 that I formed the opinion that you had noticed that 10 were being queried. But when I re-read I see that you could have overlooked it.

regards
starter

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 09:11 PM
Bill

I am glad you posted this so clearly. If you say so, then that is good enough for me.
I do have to say that since I read post #38, and you responded at #39, and continued right through to #80 that I formed the opinion that you had noticed that 10 were being queried. But when I re-read I see that you could have overlooked it.As I believed only Zhao's games were in question I only queried Zhao's games with the arbiter.
If I had believed that there were games others than Zhao's that had not been played I would have originally asked "Can you inform me of all the games in the St. George Club Championship that you are aware were not actually played" which after my discussion with Parr last Tuesday is what I ended up asking the arbiter last Wednesday.

antichrist
26-07-2005, 09:36 PM
As I believed only Zhao's games were in question I only queried Zhao's games with the arbiter.
If I had believed that there were games others than Zhao's that had not been played I would have originally asked "Can you inform me of all the games in the St. George Club Championship that you are aware were not actually played" which after my discussion with Parr last Tuesday is what I ended up asking the arbiter last Wednesday.
_____________________________________________
My post 42 of 27th June

Many of these draws were arranged by DOP as time restraints, will that effect ratings?

My Post 50 of 27th June

Quote:
Originally Posted by arosar
Which games, recorded as draws, did not actually take place?
AR

A/C:
Quite a few I think, maybe all even************
___________________________________________

Bill, You may not have believed there were more than three games but I did give you a prompt over four weeks ago, that is two days after the cross-tables were posted and I presume before you contacted the arbiter.

If you were more open-minded you would have got the questions right and prevented the mix-up this week of results going to FIDE that may need to be corrected.

I did not want to say too much for a few reasons, also I was relying on everyone doing the right thing and I was incredulous that those games were rated. As previously stated, that is why I was thick to your responses.

I did warn very early on that this may become an entangled web involving more people - so far Houdini would be proud of you - not implying anything yet but that I am becoming thinner and you thicker - sorry mate. (wish it was waist stats we were discussing)

Bill Gletsos
26-07-2005, 11:51 PM
My post 42 of 27th June

Many of these draws were arranged by DOP as time restraints, will that effect ratings?

My Post 50 of 27th June

Quote:
Originally Posted by arosar
Which games, recorded as draws, did not actually take place?
AR

A/C:
Quite a few I think, maybe all even************
___________________________________________

Bill, You may not have believed there were more than three games but I did give you a prompt over four weeks ago, that is two days after the cross-tables were posted and I presume before you contacted the arbiter.
There is nothing in your post #42 to suggest you were not just referring to Zhao's games. In fact when I directly responded to your post #42 in post #43 you followed it up in post #44 with a question directly relating to Zhao. As far as I was concerned I took it you were just referring to Zhao's games. You then prattled on about ratings over the following posts. Even in your post #70 you again referred only to Zhao and again in #73. If you meant games other than Zhao's you should not have explicitly kepting mentioning Zhao. In not one of your posts did you explicitly mention any one else but Zhao. In fact no one else mentioned anyone explictly other than Zhao either.


If you were more open-minded you would have got the questions right and prevented the mix-up this week of results going to FIDE that may need to be corrected.The FIDE rating of events has nothing to do with me.


I did not want to say too much for a few reasons, also I was relying on everyone doing the right thing and I was incredulous that those games were rated. As previously stated, that is why I was thick to your responses.As the ACF Ratings Officer I reran the June period with Zhao's draws changed to double forfeits because it was my understanding they were the only games that had not been played.


I did warn very early on that this may become an entangled web involving more people - so far Houdini would be proud of you - not implying anything yet but that I am becoming thinner and you thicker - sorry mate. (wish it was waist stats we were discussing)You could live as long as Noah and you would always be thicker than me. ;)

antichrist
27-07-2005, 05:49 AM
There is nothing in your post #42 to suggest you were not just referring to Zhao's games. In fact when I directly responded to your post #42 in post #43 you followed it up in post #44 with a question directly relating to Zhao. As far as I was concerned I took it you were just referring to Zhao's games. You then prattled on about ratings over the following posts. Even in your post #70 you again referred only to Zhao and again in #73. If you meant games other than Zhao's you should not have explicitly kepting mentioning Zhao. In not one of your posts did you explicitly mention any one else but Zhao. In fact no one else mentioned anyone explictly other than Zhao either.

The FIDE rating of events has nothing to do with me.

As the ACF Ratings Officer I reran the June period with Zhao's draws changed to double forfeits because it was my understanding they were the only games that had not been played.

You could live as long as Noah and you would always be thicker than me. ;)

We do get side-tracked in discussions and no stock-take is usually done, but in this case the auditors are out barking because "insider-trading" has become on the nose so we are doing a forensic.

If you did not have us guessing your answers- because I was not familiar with the system and terminology (soaked in my incredibility) - we could have stayed focused on the nitty-gritty of who, what, when, where and why. RESULTING IN NO DODGY REPORT BEING SENT TO FIDE.

If you did not spit the dummy and tell me to "do it yourself" re notifying G Bekker - whose contacts along with CZ's I could not find - I would not have spat the dummy and contacted FIDE. Now they may hear alarm bells when the amended results come in - you know like at the ATO. So in your roll as president maybe it left something to be desired concerning general responsibility. It was only when I mentioned FIDE in the Shoutbox that the bullsh.t stopped and contacts were sent to me - and boy, did they come quickly! And they came with no "hello, how are you, thank you or good-bye".

Merry Christmas in July anyway! And let's hope that Dragons have two lives.

Imagine how happy the NSW players would be if I hung around NSW chess for a further 900 years thereabouts - they couldn't control themselves. Esp if I dropped in uninvited for the occasinal NSWCA council meeting with my usual doze-off to help pass the time away - and demanding tea and Monte Carlos!

And by then I would be a really dirty old man - with only very faint memories of the real thing.

And I could relate stories of how in the distant past we had a donnybrook about unplayed games being FIDE-rated and a guy called Basil Gletsos.

Oepty
27-07-2005, 07:14 PM
[QUOTE=antichrist]

Terrific performance by Laura Moylan, by the way - holding the three top seeds to draws and beating up most of the rest.(Jase) (was he being sarcastic? - A/C ed 26/7/05)
[QUOTE]

Peter. From what I have read in this thread I am not sure questioning Moylan's results, apart from the draw with Zhao, is fair. Her draw with 2nd seed Koshnitsky happened in the first round, so I can not see how it could be suspect. Jason is quite likely to comment on Moylans results because of his involvement as captian of the Women's Olympiad team she was a member of. I would not read anything into that remark. If you have more information that would change my view then feel free to post it.
I have also talked to Charles Zworestine about this matter at the University Open and was satisfied with his answers.
Scott

antichrist
27-07-2005, 07:55 PM
[QUOTE=antichrist]

Terrific performance by Laura Moylan, by the way - holding the three top seeds to draws and beating up most of the rest.(Jase) (was he being sarcastic? - A/C ed 26/7/05)
[QUOTE]

Peter. From what I have read in this thread I am not sure questioning Moylan's results, apart from the draw with Zhao, is fair. Her draw with 2nd seed Koshnitsky happened in the first round, so I can not see how it could be suspect. Jason is quite likely to comment on Moylans results because of his involvement as captian of the Women's Olympiad team she was a member of. I would not read anything into that remark. If you have more information that would change my view then feel free to post it.
I have also talked to Charles Zworestine about this matter at the University Open and was satisfied with his answers.
Scott

I know nothing about it and was only speculating on what Jase may have meant and being a little mischeiveous. Originally I took the post at face value but when revisiting to answer BG I wondered.

