|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-09-08 | | acirce: <WannaBe> Because the devil rules the world, apparently. |
|
| Jun-09-08 | | dx9293: <WannaBe>
1, 2. I know the Intel/PCA Grand Prix series in the mid-1990s used it. I don't know of its use before then. 3.The PCA adopted it in order to decide the winner of rapid matches without them going on indefinitely, as the tournament was run elimination-style. 4.Because it's friendlier to scheduling (i.e., matches can't go on indefinitely). 5.Because if they didn't agree, they wouldn't be able to play in the event and wouldn't be entitled to the money that comes from it. |
|
| Jun-10-08 | | acirce: Well, I still like my explanation better. |
|
| Jun-10-08 | | Karpova: <diabloprancer: The real tragedy here is that the Women's World Champion was decided by an Armageddon game.> No, it wasn't:
FIDE Women's World Championship (2006) |
|
| Jun-10-08 | | diabloprancer: *US Women's Champion.*
My bad. |
|
| Jun-13-08 | | dx9293: Very classy lady. Before I was neutral, now I'm a fan of hers: <http://main.uschess.org/content/vie...; |
|
| Jun-13-08 | | dumbgai: Irina Krush could learn a lesson here about sportsmanship. Notice how Anna Zatonskih didn't say anything disparaging about her opponent and even thanked her for a good fight and wished her luck. |
|
| Jun-13-08 | | dx9293: <dumbgai> Exactly. |
|
| Jun-13-08 | | Augalv: <dumbgai: Notice how Anna Zatonskih didn't say anything disparaging about her opponent> She didn't need to.
All she wanted was to win the US Women's Championship for which she resorted to dirty clock tactics. <and even thanked her for a good fight and wished her luck.> How arrogant.
|
|
| Jun-13-08 | | dumbgai: <Augalv> If anybody broke a rule during the armageddon blitz, it was Krush. Not that rules matter of course, since according to her subjective moral standards of behavior as defined by herself are more important than rules. And it's arrogant to thank your opponent and wish her luck, but it's okay to openly accuse your opponent of intentionally cheating when they didn't? |
|
| Jun-13-08 | | RookFile: <All she wanted was to win the US Women's Championship for which she resorted to dirty clock tactics.> 1) <She wanted to win the US Women's Championship> Well, that sounds like the worst thing I've ever heard of. 2) <she resorted to dirty clock tricks> Yeah, the kind that the TDs didn't have a problem with, and ones that Krush herself was doing too. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | StarJock: Both Anna and Irina are excellent chess players. Both have a tremendous fighting spirit and play with integrity. They should not have been subjected to an Armageddon style time control for the deciding match. It is undignified and should not be used in Championship matches. The USCF Administration and President are to blame for allowing it. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | RookFile: I think a mud wrestling contest would be better. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | VaselineTopLove: I think they should declare co-champions from next time onwards or have an Armageddon match played out on the computer, using ICC or Chessbase software, where it will be impossible to move your piece or punch your clock before your opponent has played his/her move. (Pre-move option should be deactivated also). |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | Petrosianic: The problem with <any> Armageddon Match is what Irina belatedly noticed: That it's possible to win without demonstrating superiority over the opponent. Black can win the title by drawing the game. Or by winning on time in a lost position. Are we willing to accept results like that, or not? |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | RookFile: Clock management is a part of chess. Without them, a master might have a chance against a GM. So, despite the advantage of the white pieces, and extra time, Krush was unable to demonstrate a win. Anna showed defensive resourcefulness and deservedly won the title. Winning a game on time has always been an accepted way of winning, ever since clocks were introduced. |
|
Jun-14-08
 | | paulalbert: RE: <Petrosianic> 's inquiry " Are we willing to accept the Armageddon Match result? First, it's not up to us. I believe the tiebreak method was established in advance (thus, not unknown to the players ) who I am reasonably sure signed a contract with the organizers accepting the rules of the competition and agreeing to any forms of dispute resolution. As a chess patron myself, I certainly would insist on this to protect myself from litigation. Also, as I pointed out in my early comment on this situation way back, the Armageddon is only resorted to after more conventional games have been unsuccessful in breaking the tie. Inherent in the Armageddon solution is a time and draw odds handicap, and here the person with more time lost on time. The dispute has arisen on a technical rules issue. Was Anna moving before Irina had completed her move and what do the rules say? From