British Chess Championships 2010

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
John Philpott

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by John Philpott » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:13 am

It was good to have the question of the Alexander Best Game Prize resolved. Is there any chance of the website at http://www.britishchess2010.com/gotd.htm being updated so that it indicates who won the game of the day prizes after round 7?

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1420
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Alex McFarlane » Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:10 am

Matthew,
It is not standard practice to name appeals committees for the simple reason that it is hard enough to get volunteers without them having to endure flack for their decisions. All I can say is that the committee was made up of a combination of arbiters and experienced players.

I believe the Mulhiem position was discussed and found to be acceptable, though I don't know what the criteria were. I know of one other case where a junior was declined entry so checks were in place.

John,
I'm afraid I don't have that info but if anyone can supply it I'll ask Steve Connor to post it on the site

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 3019
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:07 pm

"I believe the Mulhiem position was discussed and found to be acceptable, though I don't know what the criteria were. I know of one other case where a junior was declined entry so checks were in place."

Is it true that various juniors were found to be "over age" in some other sections? I am told the qualifying date had changed. so may have caused some confusion.
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4011
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Stewart Reuben » Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:52 pm

I wonder if Alex is aware of the following extracted from the FIDE Tournament Rules. It is true they do not carry the same weight as the FIDE Laws of Chess. (b) is the relevant clause.

12. Penalties, appeals
(a) When there is a dispute, the CA or OC as appropriate should make every effort to resolve matters by reconciliation. If such means fail and the dispute is such that penalties are appropriate, where penalties are not specifically defined by the Laws or the regulations, he shall have discretionary power to impose penalties. He should seek to maintain discipline and offer other solutions which may placate the offended parties.
(b) In all events there shall be an Appeals Committee. The CA and OC shall ensure that the Appeals Committee is elected or appointed before the start of the first round, usually at the drawing of lots. It is recommended this consists of a Chairman, at least two members and two reserve members. Preferably no two members of the committee shall come from the same federation. No arbiter, administrator or player involved in the original dispute shall be a member of the appeal committee actually considering that dispute. Such a committee should have an odd number of voting members. Members of the Appeals Committee should not be younger then 18 years old.
(c). A player may appeal against any ruling made by the CA or CO or one of their assistants, provided the appeal is accompanied by a fee and submitted in written form not later than the deadline. Both fee and deadline shall be fixed in advance. The decisions of the Appeal Committee shall be final. The fee is returnable if the appeal is successful. It may also be returned if the appeal is unsuccessful, but reasonable in the view of the committee.

Stewart Reuben

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2702
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Matthew Turner » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:37 pm

Ernie,
I am sorry but you are wrong. It is standard practice to name appeals committees, this way the players have confidence in the system. Earlier Alex McFarlane stated

"The Appeals Committee decided to uphold the arbiter's decision BUT decided that it was unreasonable to expect the players to play on since it was now after 5pm. The AC stated that the game should not take place with Raynor scoring 1/2 and French 1.

Whether they agree with that decision or not, the control team are required to implement it.

The procedure for appeals will now be reviewed in light of this case."

The implication is that the control team (arbiters) had to abide by a (dubious) decision of the Appeals Committee. We now find that "the committee was made up of a combination of arbiters and experienced players." so in fact the dubious decision was again made by the arbiters.

There are exceptions, but the average quality of arbitting in England is some way behind the rest of (Western) Europe.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2365
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:41 pm

Matthew Turner wrote:Ernie,
I am sorry but you are wrong. It is standard practice to name appeals committees, this way the players have confidence in the system. Earlier Alex McFarlane stated

"The Appeals Committee decided to uphold the arbiter's decision BUT decided that it was unreasonable to expect the players to play on since it was now after 5pm. The AC stated that the game should not take place with Raynor scoring 1/2 and French 1.

Whether they agree with that decision or not, the control team are required to implement it.

The procedure for appeals will now be reviewed in light of this case."