I am pleased to see all women in chess do well, and hope all parties in this come out okay after tonight's meeting - I want to see another Aussie GM so we pass the Philippines - as well I have followed his career for years.

Certainly no slur was meant on anyone.

Kerry Stead
27-07-2005, 09:00 PM
If you did not spit the dummy and tell me to "do it yourself" re notifying G Bekker - whose contacts along with CZ's I could not find - I would not have spat the dummy and contacted FIDE. Now they may hear alarm bells when the amended results come in - you know like at the ATO. So in your roll as president maybe it left something to be desired concerning general responsibility. It was only when I mentioned FIDE in the Shoutbox that the bullsh.t stopped and contacts were sent to me - and boy, did they come quickly! And they came with no "hello, how are you, thank you or good-bye".
Peter, for future reference, finding email addresses is often a rather simple matter ...
Use Google! (http://www.google.com)
A search for 'Gary Bekker' gets you an email address and web page ... while a search for 'Charles Zworestine email' gets similar results ... you are allowed to do your own dirty work Peter ...

jase
27-07-2005, 09:32 PM
Peter. From what I have read in this thread I am not sure questioning Moylan's results, apart from the draw with Zhao, is fair. Her draw with 2nd seed Koshnitsky happened in the first round, so I can not see how it could be suspect. Jason is quite likely to comment on Moylans results because of his involvement as captian of the Women's Olympiad team she was a member of.

Spot on. Notwithstanding some doubt over Laura playing Zong-Yuan, her result is terrific and I'm really pleased that she is playing, and playing well. Ditto for Ngan.

antichrist
28-07-2005, 12:14 AM
Peter, for future reference, finding email addresses is often a rather simple matter ...
Use Google! (http://www.google.com)
A search for 'Gary Bekker' gets you an email address and web page ... while a search for 'Charles Zworestine email' gets similar results ... you are allowed to do your own dirty work Peter ...

People are also invited to find me in the same method, only there is about 500 of me!

As far as I know it seems that it was due to my contacting Gary and CZ that an amendment was made - that is outrageous!

What do I have to do with anything?

What is my official position?

Am I the ombudsman?

Why should dirty work (your expression) need to be done by anyone?

You are the ACF vice president (which I only found out by searching for the other two) - why didn't you ask questions and intervene very early on in the piece which no other official was (at least publically)?

Frankly speaking, I think you post is outrageous considering your position.

arosar
28-07-2005, 12:43 PM
I have an obligation to protect the reputation of the St George Chess Club to the best of my abilities. I have a fudiciary duty to our members and the chess community at large.

Hey Wise mate . . . gray reckons you'll produce only a, "sweep under the rug report" [quoted from the shout box].

On that note, when do you reckon you can come back to us? Any chance for an exclusive?

Cheers mate.

AR

The_Wise_Man
29-07-2005, 07:21 AM
Dear Chess Community

Proceeding an internal investigation and extensive discussion last night at
the St George Leagues Club Chess Club committee meeting,
the St George Leagues Club Chess Club would like to announce its decision.

"All unplayed games in the Club Championship will be scored as double
forfeits for both ACF and FIDE rating purposes."

Both players and ratings officials have been notified of this decision. We
believe that this matter can now be put to rest.
The committee is now in the process reviewing its procedures to minimise
the risk of this happening again.
We would also like to thank the people who assisted us in our
investigation.

We have some very exciting tournaments coming up including the St George
Allegro and Quickplay Championships and the St George Swiss tournament.
Entry to these tournaments is free to our members (with membership being
only $10). You may contact me for further details.

Yours in chess

Chris Nikolaou (aka The_Wise_Man)
President
St George Leagues Club Chess Club

shaun
29-07-2005, 10:52 AM
Dear Chess Community

Proceeding an internal investigation and extensive discussion last night at
the St George Leagues Club Chess Club committee meeting,
the St George Leagues Club Chess Club would like to announce its decision.

"All unplayed games in the Club Championship will be scored as double
forfeits for both ACF and FIDE rating purposes."



No other action? Especially as the above isn't so much a decision as merely a statement of fact. Or are their circumstances where unplayed games can be rated by the ACF or FIDE?

Thunderspirit
29-07-2005, 11:06 AM
No other action? Especially as the above isn't so much a decision as merely a statement of fact. Or are their circumstances where unplayed games can be rated by the ACF or FIDE?

No further action is necessary Shuan. The players have already been inconvienced by this enough.

arosar
29-07-2005, 11:29 AM
No further action is necessary Shuan. The players have already been inconvienced by this enough.

Well that's hardly the bloody point, is it?

AR

Garvinator
29-07-2005, 12:13 PM
No further action is necessary Shuan. The players have already been inconvienced by this enough.
How are the players inconvienced in the first place? They are the ones that didnt want to play, but still wanted to get all the goodies from pre arranged draws.

Garvinator
29-07-2005, 12:49 PM
From seeing the results, if all the non played games are regarded as double forfeits, what is the final table look like? Does making zhao's three games forfeits mean that the winner of the St George Club Championship change, or is there at least a tie for the title now?

Or maybe it will only be for rating reports that the games will be declared as forfeits, which helps the players in question by saving rating points, but doesnt effect in any way. There are only two ways the players involved are going to be really affected:

1) Change the St George Club Championship TOURNAMENT cross table to double forfeits and re distribute prizes, placings accordingly.
2) Dont invite the players back next year.

Paul S
30-07-2005, 06:37 PM
From seeing the results, if all the non played games are regarded as double forfeits, what is the final table look like? Does making zhao's three games forfeits mean that the winner of the St George Club Championship change, or is there at least a tie for the title now?

Zhao is still the winner. Removing his (and his opponents) "draws" puts him on 6 points, still enough to win.


Or maybe it will only be for rating reports that the games will be declared as forfeits, which helps the players in question by saving rating points, but doesnt effect in any way. There are only two ways the players involved are going to be really affected:

1) Change the St George Club Championship TOURNAMENT cross table to double forfeits and re distribute prizes, placings accordingly.
2) Dont invite the players back next year.

St George Organiser Charles Zworestine has spoken to the players involved and (as per The Wise Man's post) the St George Club has taken appropriate action. As the St George Treasurer I was at Wednesday's committee meeting and this matter was discussed extensively. I feel comfortable with the committee's decisions on this matter and as far as I am concerned the matter is closed.

One point worth mentioning. Like most people I agree that pre-arranged draws are not good for chess and should not occur. However, we all know that (particularly at the top boards during the latter stages of a tournament) during some matches players will make several half-hearted moves and agree to a draw after about 10 moves. I see no real difference between this sort of draw and a pre-arranged telephone draw (as per with Zhao).

Garvinator
30-07-2005, 07:35 PM
However, we all know that (particularly at the top boards during the latter stages of a tournament) during some matches players will make several half-hearted moves and agree to a draw after about 10 moves. I see no real difference between this sort of draw and a pre-arranged telephone draw (as per with Zhao).
if this is their attitude, which by their actions it clearly is, dont invite them back or dont allow them to play next year. Give the spots in the top division to players who actually want to play and will play all their games and give it a full effort for every game.

