Details by Chessdom
Possible scandal at the Women’s World Championship?
This is my summary as I understand it:
In the Armageddon game between IM Socko and WGM Foisor, White (Socko) has 6 minutes to Black (Foisor) 5 minutes. However, Black has draw odd.
Black ran out of time but the position on the board was K and N versus K and N which obviously is a clear draw. The arbiter ruled that it was a draw. This means that Foisor moves on to the 2nd round. However, the other side made an official protest. It is now in the hands of the Appeals Committee.
I am not sure why the decision is slow to come.
17:20 CET
Drama in Socko-Foisor! Black ran out of time, but there were only a King and Knight for each player left on the board, and the arbiters have declared a draw. Polish players are now engaged in lively discussion in front of the playing hall. Foisor progressed to the next round.
17:35 CET
Sabina Foisor explained to the interpreters that she claimed a draw before her flag fell, but the arbiters have postponed the decision. They still have the right to declare the result after one of the players forfeits on time.
18:05 CET
Monica Socko filed a complaint and Appeals Committee is now meeting to reach the final decision. The Committee’s Chairman will later elaborate the outcome at the press conference.
18:40 CET
It seems like the Appeals Committee has reached the verdict. The press conference should start shortly. Earlier, the arbiters have asked the press officers for a FIDE Handbook printout.
18:45 CET
We will have to wait a bit longer, the Appeals Committee just moved to another room!
19:20 CET
Some new details about Socko-Foisor game became known – in the whole time scramble, as pieces flew around, nobody managed to write down all the moves. The arbiters are only recalling an approximate picture (all pieces in the center), as the board was cleared before the position was written down.
20:15 CET
The Appeals Committee (reversed the ruling of the arbiter) accepted Monica Socko’s complaint and granted her a win! She goes into the next round. There won’t be any press conferences on this issue.
Monika wins on time with King and Knight versus King and Knight!
The rules should be easy. No mating material = draw.
The correct result is win to white.
From the 2005 fide laws of chess
6.10 Except where Articles 5.1 or one of the Articles 5.2 (a), (b) and (c) apply, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by the player. However, the game is drawn, if the
position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled counterplay.
In the knight v knight position, a mating position can be constructed, so the correct result is win to white.
How the arbiters got this wrong boggles the mind for a world championship.
I should have asked. What is the time control, is it rapid or blitz? Are there incremements?
This is Armageddon blitz game. White has 6 minutes and Black has 5 minutes with no delay or increment. It’s supposed to be a draw.
Of course it’s a draw. These are world-class players. They should not be allowed to ask for a win in a K+N vs. K+N endgame without pawns. Ridiculous!
OK blitz rules, no increment= thanks.
Anon- Sunday, August 31, 2008 12:14:00 PM CDT- I already covered this, white can construct a mating position, which is all that is required under the 2005 fide laws of chess.
10.2 also does not apply, so Foiser can not claim anything, so it is a win to white.
Monika should drop her ridiculous claim. That’s bad sportsmanship to claim a win with no mating material.
garvin, are you saying that Socko can play on 50 moves K+N vs. K+N to claim win on time? That’s logical FIDE rule chess? USCF rules show clear draw.
garvin, are you saying that Socko can play on 50 moves K+N vs. K+N to claim win on time? That’s logical FIDE rule chess? USCF rules show clear draw.
==================================
Under fide laws of chess, technically socko probably could, but after a few moves it would get close to:
Article 12: The conduct of the players
12.1 The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.
Playing on in Knight v Knight would surely have to be getting close to bringing the game into disrepute.
Btw, I am only answering what the correct ruling should be under the 2005 fide laws of chess ie as if I was a member of the appeals committee. No other decision can actually be backed up by quoting from the 2005 fide laws of chess.
This is just another stupid FIDE rule!
The Appeals Committee shall make the right decision. There shall be no appeal to the ruling of the Appeals Committte.
‘This is just another stupid FIDE rule!’
Who is ‘FIDE’? Are there any Americans in there?
This is just another stupid FIDE rule!
——————
I think the stupidity lies more with armageddon finishes for a world championship.
Why not just keep playing 3+2 (fischer) blitz games. Say 2 games, if still tied 1-1, then first person to win a game progresses to next round.
That has to be better than clock punching monkeys 🙂
FIDE wants to learn from the Berry brothers on how to devaluate the titles.
Yeah, remember the US finals 🙂
There are no different chess rules for IM or GM than for anybody else. With “most unskilled” play, mate is possible in KN-KN. Possible, not forceable generally, but that’s not the point.
The paradox is, that KN-K would in fact be a draw if Black’s exceeds the time limit. Maybe Foisor tried to get rid of her knight and Socko didn’t capture it, just for that reason…?