The implication is that the control team (arbiters) had to abide by a (dubious) decision of the Appeals Committee. We now find that "the committee was made up of a combination of arbiters and experienced players." so in fact the dubious decision was again made by the arbiters.

There are exceptions, but the average quality of arbitting in England is some way behind the rest of (Western) Europe.
Personally I think that appeals committees should be anonymous, save for the chair who is usually a senior arbiter and used to the flak. However the appeal decision should always be published where possible - that is usual practice.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2702
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Matthew Turner » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:49 pm

Take a look at this hugely contentious decision

http://rules.chessdom.com/appeals-commi ... cko-foisor

The Appeals committee are named as is standard practice.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1248
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Alan Walton » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:49 pm

In all the major tournaments I have played abroad, the tournament informs you which people are on the appeals committee before round 1, I am assuming they do this to give that panel a face and give players extra reassurance that decisions are conducted in the proper manner

Why is it in the UK we try do things different to everywhere else

Sean Hewitt

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Sean Hewitt » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:56 pm

Alan Walton wrote:Why is it in the UK we try do things different to everywhere else
Because the British always think they know better than everyone else!

Peter Turner
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Peter Turner » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:16 pm

Alan Walton wrote:In all the major tournaments I have played abroad, the tournament informs you which people are on the appeals committee before round 1, I am assuming they do this to give that panel a face and give players extra reassurance that decisions are conducted in the proper manner

Why is it in the UK we try do things different to everywhere else
This is also my experience abroad with England junior teams at World, European & World Schools' Championships. The Committee is often selected at the managers meeting prior to the first round and then published in a prominent public place. Perhaps more important at these events to ensure that, with so many different countries competing, there was a mix of languages and talented multi-linguists (probably the wrong word but you know what I mean) on the committee.

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Ian Thompson » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:23 pm

Matthew Turner wrote:We now find that "the committee was made up of a combination of arbiters and experienced players." so in fact the dubious decision was again made by the arbiters.
That always has been known, assuming the appeals committee was properly constituted. It had to consist of one Senior Arbiter, two other arbiters and two players' representatives. It says that in the congress information.

It seems strange to me that players' representatives can be appointed without the players they represent being told who they are. The appeals panel should have consisted of at least 10 people, so you could be sure of getting 5 who weren't involved in the dispute. I see no reason why those names couldn't be published at the start of the event. There is one obvious reason why they should be - a player lodging an appeal may have a justifiable objection to one of them being involved in his appeal due to some previous incident between the two.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2365
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:30 pm

Matthew Turner wrote:Take a look at this hugely contentious decision

http://rules.chessdom.com/appeals-commi ... cko-foisor

The Appeals committee are named as is standard practice.
The appeals committee may be named, but it is not necessarily standard practice.

Having said that, the 4NCL (always a model of good practice) publishes their committee;

* Alex McFarlane (arbiter)
* Dave Thomas (arbiter)
* David Anderton (ADs)
* Sean Hewitt (e2e4)
* Stephen Swanson (Poisoned Pawns)
* Johnathan Bourne (Brown Jack)

The question is; what difference would it make to the cases in point?

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2702
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Matthew Turner » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:34 pm

Adam,
You might also note that the 4NCL Appeals Committee has 'players' in the majority. I think the British Championships Appeals Committee is probably unique in having the majority of members being arbiters

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2365
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:42 pm

Matthew Turner wrote:Adam,
You might also note that the 4NCL Appeals Committee has 'players' in the majority. I think the British Championships Appeals Committee is probably unique in having the majority of members being arbiters
That is neither a good nor a bad thing; just different. As Alex has said, the procedures will be reviewed, but my personal opinion is that publishing the list of people involved in the panel would serve no practical purpose. But I am sure it is one option being considered.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2702
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: British Chess Championships 2010

Post by Matthew Turner » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:50 pm

Adam,
It is a basic tenet of the English legal system that you ultimately have the right to be judged by a panel of your peers. Every other chess event (that I know of) also applies this principle, why should the British Championships be different?

Post Reply