English Chess Forum

Brian Towers wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 1:42 pm

FIDE Competition Rules wrote:8.3 Swisses
(4) In an L2, L3 or L4 tournament the rules may permit a player to take a half point bye in a given round. It is only allowed if adequate notice has been given and is agreed to by the arbiter.
Such permission might not be granted to a player who receives conditions, or who has been given a free entry to the tournament. It is not permitted in the last round of a tournament.

Note that Gibraltar is an L2 event - an event where norms are possible.

"Adequate notice" is, quite rightly, at the discretion of the arbiter and will depend on the circumstances. Further guidance is given by -

FIDE Competition Rules wrote:8.3 Swisses
(2) If a player cannot play a particular round it is essential to inform the Pairings Controller and CA before the pairings for that round are made.

So, if you want a half point bye in the next round for a day's sightseeing or because you're tired after a long hard game then tell the arbiter before he does the next round draw to avoid disappointment. Changing the pairings after they've been published is obviously physically much easier in these days of computer pairings but is highly undesirable and is only going to happen in exceptional circumstances in an L2 event, say a sudden outbreak of novovirus. In L3 events (bog standard FIDE rated) and L4 (not FIDE rated) you may be lucky.

Does anyone actually take any notice of the FIDE Competition Rules though?

For example, it says here that you can't allow a half point bye in the last round of a tournament in 8.3(4). Let's say Gibraltar (or some other tournament) did that. What is anyone going to do about it? QC rates games, not tournaments, and the games have been played so should be submitted for rating. The norms will presumably still be valid, since the player would have had a 9-round norm in the bank anyway.

I genuinely don't understand the FIDE Competition Rules document, given it says:

FIDE Competition Rules wrote:1.1 Where an event has a situation not covered by internal rules, these Rules shall be considered
to be definitive.

If you just write your internal rules saying "1. The FIDE Competition Rules do not apply to this event", and then write your own rules doing whatever you want (e.g. permitting byes in the last round overriding 8.3(4)), then you can do that.

I don't think you can use the FIDE Competition Rules to justify this, because they say you can always override them, even if that doesn't make any sense either in the context of the 14th point of the document about arbiter appointments.

I was watching the news just now and they were reporting from la Linea de la Concepción, talking about waves five metres high and gusts of wind of up to 120 kilometres an hour.

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:13 pm

I was watching the news just now and they were reporting from la Linea de la Concepción, talking about waves five metres high and gusts of wind of up to 120 kilometres an hour.

Those who attend the Blackpool Congress in March presumably wondering what the fuss is about.

Pairings/Results
Round 9 on 2018/01/31 at 15.00
Bo. No. Name Rtg Pts. Result Pts. Name Rtg No.
1 15 GM Dubov Daniil 2694 6½ 6½ GM Vachier-Lagrave Maxime 2793 2
2 3 GM Nakamura Hikaru 2781 6½ 6½ GM Rapport Richard 2700 12
3 1 GM Aronian Levon 2797 6 6 GM Sethuraman S.P. 2646 25
4 16 GM Howell David W L 2682 6 6 GM Vitiugov Nikita 2732 7
5 24 GM Grandelius Nils 2647 6 6 GM Wang Hao 2711 10
6 14 GM Gelfand Boris 2697 6 6 GM Gupta Abhijeet 2610 31
7 4 GM Navara David 2749 5½ 6 GM Oparin Grigoriy 2607 33

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 9:14 am

The rule about taking two byes and not winning a prize is a good one and should be used in British weekend tournaments.

That seems unnecessarily harsh to me. The approach I've seen in some American tournaments seems better - you can take as many byes as you like; the first one or two will score 0.5 points; any more than that score 0 points.

Ian Thompson wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:17 pm

That seems unnecessarily harsh to me.

I played in a tournament where shared second place was taken by a player with 4/5, three wins and two byes. In round 3, the player pleaded illness and got a second bye after the Friday evening one. The only possible opponent for round 3 on 1.5 was the top seed who had been held to a draw in the first round. As it was, the top seed was downfloated to someone on 1, but then won the tournament with 4 wins and a draw.

Ian Thompson wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:17 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 9:14 am

The rule about taking two byes and not winning a prize is a good one and should be used in British weekend tournaments.

That seems unnecessarily harsh to me. The approach I've seen in some American tournaments seems better - you can take as many byes as you like; the first one or two will score 0.5 points; any more than that score 0 points.

Isn't that what we do in England anyway? If someone asks me when they enter if they can have two byes rather than one, I say "Yes, but you only get 1/2 point for the first one." The implication is the 2nd would score 0. I rather assumed that was what every English tournament did?

Howell as James Bond

I've given more than one half-point bye in my tournaments before, mostly for rather odd reasons. (Example: player takes a half-point bye in round 1, then turns up between the re-pairing time and the default time for round 2.)

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:38 pm

Ian Thompson wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:17 pm

That seems unnecessarily harsh to me.

I played in a tournament where shared second place was taken by a player with 4/5, three wins and two byes.

I played in a student event once when a cash board prize went to somebody scoring 4.5 out of 6. Four defaults and a draw.

Jonathan Bryant wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:16 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:38 pm

Ian Thompson wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:17 pm

That seems unnecessarily harsh to me.

I played in a tournament where shared second place was taken by a player with 4/5, three wins and two byes.

I played in a student event once when a cash board prize went to somebody scoring 4.5 out of 6. Four defaults and a draw.

That is pretty amazing

Dubov-MVL was an uneventful draw and they are joined on 7/9 by Aronian.

Ah right, I was wondering who was actually winning the thing! I find it a difficult event to keep track of, with so many top names, and naturally this forum rather focuses on the procedures and transparency in claiming half point byes.

Naka still doing well, I presume? ?

Not sure his board hasn't suffered a screenfreeze. (Also Howell's.)

David's has restarted and not to his advantage. Nakamura-Rapport currently showing no moves at all.