Hastings13-14

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
John Moore
Posts: 1806
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by John Moore » Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:04 pm

Here's a real shock from Round 2 - Ke Mu 0-1 Tom Stonehouse.

Richard Bates
Posts: 2942
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Richard Bates » Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:27 pm

John Moore wrote:Here's a real shock from Round 2 - Ke Mu 0-1 Tom Stonehouse.
Is he a promising junior? ;)

Graham Borrowdale

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Graham Borrowdale » Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:32 pm

Not if he is the same T Stonehouse I played in one of the minor sections at Hastings in 1981 !

Richard Bates
Posts: 2942
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Richard Bates » Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:33 pm

Graham Borrowdale wrote:Not if he is the same T Stonehouse I played in one of the minor sections at Hastings in 1981 !
You're only as old as you feel!

John Moore
Posts: 1806
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by John Moore » Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:37 pm

Great result for a nice guy who I inadvertently lost to a county match some years ago. He'll have a great pairing tomorrow.

John R Moore
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by John R Moore » Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:56 pm

Beating someone who is 530 ELO points above you is certainly a fantastic achievement !

Keith Arkell
Posts: 724
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:10 am

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Keith Arkell » Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:09 pm

Thanks for the replies guys. I guess I would prefer it if the rules were clear cut. In the same way as, for example, ' if a player is more than half an hour late then he/she will be defaulted'.

Nick Pert
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:26 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Nick Pert » Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:18 pm

If it makes you feel better Keith I was also refused a bye for the London Classic last year despite requesting in advance of the tournament which is why I was forced to miss the whole event, because I had an event that I had to attend. I've been really unwell over Christmas so I'm just pleased to have actually made it to Hastings although I am not expecting much in terms of chess performance. I'm happy to start on whatever score the organisers choose, but of course would prefer 1 point over 0 points!

Carol Williams
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:27 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Carol Williams » Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:26 pm

Hi Nick - glad from all of us that you have made it to Hastings - hope that you are feeling better.

Would like to see some rules regarding quick draws!

Richard Bates
Posts: 2942
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Richard Bates » Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:31 pm

Keith Arkell wrote:Thanks for the replies guys. I guess I would prefer it if the rules were clear cut. In the same way as, for example, ' if a player is more than half an hour late then he/she will be defaulted'.
I sort of assumed that such "rules" were linked to the receipt of conditions - in which case one wouldn't really expect them to be made publicly available but agreed privately when conditions are accepted (assuming that the definition of 'conditions' isn't extended to include free entry). It would seem somewhat unfair if a GM not in receipt of conditions should be more restricted in their ability to take half point byes than an IM in the same position. In general i would never be in favour of half point byes being agreed after the tournament (including publication of first round draw) has commenced, as opposed to in advance. I think it would then be possible to use as a tactically beneficial device.

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1421
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Alex McFarlane » Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:44 pm

