Irish Championship 2019

zeitnot

The live commentary was great. First ever for an Irish championship?

Bizarre ending to Melaugh S - Quinn. White blundered with 49. Kf3??, dropping the queen. I assumed he was lost anyway, as did everyone on Fionchetta's commentary. But apparently it's equal with best play. After 49. Kf2 g5 (else no way to make progress, as K can't move, Nf6 can't move without dropping the e-pawn, and Nf7-any Qe7+ leads nowhere) 50. Qf5 and again Black can't make progress.

Tim Harding

Did Baburin-Delaney really end the way the live board is showing, with Killian grabbing a pawn and allowing mate on the move?

Or is this typical last move syndrome on live boards after an agreed draw?

Online Stockfish implies that Murray's 103rd move threw away a half point.

Tarun v Collins is still going on. A piece exchange at move 96 started a new 50-move count.

Joedryan

Tim Harding wrote: »

Did Baburin-Delaney really end the way the live board is showing, with Killian grabbing a pawn and allowing mate on the move?

Or is this typical last move syndrome on live boards after an agreed draw?

Online Stockfish implies that Murray's 103rd move threw away a half point.

Tarun v Collins is still going on. A piece exchange at move 96 started a new 50-move count.

Baburin-Delaney was a dead draw but Killian blew it.

Welcome to my world of misery Kilian lad.

Edit - just seen David Murray has lost to Colm, @David welcome to the club of misery

Retd.LoyolaCpt

After the New Hopes headlined the first few days, the Empire struck back today... (I’ll show myself out)

Lopez, Collins, Brady, Fitzsimons, Ryan, Daly, Quinn - all undefeated today (as long as Sam doesn’t flag or selfmate)

Murphy And Li also back into contention. Could be a lot of heavy hitters playing in round 6 after round 5 pitted a lot of non-titled players against titles rivals.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

Is this Collins-Kanyamarala close to the Irish record for move count? I’m looking at you Zeitnot... just rounded move 140 with 6 left until it’s been 50 moves since a piece was taken

Tim Harding

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Is this Collins-Kanyamarala close to the Irish record for move count? I’m looking at you Zeitnot... just rounded move 140 with 6 left until it’s been 50 moves since a piece was taken

Sam called it a day with 6 moves to spare, maybe not wanting to be reported to Tusla for cruelty to children?
At least he avoided the fate of yesterday's player in the Weekday Open who lost on time with R v N.

Before that he had played about 45 moves with an extra pair of minor pieces on.
It's now known that R+B v B+N is generally a theoretical win if the bishops of OPPOSITE colours; an interesting case was analysed in New In Chess not long ago.
I think other cases of R and piece v two pieces are supposed to be drawn if there aren't special circumstances. Well done to Tarun for holding it under pressure.

zeitnot

Joedryan wrote: »

Baburin-Delaney was a dead draw but Killian blew it.

Welcome to my world of misery Kilian lad.

Edit - just seen David Murray has lost to Colm, @David welcome to the club of misery

Though each of these must have been very painful, to me Murray's has to be the worst. You're the only one pressing, with no chance of losing and not even an apparent threat, the only reason the game is going on this long is that you're keeping it going, you play one natural-looking move at the end of a very long game, and *bam*, that's it.

Though I thought at the time that 63. Kd2 was a "zero time" move in Ryan - Lopez, after thinking about it some more I think I was just wrong. I saw that after an exchange of Q-side pawns White could bring the king to h1 and didn't consider there was anything else. But 63... Kb3 64. Kd3 f5, and now 65. Kd2 or 65. Kd4 Kc2 66. c4 -- does either draw? Not hard with any time to think but there's enough to create a doubt with a flag hanging.

macelligott

I wouldn't be surprised if the players on the bottom board agreed a quick draw tomorrow and decided to watch the heavy hitters battle it out on the top 5 boards instead :-)

Joedryan

zeitnot wrote: »

Though each of these must have been very painful, to me Murray's has to be the worst. You're the only one pressing, with no chance of losing and not even an apparent threat, the only reason the game is going on this long is that you're keeping it going, you play one natural-looking move at the end of a very long game, and *bam*, that's it.