Another controversy !! I HATE this armageddon business
According to the appendices to the FIDE Laws of Chess (C2.), the article 10.2 does not apply to Blitz as Garvin already mentioned. I am not entirely sure about Armageddon as something special, but I guess so, that 10.2 doesn’t apply either.
But meanwhile I read that Foisor had claimed a draw before the flag fell, and the arbiters hadn’t decided about it yet. That could have been a repetition claim. We don’t know it yet. But in that case, the result is not clear and I understand the delay when there was no notation in the end…
I would not be surprised if it’s cancelled and repeated.
It is possible to checkmate with a King and Knight vs.a King!
If the Fide (They are not playing under USCF rules) rules are as Garvin states…Socko won….PERIOD! Bad rules are not….are still the rules.
Bad Rules or not…are still Rules.
Boy! what a long blitz game… that’s insane!
Well… I go for a Solomon rule: play another game, says this fool! 🙂
I do like the excitation…
Rui leprechaun
(…to confound the federation! :))
“The rules should be easy. No mating material = draw.”
No it’s not so easy. Mate is possible, and if mate is posible with ANY sequence of legal moves, then the player who’s flag fell loses.
So the only conclusion is that white wins. Foisor says that she claimed draw before her flag fell, but I don’t think you can claim that in armageddon games. Only in “normal” games you can claim a draw if you can prove that your opponent makes no attempt to win.
Socko won! Wow.
from chessdom
“The Appeals Committee accepted Monica Socko’s complaint and granted her a win! She goes into the next round. There won’t be any press conferences on this issue. “
Anonymous of 1:29:00 PM, my idea was that she may have claimed another draw (maybe repetition), not a 10.2 draw. Of course it’s just a guess.
At least we found who the winner is. It was getting annoying to wait for that.
Too bad for Sabina 🙁
It was a correct decision.
Although most people thing that in such cases it is an automatic draw, it isn’t.
Only endings where there isn’t enough material to mate, like : bare kings or K vs. K&N or K vs. K&B are automaticaly drawn. Others are not.
Rules only talk about “enough material to mate” not about “enough material to force mate”.
Interestingly a B vs B endgame is drawn if they are both light (dark) squared – because no mate is possible. If the bishops are of opposite colours the game is not automatically drawn because mate is possible.
Aw, Come on!
Technically it is correct, although stupid.
But let us learn lessons: no more armagedon games!
It is stupid!
Let see it could be finish of Topalov-Kamsky or Anand-Kramnik game.
“Black ran out of time …”
Then Black lost.
In normal time control chess, the time to claim theoretical draw is before your flag falls, not after.
Is this flag-fall rule different in speed chess than in normal time control chess?
That this situation is a controversy that requires long closed-door meetings by multiple arbiters, suggests that the chess rule book needs to be better at disambiguating rule precedence.
There are no draw problems in chess.
.
garvin is correct: a helpmate in KN-KN is possible and therefore the arbiter cannot intervene and declare a draw.
A pity they didn’t have time to whack out 50 moves each for a draw-claim.
Sily situation, but them’s the rules.
“”Black ran out of time …”
Then Black lost.
In normal time control chess, the time to claim theoretical draw is before your flag falls, not after.
Is this flag-fall rule different in speed chess than in normal time control chess?”
Did you even read before posting???
The claim was made BEFORE the flag fell. But you can’t claim this in blitz.
What’s sad is that even arbiters don’t know the ruless and made a wrong decision first. Then they looked up into the FIDE handbook to see that they are wrong and Socko’s protest is right.
Let’s play dice: Each throws one dice, the higher wins. If equality, throw again.
Chess has become like that.
You would lose a game against any of the participants.
By throwing dice you might win.
So it’s definatelly not the same. Skills matter, even in armageddon.
There was talk about a draw claim, but it was NOT told that it was a claim referring to article 10.2. I don’t assume that. Instead, it could have been a repetition claim or a 50 move claim, which I think are possible in blitz?
Meanwhile, it seems as if that draw claim is not part of the considerations anymore.
It’s clear that the only stupid thing there was the Chief Arbiter, whose name everybody is not saying??
If there was a CORRECT claim for 3-fold repetition or 50 move rule, then the draw would stand. But it obviously wasn’t. Foisor probably asked for a draw by claiming that her oppoent is not trying to win by normal means. But you can’t do that in blitz, because blitz is in a way time play from move 1.
If Foisor correctly claimed draw due to repetition or 50 rule move the game would end immediatelly. The game continued so it is obviously that she claimed according to the 10.2 rule. But you can’t do that in blitz which she clearly didn’t know and obviously the arbiter didn’t know it either!!!