FIDE Grand Prix 2014-2015

[Mick Norris]

Good to see Karjakin beaten.

Yes it is

So it's a 3-way tie going into the last round tomorrow which I think may start an hour earlier.

Yes, the website has a 2 pm start rather than 3 pm for the other rounds, so presumably 10 am for us rather than 11 am

[Mick Norris]

Jakovenko qualifies for the candidates if he beats Nakamura with black, tough ask as Nakamura qualifies with a draw as far as I can see from here
Race to FIDE candidates 2016

[Mike Truran]

ck Norris » Mon May 25, 2015 5:04 pm

Tim Harding wrote:
Good to see Karjakin beaten.

Yes it is

Why? What do Karjakin's political views have to do with anything? If he wants to adopt Russian citizenship and support Putin, who are we (from our Western European liberal standpoint) to say that he can't? If he plays good chess, that should be enough.

Perhaps we should expunge all of Alekhine's games from the records because he was a Nazi sympathiser?

[Matt Mackenzie]

Indeed, one could mention Fischer's less than spotless record on political matters too.....

Karjakin has, I agree, been a bit of a dick - young people often are in these things, you know

[John McKenna]

Isn't the point about Alekhine that many would, and did, forgive him his political views because he was of the Russian aristocracy, therefore an anti-communist and a natural ally of the Third Reich? That he was a great chessplayer also mitigates what some, depending on where they stand, see as his personal foibles, or failures.

Karjakin is in different position - to that of Alekhine to the Reich - more akin to that of a young German living in the Sudetenland in 1938, who decides early to declare his allegiance to what he perceives as his real homeland - Mother Russia in this case. Both did what they saw as right for them.

That some of us see them as doing something wrong is down to where we stand in the sorry scheme of things. To some any supporter of Putin is an enemy, to others some supporters of Putin are not necessarily deserving of enmity, as such. Chessplayers are not usually as blameworthy as politicians, financiers, industrialists, the military and other such powerful people.

[Chris Rice]

I was quite interested in that round 9 game between Karjakin and Caruana. In a report on the Russian chess news site it was confirmed that both players signed the score sheets accepting a draw by repetition. After that the arbiter realized he's made a mistake and said there was no repetition. Read all about it here http://chess-news.ru/en/node/19090

I was quite taken aback when I discovered that this is all legal. If we look at the Laws of Chess we see at 8.7
"At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both score sheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise." http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article

So all's well except of course that this is a ridiculous piece of drafting.

[Jonathan Bryant]

ck Norris » Mon May 25, 2015 5:04 pm

Tim Harding wrote:
Good to see Karjakin beaten.

Yes it is

Why? What do Karjakin's political views have to do with anything? If he wants to adopt Russian citizenship and support Putin, who are we (from our Western European liberal standpoint) to say that he can't? If he plays good chess, that should be enough.

I don’t see anybody suggesting that he can’t Mike. It’s more than some of us don’t particularly care for the fact that he did/does. As for playing good chess being 'enough' - well, each to his own, I suppose. Perhaps it depends on how you answer the question 'enough for what?' and/or whether you consider an ability to play chess to be the most important thing about a person.

[Mike Truran]

Well, as you say, each to their own,I guess. Probably best to leave it there.

[Brian Towers]

I was quite taken aback when I discovered that this is all legal. If we look at the Laws of Chess we see at 8.7
"At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both score sheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise." http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article

So all's well except of course that this is a ridiculous piece of drafting.

My initial reaction was to highlight this and ask Stewart Reuben for his opinion but on second thoughts his thinking might be influenced by having been on the wrong end of such a decision in his rather short game against Tony Miles about 40 years ago.

There again, on third thoughts, perhaps that makes him uniquely qualified to comment! Poacher turned gamekeeper, as it were.

[Roger de Coverly]

I was quite taken aback when I discovered that this is all legal. If we look at the Laws of Chess we see at 8.7
"At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both score sheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise." http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article

I rather think there should be a time limit on arbiters deciding otherwise in light of the ridiculous decision described below.

http://www.chessrules.com.au/chess-rule ... /15/chess/

A tale from the recent World Youth Championship has provoked some outrage in the chess world. A 14-year-old Belgian player had drawn a game with a three-move repetition but there was some controversy later over whether the rules had been met. So, the organisers hauled the boy out of bed at 11pm and had him play the game from the final position at midnight, and he duly lost.

[Roger de Coverly]

I was quite taken aback when I discovered that this is all legal. If we look at the Laws of Chess we see at 8.7
"At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both score sheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise." http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article

I rather think there should be a time limit on arbiters deciding otherwise in light of the ridiculous decision described below.

http://www.chessrules.com.au/chess-rule ... /15/chess/

A tale from the recent World Youth Championship has provoked some outrage in the chess world. A 14-year-old Belgian player had drawn a game with a three-move repetition but there was some controversy later over whether the rules had been met. So, the organisers hauled the boy out of bed at 11pm and had him play the game from the final position at midnight, and he duly lost.

If I recall the reports of the incident, it wasn't even that the position hadn't been repeated, rather that the procedure for who says what and when as outlined in the Laws of Chess had not been followed to the letter.

[Chris Rice]

I rather think there should be a time limit on arbiters deciding otherwise in light of the ridiculous decision described below.

I guess that's one way of fixing the problem. My feeling is that the signed score sheets by both players should act in the same way as a contract. If you sign you accept the result even if a mistake is discovered later. The way that 8.7 is currently drafted gives too much power to the arbiter to be able to change things and there is no criteria laid out for making such changes and this can lead to inconsistent decisions such as what happened to that poor kid you describe above. Currently in Khanty-Mansysk the rumours are flying that the only reason the chief arbiter corrected the decision in the Caruana-Karkakin game was because of the Grand Prix standings. These may not be true of course but this is what you get in the absence of an agreed process.

[Tim Harding]

Jakovenko qualifies for the candidates if he beats Nakamura with black, tough ask as Nakamura qualifies with a draw as far as I can see from here
Race to FIDE candidates 2016

Nakamura seems (writing this around move 22) to be suffering from indecision about whether to play for a win or draw with White and is now somewhat worse.

Caruana seemed to play for a draw but could even be better. It seems he will certainly qualify for the candidates even if he loses, but the other place is in doubt.

A good tense last round after two hours play.

[Chris Rice]

Move 25, Nakamura efficiently hoovering the board clean.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both score sheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise."

The intention was probably to allow the arbiter to correct a result, e.g. if the players accidentally signed for 0-1 and it was actually 1-0. This might be considered a good thing. However, the wording allows the arbiter to change anything at any time. which is not good. The Law would be extremely long if you had to explain in minute detail what the interpretations were in each case. In this case, I would have thought they had evidence from the sensory board, so would easy to get it right in the first place?