ECF arbiting at Aberystwyth - FIDE perspective

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Roger Lancaster
Posts: 935
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Roger Lancaster » Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:25 pm

Quite so, the rules of the specific event said nothing of the kind. So where did the Arbiters Commission get that information from?

Michael Flatt
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Michael Flatt » Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:30 pm

As there was no intention by the English Chess Federation to send the event to FIDE for rating, they could to follow only internal regulations that may be not known and cannot be commented by the Arbiters’ Commission.
The English is slightly strange (due to being written by non native English speakers), but it is clear to me that the FIDE Commission accepted that the ECF might have internal procedures that are unknown to them.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 7385
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberystwyth - FIDE perspective

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:33 pm

Yes, I assumed you'd taken your view from the phrase you quote, but I'm still struggling with the "specific event" bit. If they'd left that out I don't suppose I'd have a problem, but they chose to add it.
Last edited by JustinHorton on Sun Sep 06, 2015 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Michael Flatt
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Michael Flatt » Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:37 pm

JustinHorton wrote:Yes, I assumed you'd taken your view from the phrase you quote, but I'm still struggling with the "specific event" bit. If they'd left that out I don't suppose I'd have a problem, but they chose to add it.
I agree.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 935
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Roger Lancaster » Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:39 pm

I agree Michael's view is possible, and the minutes were evidently not written by a native English speaker, but I have the same difficulty as Justin. Incidentally, the game was (was, no typo!) graded by the ECF.

Ray Sayers

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Ray Sayers » Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:29 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:“Fourth, the FIDE Laws of Chess do not provide for a ‘split result’ (awarding each person a result that does not sum 1 point);"

Really? What about when a phone goes off when the non-phone wielder has bare king? That is scored half-zero, unless you can show that the phone was on when the innocent party had mating material.
Just one example.
I'm pretty surprised by that. I don't see that anywhere in the FIDE laws of chess. I do see under 11.3:

b.During play, a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone and/or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue. If it is evident that a player brought such a device into the playing venue, he shall lose the game. The opponent shall win.
The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty.
The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9.

And since the FIDE ruling also says:

Fourth, the FIDE Laws of Chess do not provide for a ‘split result’ (awarding each person a result that does not sum 1 point);

I'm not sure why people are still arguing that the result of a game should result in anything other than a sum total of 1 point. I think the problem seems to be in the arbiting, not the scoring system!

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by David Sedgwick » Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:00 pm

Ray Sayers wrote:
Kevin Thurlow wrote:“Fourth, the FIDE Laws of Chess do not provide for a ‘split result’ (awarding each person a result that does not sum 1 point);"

Really? What about when a phone goes off when the non-phone wielder has bare king? That is scored half-zero, unless you can show that the phone was on when the innocent party had mating material.
Just one example.
I'm pretty surprised by that. I don't see that anywhere in the FIDE laws of chess. I do see under 11.3:

b.During play, a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone and/or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue. If it is evident that a player brought such a device into the playing venue, he shall lose the game. The opponent shall win.
The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty.
The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9.

And since the FIDE ruling also says:

Fourth, the FIDE Laws of Chess do not provide for a ‘split result’ (awarding each person a result that does not sum 1 point);

I'm not sure why people are still arguing that the result of a game should result in anything other than a sum total of 1 point. I think the problem seems to be in the arbiting, not the scoring system!
The 2009 Laws specified that:

"Without the permission of the arbiter a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue, unless they are completely switched off. If any such device produces a sound, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. However, if the opponent cannot win the game by any series of legal moves, his score shall be a draw.

The current Laws (Article 12.9.f) state that the penalties open to the arbiter include:

"declaring the game to be lost by the offending player (the arbiter shall also decide the opponent’s score)"

So where you are not allowed to bring a mobile phone into the venue at all, you lose 0-1 if you are found to have done so.

But where you are allowed to bring your mobile in, but it rings when your opponent has only a bare king, 0-½ would still be appropriate.

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2307
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Ian Thompson » Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:09 pm

Ray Sayers wrote:And since the FIDE ruling also says:

Fourth, the FIDE Laws of Chess do not provide for a ‘split result’ (awarding each person a result that does not sum 1 point);
That's clearly wrong. The FIDE Laws say (12.9 f) "declaring the game to be lost by the offending player (the arbiter shall also decide the
opponent’s score)". There's no doubt that this law permits a result of 0 to one player and 0.5 to the other.

It's certainly arguable that Law 12.9 d "increasing the points scored in the game by the opponent to the maximum available for that game" permits the total points scored for the game to be more than 1 because there's no requirement, only the option, of reducing the other player's score to 0. Whether it would ever be appropriate to do this is another matter.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 3396
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:25 am

Thanks to David and Ian for understanding (and confirming) what I was saying.

