Keep rules simple: no undo.

_________________
Sorin - 361points.com

@sorin

No, sometimes a missclick appears, during an lag, cause the system made problems, not the finger slipped. Also a fingerslip is a problem, in a real live tournament it wouldn´t count as a move, if accidently a stone falls from your finger and lands on a point. In these case it would be undone.

To let it simple I say it again. There should be some rules, which gives the referee a good base for estimation and enough authority, that his judgement after the estimation will be done, no option of arguing any further.

That can also help, for situations not occured or mentioned yet. Give some estimation options to the referee, a base to decide, but enough freedom, that he can use it on many things and that gives him authority too, no arguing options after judgement. Who wants to argue after the judgement and don´t wanna hear, that there is no option for it (after they reminded him of that fact), loses the game.

Even in law there are decisions and judgements, depending on estimation, cause live doesn´t always follow the rules and there things occuring nobody could foresee. So there are some laws even build up on estimation (ok I know this fact exactly here in Germany, but it´s logical that other nations would do the same).

With its built-in trackpad, my computer clicks without my clicking at all.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

When I was running the EGF referee workshops I said:"The purpose of tournament rules is to dstinguish the skill of playing go form other skills for example physical, social, technical skills. The effect of other skills shoud be minimized."

Bearing this in mind, I would have the game continued.

Money and human resources have been invested in the match. In the subsequent games it should be possible to implement a backup plan with backup communications in case of problems. One could even consider that the players play with real boards and the proctors play the opponents moves on the board.

1) In case the tournament organizer announced clear rules how to deal with lags, then these rules shall apply. Case closed.

2) In case there are no rules, the organizer needs
- to solve this unique situation
- to create rules that will be valid for next games
I don't think the newly created rules must be retrospectively applied to the game Lui-Surma. We are in an unfortunate situation, and IMO the organizer needs to apologize to players and to try to find a solution that will be acceptable for both sides.

Bill, you can invest in a better mouse for the next online tournament

My concern with any well intended rule for misclicks is that it will be abused in creative ways, and create more trouble than it's worth:

"What do you mean it is unlikely to misclick for 30 moves in a row?"
"What do you mean I cannot undo after 5 seconds, that was clearly less than 1 second where I come from!"
etc...

_________________
Sorin - 361points.com

And maybe with real clocks on each side (one clock indicates the time for one player but not for the other player).

I was recording a high level, in-person game once for the initial AGA pro tournament, and one of the players made a really strange move. We asked him about the move after the game to see if he was thinking something we couldn't see. He replied, "I misclicked"

In games within Euro team championship you can see players asking for an undo after a misclick.
I have no idea how are the official rules though.

1. I hope that Eric recognizes his responsibility to come out and resign this game. Remaining silent is unsportsmanlike to Mateusz and also has a negative impact on his image as a player and the whole tournament.

2. For the purposes of clarifying rules for games in future online tournaments, there are two ways to address the issue in the future

The simple way (perhaps unfair and not in the spirit of the game)
2.1 In an online match, regardless of the reason, the player who times out automatically loses.

The complex way (more fair and in the spirit of the game but harder to implement)

2.2. In an online match that is proctored, if the proctor finds evidence the player times out due to circumstances beyond their control (computer crashes, lag, connectivity issues, etc.) the match will be

2.2.1 replayed
2.2.2 continued
2.2.2.1 from the last move sent to the server
2.2.2.2 from the last move which would have been sent to the server had the lag or issue not occurred
(must also specify rules here at which point connectivity lag issues are reported, by which party, and process to rule for a replay or continuation)

2.2 otherwise, the player who times out automatically loses

I suppose we should soon see an announcement, since today is arrival day for the IMSA
https://www.intergofed.org/igf-news-fee ... rules.html

_________________
North Lecale

It's not Eric's responsibility to resign - it's the organizers' responsibility to make a decision. One could just as easily say that Mateusz is being unsportsmanlike not to accept his loss by time, which is equally ridiculous.

_________________
be immersed

Keep banging the drum

_________________
North Lecale

Bear in mind this is a team event, so whilst Eric may be happy to resign if it were just him who losses out from doing so, he may feel a responsibility to the rest of the team to not to do. Or others in the team or team captain may want him not to.

Or set the software so that a double click on the same spot is required to make a play. Edit: For instance, the first click changes the color of the point to indicate that it is the proposed play. A second click on that point makes the play.



Good point.

I kind of like a double click alternative. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, Click, but verify.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Same to you, buddy!

_________________
be immersed

For this type of team event, this suggestion, I forget who made it, is interesting. Let Eric continue against the next opponent. Mateusz is, however, not eliminated, but simply moved to last in line on the EGF team. A kind of Eric won, but Mateusz did not lose solution. (For those who recall it, the apparently non-sensical ruling, White won, but Black did not lose, occurred in team competition between East and West Japan. )

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

It is not clear that Eric can resign. A resignation is something that happens in the game. But the game is not in progress. It is over, or suspended, or under adjudication.

The point about it being a team responsibility, not a personal choice, is also quite good.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Sorry... when? I'm a bit of a Kansai kiin fanboy. Or do you mean another "West Japan"?

Take care.

_________________
一碁一会

Mateusz has reported connectivity/lag issues during his game, which are circumstances beyond his control that negatively impacted the game. Despite this, the game was played almost to completion, and reached a position where one side has an extremely high probability of winning. At this high level of play, it would have been possible for Eric to resign even 10-20 moves before the move which timed out.

Therefore, it is unsportsmanlike for Eric not to resign, but Mateusz has no obligation to resign as he was leading. In the spirit of the game it is 100% Eric's responsibility to resign, and should have been done immediately a few hours after this match was played and the incident having occurred. It allows for the tournament organizers to withhold a ruling which would potentially be fraught with controversy, and also potentially set a precedent they do not want to set.

The organizers then can freely prepare a written document of rules in the event that something similar happens again, to account for lag time-outs, connectivity issues, etc. and the process for which players can report such issues, and the steps that the organizers would take.

One can argue that it is unfair to place this burden on Eric and that the organizers could have prepared better for corner cases (lag, connectivity issues, etc.), but life is random, and it happens that things have already reached this stage. I would still strongly suggest Eric come out to resign, not only to save the spirit of the game but to allow the tournament organizers to freely be able to implement new rules to reduce the possibility of such a dispute taking place again.