I am still trying to work out why NOBODY said NO to the players.
Yes, the players might have turned up and played 10 moves and agreed a draw, but at least they turned up. This increases the chances that the players in question will actually play a full game by taking the attitude of- oh well i am here now, i might as well play a full game.

I am surprised that the committee of St George arent more dismayed at this state of affairs. The players in question are able to complete their commitments in other tournaments, so clearly they have just thought, oh its only St George Club Championships, I can just do what I like and agree draws by telephone.

Rincewind
30-07-2005, 07:45 PM
I suspect that (although on a much smaller scale) it happens much more than most people here are letting on.

In club events it is common practice for players to defer the play of their game if one or both players cannot make the club venue on the normal night. If it become difficult for one or both players to pla the game, particluarly if the event is using swiss pairings then I think it would be often suggested that they agree to a draw without ever meeting to play. Be interesting to know the numbers.

I know draws have been offered to me on more than one occasion in the last year.

antichrist
30-07-2005, 08:15 PM
Zhao is still the winner. Removing his (and his opponents) "draws" puts him on 6 points, still enough to win.



St George Organiser Charles Zworestine has spoken to the players involved and (as per The Wise Man's post) the St George Club has taken appropriate action. As the St George Treasurer I was at Wednesday's committee meeting and this matter was discussed extensively. I feel comfortable with the committee's decisions on this matter and as far as I am concerned the matter is closed.

One point worth mentioning. Like most people I agree that pre-arranged draws are not good for chess and should not occur. However, we all know that (particularly at the top boards during the latter stages of a tournament) during some matches players will make several half-hearted moves and agree to a draw after about 10 moves. I see no real difference between this sort of draw and a pre-arranged telephone draw (as per with Zhao).

Paul, as we have been notified by Peter P, that FIDE rules state that the games have to be played at the venue and time allocated, presumably the DOP/Arbiter was present expecting to arbiter, so also presumably he knew that the games were not being played. Which means that should not have went into his report. As Peter P's post was already up before the meeting was this rule considered? Also the arbiter being an IA I am sure he would have been familiar with this rule.

From a distance it does not look good. If there are answers let us have them otherwise our suspicious minds will work overtime.

Was originally only 3 results amended but more will have to be?

Bill Gletsos
31-07-2005, 12:41 AM
The amended crosstable is as follows:


No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Zhao, Zong-Yuan NSW 2420 6 * 1 - - 1 - 1 1 1 1
2 Koshnitsky, Ngan NSW 2216 5.5 0 * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 0 1
3 Rose, Adrian P NSW 2061 5 - ½ * ½ ½ 1 1 1 ½ -
4 Moylan, Laura A NSW 1985 5 - ½ ½ * 0 ½ 1 1 ½ 1
5 Zvedeniouk, Ilia NSW 1978 4.5 0 0 ½ 1 * 0 1 ½ 1 ½
6 Kabir, Ruhul NSW 2211 4 - ½ 0 ½ 1 * 0 0 1 1
7 Reitmans, Quentin NSW 2027 3.5 0 0 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 ½
8 Zirdum, Ivan NSW 2019 3.5 0 0 0 0 ½ 1 0 * 1 1
9 Bird, Andrew NSW 2176 2 0 1 ½ ½ 0 0 0 0 * 0
10 Camer, Angelito NSW 2135 2 0 0 - 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 1 *
I have asked Peter Parr to question his sources and ask them to explicitly name the players involved in any games that they claim were not actually played other than those shown in the above crosstable.

Paul S
31-07-2005, 02:14 AM
I suspect that (although on a much smaller scale) it happens much more than most people here are letting on.

In club events it is common practice for players to defer the play of their game if one or both players cannot make the club venue on the normal night. If it become difficult for one or both players to pla the game, particluarly if the event is using swiss pairings then I think it would be often suggested that they agree to a draw without ever meeting to play. Be interesting to know the numbers.

I know draws have been offered to me on more than one occasion in the last year.

I agree with what Barry says. I have no doubt that it happens a lot more often than what people think. While I don't see anything corrupt about it (seeing as both players agree to it), it is something that should NOT be happening as it is "bad form" and has some distorting effect on the ratings.

I will admit to having "played" one "telephone draw" during my chess career. It was 3 years ago (under circumstances similar to what Barry describes) in the 2002 Ryde-Eastwood Club Championships. Its not something I was pleased about having happened, but it seemed the most expedient and practical thing to do at the time. In my case I turned up on the scheduled (Wednesday) night only to find my opponent was not there. Someone at the club informed me that my opponent often did not play his matches on the scheduled Wednesday night due to work commitments and that this was the case with my match (apparently my opponent had informed the Ryde-Eastwood chess club that he could not make it that night, but for whatever reason this information was not passed on to me). My opponent rang me the next day apologising/explaining and asked if we could reschedule our game. I was under the impression that we had agreed to reschedule our game on a Saturday afternoon at the Leagues club, but when I arrived my opponent was not there. So, I rang him to find out what happened and he claimed that I was mistaken and suggested we reschedule for Tuesday night. As you can imagine, by this stage I had had enough and told him I was not interested as I had already turned up twice to Ryde-Eastwood expecting to get a game against him. I suggested that we either call it a draw or we both ring the arbiter (Bill Gletsos) and get him to make a decision based on the two versions of events. My opponent agreed to call it a draw, so I rang Bill the next day and told him "the result was a draw" (without specifying whether we had played or not). As I say, its not something I felt good about, but at the time it seemed to be the solution causing the least amount of hassle.

Paul S
31-07-2005, 02:40 AM
if this is their attitude, which by their actions it clearly is, dont invite them back or dont allow them to play next year. Give the spots in the top division to players who actually want to play and will play all their games and give it a full effort for every game.

Charles has spoken to the players involved, and Mr Zhao is most apologetic about the whole thing. Lets understand that while agreed draws (whether by telephone or other means) are inappropriate and should not happen, there is no corruption involved (and both players agreed to it).


I am still trying to work out why NOBODY said NO to the players.

In a large competition (50+ players) that runs over several weeks duration, some games are (like Barry says) not played at the venue on the scheduled night due to one or both players being unavailable (eg I played one of my games at my opponent's house as he had other commitments on the Tuesday night I was scheduled to play him). So how would the arbiter know at the time whether these games were real draws or "telephone draws" if the games in question were not played on the Tuesday night at St George Leagues Club?


Yes, the players might have turned up and played 10 moves and agreed a draw, but at least they turned up. This increases the chances that the players in question will actually play a full game by taking the attitude of- oh well i am here now, i might as well play a full game.


An agreed draw after 10 or so moves is only marginally morally more acceptable than a "telephone draw". The "telephone draw" has the advantage for the players of not having to travel to the venue.


I am surprised that the committee of St George arent more dismayed at this state of affairs. The players in question are able to complete their commitments in other tournaments, so clearly they have just thought, oh its only St George Club Championships, I can just do what I like and agree draws by telephone.

I think it is possible that the players involved may have agreed to telephone draws in other tournaments in the past.

Garvin, you should spend your time fixing up the 2005 Grand Prix (eg it is almost August and I have yet to see any progess results of the 2005 GP) rather than worry about what the St George chess club does.

WhiteElephant
31-07-2005, 02:47 AM
I reckon that as long as draws by mutual agreement are legal in chess, who cares whether they are decided over the board or over the phone. What a joke to force players to sit down, play a few random moves, then agree to a draw.

