retire come back Whats next

  

Back to forum


Dorel Oltean    (2006-11-19)
retire, come back. What's next ?

Is allowed to retire from FICGS tournaments (loosing around 10 games on time) and then come back to resume unfinished games and start new ones? The answer is YES , it happened and , after more then a week from my previous message, it seems it can happen again. The soft reaction of the administrator of the site and the totally (surprising for me) lack of reaction from any FICGS member showed it’s only me who has a problem. (Maybe, by changing the subject, my message was hidden behind the discussions about ‘the 60 days rule’). I cannot accept that ! For me chess is a serious thing. I consider chess a sport where the equality of chances and the respect for the competition must be the first rules. So I decided to retire from all FICGS tournaments . In M02 group I didn’t finished any game so my retiring will not affect the final standing. In WCH M01 I have only one unfinished game and my opponent will finish second last anyway. So my withdraw will only permit someone else to finish first and qualify instead of me. In my last group, A02 I wish to finish my remaining game (if I am allowed) than I will leave, with real sorrow, FICGS for good. Whishing you nice games Dorel Oltean


Charlie Neil    (2006-11-19 17:05:27)
Retire and come back.

I'm sorry to read that you feel you have to leave because of the behaviour of some other people. I think that is just one of the drawbacks of having a free site on the internet. Anyone can join our "club" and conduct themselves in an unsporting manner. I think it is just one of those things. I have been the victim of similar unsportsman like behaviour in over the board games, by post and on similar sites here on the net. I just think you get that tiny minotiry (and that is all they are) who mess around. I do like playing on ficgs and , (so far) have been paired with well-mannered opponents who play fair. I have had a number of silent withdrawals but that is to be expected. I am just sad to think if any well meaning players would leave because of someone messing around. But life's like that, that's the way it is.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-19 17:56:13)
Retire and come back.

Hello Dorel.

I'm very sorry about that, but actually Charlie just said everything.

"It is just one of the drawbacks of having a free site on the internet."

This was only an obvious example, but the problem is quite more complex... What about a player who just looses a game on time and continue his other games. Farther, why a player should draw to another one and win to a third. Any result in any round-robin tournament is partly 'aleatory' and depends on many other factors than chess, particularly rules.

It also happens in over the board tournaments to get prizes, it can happen everywhere and at ICCF too... That's why I prefer knockout system. Of course, I'd like to solve all problems, but no rules are perfect. (by the way all suggestions are welcome)


The original post was in 'temps de réflexion' thread :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=1453


Best wishes.


Marius Zubac    (2006-11-19 19:21:59)
A penalty system is needed

Hello Thibault. I think that time has come for you to add new rules to FICGS and a penalty system (using penalty points) to discourage players from retire-comeback behavior. Loosing some games on time unless provoked by some unforeseen event should be also penalized although less severe. Upon reaching a certain number of penalty points the player should be prevented to register for new FICGS tournaments (let's say a half a year) and on resuming the penalized player should be only allowed to play a limited number of games until the lesson is learned. If you would compare FICGS list with the server-based IECG list you should notice that FICGS is less populated in the strong players section (2200+) than IECG and this has an impact on the quality of high-end tournaments, norms and titles and of course ratings. If we want to improve FICGS some action in this regard must be taken. I sympathize with Mr. Oltean and wish he reconsiders his decision. Marius


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-19 21:40:49)
Re: A penalty system is needed

Hello Marius, thanks for suggestions.

My problem is : How to deal with ie. a player who can't play (personal or any good reasons) during a while and looses only one or two games on time in a tournament ? .. How to prove a 'retirement' ? .. Above all, we have to avoid cases that could be undecided by the rules.

Of course, IECG server is more populated in the strong player section ! .. But there is no link with this in my opinion, IECG - International Email Chess Group - exists for more than 10 years, it's a long way. I regularly read IECG forum but I did not try IECG server yet.

I only know that IECG & FICGS servers started about the same time (FICGS started one or two weeks before IECG server), as Ortwin gave me some advices about the server before it started...


Marius Zubac    (2006-11-20 00:25:05)
The penalty system - a proposal

A player that for a (good) reason is not able to continue his games should have two choices: A) Let some games get lost on time and then he would be treated under the penalty system. B) Ask for a retirement and in this case no penalties should be applied. Once a player asks for retirement the following actions should be taken: 1. His status in the rating list should be flagged to retired; perhaps a retired player should not be able to register a new tournament; 2. A retired player could get re-instated by applying directly to the FICGS adjudication commission; 3. All the retired player’s running games should then be frozen and dealt with on a by tournament basis: 3a) if in a tournament the retired player has finished games that are not lost the remaining games should be adjudicated by FICGS for rating purposes. However all the retired player’s games should not be counted for qualification purposes (if the tournament provides qualification to a next stage); how the games are to be considered for norms is a matter to be discussed. 3b) if in a tournament the retired player has finished games that are all lost the tournament director can act as in 3a) or has the option of canceling all the retired player’s games. This proposal is far from perfect but shows that we are not helpless and some action can be taken. The reason I mentioned IECG is because probably on the server the population is roughly equivalent with the FICGS’s one but in IECG’s case the distributed is more favorable in the upper section. This is the reason why there is enough active population at any given time for new tournaments and severe rules are not needed as much as in FICGS’s case in order to maintain a meaningful activity. My belief is that the centaur mode will prove in time to generate stronger games, stronger chess and FICGS will have chances to become in time the most relevant correspondence chess server. The technical conditions are already met. Marius


Lawrence Nesko    (2006-11-20 00:52:58)
Perhaps a silly question, but...

Hello, all. I'm new to the world of correspondence chess. So if my question is naive, or has been answered at some point in the past, I apologize. It seems that there are no single-elimination tournaments available on FICGS. Why is this? Please don't take this question as a form of comlaint. I'm merely curious. Have I overlooked something? Or is it simply not the norm in the chess world, correspondence or otherwise?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-20 01:03:54)
Re: Perhaps a silly question, but...

Hello Lawrence.

Do you mean "knockout tournament" ?

Reason is simple, it doesn't make sense in correspondence chess, as time controls are too slow and rounds can't be played at the same time. On the contrary, in round-robin tournaments all rounds can be played at the same time...

But knockout system is great and it remains in FICGS chess WCH, which is a multi-stages tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-20 01:33:29)
Re: The penalty system - a proposal

Ok, I say why not... But once again the problem is : What to do if a player looses only one game on time (after 12 moves, very small advantage for his opponent) in a tournament ? .. How to be sure he has bad or good reasons ? How to prove a 'retirement' ? .. My opinion is you can't prevent all cheating attempts (obvious or agreements between players), but we have to discourage them as much as possible. At IECG, there are many tournament directors but a player can withdraw from a tournament without loosing a single point, and there are consequences on the result in all ways.

CJS Purdy : "The only valid excuse for withdrawal from a chess tournament is death, and then only with a death certificate" :)

I think FICGS rules are quite hard already. Most important is to follow clear rules, with no human decision as much as possible. Still looking for improvements.


Lawrence Nesko    (2006-11-20 01:39:51)
Thank you....

...for the timely and informative response, Thibault.