Hastings Masters Round: 3


Table White Fed Score Result Black Fed Score

1 2452 IM Vakhidov, Jahongir UZB 2 2595 GM Ma, Qun CHN 2
2 2500 GM Gormally, Daniel W ENG 2 2160 Haria, Ravi ENG 2
3 2598 GM Khenkin, Igor GER 1.5 2471 GM Flear, Glenn C ENG 2
4 1772 Stonehouse, Tom H ENG 2 2649 GM Mchedlishvili, Mikheil GEO 1.5
5 2569 GM Tomczak, Jacek POL 1.5 2047 Mueller, Constantin GER 2
6 2317 IM Knott, Simon J B ENG 1.5 2519 GM Gordon, Stephen J ENG 1.5
7 2512 IM Hawkins, Jonathan ENG 1.5 2375 IM Mannion, Stephen R SCO 1.5
8 2496 GM Rahman, Ziaur BAN 1.5 2282 IM Prosviriakov, Vladimir USA 1.5
9 2355 IM Foisor, Cristina-Adela ROU 1.5 2438 GM Arkell, Keith C ENG 1.5
10 2434 GM Cherniaev, Alexander RUS 1.5 2189 IM Marusenko, Petr UKR 1.5
11 2223 Kett, Tim WLS 1.5 2397 IM Foisor, Ovidiu-Doru ROU 1.5
12 2216 WIM Foisor, Mihaela-Veronica ROU 1.5 2381 IM Fernandez, Daniel Howard SIN 1.5
13 2560 GM Hebden, Mark L ENG 1 2081 FM Cafferty, Bernard ENG 1.5
14 2554 GM Pert, Nicholas ENG 1 2025 Taylor, Adam C ENG 1.5
15 2425 IM Sarkar, Justin USA 1 1916 Halfhide, Sebastian NED 1.5
16 2387 IM Milliet, Sophie FRA 1 1693 Brewer, Callum D ENG 1.5
17 2138 Sugden, John N ENG 1 2431 IM Wegerle, Joerg GER 1
18 2378 Kipper, Jens GER 1 2118 Harari, Zaki ENG 1
19 2124 Jaunooby, Ali R ENG 1 2339 FM Radovanovic, Jovica SRB 1
20 2326 FM Sowray, Peter J ENG 1 2082 Lenier, Jude A ENG 1
21 2088 Brown, Thomas WLS 1 2325 FM Erzhanov, Arman KAZ 1
22 2282 Jackson, James P ENG 1 2078 Villiers, Thomas ENG 1
23 2269 Harvey, Marcus R ENG 1 1988 Pickersgill, Adrian O ENG 1
24 2258 FM Stewart, Neil GER 1 2008 Spanton, Tim R ENG 1
25 2246 FM Ledger, Dave J ENG 1 1975 Fernandez, Michael ENG 1
26 2245 Repplinger, Marc GER 1 1914 Othman, Mustapha NGR 1
27 2037 Helmer, Christoph GER 1 2209 Schuster, Martin GER 1
28 2199 McPhillips, Joseph ENG 1 1899 Staniforth, Matthew WLS 1
29 1998 Oyama, Akito ENG 1 2195 FM Eames, Robert S ENG 1
30 1983 Taylor, Adam A ENG 1 2192 Rayner, Francis WLS 1
31 1902 Young, Mel J ENG 1 2188 Wadsworth, Matthew J ENG 1
32 1868 Low, Zhen Yu Cyrus SIN 1 2149 Kvisla, Johannes Luangtep NOR 1
33 2138 Burnett, Jim ENG 1 1833 Willson, Ollie ENG 1
34 1932 Flynn, David ENG 0.5 2302 Mu, Ke CHN 0.5
35 2229 Snape, Ian L ENG 0.5 1972 Roggensack, Hans Peter GER 0.5
36 2218 CM Rowe, Duane JAM 0.5 1942 ter Steeg, Marcus, Dr. GER 0.5
37 1873 Obsieger, Hendrik, Dr. GER 0.5 2200 Kewes, Gerd GER 0.5
38 2195 Anderson, John ENG 0.5 1832 Clayton, Tristan ENG 0.5
39 2176 WIM Atkins, Rita ENG 0.5 1735 McKenna, John R ENG 0.5
40 1727 Gunn, Michael J ENG 0.5 2167 WFM Chlost, Marlena POL 0.5
41 2151 Bianco, Valerio ITA 0.5 1718 French, Max ENG 0.5
42 1597 Dean, Michael ENG 0.5 2060 Degro, Heiko GER 0.5
43 2013 Pettersen, Joar Gullestad NOR 0.5 1672 * Fell, Colin C ENG 0.5
44 2291 FM Strugnell, Carl FRA 0 1736 Macrae, James S SCO 0
45 2272 FM Croad, Nicolas NZL 0 1605 Shierlaw, Hamish ENG 0
46 1648 Witt, Holger GER 0 1848 Dennis, Nigel W ENG 0
47 1674 Mitchell, Robert NZL 0 0 * To be arranged 0

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4018
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Stewart Reuben » Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:39 am

Keith the current Law actually states

6.6
a. Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game. Thus the default time is 0 minutes. The rules of a competition may specify otherwise.
b. If the rules of a competition specify a different default time, the following shall apply. If neither player is present initially, the player who has the white pieces shall lose all the time that elapses until he arrives, unless the rules of the competition specify or the arbiter decides otherwise.