If draws by mutual agreement are seen as undesirable for chess - then they can be banned or discouraged in various ways. But so long as they are legal, to specify WHEN, WHERE and HOW they are to be made seems pointless and insulting the intelligence of the players.

shaun
31-07-2005, 07:18 AM
Someone from St George please correct me if I am wrong but the problem in this event was not the "telephone" draws, but how the games were reported to the DOP ie the claim that the draws had been played when they had not.
If the tournament conditions allow games to be agreed drawn without play (not a desirable condition btw), then such games should be clearly recorded as such on the crosstable (and obviously for rating purposes).

BTW In the 2005 Belconnen Premier, Ian Rout was unable to arrange a deferred game against his opponent and assuming responsibility for the problem, simply conceded the forfeit.

antichrist
31-07-2005, 08:19 AM
..............
Players who enter FIDE rated events are required to play their games at the venue and times appointed for the tournament..

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

Referring back to my earlier post and to Peter Parr's post above you have all ignored, what seems to me, the crucial point.

IT IS BREAKING FIDE RULES IF THE GAMES ARE NOT PLAYED AT THE VENUE AT THE APPOINTED TIME FOR THE TOURNAMENT

So it is the reporting of the games which could be the problem. Again, was this issue faced at the meeting?

arosar
31-07-2005, 08:43 AM
I reckon that as long as draws by mutual agreement are legal in chess, who cares whether they are decided over the board or over the phone. What a joke to force players to sit down, play a few random moves, then agree to a draw.

The same point was made to me by a mate of mine. This sounds almost persuasive, but the problem is that it's against the rules (see 5.2.c). And what particularly irks me is that it's not really in the spirit of contest. Is it? I realise also that sometimes, one or both players, may become unavailable. In that case, one or both players should simply be forfeited. In the St George fiasco, it is known that one player could no longer commit to the remainder of the tournament. Why should he have the luxury of a "draw" by phone? Imagine if the comp was a close contest and one or two other players were in the running for first. It'd be totally unfair. Choosing to play in a tournament is making a commitment. Once you're out - you're out.

AR

arosar
31-07-2005, 08:47 AM
IT IS BREAKING FIDE RULES IF THE GAMES ARE NOT PLAYED AT THE VENUE AT THE APPOINTED TIME FOR THE TOURNAMENT

You must be referring to the FIDE Tournament Rules, under section "III The Play". Point 1 reads: "All games must be played in the tournament area at the times specified in advance by the organisers."

But now tell me first: why is this relevant exactly? Please inform the house where some of these games were played.

AR

ursogr8
31-07-2005, 09:36 AM
<snip>

BTW In the 2005 Belconnen Premier, Ian Rout was unable to arrange a deferred game against his opponent and assuming responsibility for the problem, simply conceded the forfeit. :clap: :clap:

This is our local guideline too. If you (player A) want to postpone then we tell you who your opponent is; if a convenient time can be found then the game proceeds; else, a FORFEIT by the player A.

starter

antichrist
31-07-2005, 09:40 AM
You must be referring to the FIDE Tournament Rules, under section "III The Play". Point 1 reads: "All games must be played in the tournament area at the times specified in advance by the organisers."

But now tell me first: why is this relevant exactly? Please inform the house where some of these games were played.

AR

At least the three games, I think has now been were established, were not played, so the issue is not where were they played.

The issue is the rules state they must be played, according to Peter Parr and yourself, at a defined place and time with arbiter present - presumably. And we presume the arbiter knows and remembers the rules - only presuming.

And now you Pinoy, put two and two together, as I have been of warned of certain things by FIDE.

Brian_Jones
31-07-2005, 09:40 AM
Looking at the latest crosstable above, it appears to me that Adrian Rose and Laura Moylan could have caught Zong-Yuan Zhao if they had won their outstanding games. So why weren't the games played? Maybe the games should be rescheduled even now?

antichrist
31-07-2005, 11:13 AM
Kegless from Shoutbox 29/7
Actually, as I have only just found out, many people knew more than they were saying. Imagine how surprised they must have been when it was you (A/C) who picked up the ball. Instead of the subtle hints they originally had in mind, they had to bludgeon you over the head with facts.

Bill Gletsos
31-07-2005, 11:48 AM
You must be referring to the FIDE Tournament Rules, under section "III The Play". Point 1 reads: "All games must be played in the tournament area at the times specified in advance by the organisers."According to the way I read the FIDE Handbook the critical wording is at the start of the section on the FIDE Tournament Rules which states: "The event shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess. The FIDE Tournament Rules shall be used in conjunction with the Laws of Chess in no way contradict them. They are applicable to all official FIDE competitions. It is recommended they also be applied to all FIDE rated tournaments, if applicable."

It is a requirment for FIDE Tiles/norms that the event be played under the FIDE Tournament Rules as specified in "International Title Regulations (Qualification Commission)" of the FIDE Handbook.
However for events being submitted soley for the purpose of FIDE Rating the FIDE Tournament rules are not mandatory and are just recommendations.

The only requirements an event needs to meet to be FIDE rated are set out in the FIDE Handbook under the section "FIDE Rating Regulations (Qualification Commission)".

As such although it may well be desireable there is no requirement for the St. George Championship to meet the FIDE Tournament Rules requirements.

Paul S
31-07-2005, 11:54 AM
Someone from St George please correct me if I am wrong but the problem in this event was not the "telephone" draws, but how the games were reported to the DOP ie the claim that the draws had been played when they had not.

You would need to ask Charles Zworestine as to precisely what he was told by the players. It seems to me that he was told something like "the result(s) was a draw" (without the players specifying to him whether it was a telephone draw or a played draw - much like I did with Bill 3 years ago - refer post #190 in this thread).


If the tournament conditions allow games to be agreed drawn without play (not a desirable condition btw), then such games should be clearly recorded as such on the crosstable (and obviously for rating purposes).

I agree.


BTW In the 2005 Belconnen Premier, Ian Rout was unable to arrange a deferred game against his opponent and assuming responsibility for the problem, simply conceded the forfeit.

Ian Rout did the correct thing.

Bill Gletsos
31-07-2005, 11:55 AM
An agreed draw after 10 or so moves is only marginally morally more acceptable than a "telephone draw". The "telephone draw" has the advantage for the players of not having to travel to the venue.That is immaterial. Agreed draws after 10 moves or so are legal under the Laws of Chess. Zero move draws are not.

antichrist
31-07-2005, 12:05 PM
According to the way I read the FIDE Handbook the critical wording is at the start of the section on the FIDE Tournament Rules which states: "The event shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess. The FIDE Tournament Rules shall be used in conjunction with the Laws of Chess in no way contradict them. They are applicable to all official FIDE competitions. It is recommended they also be applied to all FIDE rated tournaments, if applicable."

It is a requirment for FIDE Tiles/norms that the event be played under the FIDE Tournament Rules as specified in "International Title Regulations (Qualification Commission)" of the FIDE Handbook.
However for events being submitted soley for the purpose of FIDE Rating the FIDE Tournament rules are not mandatory and are just recommendations.

The only requirements an event needs to meet to be FIDE rated are set out in the FIDE Handbook under the section "FIDE Rating Regulations (Qualification Commission)".

As such although it may well be desireable there is no requirement for the St. George Championship to meet the FIDE Tournament Rules requirements.