Michael Flatt
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Michael Flatt » Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:49 am

JustinHorton wrote:Yes, I assumed you'd taken your view from the phrase you quote, but I'm still struggling with the "specific event" bit. If they'd left that out I don't suppose I'd have a problem, but they chose to add it.
David Sedgwick wrote:
The Arbiters’ Commission after discussion agreed that according to the FIDE Laws of Chess the decision of the arbiters and the Chief Arbiter had been correct. As there was no intention by the English Chess Federation to send the event to FIDE for rating, they could to follow only internal regulations that may be not known and cannot be commented by the Arbiters’ Commission. According to the rules of the specific event, the Tournament Manager had the right to overrule any decision of an arbiter or the appeals committee.
The reference to the specific event is important. It was the under-8 section of the British Championships which is organised by the ECF and is controlled by an appointed Tournament Director. The under 8 event is not FIDE rated and, therefore, lies outside the jurisdiction of FIDE. Since the FIDE Arbiters Commission have no interest in the internal workings of ECF and how they run their domestic events they will not rule against the ECF. Had the dispute occurred in the FIDE rated Open I am sure that the Arbiters Commission would have taken a different view.

The strange use of "only" I interpret as meaning "not FIDE". The ambiguity arises from being written by a non native English speaker.

Rephrasing it into standard English: they need only follow internal regulations that may be not known and cannot be commented [on] by the Arbiters’ Commission.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18521
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:10 am

It doesn't look as if the controversies at Canterbury in 2010 in the Major Open got through to British arbiters. In the context of a game between tournament leaders, it is unfair to their rivals for a game to have one and a half points at stake, no matter how many tantrums are thrown by the players or their parents.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 935
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Roger Lancaster » Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:26 am

There are two issues here which consequently tend to get confused. The first is the intervention of a third party to overrule the appointed arbiting team and furthermore to do so (in the opinion of RTRC amongst others) incorrectly, a double error in judgment. The second is the merits and demerits, in any situation, of arriving at a result which does not sum to one point - this applies particularly in later rounds of a tournament when an award of 1 1/2 points may terminally disadvantage rivals.

Roger rightly mentioned that the 1 1/2 points queston also arose at the Major Open at Canterbury. As that event was FIDE-rated (and therefore fell more squarely under FIDE's authority than the 2014 case) it's perhaps unfortunate that none of the complainants there thought, as far as I am aware, to complain to FIDE.

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Alex McFarlane » Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:29 am

There were two 1-1/2 scores at Canterbury.

The controversial one was not decided by the arbiters but by an Appeals Committee. That being the case FIDE would not have been able to take any action.

In the other case an arbiter made a wrong 10.2 decision (draw in the last two minutes) by rejecting a valid claim. At that time the Laws of Chess prevented an appeal being made for such a decision. As Chief Arbiter I was called in and decided that 0.5 should be given but that we couldn't take the point off the other player. Had the current rules been in force an appeal would have been made and the result changed to .5-.5.
Those parents who questioned the decision seemed satisfied when an explanation was given.

With regard to the FIDE Commissions decisions there are two points to be made. The decisions were made only by the main officials of both groups and not the full Commission and secondly, I do not believe that either Commission was made aware of both sides of the story. The Arbiters' Commission may have had more info the the Rules Commission which met earlier. I know that Kevin Staveley was not asked for his account of events.
Last edited by Alex McFarlane on Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Michael Flatt
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Michael Flatt » Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:33 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:It doesn't look as if the controversies at Canterbury in 2010 in the Major Open got through to British arbiters. In the context of a game between tournament leaders, it is unfair to their rivals for a game to have one and a half points at stake, no matter how many tantrums are thrown by the players or their parents.
It is interesting to speculate as to what comments the FIDE Arbiters' Commission might have made had the two Canterbury disputes been referred to them. Now that players are aware of the possibility of referring the dispute to FIDE, organisers should avoid following the questionable practice of awarding 1.5 points for a game.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 935
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: ECF arbiting at Aberyswyth - FIDE perspective

Post by Roger Lancaster » Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:39 am

As to Roger's reference to "... no matter how many tantrums are thrown by the players or their parents ...", I assume his reference to parents is less likely to refer to Canterbury than to Aberystwyth. I am frankly curious - verging on incredulous - as to how an experienced arbiter such as KS acted as he did and, of course, the ECF remains tight-lipped on the point. If anyone can enlighten me, either through the forum or privately, I'd be most interested. Confidences wil be respected where requested.

Post Reply