Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

The very latest International round up of English news.
LawrenceCooper
Posts: 7173
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by LawrenceCooper » Mon Jul 10, 2017 7:24 pm

Chris Rice wrote:
According to this article FIDE Ethics Commission to study comeback by Kasparov Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, has claimed that Kasparov must first be cleared to compete. Given that Kasparov was disqualified for two years for alleged corruption and vote buying at the 2013 FIDE Presidential election in Tallinn in Estonia.
Nigel Freeman:

Contrary to the report, the FIDE Ethics Commission advises as follows:

Kasparov was banned from holding office in FIDE and participating in FIDE meetings until 20 October 2017. This was because his offence was committed in the political arena. He is not banned from playing chess or participating as a player in FIDE rated tournaments.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Tue Jul 11, 2017 8:56 am

"This was because his offence was committed in the political arena. He is not banned from playing chess or participating as a player in FIDE rated tournaments."

I don't understand. Is "corruption and vote buying" not permitted in FIDE?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:49 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
I don't understand. Is "corruption and vote buying" not permitted in FIDE?
It isn't permitted for those in opposition to the lifetime presidency.

Tim Harding
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:46 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by Tim Harding » Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:19 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
I don't understand. Is "corruption and vote buying" not permitted in FIDE?
It isn't permitted for those in opposition to the lifetime presidency.
Maybe Donald Trump can be persuaded to give up the White House and run for FIDE President instead as it is much harder to impeach a FIDE dictator?

Afterthought: He could ask Donald junior to take advice on this from Putin?
Tim Harding
Historian and FIDE Arbiter

Author of 'Steinitz in London,' British Chess Literature to 1914', 'Joseph Henry Blackburne: A Chess Biography', and 'Eminent Victorian Chess Players'
http://www.chessmail.com

Chris Rice
Posts: 3417
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by Chris Rice » Wed Jul 12, 2017 7:36 pm

Chris Rice wrote: The worst example I saw was Anand, four pawns up against Kramnik in an easily winning position, just making moves and losing pawn after pawn. Finally, he is about to queen his e-pawn and realises that Kramnik has a knight fork so Anand in a blind panic promotes to a knight and I'm pretty sure illegally uses two hands to do it. The video on the Chess24 (scroll down to the bottom) shows those last few moves if anyone wants to view it. It looked to me that the two players thought the whole thing was a farce, agreed to a draw and laughed it off.
10 days later and suddenly its breaking news....

In this Peter Doggers article I'm wondering how David Sedgwick would view the sentence "Few arbiters in the world would have had the guts to tell a five-time world champion that he lost this game due to an illegal move." From what I saw both Kramnik and Anand were perfectly happy to draw but should there have been someone watching and intervening?

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by David Sedgwick » Wed Jul 12, 2017 7:52 pm

Chris Rice wrote:In this Peter Doggers article I'm wondering how David Sedgwick would view the sentence "Few arbiters in the world would have had the guts to tell a five-time world champion that he lost this game due to an illegal move." From what I saw both Kramnik and Anand were perfectly happy to draw but should there have been someone watching and intervening?
I'd better not comment until I've contacted the two event arbiters about Peter Doggers's article.

Brian Towers
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by Brian Towers » Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:01 pm

Chris Rice wrote:
Chris Rice wrote: The worst example I saw was Anand, four pawns up against Kramnik in an easily winning position, just making moves and losing pawn after pawn. Finally, he is about to queen his e-pawn and realises that Kramnik has a knight fork so Anand in a blind panic promotes to a knight and I'm pretty sure illegally uses two hands to do it. The video on the Chess24 (scroll down to the bottom) shows those last few moves if anyone wants to view it. It looked to me that the two players thought the whole thing was a farce, agreed to a draw and laughed it off.
10 days later and suddenly its breaking news....

In this Peter Doggers article I'm wondering how David Sedgwick would view the sentence "Few arbiters in the world would have had the guts to tell a five-time world champion that he lost this game due to an illegal move." From what I saw both Kramnik and Anand were perfectly happy to draw but should there have been someone watching and intervening?
The FIDE Laws of Chess state that if there is one arbiter per game and the games are recorded then standard competition rules apply. Otherwise blitz rules apply. If there had been one arbiter per game then, yes, there should have been someone watching and intervening, but then it would have been under standard competition rules and a first illegal move would not have ended the game. With many games per arbiter it is a physical impossibility for an arbiter to watch every game.

So, bottom line, the question as posed doesn't get off the ground. It was up to Kramnik to claim the win.

It's also worth noting that had there been an arbiter watching he would have had to act swiftly enough to intervene before the handshake. The draw agreement ends the game. A moment or two's hesitation and it is too late.
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by David Sedgwick » Wed Aug 02, 2017 9:29 am

Chris Rice wrote:In this Peter Doggers article I'm wondering how David Sedgwick would view the sentence "Few arbiters in the world would have had the guts to tell a five-time world champion that he lost this game due to an illegal move." From what I saw both Kramnik and Anand were perfectly happy to draw but should there have been someone watching and intervening?
David Sedgwick wrote:I'd better not comment until I've contacted the two event arbiters about Peter Doggers's article.
The GCT has decided not to respond to the article, so I don't feel able to say very much.

I am satisfied that the arbiters acted correctly.

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Grand Chess Tour events: Paris GCT and Leuven, Belgium

Post by NickFaulks » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:21 am

Chris Rice wrote:In this Peter Doggers article I'm wondering how David Sedgwick would view the sentence "Few arbiters in the world would have had the guts to tell a five-time world champion that he lost this game due to an illegal move."
Few arbiters in the world might have had the guts to apply an Olympiad's anti-cheating regulations to a player who was once involved in a World Championship match. One did, though, and it only takes one.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.