Arbitration question

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5802
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sun Nov 01, 2020 9:33 am

"Anybody who wins a game by default goes to the bottom of the score group."

Again, that's a bit unfair as it's not usually your fault if you win on default. But I accept that tie-break systems all have faults.

At the Civil Service Championship, (as we had three trophies to distribute) we had at one stage:-

1) who beat whom
2) Sum Progressive Scores
3) Sum of Opponents' Scores
4) Sonneborn-Berger

trying to cover everything, then one year Neil Graham was arbiter and added "5) Pistols at dawn", which made everyone laugh. However, several years later, the players sharing second and third place were level on all 4 official tie-breaks. We didn't use 5)... Someone suggested, "5) player playing more games with black". We asked the two players what they thought and they happily agreed to that. One year we had a blitz play-off, but that has to be done straight after the last games finish. Someone who finished early might have relaxed, and the one who's just finished might be tired. So we gave that up.

So in answer to the original question, use whatever you like, just make sure you tell everyone in advance.

NickFaulks
Posts: 8452
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Nov 01, 2020 9:48 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun Nov 01, 2020 9:33 am
Someone who finished early might have relaxed
In North America, where playoffs are the norm, this has tended to mean spending their winnings getting completely blotto - or, in Bermuda's case, taking full advantage of the hospitality tent.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 3148
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Wed Nov 04, 2020 1:24 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Sat Oct 31, 2020 4:20 pm
You'd have to be extraordinarily unlucky for TPR to not break a tie, so put that one somewhere in the list.
Sorry, how is TPR calculated?

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4539
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Wed Nov 04, 2020 7:11 pm

TPR is quite laborious by hand, You consider each game played separately. Look at the rating of the opponent. If you draw, you get his rating. If you win, you et his rating + 400. If you lose his rating -400. Then add everything up.
Much simpler is to take the Rating average of your opponents. If one game didn't take place, then just forget about that game.

Disadvantage. If the opponent is more than +400 higher, or greater than -400 below, the result is distorted.

The main problem of splitting prizes is that, say there are 3 players involved in the tie and the total sum is 1000. Then each player gets 333.33. That can only be worked out by the treasurer after the games have finished.
There is another one. If players are eligible for more than one prize and also have the rule that no player can get more thn one prize. I have no intention of explaining the ramifications of that one.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 3148
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Wed Nov 04, 2020 7:35 pm

So what should be the tie-break system?

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 3148
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Fri Nov 06, 2020 7:33 pm

This Friday, my Tie-break systems were
1-Direct encounter 2-Bucholz's 3-Average rating of opponents
https://lichess.org/swiss/Fuxemg9z
How do I calulate Average rating of opponents when a player had a bye the last round?

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4815
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford
Contact:

Re: Arbitration question

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Fri Nov 06, 2020 9:32 pm

The same way you always calculate it: add up the ratings of the players he played and divide by the number of games he played.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 3148
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Aug 07, 2021 9:21 am

Thanks.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 3148
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Aug 07, 2021 9:29 am

Given:

happening in an unsupervised rapid tournament, what would be the judgement if Black, disregards the mate and plays Kxf7, after which White plays exf7, where Black stops the clock, summons the arbiter, and claims illegal move by White?

Matthew Turner
Posts: 3600
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Matthew Turner » Sat Aug 07, 2021 10:13 am

Checkmate ends the game, so Black didn't play Kxf7 because there wasn't a game in progress at that point.

Joseph Conlon
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:18 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Joseph Conlon » Sat Aug 07, 2021 12:35 pm

This reminds me of a couple of arbitration questions I had meant to ask about arising from my events, both from the top section.

1. One player makes a desperado queen sacrifice to force stalemate. The other player was carefully considering the position, but capturing the queen was forced leading to stalemate. Strictly, before the capture the position was dead and so (as I understand it) the game is already over. However it seemed churlish to step in rather than allowing the game to be played out to the natural conclusion. Do arbiters ever step in to declare the game over in such a position?

2. White makes a move and fails to press the clock which ticks for several minutes. At this point, observing his clock running, White then makes a second move (which would be otherwise legal in the position) somewhat to Black’s surprise. I treated this as an illegal action but I was unsure whether I should have treated it as an illegal move.

Thanks for guidance,

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2720
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Adam Raoof » Sat Aug 07, 2021 7:12 pm

Joseph Conlon wrote:
Sat Aug 07, 2021 12:35 pm
This reminds me of a couple of arbitration questions I had meant to ask about arising from my events, both from the top section.

1. One player makes a desperado queen sacrifice to force stalemate. The other player was carefully considering the position, but capturing the queen was forced leading to stalemate. Strictly, before the capture the position was dead and so (as I understand it) the game is already over. However it seemed churlish to step in rather than allowing the game to be played out to the natural conclusion. Do arbiters ever step in to declare the game over in such a position?

2. White makes a move and fails to press the clock which ticks for several minutes. At this point, observing his clock running, White then makes a second move (which would be otherwise legal in the position) somewhat to Black’s surprise. I treated this as an illegal action but I was unsure whether I should have treated it as an illegal move.

Thanks for guidance,
1. Generally I would not interfere with the players, and allow them to conclude the game.

2. I think this is an irregularity, rather than an illegal move - so as the arbiter I might (or might not) give the player with the Black pieces some extra time to compensate.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1857
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Joey Stewart » Sat Aug 07, 2021 10:07 pm

I remember years ago one of my school mates did a really dirty trick similar to this moving out of checkmate idea - his opponent had successfully defended king Vs pawn into a stalemate position but he forced him to move anyway, and as soon as the guy put his king into check he claimed an illegal move win.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 3148
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sun Aug 08, 2021 7:10 am

Matthew Turner wrote:
Sat Aug 07, 2021 10:13 am
Checkmate ends the game, so Black didn't play Kxf7 because there wasn't a game in progress at that point.
How are you going to figure out that this was mate?

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon
Contact:

Re: Arbitration question

Post by David Sedgwick » Sun Aug 08, 2021 11:00 am

soheil_hooshdaran wrote:
Sun Aug 08, 2021 7:10 am
Matthew Turner wrote:
Sat Aug 07, 2021 10:13 am
Checkmate ends the game, so Black didn't play Kxf7 because there wasn't a game in progress at that point.
How are you going to figure out that this was mate?
You seem to have been able to recreate the sequence of events, so surely the arbiter could also have done that.

Post Reply