Bill, according to what you have stated here, does the arbiter need to be in attendance whilst the game is being played? And must the game be played at the venue and time as originally stated? Must scoresheets be handed in or shown to the arbiter?

antichrist
31-07-2005, 03:35 PM
Jase, you are also an arbiter, can you answer the questions asked in previous post - Bill has gone to sleep at the wheel.

a) according to what Bill has stated 2 posts up, does the arbiter need to be in attendance whilst the game is being played?

b) And must the game be played at the venue and time as originally stated?

c) Must scoresheets be handed in or shown to the arbiter?

WhiteElephant
31-07-2005, 03:45 PM
The same point was made to me by a mate of mine. This sounds almost persuasive, but the problem is that it's against the rules (see 5.2.c). And what particularly irks me is that it's not really in the spirit of contest. Is it? I realise also that sometimes, one or both players, may become unavailable. In that case, one or both players should simply be forfeited. In the St George fiasco, it is known that one player could no longer commit to the remainder of the tournament. Why should he have the luxury of a "draw" by phone? Imagine if the comp was a close contest and one or two other players were in the running for first. It'd be totally unfair. Choosing to play in a tournament is making a commitment. Once you're out - you're out.

AR

Yes, the mutual agreement rule is anti-competitive and is a problem for chess as a spectator sport. No one wants to watch draw after draw from Kramnik and Leko, and I am sure it negatively affects sponsorship as well. It is good to see some tournaments making an effort to stop such draws, such as no agreed draws before move 30 or 40, or only permitting draw offers through the arbiter.

However, in club games, so long as draw offers are permitted and both players are willing, I don't see why they can't be agreed in any manner or place the players see fit. If someone is unavailable for the rest of the tournament and tries to agree to a phone draw, their opponent can simply decline.

WhiteElephant
31-07-2005, 03:47 PM
Jase, you are also an arbiter, can you answer the questions asked in previous post - Bill has gone to sleep at the wheel.

a) according to what Bill has stated 2 posts up, does the arbiter need to be in attendance whilst the game is being played?

b) And must the game be played at the venue and time as originally stated?

c) Must scoresheets be handed in or shown to the arbiter?

This would be interesting to know. I don't play regularly at a club these days, but when I used to play at Waverley, I played several games at my or my opponent's place, and other club members used to do it as well.

antichrist
31-07-2005, 04:02 PM
This would be interesting to know. I don't play regularly at a club these days, but when I used to play at Waverley, I played several games at my or my opponent's place, and other club members used to do it as well.

My questions are specifically subject to Bill's interpretations in post 201 concerning FIDE-rated games.

Bill Gletsos
31-07-2005, 04:29 PM
Bill, according to what you have stated here, does the arbiter need to be in attendance whilst the game is being played?Although desireable it is apparent the rules allow for the situation that an arbiter is not present. e.g Article D

And must the game be played at the venue and time as originally stated?No. That is only relevant for events that are run under the FIDE Tournament Rules.
Virtually all events run in Australia are not subject to those rules unless the event allows FIDE Titles/norms to be awarded. e.g. Oceania Zonal.
Virtually all club events would not be subject to those rules even those that are FIDE rated.

Must scoresheets be handed in or shown to the arbiter?Artilce 8.2 states "The scoresheet shall be visible to the arbiter throughout the game." however clearly if the arbiter is at the other end of the room he can obviously not see it. This would be no different to a situation where no arbiter is present.

Article 8.3 states: "The scoresheets are the property of the organisers of the event." and Article 8.7 states "At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both scoresheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise."

Neither indicate that they must be presented to the arbiter, although it could be reasonably expected that the arbiter could obtain them if he so requested.

antichrist
31-07-2005, 04:58 PM
So in theory and practise A/C can defeat Kasparov in a FIDE-rated game without anyone seeing the scoresheets or the game? (assume it is I have drawn him in round 1 or there have been many forfeits)

I am finding it a bit far-fetched that a FIDE-rate game can take place without an arbiter and sighted score-sheet

ursogr8
31-07-2005, 08:59 PM
<snip>Virtually all events run in Australia are not subject to those rules unless the event allows FIDE Titles/norms to be awarded. e.g. Oceania Zonal.
Virtually all club events would not be subject to those rules even those that are FIDE rated.

<snip>.

Bill

Could you expand on this because we have become interested locally in this point.
We now see that we have been remiss (in the past) in overlooking the rule, for a FIDE event, for playing postponed games at the venue. We genuinely like to be law-abiding.


starter

Bill Gletsos
31-07-2005, 09:38 PM
Bill

Could you expand on this because we have become interested locally in this point.
We now see that we have been remiss (in the past) in overlooking the rule, for a FIDE event, for playing postponed games at the venue. We genuinely like to be law-abiding.The FIDE Handbook section C06 on the FIDE Tournament Rules says "The event shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess. The FIDE Tournament Rules shall be used in conjunction with the Laws of Chess in no way contradict them. They are applicable to all official FIDE competitions. It is recommended they also be applied to all FIDE rated tournaments, if applicable."

Playing the games at the venue is only mentioned in the FIDE Tournament Rules C06 03.1 not the FIDE Rating Regulations B02. The FIDE Title/norm events B01 01.11 states they are governed by the FIDE Tournament Rules.

This wording of C06 would indicate there is a difference between a FIDE rated event and an official FIDE Competition. Official FIDE events would appear to be FIDE events such as Zonals and Title/norm events not just run of the mill events run for FIDE rating.

antichrist
01-08-2005, 10:44 PM
Bill, I thought I read from you somewhere (but can't find) that the matter would be discussed at the next NSWCA council meeting.

Was the matter discussed last Thursday? And if not why not? Were the people concerned called in and questioned?

Bill Gletsos
01-08-2005, 11:01 PM
Bill, I thought I read from you somewhere (but can't find) that the matter would be discussed at the next NSWCA council meeting.

Was the matter discussed last Thursday?Yes.

Were the people concerned called in and questioned?No.

antichrist
01-08-2005, 11:11 PM
I can go on asking dozens of questions until I receive a positive answer but why waste your and my time, it is clear that myself and many other people would be interested in what occurred.

So can you please let inform if any motions were proposed, passed etc.? And any other important details.

Bill Gletsos
01-08-2005, 11:17 PM
I can go on asking dozens of questions until I receive a positive answer but why waste your and my time, it is clear that myself and many other people would be interested in what occurred.You wont be wasting my time as I wont be answering them.


So can you please let inform if any motions were proposed, passed etc.? And any other important details.All I'm prepared to say is that the matter was discussed by the Council.

antichrist
01-08-2005, 11:21 PM
You wont be wasting my time as I wont be answering them.

All I'm prepared to say is that the matter was discussed by the Council.

Surely paid up members have a right to be informed of council business of matters of interest and importance, even if such info is provided more privately than the BB.

This is the transparency issue I have brought up many times before re NSWCA council meetings.

Bill Gletsos
01-08-2005, 11:28 PM
Surely paid up members have a right to be informed of council business of matters of interest and importance, even if such info is provided more privately than the BB.

This is the transparency issue I have brought up many times before re NSWCA council meetings.You have the right as per the constitution to contact the Secretary and view the minutes. The minutes for that meeting have however not yet been produced.

ursogr8
03-08-2005, 08:28 PM
Surely paid up members have a right to be informed of council business of matters of interest and importance, even if such info is provided more privately than the BB.

