Tradewise Gibraltar Masters 2017

[NickFaulks]

even Yifan has apologised in an official statement

Where can I find that?

In a very simple place, the tournament website

She was given a clear opportunity to retract her ( strongly ) implied suggestion that the organisers had corrupted the pairings and conspicuously did not take it.

To be honest, if the organisers took this case to Ethics, which they obviously won't, I think it would have to be considered.

[Roger de Coverly]

To be honest, if the organisers took this case to Ethics, which they obviously won't, I think it would have to be considered.

There's very little for players to get agitated about with pairings, other than whether the underlying rules are correct. The Gibraltar arbiters used a widely employed program which implements one of the rule sets approved by FIDE for pairings. Any arbiter who did adjust the pairings would easily be found out, as there must be thousands of installations of the program. With the tournament data also readily available, it's a simple enough task for those skilled at using this software to parallel run the pairings and check the outcomes are the same as published. Jack Rudd notes that the ECF Home Director has already done this and a commentator at the chessbase site also.

You can argue the legitimacy of floating the lowest rated player, particularly where this results in a bye. That's querying the method rather than the implementation.

[JustinHorton]

She was given a clear opportunity to retract her ( strongly ) implied suggestion that the organisers had corrupted the pairings

For what it's worth, that's not the implication as I perceived it. I don't think she has clearly said, either way, what her thinking was, which doesn't help, but I personally thought she felt that the pairings she received were not illegitimate, but should in one way or another have been avoided.

Incidentally, in so far as it may be applicable, there's a couple of discussions about the legitimacy or otherwise of amending and avoiding pairings in this forum's thread on the 2015 British Championship.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Again, it doesn't matter what people say just look at the pairings; it doesn't surprise me a Russian thinks its a conspiracy, even Yifan has apologised in an official statement

While showing her unhappiness with the pairing against women, I have not seen any explanation from Hou Yifan why it is so unpleasant to play against a woman.

How odd. She actually makes the case that players should be disappointed and they are entitled to complain when paired against women!

[Mark Ashley]

When was the last time a GM acted like this to the extent that they actually forfeited or threw a game in a tournament or match like this? I can only think of Bobby Fischer, but there must be other examples out there.

Not exactly the same, but how about Karpov's "Anti-morning variation". Back in the mid 90's if i remember correctly was asked to play a morning round game against Leko or or one of the young russian/ukranian players and turned up, played one move and offered a draw, which his very young opponent immediately, accepted

[David Shepherd]

Logic says that it is very unlikely for Hou Yifan to be paired against so many women, she clearly knew this and as the tournament went on she will have increasingly felt that something was not right. This will have been distracting for her in the games she played. By the end of the tournament she will have been totally fed up and distracted, and so it is not totally surprising that she took a snap decision to resign the last game.

The reality is, it is very unlikely the pairings were incorrect and simply the case of a rare event happening. Such is the case with probability, its unlikely that the organisers did anything wrong and understandable that she became upset. The really sad thing is that it should have been viewed in a very positive light. There were a significant number of women playing in the tournament, who must have been performing well to be paired against such a great player, hopefully it is a sign of things to come and the organisers should be congratulated.

I suspect it is just an unfortunate but very understandable incident, and time to move on.

[PeterFarr]

Logic says that it is very unlikely for Hou Yifan to be paired against so many women, she clearly knew this and as the tournament went on she will have increasingly felt that something was not right. This will have been distracting for her in the games she played. By the end of the tournament she will have been totally fed up and distracted, and so it is not totally surprising that she took a snap decision to resign the last game.

The reality is, it is very unlikely the pairings were incorrect and simply the case of a rare event happening. Such is the case with probability, its unlikely that the organisers did anything wrong and understandable that she became upset. The really sad thing is that it should have been viewed in a very positive light. There were a significant number of women playing in the tournament, who must have been performing well to be paired against such a great player, hopefully it is a sign of things to come and the organisers should be congratulated.

I suspect it is just an unfortunate but very understandable incident, and time to move on.

Agree with this; it seems her underlying motivation is that she wants to compete with the top men, and not be seen to just be the best of the women. In that light, her ambition is to be admired - she wasn't just there for the women's prize - though obviously her action in the last game not defensible. I certainly hope she and the organisers can make peace.

[NickFaulks]

but I personally thought she felt that the pairings she received were not illegitimate, but should in one way or another have been avoided.

Why could she possibly believe that the computer pairings should be altered to suit her wishes? Because she is World Champion?

In any case, if it were shown that the pairings had been doctored in this way, the whole tournament would have been invalidated for norm purposes.