So Hastings specifies 30 minutes. But a player might turn up even later and might not lose by default. An extreme example. The player is a doctor. On his way he aids somebody who is ill and saves his life. He arrives more than 30 minutes late. He would not lose.

Some organisers would have defaulted both you and Jonathan in the second round of this event after your instant draw.

Keith Arkell
Posts: 724
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:10 am

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Keith Arkell » Mon Dec 30, 2013 1:09 am

Nick Pert wrote:If it makes you feel better Keith I was also refused a bye for the London Classic last year despite requesting in advance of the tournament which is why I was forced to miss the whole event, because I had an event that I had to attend. I've been really unwell over Christmas so I'm just pleased to have actually made it to Hastings although I am not expecting much in terms of chess performance. I'm happy to start on whatever score the organisers choose, but of course would prefer 1 point over 0 points!
Nothing personal against you Nick, and good to see you're here. I have no problem at all with us guys being granted half point byes. At Coulsdon 2008 I also began with 2 of them, and anyway they hardly increase our chances of doing well. If you were also refused one at the Classic then we are in the same boat.

It is this inconsistency which I'm addressing here. It is one of the few areas in chess which is often neglected (though not always) in the tournament rules. Also, I would prefer it if all players were treated equally in this respect, irrespective of how much they paid or were paid to play, though I guess I understand why this isn't the case.
Carol Williams wrote:
Would like to see some rules regarding quick draws!
In that case look up 'Sofia Rules' Carol! Fortunately, for the sake of many of us, particularly on new years day, they are not applicable at Hastings :D

Keith Arkell
Posts: 724
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:10 am

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Keith Arkell » Mon Dec 30, 2013 1:27 am

Stewart Reuben wrote:
Some organisers would have defaulted both you and Jonathan in the second round of this event after your instant draw.
All well and good Stewart, except, unlike the players from the following extract from Wikipedia, Jonathan and me didn't have an 'instant draw' :?

'Once, in the last round of a tournament (Luton, UK, 1975), with Miles needing a draw for first place, and his opponent, Stewart Reuben, wanting a draw for a high placing, he agreed a draw without playing any moves. The arbiter decided to give both players no points for this non-game; the players claimed this "game" had been played often, when players prearranged a draw – this was the only time it had been scored 0–0, rather than playing out some anodyne non-moves. This sparked a hefty amount of correspondence in British chess journals.' :lol: :lol: :lol:

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4018
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Hastings13-14

Post by Stewart Reuben » Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:13 am

Interesting that about Wikipedia and completely wrong. Should I bother to get it corrected?
The arbiter suggested we play no moves after we told him we had a pre-arranged draw. Tony and I were rather taken aback, but signed the scoresheets 1 draw agreed. We were perfectly prepared to play some token moves as you Keith did in round 2. The 'game' was scored as a draw and we received our prize money accordingly. A complaint was made by the organiser the following day when he find out.

More recently the Laws have been changed, possibly be me. A move is required from both players for it to constitute a game. Since the flak of 1975 I have always asked to players to play some token moves. Thus the fact is, that the only completely honest game of this nature. was that between Tony and me. I still believe what we did was best as there was no dishonesty at all. I loathe the idea of concocted games, especially if it isn't at all obvious this is what they are.

Gallagher v Arkell British Championship last round Scarborough 1999. A 3 move draw, if I remember correctly. I never discussed it with you, but I suspect this was NOT pre-arranged. i.e. Joe only knew what was in your mind after you made your third move, made the offer and pressed the clock.

Tom Stonehouse had no opponent for round 1 at Hastings. I said I was prepared to act as a filler, but quite expected him to say, 'no thanks'. That is what happened. We have known each other for about 50 years, went on holiday together once and even taught at the same school for a period. Thus Tom scored a win bye. Who could have expected him to win in round 2!

Post Reply