the erudite research and discussion on this matter by others, it does not seem that any concrete rules were broken. Lessons learned from this situation: The move timing issue needs to be clarified in the rules and perhaps it would be better to have a time increment in Armageddon to enhance the probability of the result coming from the results on the board rather than the time element. As I said earlier, a shootout in football to break a tie is not ideal ( and there can be similar rule disputes: did the keeper move before the shot? ) but it's a pragmatic solution known by the players in advance, subject to theoretical discussion and dispute, but the results stand until something new ( and understood before the competition begins) is in effect the next time. Quite rightly here, the results stand. In any competition,a close and, unfortunately, controversial result is always tough on the loser. Both Anna and Irina are to be commended for outstanding competitive performances. Paul Albert |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | Augalv: <1) <She wanted to win the US Women's Championship> Well, that sounds like the worst thing I've ever heard of.> You left out the word <All> This is what I wrote: <All she wanted was to win the US Women's Championship> Meaning: Zatonskih didn't want to do it by legal means. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | cannibal: <Augalv: This is what I wrote: <All she wanted was to win the US Women's Championship>
Meaning: Zatonskih didn't want to do it by legal means.> I think it's been stated about a billion times before, but a) There is no hint whatsoever, that Zatonskih thought she was doing something illegal during the game. b) In fact, as far as I know, there was wide consensus that what she did wasn't illegal at all, at least there's definitely no consensus that it was. So instead of posting ridiculous and baseless accusations like that, you might as well not post at all. (Btw, in your opinion, did Irina want to win by legal means only? If so, why did she hit the clock after knocking a rook off the board without even picking it up? That's by far the most "illegal" thing I've seen in that game) It's not a great thing to have a championship decided by little tricks like moving close to the clock, but all in all, Irina has only herself to blame for this. I mean, has she never played blitz before? She could have done anything to win this on time: First of all, if you leave your jacket on and adjust your sleeves after every single move, no wonder you're gonna lose on time. And why not just give a crazy unexpected check in the end (and capture the king if Anna moves the rook again), or even delay your clock-hitting for a split second, so Anna would have actually hit the clock first (which would have meant her own clock would have been running after her move).
And I'm pretty sure the reasons why she didn't do any of this were not moral doubts of any kind. She just wasn't clever enough, that's all. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | RookFile: <Augalv: You left out the word <All> > Hey thanks. With insights like that, I'm sure you've got a promising future. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | Akavall: <This is what I wrote: <All she wanted was to win the US Women's Championship> Meaning: Zatonskih didn't want to do it by legal means.> <All she wanted was to win the US Women's Championship> Does not mean
<Zatonskih didn't want to do it by legal means.> |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | Augalv: <So instead of posting ridiculous and baseless accusations like that, you might as well not post at all.> My accussations are based on the following: Zatonskih moved within Irina's time. If Irina had done the same she would have won quite easily considering she had a large time advantage. <Btw, in your opinion, did Irina want to win by legal means only? If so, why did she hit the clock after knocking a rook off the board without even picking it up? That's by far the most "illegal" thing I've seen in that game)> The rook was knocked off because Zatonskih didn't wait for Irina to hit the clock. If she had, the Rook definitely wouldn't have fallen. Her hands were too much in Irina's way for her to be able to make a move without knocking off a piece. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | lorker: Everyone moves in the other person's time when they're down to their last seconds. You have to do that or you will lose. And as even world reknown people like Gijssen have said this isn't illegal, one shouldnt say Anna Zatonskih did anything illegal. She was just trying to win, as was Irina Krush, who it seemed to me was behaving just as badly, if not worse. |
|
| Jun-14-08 | | RookFile: I guess that's the point that keeps sailing over Augalv's head. The TD went to all that trouble to report that what Zatonskih did was not illegal, but he won't pay any attention to that little detail. |
|
| Jul-17-08 | | brankat: Happy Birthday Anna! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