This is the transparency issue I have brought up many times before re NSWCA council meetings.

a/c

Can we anticipate that you will seek access to these minutes when they are available? We are all interested, but the minutes are unlikely to find their way to Mexico.

tks
starter

antichrist
05-08-2005, 02:39 AM
a/c

Can we anticipate that you will seek access to these minutes when they are available? We are all interested, but the minutes are unlikely to find their way to Mexico.

tks
starter

Thy will be done in Heaven, as it is done on Earth.

antichrist
05-08-2005, 11:24 AM
Frankly speaking, the action taken, that I have heard of so far, does not seem appropriate, but I don't want to air it in public.

I will sit on my hands and hold out in hope on what the NSWCA has done.

Bill Gletsos
06-08-2005, 04:44 PM
The amended crosstable is as follows:


No Name Feder Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Zhao, Zong-Yuan NSW 2420 6 * 1 - - 1 - 1 1 1 1
2 Koshnitsky, Ngan NSW 2216 5.5 0 * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 0 1
3 Rose, Adrian P NSW 2061 5 - ½ * ½ ½ 1 1 1 ½ -
4 Moylan, Laura A NSW 1985 5 - ½ ½ * 0 ½ 1 1 ½ 1
5 Zvedeniouk, Ilia NSW 1978 4.5 0 0 ½ 1 * 0 1 ½ 1 ½
6 Kabir, Ruhul NSW 2211 4 - ½ 0 ½ 1 * 0 0 1 1
7 Reitmans, Quentin NSW 2027 3.5 0 0 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 ½
8 Zirdum, Ivan NSW 2019 3.5 0 0 0 0 ½ 1 0 * 1 1
9 Bird, Andrew NSW 2176 2 0 1 ½ ½ 0 0 0 0 * 0
10 Camer, Angelito NSW 2135 2 0 0 - 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 1 *
I have asked Peter Parr to question his sources and ask them to explicitly name the players involved in any games that they claim were not actually played other than those shown in the above crosstable.When I spoke to Peter yesterday he was unable to provide any evidence to support speculation that any other games were unplayed and scored as draws.
As such the above crosstable represents what I will be using to rerun the St. George Championship.

The_Wise_Man
06-08-2005, 05:53 PM
It is the understanding of the St George Leagues Club Committee that these are all the games that were unplayed.

Whilst there are false suggestions from people outside the club that there are more games that were unplayed. This is not the case.

There is no evidence to suggest that any other games were not played.

Bill, you can process the rating and we can move on...

Wise

antichrist
06-08-2005, 08:45 PM
It is the understanding of the St George Leagues Club Committee that these are all the games that were unplayed.

Whilst there are false suggestions from people outside the club that there are more games that were unplayed. This is not the case.

There is no evidence to suggest that any other games were not played.

Bill, you can process the rating and we can move on...

Wise

Almost...

I have my reservations which may be exposed after I see the NSWCA council minutes.

antichrist
07-08-2005, 10:58 AM
When I spoke to Peter yesterday he was unable to provide any evidence to support speculation that any other games were unplayed and scored as draws.
As such the above crosstable represents what I will be using to rerun the St. George Championship.

Bill, this should have been presesnted about two days after this issue was first raised, instead of all that bulldust you were carrying on with for weeks.

If that had been done this issue would have dead and buried ages ago. But the anger that has arisen by it's protractedness has made people look at the finer points and wider implications. That is the part that I regret - but that is the fault of the people at the top.

peter_parr
15-08-2005, 03:11 PM
15 August 2005 – During the last 10 days I have spoken to the St. George Leagues Club Chess Club President (by phone) and to the NSWCA President who made his regular visit to my shop in the Sydney CBD.

I advised both of the following..

1. The NSWCA should write a letter to the arbiter asking why the FIDE rated event was submitted for FIDE rating and ACF rating with incorrect results.
2. Why did the arbiter several months later re-submit the reports for FIDE and ACF rating with amended results which were also incorrect.
3. It has so far been confirmed by the arbiter that 4 games had been submitted with incorrect results and “to the best of his knowledge the other games were all played”.
4. The NSWCA must ensure the other games were all played. In the circumstances I believe the NSWCA must confirm whether the games not played at the venue under the supervision of the arbiter were actually played obtaining copies of the score sheets of these games. “to the best of my knowledge” is not sufficient.
5. When the NSWCA has completed its investigation of the results of the event the new table should be submitted to FIDE.

I have known the arbiter since he first visited my Chess Centre of NSW in the heart of the Sydney CBD (in Sussex St) as a child. In recent years he has done an enormous amount of voluntary work in Junior chess, club chess state and National level chess and is to be very highly congratulated for all his work when the vast majority of chess players do virtually no work for chess.

However FIDE at its Presidential Board Meeting in Doha, Qatar in May 2005 unanimously agreed that “there would be severe punishments for players, arbiters, officials, organisers and federations in proven cases of malpractice, up to a ban for life.

This is all being discussed again this week at the FIDE Congress in Dresden, Germany.

Sa far the NSWCA and ACF appear not to have even written any letter to the club or arbiter when a false report is submitted and a second report is also false.

It is NOT my responsibility to speculate what other games may or may not have been played (as suggested by the NSWCA President in post 222 of 6 August).

FIDE could well ask NSWCA and ACF what action have you taken about the false reports? Why did the arbiter arrange the results of games with the players with the games not being played but submitted for ratings?

The NSWCA needs to be able to advise FIDE that it has taken action by letters etc and written confirmation from the arbiter that it will never happen again.

NSWCA should also write to North Sydney Leagues Club Chess Club.

The FIDE rated club championship was scheduled to be held from 8th February 2005 to 19th April 2005.

The results were submitted to FIDE on 23rd July 2005 but the event has in fact not yet finished.

The duration of a FIDE event must be not greater then 90 days yet this FIDE event in NSW is incomplete after more then 180 days.
Why is NSW breaking FIDE rules again?

Why does the NSWCA Council go to such extra-ordinary lengths to take action against Matthew Sweeney – who posts messages on his own private bulletin board – nothing to do the NSWCA yet does nothing when the game is brought into disrepute by the serious matter of false results being sent to FIDE.

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

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2005, 07:55 PM
It would appear Peter Parr fails to appreciate that the St. George Club Championship and the North Sydney Club Championship are not NSWCA events and have nothing to do with the NSWCA.

They are individual club events that those clubs wish to have FIDE rated. It is not the NSWCA's responsability to ensure these events conform to FIDE regulations. It is the responsability of the ACF FIDE ratings Officer to whom the events are submitted for FIDE rating.

As for the St. George event because it was submitted to NSW for ACF rating, the NSWCA has sent a letter to the St. George Chess club informing them that that the correct procedure is to be carried out in the future and that there be no re-occurrence of recording unplayed games as drawn games.

The arbiter in his last email on the subject has informed me as ACF Ratings Officer and Gary Bakker as ACF FIDE Ratings Offcier that the "the only unplayed games are Zhao-Moylan, Zhao-Kabir, Zhao-Rose and Camer-Rose".

With regards the St. George Club Championship Peter says:
"It is NOT my responsibility to speculate what other games may or may not have been played (as suggested by the NSWCA President in post 222 of 6 August)."

Well when I have been in his shop Peter was the one speculating and making claims of specific players supposedly not playing games.

The arbiter and the club say that all the unplayed games have been reported.

If Peter wishes to continue to claim that more than the 4 games mentioned above were not played then let him come out and make that claim directly by naming the players involved.