Though I thought at the time that 63. Kd2 was a "zero time" move in Ryan - Lopez, after thinking about it some more I think I was just wrong. I saw that after an exchange of Q-side pawns White could bring the king to h1 and didn't consider there was anything else. But 63... Kb3 64. Kd3 f5, and now 65. Kd2 or 65. Kd4 Kc2 66. c4 -- does either draw? Not hard with any time to think but there's enough to create a doubt with a flag hanging.

Thing is I had already decided Kd2 was the move well in advance but for some reason my brain went to mush when called for.

I agree with you though, Davids loss is a far more painful one than my one as I had fought back from a probably lost position earlier.

macelligott

Killian was almost an hour ahead on the clock against Baburin when he blundered into a mate in 2 in a drawn position.
Painful :-(
https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-tournaments/irish-championship-2019/5/1/5

Joedryan

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Commentary today from 5.30pm on twitch.tv/fionchetta or embedded on https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-tournaments/irish-championship-2019/5/1/1

The weekday event is being broadcast daily here: https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-tournaments/irish-weekday-open-2019/3/1/1

Who is doing the commentary?

zeitnot

Tim Harding wrote: »

Sam called it a day with 6 moves to spare, maybe not wanting to be reported to Tusla for cruelty to children?
At least he avoided the fate of yesterday's player in the Weekday Open who lost on time with R v N.

Before that he had played about 45 moves with an extra pair of minor pieces on.
It's now known that R+B v B+N is generally a theoretical win if the bishops of OPPOSITE colours; an interesting case was analysed in New In Chess not long ago.
I think other cases of R and piece v two pieces are supposed to be drawn if there aren't special circumstances. Well done to Tarun for holding it under pressure.

Minor point about the rules: the game yesterday was (clearly correctly) given as a win for White, since there was a legal sequence of moves that would lead to White (K+N) mating Black (K+R).

My question is what happens if we have one of these K+N v K+R positions, and the K+R player's flag drops, say, 70 moves after the last pawn move or piece capture (the players aren't recording moves), and it would take at least 6 moves to create the mate even if both players are working together. I.e., the 75-move rule (9.6.2) would inevitably come into play before mate could be delivered. What would you decide as controller?

Do you decide
(A) The game is lost by the player whose time ran out. Rule A.4.3 says "the game is drawn if the position is such that the claimant cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves", and doesn't impose limits on the number of moves;
or
(B) The game is a draw. Rule 9.6.2 says that the game is drawn if "any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture". Thus, while there may be a series of moves that results in mate, there isn't a series of *legal* moves, since any moves played after the game is over are not "legal".

macelligott

Joedryan wrote: »

Who is doing the commentary?

WIM Fiona Steil-Antoni - a professional chess commentator.

Tim Harding

macelligott wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if the players on the bottom board agreed a quick draw tomorrow and decided to watch the heavy hitters battle it out on the top 5 boards instead :-)

In that case I will demand a recount in the Tipping Competition because Sodacat asked me to vote for wins for his opponents in the remaining rounds.

I hope that isn't against the law? It would get a jockey banned...

Joedryan

macelligott wrote: »

WIM Fiona Steil-Antoni - a professional chess commentator.

I think I have seen her do some commentary with Simon Williams, if Simon was over he'd never leave the bar mind.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

zeitnot wrote: »

Tim Harding wrote: »

Sam called it a day with 6 moves to spare, maybe not wanting to be reported to Tusla for cruelty to children?
At least he avoided the fate of yesterday's player in the Weekday Open who lost on time with R v N.

