Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

The very latest International round up of English news.

Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election?

Poll ended at Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:05 am

Arkady Dvorkovich
5
11%
Georgios Makropoulos
9
20%
Nigel Short
22
48%
None of the Above
10
22%
 
Total votes: 46

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1689
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Michael Farthing » Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:22 am

Sorry Roger. That is not the correct answer. It fulfills the percentages exactly, but it is not the lowest that would yield these percentages correct to one decimal place

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1689
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Michael Farthing » Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:26 am

Clue: Rather curiously and totally by chance, at this very moment, the correct answer is displayed on this page (but it will not be so for long).

shaunpress
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:41 am

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by shaunpress » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:47 pm

Chris Rice wrote:
Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:48 am

Now Dvorkovich or Short would be thinking that "may be" will be taken as including federations that would vote for Makro and excluding those that don't. As Roger says above Dr Siegel is part of the Makro team so he's clearly conflicted. So perfectly legitimate for Kouatly to argue what he did. As for FIDE following the procedures laid down correctly, don't make me laugh. Past Presidential campaigns have shown how corrupt this body is when it wants to cling on to power. Perhaps Dr Siegel's over reaction is testament to the pressure that Makro's team are feeling.
Kouatly also quoted Finance Regulation 6.2

A federation that is two years in arrears shall be temporarily excluded.

I would have though the "shall" in 6.2 takes precedence over the "may" in A2.5. These sorts of issues (contradictory sections, sloppy wording, out of date references etc) occur throughout the Handbook and despite being told on a number of occasions that it was going to be 'fixed' I'm wondering if this is actually a feature and not a bug. If it becomes clear that the majority of federations in arrears might vote the "wrong" way, then the GA may not even need to be involved, with "oh sorry, 6.2 does take precedence after all" being the call.

Chris Rice
Posts: 2524
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Chris Rice » Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:53 am

shaunpress wrote:
Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:47 pm
Chris Rice wrote:
Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:48 am

Now Dvorkovich or Short would be thinking that "may be" will be taken as including federations that would vote for Makro and excluding those that don't. As Roger says above Dr Siegel is part of the Makro team so he's clearly conflicted. So perfectly legitimate for Kouatly to argue what he did. As for FIDE following the procedures laid down correctly, don't make me laugh. Past Presidential campaigns have shown how corrupt this body is when it wants to cling on to power. Perhaps Dr Siegel's over reaction is testament to the pressure that Makro's team are feeling.
Kouatly also quoted Finance Regulation 6.2

A federation that is two years in arrears shall be temporarily excluded.

I would have though the "shall" in 6.2 takes precedence over the "may" in A2.5. These sorts of issues (contradictory sections, sloppy wording, out of date references etc) occur throughout the Handbook and despite being told on a number of occasions that it was going to be 'fixed' I'm wondering if this is actually a feature and not a bug. If it becomes clear that the majority of federations in arrears might vote the "wrong" way, then the GA may not even need to be involved, with "oh sorry, 6.2 does take precedence after all" being the call.
Further to this Peter Doggers has written an article FIDE Elections: 'Fake News' And The Call For Transparency which provides a breakdown of a recent exchange of letters among chess officials, and what it means for the FIDE presidential elections.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5611
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:47 pm

Chris Rice wrote:
Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:48 am
So perfectly legitimate for Kouatly to argue what he did.
Going by the Doggers article, not particularly.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Chris Rice
Posts: 2524
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Chris Rice » Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:20 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:47 pm
Chris Rice wrote:
Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:48 am
So perfectly legitimate for Kouatly to argue what he did.
Going by the Doggers article, not particularly.
Perhaps you should read it again.

Doggers "Although the reasons might be plausible and fair, they definitely need more explanation, and it remains to be seen how serious it is that FIDE went against its own regulations. It's a topic that surely will be discussed at the FIDE Congress in Batumi."

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5611
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:29 pm

I think Chris that before someone claims there is a letter saying that that parties will not be allowed to participate in the General Assembly, I'd like there to be a letter saying that parties will not be allowed to participate in the General Assembly.

I would also like not to read the paragraph
Chess.com asked the FIDE delegates by email whether such a letter from FIDE exists, in which a deadline of July 23 was mentioned. None of the delegates that responded had received such a letter.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5611
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:42 pm

I mean tastes may differ, but if I were Dr Siegel and I read that a letter had been sent, the consequences of which would be the exclusion of federations, and I had written not a word to that effect, I might think I had some serious cause for complaint. "Misleading" would be a kinder description than this merits.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Chris Rice
Posts: 2524
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Chris Rice » Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:11 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:42 pm
I mean tastes may differ, but if I were Dr Siegel and I read that a letter had been sent, the consequences of which woujd be the exclusion of federations, and I had written not a word to that effect, I might think I had some serious cause for complaint. "Misleading" would be a kinder description than this merits.
My main point was that given what's gone on in the past and the woolly wording in the statutes/regs there is a fear that certain federations that in theory would vote against Makro will be excluded. This seemed a legitimate enough reason for Kouatly to argue the point.
I do take your point that Kouatly appears mixed up as to the sources of his concerns and with the interpretation of communications that had been sent which of course unfortunately diminishes the strength of his argument. My take on the Doggers article was that despite the holes in Kouatly's statement FIDE still have a case to answer.
On Dr Siegel, tastes differ as you say, but I find his aggressive responses to be surprising. I've found in the past that when people start shouting when challenged its quite often a sign that they don't want anyone to look too deep into what they are doing.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5611
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:23 pm

I dunno, it may be just a natural reaction to people suggesting he's saying things he hasn't said.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

NickFaulks
Posts: 4469
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by NickFaulks » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:57 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:23 pm
I dunno, it may be just a natural reaction to people suggesting he's saying things he hasn't said.
It's an election campaign, get used to it. There will be worse.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 5611
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:47 pm

Oh for sure, politics ain't beanbag as the Americans say.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Chris Rice
Posts: 2524
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Chris Rice » Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:20 am

It's amazing how petty some of the arguments have become in this election. The following position, White to play, has become the source of a raging argument on Facebook between Sutovsky and Makro where somehow even Luke McShane gets a mention.