[PeterFarr]

but I personally thought she felt that the pairings she received were not illegitimate, but should in one way or another have been avoided.

Why could she possibly believe that the computer pairings should be altered to suit her wishes? Because she is World Champion?

In any case, if it were shown that the pairings had been doctored in this way, the whole tournament would have been invalidated for norm purposes.

Well no it seems she thought the reverse of that, i.e. that the pairings were being manipulated already, in a way she considered unfavourable. Whereas it appears to have been just bad luck that the draw went like that. Maybe better communication with the organisers at an earlier stage would have resolved the issue before it came to a head.

[JustinHorton]

but I personally thought she felt that the pairings she received were not illegitimate, but should in one way or another have been avoided.

Why could she possibly believe that the computer pairings should be altered to suit her wishes? Because she is World Champion?

That's a question perhaps best put to her, or to anybody who thinks for any reason, good or bad, that certain pairings in a tournament, which would otherwise occur, should be avoided.

[Mick Norris]

but I personally thought she felt that the pairings she received were not illegitimate, but should in one way or another have been avoided.

Why could she possibly believe that the computer pairings should be altered to suit her wishes? Because she is World Champion?

That's a question perhaps best put to her, or to anybody who thinks for any reason, good or bad, that certain pairings in a tournament, which would otherwise occur, should be avoided.

Which I think has been established was the case here, to avoid an Iran v Israel clash

Ignoring the politics of this, why does this manipulation not invalidate the event for norm purposes? Is there a list somewhere of valid pairing manipulations?

[David Sedgwick]

That's a question perhaps best put to her, or to anybody who thinks for any reason, good or bad, that certain pairings in a tournament, which would otherwise occur, should be avoided.

Which I think has been established was the case here, to avoid an Iran v Israel clash

Ignoring the politics of this ...

We don't live in a hypothetical world where you can do that. We live in the real world.

Why does this manipulation not invalidate the event for norm purposes?

The relevant FIDE Regulation reads:

"Tournaments that make changes to favour one or more players (for example by altering the number of rounds, or the order of rounds, or providing particular opponents, not otherwise participating in the tournament), shall be excluded."

Avoiding a pairing between players from countries actually or prospectively in conflict is not done for any such purpose.

[Roger de Coverly]

Logic says that it is very unlikely for Hou Yifan to be paired against so many women,

Why should you think that, given that pairings are established in a deterministic manner based on results and relative seedings at the start of the tournament? You quite often get a run of opponents who are adjacent seeds. For those in say the middle, you win and get paired against someone 200 points higher. You lose and get someone 200 points lower. You win and get someone 201 points higher etc.

The starting rank is at
http://www.chess-results.com/tnr257693. ... t=0&wi=821

Hou Yifan is ranked at 22 with a rating of 2651.

She played opponents with rankings of
143 WGM Pourkashiyan Atousa 2303 IRI
85 GM Zhukova Natalia 2447 UKR
47 GM Muzychuk Anna 2558 UKR
51 GM Muzychuk Mariya 2546 UKR
5 GM Adams Michael 2751 ENG
81 GM Cramling Pia 2454 SWE
78 IM Ider Borya 2463 FRA
38 GM Ju Wenjun 2583 CHN
66 IM Batsiashvili Nino 2492 GEO
37 GM Lalith Babu M R 2587 IND

Apart from the first and fifth rounds, that's players in the rating range 2447 to 2587 and seeding range 37 to 85 which is where there's something of a concentration of female players.

In any event the only case to answer is whether the widely used FIDE pairing methods are appropriate for an event with a sizeable prize only available to some of the participants and not whether the organisers followed the results generated by the program. You could introduce a tweak that favoured or disfavoured FF pairings as against MF pairings, but I'm not aware of any pairing method which does this.

[JustinHorton]

Why does this manipulation not invalidate the event for norm purposes?

The relevant FIDE Regulation reads:

"Tournaments that make changes to favour one or more players (for example by altering the number of rounds, or the order of rounds, or providing particular opponents, not otherwise participating in the tournament), shall be excluded."

Avoiding a pairing between players from countries actually or prospectively in conflict is not done for any such purpose.

Evidently not, but why? I assume we're reading "favour" to mean something like "provide a competitive advantage to", but why would be that the case here? And what is the application of the rule to our favourite awkward situation, the case of the brothers Pert?

[JustinHorton]

(Personally I think I'm very much in favour of applying the rules as agreed at the outset of a tournament. I'm not yet seeing though why a limit on the number of FF pairings shouldn't be possible if deemed desirable.)