Before that he had played about 45 moves with an extra pair of minor pieces on.
It's now known that R+B v B+N is generally a theoretical win if the bishops of OPPOSITE colours; an interesting case was analysed in New In Chess not long ago.
I think other cases of R and piece v two pieces are supposed to be drawn if there aren't special circumstances. Well done to Tarun for holding it under pressure.

Minor point about the rules: the game yesterday was (clearly correctly) given as a win for White, since there was a legal sequence of moves that would lead to White (K+N) mating Black (K+R).

My question is what happens if we have one of these K+N v K+R positions, and the K+R player's flag drops, say, 70 moves after the last pawn move or piece capture (the players aren't recording moves), and it would take at least 6 moves to create the mate even if both players are working together. I.e., the 75-move rule (9.6.2) would inevitably come into play before mate could be delivered. What would you decide as controller?

Do you decide
(A) The game is lost by the player whose time ran out. Rule A.4.3 says "the game is drawn if the position is such that the claimant cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves", and doesn't impose limits on the number of moves;
or
(B) The game is a draw. Rule 9.6.2 says that the game is drawn if "any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture". Thus, while there may be a series of moves that results in mate, there isn't a series of *legal* moves, since any moves played after the game is over are not "legal".

God help the arbiter who gets this question in real time.

zeitnot

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

God help the arbiter who gets this question in real time.

It's not that hard compared to the rules for the tipping competition.

Actually, I think one of the candidate answers above is clearly better than the other. But I'm not a qualified arbiter and I'd be interested to hear what qualified arbiters would rule.

Tim Harding

zeitnot wrote: »

Minor point about the rules: the game yesterday was (clearly correctly) given as a win for White, since there was a legal sequence of moves that would lead to White (K+N) mating Black (K+R).

My question is what happens if we have one of these K+N v K+R positions, and the K+R player's flag drops, say, 70 moves after the last pawn move or piece capture (the players aren't recording moves), and it would take at least 6 moves to create the mate even if both players are working together. I.e., the 75-move rule (9.6.2) would inevitably come into play before mate could be delivered. What would you decide as controller?

Do you decide
(A) The game is lost by the player whose time ran out. Rule A.4.3 says "the game is drawn if the position is such that the claimant cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves", and doesn't impose limits on the number of moves;
or
(B) The game is a draw. Rule 9.6.2 says that the game is drawn if "any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture". Thus, while there may be a series of moves that results in mate, there isn't a series of *legal* moves, since any moves played after the game is over are not "legal".

This is indeed a tricky case, worthy of a question in a FIDE Arbiters’ exam.
They say that “Fools rush in where wise men fear to go.” So here is my take:

In the case Zeitnot describes, since moves are not being written down, we are talking about a game played with increments of less than 30 seconds per move (as at Bunratty for example) or perhaps no increment (rare these days).


For clarity, let us first dispose of the question about whether mate is deliverable at all. Zeitnot cites the “Rule A.4.3”; that is not correct. It is Rule 5.2.2 that he was quoting.

FIDE Arbiter&#8217 wrote: »

5. 2. 2.The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponents king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to end in a “dead position‟. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was in accordance with Article 3 and Articles 4.2 – 4.7.

To state the obvious, checkmate is not possible with a single B or N versus bare K. It is not possible with bishops moving on squares of the same colour. Mate is in general possible with N v R, N v B, B v N and B v B moving on the opposite colour squares. Also with R, Q or P versus anything. Sometimes the specific case, as here, must be examined to see if exceptional circumstances arise in the sequence that leads to the checkmate,

The principal rule governing the situation is article 6.9 and the interpretation paragraph in the 2019 Arbiters Manual (pages 17-18) which is slightly more detailed than in the January and September 2018 editions. In fact it deals explicitly with the case in question whereas the 2018 editions did not. Clearly the Arbiters’ Commission has been thinking about cases like that proposed by Zeitnot.
With the new interpretation it is clear that DRAW is correct, i.e., if the mate cannot occur until after move 75 or if a 5-fold repetition would be brought about before the mate.