If he still cannot or will not do that then end of story.

arosar
15-08-2005, 08:34 PM
It would appear Peter Parr fails to appreciate that the St. George Club Championship and the North Sydney Club Championship are not NSWCA events and have nothing to do with the NSWCA.

They are individual club events that those clubs wish to have FIDE rated. It is not the NSWCA's responsability to ensure these events conform to FIDE regulations. It is the responsability of the ACF FIDE ratings Officer to whom the events are submitted for FIDE rating.

I'm going to quote this just so you can go and delete it.

AR

PHAT
15-08-2005, 09:03 PM
It would appear Peter Parr fails to appreciate that the St. George Club Championship and the North Sydney Club Championship are not NSWCA events and have nothing to do with the NSWCA.

2. OBJECTS [of the NSWCA]

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales.


They are individual club events that those clubs wish to have FIDE rated. It is not the NSWCA's responsability to ensure these events conform to FIDE regulations.

Again
2. OBJECTS [of the NSWCA]

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales.


Well when I have been in his shop Peter was the one speculating and making claims of specific players supposedly not playing games. ... If Peter wishes to continue to claim that more than the 4 games mentioned above were not played then let him come out and make that claim directly by naming the players involved.

If he still cannot or will not do that then end of story.

Peter Parr was then, speaking to you, privately. He apparently did name names to you, privately. Just perhaps, you should follow it up, privately.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2005, 09:18 PM
2. OBJECTS [of the NSWCA]

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales.

Again
2. OBJECTS [of the NSWCA]

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales.Nice selective quoting of the Constitution to change the meaning. You left out the word by at the end of that.

It actually says:

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales by: -
a. encouraging the teaching and playing of chess in schools and amongst juniors and by promoting matches between schools,
b. promoting and conducting chess matches, competitions, and tournaments,
c. awarding prizes, titles, and awards,

d. affiliating with the Australian Chess Federation and, as is necessary,
e. affiliating or co-operating with other chess, sporting, or social organizations, whether inside or outside New South Wales,

f. adopting or altering rules of play,
g. providing means for hearing and determining disputes, and by taking actions it deems necessary to promote the aforesaid.


Peter Parr was then, speaking to you, privately. He apparently did name names to you, privately. Just perhaps, you should follow it up, privately.He is publically making accustions. Let him name the players concerned publically.

PHAT
15-08-2005, 09:26 PM
Nice selective quoting of the Constitution to change the meaning. You left out the word by at the end of that.

It actually says:
To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales by: -
a. encouraging the teaching and playing of chess in schools and amongst juniors and by promoting matches between schools,
b. promoting and conducting chess matches, competitions, and tournaments,
c. awarding prizes, titles, and awards,

d. affiliating with the Australian Chess Federation and, as is necessary,
e. affiliating or co-operating with other chess, sporting, or social organizations, whether inside or outside New South Wales,

f. adopting or altering rules of play,
g. providing means for hearing and determining disputes, and by taking actions it deems necessary to promote the aforesaid.




I might have used just the heading for brevity, but at least I did not deliberately doctor out the most important clause.


2g. taking actions it deems necessary to promote the aforesaid.

Readers can check the NSWCA Constitution (http://www.nswca.org.au/ConstNSWCA.htm) here.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2005, 09:29 PM
I might have used just the heading for brevity, but at least I did not deliberately doctor out the most important clause.


2g. taking actions it deems necessary to promote the aforesaid.Thewre is nothing doctored out at all and you can see that the sentence is in my quote. It is just the formatting that is messed up with the section lettering as they were not copied as part of the cut & paste.

The correct lettering is:

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales by: -
a. encouraging the teaching and playing of chess in schools and amongst juniors and by promoting matches between schools,
b. promoting and conducting chess matches, competitions, and tournaments,
c. awarding prizes, titles, and awards,

d. affiliating with the Australian Chess Federation and, as is necessary, affiliating or co-operating with other chess, sporting, or social organizations, whether inside or outside New South Wales,

e. adopting or altering rules of play,
f. providing means for hearing and determining disputes, and by
g. taking actions it deems necessary to promote the aforesaid.

arosar
15-08-2005, 09:54 PM
FMD! Bloody Matty gazzumped me. Bastard.

Anyway, the Constitution reads (again!): "To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales" by "affiliating with the Australian Chess Federation and, as is necessary, affiliating or co-operating with other chess, sporting, or social organizations, whether inside or outside New South Wales."

And one of those other chess organisations is, of course, FIDE.

To now say, "It is not the NSWCA's responsability to ensure these events conform to FIDE regulations. It is the responsability of the ACF FIDE ratings Officer to whom the events are submitted for FIDE rating" is perhaps the greatest act of pilacy (see, I just invented this word, meaning "to wash ones hands") since a South Australian big wig sent off the CDs to Mexican big wig.

Mr Gletsos cares enough about FIDE's Laws of Chess to actually catalogue the July 1 changes - but he apparently turns a blind eye to FIDE's own rules on rated events!

Here's a familiar word: HYPOCRISY!

Bill, you are wrong on this issue. Stop playing the bully-boy bureaucrat.

AR

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2005, 11:39 PM
FMD! Bloody Matty gazzumped me. Bastard.

Anyway, the Constitution reads (again!): "To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales" by "affiliating with the Australian Chess Federation and, as is necessary, affiliating or co-operating with other chess, sporting, or social organizations, whether inside or outside New South Wales."

And one of those other chess organisations is, of course, FIDE.

To now say, "It is not the NSWCA's responsability to ensure these events conform to FIDE regulations. It is the responsability of the ACF FIDE ratings Officer to whom the events are submitted for FIDE rating" is perhaps the greatest act of pilacy (see, I just invented this word, meaning "to wash ones hands") since a South Australian big wig sent off the CDs to Mexican big wig.The NSWCA isnt affiliated with FIDE. In fact FIDE could care less about the NSWCA, CV or any other State Association for that matter.

FIDE only recognises National Federations.

Now I understand the Phillipines has had some problems in the past deciding exactly who their National Federation is and perhaps that is why you are confused but here in Australia it is the ACF and the FIDE rating of events is the ACF FIDE Rating Officers responsability.

In fact Parr in post #141 was questioning the score table posted by Gary in post #131. Therefore if he has an issue with the FIDE rating of the event he should take it up with Gary, not the NSWCA.

PHAT
16-08-2005, 12:07 AM
The NSWCA isnt affiliated with FIDE. In fact FIDE could care less about the NSWCA, CV or any other State Association for that matter.

So what? This fiasco is:
In NSW
With NSW players
Of a NSW club and
A NSW DOP

Surely the NSWCA is not going to simply say, "Not our problem."

Or is it a case of, as Baroness Marget Thatcher says, "Never say sorry, never explain."
[/QUOTE]

Bill Gletsos
16-08-2005, 12:36 AM
So what? This fiasco is:
In NSW
With NSW players
Of a NSW club and
A NSW DOP

Surely the NSWCA is not going to simply say, "Not our problem."

Or is it a case of, as Baroness Marget Thatcher says, "Never say sorry, never explain."My response is in post #227.

arosar
16-08-2005, 06:43 AM
My response is in post #227.

Here you go again with your hocus-pocus. Never a direct answer. Fact is, these questionables occurred in your jurisdiction. As you are the governing body in NSW, it is your duty to do something.

Your responses are pathetic. You're basically resigning to your impotence.