The position is taken from a real game between Makropoulos (2420) and Gabor Kallai (2405) at the Vilcea Festival, Romania in 1984. I won't give the game in case anyone wants to have a bash at solving the combination but the opening was a c3 Sicilian.

Now the reason its caused much gnashing of teeth is that the position turned up on FIDE Forward's Facebook site with 1700+ likes which rose to over 3000. This caused Sutovsky to write the following post:

"Fake likes campaign is a new low of current FIDE leadership.

An official page of Mr.Makropulos' campaign (FIDE Forward) has the following position from his game a few decades ago when he was a player. Now, have a look: 1700+ likes. Really? Such an impressive combination? Of course not. Huge number of likes overnight, and 99% of them from accounts that have nothing to do with chess? And now let's analyze one move deeper - after all, it is not only Mr. Makropulos who plays chess here. 1700+ likes are identical. Simple automatic standard like. And only 8 (eight) other emoticons. That can not be anything but the fake support campaign.
It is actually a pretty stupid step from Makro's camp. He does not air any program, he does not even try to pretend that his possible reign will be anything more than a continuation of previous policies - just with considerably worse funding, as Russia's and Azeri huge regular funding for the top events will be off, and FIDE never had any proper commercial sponsorship for 32 years of Makro being on top positions. So, he simply can not compete with Dvorkovich on that most important battleground. And he informs/reminds all, that he was a strong IM and that is with Nigel Short running for the same post. And official Makro's campaign page buys hundreds of fictious likes to show an alleged support he has. Well, Makro, it can't be you really. You are anything but stupid. Adjust!"

As you can imagine there was a huge fire on social media and eventually Makro replied with:

"Dear Emil Sutovsky, With the occasion of your insulting comment, we have posted on the facebook page of FIDE Forward, the explanation why the chess puzzle of my game with Kallai, got so many likes. Copy- pasting your own words; Well, Emil, "it can't be you really. You are anything but stupid. Adjust!"

P.S. If McShane gets 3,000 likes, don’t get panicked again, he is not running for President against Dvorkovich! Moreover, we will be also happy to publish one of your marvelous combinations that you have showed me once in the past."

Makro's full explanation of the 'likes' on the FIDE Forward site was the following:

"FIDE Forward, FIDE for All!

The simple fact that the chess puzzle from the game Makropoulos - Kallai received 2300+ likes, has disturbed 2-3 people who have made several insulting comments, and who in the upcoming elections of FIDE support another ticket and not "FIDE Forward".

We would like to clarify that by spending the "enormous" amount of approximately 4 euros per day, we promote our posts (through face book ads) to those who are presented with the following interests: "Chess", "World Chess Championship", "Chess Opening Encyclopedia" and "FIDE titles". As a result, the chess puzzle has reached up until now 20,672 people. Out of them, 11% decided to like the puzzle. It should be also noted that 8,004 to whom the post reached, were organic. Organic reach is the number of people who see your content without paid distribution.

It is thus obvious that they are neither fake likes and that nor 2,300 people will vote for Makropoulos in Batumi. The expected number of votes that the FIDE Forward ticket will reach there, is in the range of 110 to 115 votes, if we manage to block the unethical methods of our opponents. We are following the same policy of advertising yesterday's nice combination of Luke McShane, and we will keep doing so with the rest of chess puzzles and posts.

Last but not least, in the program of "FIDE Forward", one of the key points is precisely to try and reach all those people who although are interested in chess, they are not actively engaged - and it is easily proved that this is not difficult.

The insulting comments against our posts from some few individuals, actually is also a discrimination, against these 2,300+ people who have made the crime of liking our post, by considering that "they have nothing to do with chess", probably because many of them might not have an official rating or a chessboard in their profile picture. They may not be Grand Masters, but they are still human beings! They are chess fans who are interested in our game...

FIDE Forward believes that FIDE shall not be turned into an elitist group but remain an International Sport Organization which will be politically and financially independent of the influence of any government or country, and where the hundreds of millions of people who love chess can have a voice."

NickFaulks
Posts: 4469
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:37 am

NickFaulks wrote:
Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:57 pm
There will be worse.
Didn't have long to wait. Makro should be happy to be on the same end of Sutovsky's cheating accusations as Mihaela Sandu and John Cooper.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17319
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:44 am

Chris Rice (quoting FIDE) wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:20 am

FIDE Forward believes that FIDE shall not be turned into an elitist group but <B>remain </B> an International Sport Organization which will be politically and financially independent of the influence of any government or country, and where the hundreds of millions of people who love chess can have a voice."
Surely "become" is a better verb than "remain". What of all the visits by Kirsan alongside Russian ambassadors and promises of sports scholarships? That was in support of himself, but also the election of the team now headed by Makro.

Hundreds of millions is a serious exaggeration, but even removing a zero or two from that count or drop down to the list of players, potential players and ex-players on the FIDE and national rating lists, what proposals are there from any of the competing slates to enable "can have a voice"?

Post Reply