The wording of the rule is:

FIDE Arbiter&#8217 wrote: »

6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that 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.”

(The clauses of article 5 referred to cover situations where the game has just ended in checkmate or a draw before the flag fall is observed; this is not relevant to Zeitnot’s case.)

The interpretation of the rule was enlarged and amended in the new Manual taking effect from 1 July 2019. The first sentence is entirely new and applies in this case. There was also additional wording later. The paragraph now reads as follows

FIDE Arbiter&#8217 wrote: »

Also in the case of articles 9.6.1 and 9.6.2, even if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is drawn.
This means that a simple flag fall might not lead the Arbiter to declare the game lost for the player whose flag has fallen. The Arbiter has to check the final position on the chessboard and only if the opponent can checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves, can he declare the game won by the opponent. Where there are forced moves that lead to a checkmate or to a stalemate by the player, then the result of the game is declared as a draw. Where a piece has been touched but not moved or captured before the flag fall, a resulting forced move shall not be considered as part of the series of moves.

Article 9.6 and interpretation (page 25 of the Manual) read as follows:

FIDE Arbiter&#8217 wrote: »

9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence.

Interpretation paragraph:

FIDE Arbiter&#8217 wrote: »

In 9.6.1 case, the five times need not be consecutive. In both 9.6.1 and 9.6.2 cases the Arbiter must intervene and stop the game, declaring it as a draw.

So the Arbiter has to check the actual sequence that leads to the mate. My reading of 9.6.2. is that if move 75 is checkmate it is a win, but the game is drawn if 75 moves are completed by both sides without pawn move, capture or checkmate.
In Zeitnot's example mate cannot be delivered until 76 moves after the last pawn move or capture.
The arbiter has no discretion about declaring the game drawn under 9.6.1 and 9.6.2. He/she must do so.

Therefore: My decision as FIDE-licensed National Arbiter is a DRAW.
Other NA, FAs or IAs reading this are invited to express their agreement or contradict me with supporting evidence.

sodacat11

In case anyone is wondering what happened at the end of my game v Alice O'Gorman today the move 50 g5+ wasn't actually played as shown on chessbomb. I inadvertently allowed a threefold repetition in a winning position on the move before that. Kinda sums up my week, I knew before the tournament started that I wasn't in the right condition to play but against my better instincts I went ahead and am now paying the price. C'est la vie.

macelligott

In the “old days” there would have been several “GM” (short) draws by this stage of the tournament. Glad those days are over. My perception was that there were several short draws in the ‘70’s & 80’s. But maybe I’m wrong. I’m sure Seán Coffee can adjudicate one way or the other :-)

macelligott

Which players are still in the running for norms?

Retd.LoyolaCpt

macelligott wrote: »

Which players are still in the running for norms?

O’Donnell needs 2.5/3
Moran needs 2/3
Brady 3/3

Tarun and Colm may be able to do it with 3/3s too but I haven’t calculated.

Trisha needs 1.5 or 2 for her third WIM Norm. Depends on her last 3 opponents.

zeitnot

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

O’Donnell needs 2.5/3
Moran needs 2/3
Brady 3/3

Tarun and Colm may be able to do it with 3/3s too but I haven’t calculated.

Trisha needs 1.5 or 2 for her third WIM Norm. Depends on her last 3 opponents.

It's messy for several of these because they depend on getting the average rating of opponents way up, as well as getting 3/3.

For Colm, for example, he currently has average opponent rating 2182 (after bringing one opponent up to 2050). He needs an average opponent rating of 2230. So his opponents in the last two rounds would have to average 2398. He would need to get Baburin and Collins in the last two rounds; is this even possible?

Brady needs opponents averaging 2291 over the last two rounds. Much more feasible.

Tarun has average opponent rating (after adjustment) of 2316, so he would need an average of only 1929 if he scores 3/3, an average of 2168 if he scores 2.5/3.

(Please don't rely on any of these numbers without double-checking them.)

sodacat11

macelligott wrote: »

Which players are still in the running for norms?