AR

PHAT
16-08-2005, 07:21 AM
Your [Bill] responses are pathetic. You're basically resigning to your impotence.

That too!?!? :lol:

antichrist
16-08-2005, 09:33 AM
My response is in post #227.

Bill, I am on someone' else computer and can't go back and research but I will rely on my memory to make a point.

You have told me earlier that NSWCA did discuss the St George fiasco at it's last meeting but you did not call in the "defendents" - what sort of justice was this - every one deserves their "day in court".

When I queried what action was taken you informed me that I would have to look at the Council's minutes. Fair enough maybe.

But then later on you disclose an element of Council's meeting by saying that the DOP was sent a letter not to repeat again or something to that effect (quickly checking I could not find the post).

As it is very difficult for me to physically attend to read Council's minutes, and as I am a paid up member as far as I know, could you divulge if any other action was taken re this affair?

If you do not I may have to agree with AR and change your name to "Stonewall Gletsos".

I am not at my own computer to check if I have yet received a reply from the secretary as any provision for me being informed of Council's minutes.

If this whole affair is not NSWCA's because it is FIDE and a St George affair, then why did NSWCA Council bother discussing the affair at all and sending off that letter?

Harry Houdini, if you decide to accept this mission.....

antichrist
17-08-2005, 04:42 PM
................

But then later on you disclose an element of Council's meeting by saying that the DOP was sent a letter not to repeat again or something to that effect (quickly checking I could not find the post).
.....

In the above para from my previous post I mistakenly stated that a letter had been sent to the DOP, whereas now I have seen the following part of the relevant post that the warning letter was in fact sent to the St George Club. I apologise for any implication that may have been taken from my mistake.


BG (from earlier post)
As for the St. George event because it was submitted to NSW for ACF rating, the NSWCA has sent a letter to the St. George Chess club informing them that that the correct procedure is to be carried out in the future and that there be no re-occurrence of recording unplayed games as drawn games.

antichrist
18-08-2005, 06:52 AM
AR, as a Catholic you have a special mission.

It appears that Bill is suffering from lockjaw re the following points from two posts up:

1) A/C to BG:
You have told me earlier that NSWCA did discuss the St George fiasco at it's last meeting but you did not call in the "defendents" - what sort of justice was this - every one deserves their "day in court".


2) A/C to BG
If this whole affair is not NSWCA's because it is FIDE Ratings Officer and a St George affair, then why did NSWCA Council bother discussing the affair at all and sending off that letter?

Can you go to Sunday Mass, put a hefty dono in the plate, go to St Mary's shrine on the side, put in another hefty dono and light up about 20 candles and then kneel down and pray for a miracle that Bill's condition is cured.

And for good measure toss another prayer at Mary McKillop, our local hero and rep for Aussie!

bergil
18-08-2005, 10:05 AM
I have known the arbiter since he first visited my Chess Centre of NSW in the heart of the Sydney CBD (in Sussex St) as a child. In recent years he has done an enormous amount of voluntary work in Junior chess, club chess state and National level chess and is to be very highly congratulated for all his work when the vast majority of chess players do virtually no work for chess.

However FIDE at its Presidential Board Meeting in Doha, Qatar in May 2005 unanimously agreed that “there would be severe punishments for players, arbiters, officials, organisers and federations in proven cases of malpractice, up to a ban for life.


What you meant to say was, being a gossipy old hack and jealous of anyone who is thought well of in chess. You would like to try to put the boot into the arbiter of the StGeorge Club Championship because he does all his work without trying to make a living out of chess.

He has never tried to publish a chess magazine or own a chess shop or have a chess centre above his shop so players easily make purchases without having to travel after playing their games. Nor does he attack or bad mouth another business rival.

No he just does it cause he loves the game. I hope you are prepared to get off your backside and pick up the slack when there is nobdy to DOP events in NSW if he doesn't.

Please tell us again, oh doyen of the chess world. How much you done for us the chess community and not for yourself and your pocket!

P.S
Nice plug for the business in your post

antichrist
18-08-2005, 12:34 PM
In case anyone misunderstands the shop is no longer in Sussex Street, it is basement level, 72 Campbell St - I would not do this commercial if it wasn't.

A bit below the belt Bergil about someone who I believe is genuinely concerned for chess. He did his hard yards of volunteer work at the highest level for decades - in my day if not in yours. Travelled overseas and everything.

I also am genuinely concerned for chess which is why I have also been following the issue, even leading the pack, but in the absence of officialdom taking the lead I had to and we are lucky that ex-officials still butt in to do the right thing.

People who have previously worked hard and upheld the standards, as Peter P has, don't like to see things go "downhill", that is their work diminished.

I think his was a very timely warning. Esp when we are trying to squeeze another GM out of the contestants...

You just do your bit to ensure things go according to rules and then people such as Peter won't see the need to get involved.

Frankly speaking, there is someone else in a similar position to Peter, who appears to know everything brilliantly and did not get involved, maybe because he is in chess business, who should have - in the face of lack of official action.

It should not have been left to an old hopeless fartarse like myself who did not understand the first thing about the rating system and had Bill tying me in knots for weeks.

Vlad
18-08-2005, 12:46 PM
What you meant to say was, being a gossipy old hack and jealous of anyone who is thought well of in chess. You would like to try to put the boot into the arbiter of the StGeorge Club Championship because he does all his work without trying to make a living out of chess.

He has never tried to publish a chess magazine or own a chess shop or have a chess centre above his shop so players easily make purchases without having to travel after playing their games. Nor does he attack or bad mouth another business rival.

No he just does it cause he loves the game. I hope you are prepared to get off your backside and pick up the slack when there is nobdy to DOP events in NSW if he doesn't.

Please tell us again, oh doyen of the chess world. How much you done for us the chess community and not for yourself and your pocket!

P.S
Nice plug for the business in your post

I believe this is a very unfair comment and very anti-Australian as well.

Do not you realize that we have a very bad crisis in NSW and in chess in general exactly because smart and successful people do not go into chess? We have a very few of them left. They are our scarce resource. Do not force them to leave.

In addition, I can say that Peter is very right in what he is saying. Since I met Charlz about 3 years ago I have always been of extremely high opinion about him in any respect. The last two occasions (Grade Matches and St George tournament) though have left me completely puzzled.

arosar
18-08-2005, 01:03 PM
Let's just understand that bergil is a newbie to chess and does not really understand everything. That he apparently needs to be told what Mr Parr has done for us is adequate proof of his ignorance.

AR

bergil
18-08-2005, 01:25 PM
I believe this is a very unfair comment and very anti-Australian as well.

It maybe unfair but how is it un-Australian?

arosar
18-08-2005, 01:27 PM
That it is unfair.

AR

bergil
18-08-2005, 01:29 PM
[QUOTE=drugDo not you realize that we have a very bad crisis in NSW and in chess in general exactly because smart and successful people do not go into chess? We have a very few of them left. They are our scarce resource. Do not force them to leave.
[/QUOTE]
My point exactly, everyone wants to give it to Charles re Club champs and Grades, which is not his fault.

If he stop all his activities in chess, who is going to do it?

bergil
18-08-2005, 01:31 PM
That it is unfair.

AR
What to have an opinion? Your kidding!

arosar
18-08-2005, 01:35 PM
What to have an opinion? Your kidding!

Err...no...the substance and expression of your opinion. Just think for a moment: who are you compared to PP?

Remind us again. You're a newbie to chess, right?

AR