I need another loss or two to confirm my "minor" title.

macelligott

Did Gerry O’Connell really leave a whole Rook en prise against Trisha today ?
He was under no pressure!

sodacat11

macelligott wrote: »

Did Gerry O’Connell really leave a whole Rook en prise against Trisha today ?
He was under no pressure!

There has been an unusually high number of outright blunders this week , I think that the lack of oxygen in the room is responsible,no fresh air at all and despite the high ceilings the air is really stuffy. It didn't help that one person I played spent the entire game farting, talk about weapons of mass destruction.:(

zeitnot

What are people's tips now for who wins the title?

This year, as last year, there will be no shared title. Instead the tie-break will be 1. result of the individual game between the two; 2. two game rapid playoff.

So if Murphy wins both his last two games, he's guaranteed to win the title: he could only be caught by Lopez and he has now won their individual game.

If Collins beats Murphy and Lopez beats Li in round 8, then Collins and Lopez play in round 9. I'm not sure how the colour assignment works; they would be level on points with the same colours throughout; is it that Collins would get the colour he is due, i.e., Black? The winner of that game, if any, would win the title. If that's a draw, they would both be on 7/9 and could be caught by either O'Donnell or Brady. That would end up in a playoff match.

If Collins and Murphy draw and Lopez beats Li in round 8, then again Collins and Lopez play in round 9. But this time maybe it's Lopez, as the player in the lead, who gets the colour he's due, i.e., Black. A draw would keep him 1/2 point ahead of Collins, but if Murphy won in the last round, then again he would finish ahead of Lopez (if they're the only two on 7/9) and would win the title.

Li, Brady, and O'Donnell each have a reasonable shot of finishing in at least a playoff for the title if they win their last two games. Actually, since none of these has won or lost against anyone else who could finish on 7/9, I think it would be a playoff.

Other possibilities involve winning after finishing with 6.5/9: possible but not that likely.

sodacat11

zeitnot wrote: »

What are people's tips now for who wins the title?

This year, as last year, there will be no shared title. Instead the tie-break will be 1. result of the individual game between the two; 2. two game rapid playoff.

So if Murphy wins both his last two games, he's guaranteed to win the title: he could only be caught by Lopez and he has now won their individual game.

If Collins beats Murphy and Lopez beats Li in round 8, then Collins and Lopez play in round 9. I'm not sure how the colour assignment works; they would be level on points with the same colours throughout; is it that Collins would get the colour he is due, i.e., Black? The winner of that game, if any, would win the title. If that's a draw, they would both be on 7/9 and could be caught by either O'Donnell or Brady. That would end up in a playoff match.

If Collins and Murphy draw and Lopez beats Li in round 8, then again Collins and Lopez play in round 9. But this time maybe it's Lopez, as the player in the lead, who gets the colour he's due, i.e., Black. A draw would keep him 1/2 point ahead of Collins, but if Murphy won in the last round, then again he would finish ahead of Lopez (if they're the only two on 7/9) and would win the title.

Li, Brady, and O'Donnell each have a reasonable shot of finishing in at least a playoff for the title if they win their last two games. Actually, since none of these has won or lost against anyone else who could finish on 7/9, I think it would be a playoff.

Other possibilities involve winning after finishing with 6.5/9: possible but not that likely.

My original prediction was 1Lopez 2Collins 3Murphy so I'll stick with that. Lopez losing yesterday has certainly made it interesting though.
I d'ont like the idea of a rapid play off for a classical event. In 2012 when five of us were leading going into the last round I made it quite clear that I would not take part in one if I tied.

sodacat11

Numerous blunders by Gerry O'Connell today, very unlike him. I have no live coverage of the Ryan and Lyons games, is anyone else having this problem?

sodacat11

Shane Melaugh has blundered now against Fox in a dead drawn position ,,,,,,,,,oh wait Fox has accepted a draw in a winning position???