EGF vs AGA pros win-and-continue match

[k0n0]

Please explain what you think why referee decided to approve AGA appeal, which by one of the organizers contains „proctors don't have written instruction to monitor lag“.
I don't see any other point than to try to remove proctor's statement that Surma played on time.

I thought my next paragraph explained my thoughts

Why did AGA players appeal? I can understand that in case it was Eric who had a lag problem then he wouldn't be so lucky like Mateusz, because Eric's proctor was not paying attention to Eric's moves. So theoretically Eric would be in disadvantage.

but maybe my lack of english obscured its meaning. I will explain it using other words:

My guess (based on limited info only) is: if the situation was opposite, and it was not Mateusz but Eric who suffered internet lags, then his protest would be rejected, because his proctor was not paying attention to Eric's moves. So AGA objected a theoretical inequality.

But this is only my speculation, unfortunately. Even after more detailed explanation by Hajin Lee, there is a lack of information about the case.
And that feeds negative feelings at both sides of the ocean

[Calvin Clark]

Ali makes an important point. In general, things should be done in a way that players want to participate in similar events in the future. That includes not just better processes and technical robustness, but touches on current behavior. Players should be able to enter tournaments without fear of being dragged into a scandal. Superhuman foresight should not be required of them. If they make news in the little Western go world, it should be because of their excellent play, not because of some controversy. This is not easy to achieve and most sports still have big challenges in that area. But we should keep the possibility of having more and better tournaments for Western pros a priority.

[Laurent]

some ten years ago in Holland when Laurent Heiser lost on time when filling dame

What happened then? Was there any dispute about the result of the game?

IIRC, game was completely over, dame points were played. Heiser has clearly won.
Heiser's opponent played some threat inside his territory, which could be dangerous if not answered correctly (some kyu level).
But before that move was played, someone asked Heiser something, he turned away and got distracted, and he lost on time.

There was argument after the game, and since they argued that game was not over yet due to threat, it was declared that Heiser lost on time.
Out of the protest, he left tournament.

-----

IIRC it was in Amsterdam go Oza 2006.
http://www.europeangodatabase.eu/EGD/To ... n=10337085
Game was against Jurij Pljusch 4d.
Oddly, Heiser is not listed, and Pljusch was listed as being free (0+), which is not possible on this tournament.

Hello everyone,
For already quite some time, I have been intending to create an account here to participate in some discussions, but I never got around actually doing it, partly due to problems with the registration.
Now, in order to adjust some slightly inaccurate memories, I got more persistent and thanks to the help of Uberdude, I finally managed to get in
Yes, there were some analogies in the case being discussed here and my game in the Netherlands, even though it was an "offline" game:
- Both games were in the very final stage with the outcome - on the board! - already clearly decided (in the case of my game, being over 20 points ahead)
- it was the final byoyomi period

Actually (unsurprisingly) we were both playing rather fast at that stage of the game (not sure if it was already dame-filling or just the last 1-2 pointers).
So I also played my move many seconds before the end of the byoyomi period and pushed the clock (even twice, as I usually do with Ing-clocks during byoyomi).
When I was wondering why my opponent suddenly restarted "thinking", I watched at the Clock, saw that my time was still running, but it was already too late...

The decision of the referee simply was that the clock cannot be overruled. If it "says" that you have run out of time, the game is lost, case closed.

Something positive: After that event, the EGF rules were extended to allow the referee to forfeit a game due to unsportmanlike behaviour...

[Kirby]

I have been intending to create an account here to participate in some discussions, but I never got around actually doing it, partly due to problems with the registration.
Now, in order to adjust some slightly inaccurate memories, I got more persistent and thanks to the help of Uberdude, I finally managed to get in

Off-topic:

If you still aren't getting the registration emails, please let me know - I experimented with this a bit earlier, and thought things were fixed. Your account activation was manual to bypass the email, but I'm still curious to know if you ever received an email of any sort.

[sorin]

After reading Hajin Lee's Facebook post https://www.facebook.com/hajin88/posts/2184711538232227 about the organizers' decision, I think I understand better the decision to not take into account the proctor's testimony about Mateusz playing his move in time (in his KGS client).
I guess the explanation about "not proctor's official job to monitor time" was not the best way to explain it, since it gave rise to a lot of outrage in the Go community.
A better explanation is the following: Eric said his own proctor was not closely monitoring the game (and rightfully so, since proctors are only there to prevent cheating), which brings the point: if Eric had the same lag problem, his proctor would not have been able to (and not even have to) help him with a similar testimony, so for fairness we should also discount Mateusz's proctor's testimony.
Not sure why this makes me feel better about the decision, but it does

Also, it looks like, unfortunately, this incident turned the whole event from what was supposed to be a happy time for Go community, into a very miserable time, with people screaming at each other online and hating each other for taking sides. So maybe it was a bad idea to organize this event, in the hindsight?

[jann]

unfortunately, this incident turned the whole event from what was supposed to be a happy time for Go community, into a very miserable time, with people screaming at each other online and hating each other for taking sides. So maybe it was a bad idea to organize this event, in the hindsight?

I doubt there would have been significant discontent from either side if the game would have been resumed.

[k0n0]

After reading Hajin Lee's Facebook post https://www.facebook.com/hajin88/posts/2184711538232227 about the organizers' decision ...
A better explanation is the following: Eric said his own proctor was not closely monitoring the game (and rightfully so, since proctors are only there to prevent cheating), which brings the point: if Eric had the same lag problem, his proctor would not have been able to (and not even have to) help him with a similar testimony, so for fairness we should also discount Mateusz's proctor's testimony.

Is it your speculation only, or do you have any special information directly from Hajin Lee?
That linked Hajin Lee's post at facebook is quite unclear concerning this topic.

... with people screaming at each other online and hating each other for taking sides. So maybe it was a bad idea to organize this event, in the hindsight?

A bad idea was not to be open to public. Then you can expect rumors, crazy speculations, suspicion and outrage.
So far from organizers we have got one brief verdict, and no official explanation. The unoficial post from Hajin Lee explains some points, but only partially and vaguely.

(The decision by Myungwan is a bit unfortunate (details here), but I believe it would be better accepted if the reasoning was better explained and details of the case were uncovered.
edit: players accepted him prior the match and so must accept his decision. But the public won't accept things so easily. And the public is a very important component here)

[sorin]

After reading Hajin Lee's Facebook post https://www.facebook.com/hajin88/posts/2184711538232227 about the organizers' decision ...
A better explanation is the following: Eric said his own proctor was not closely monitoring the game (and rightfully so, since proctors are only there to prevent cheating), which brings the point: if Eric had the same lag problem, his proctor would not have been able to (and not even have to) help him with a similar testimony, so for fairness we should also discount Mateusz's proctor's testimony.

Is it your speculation only, or do you have any special information directly from Hajin Lee?
That linked Hajin Lee's post at facebook is quite unclear concerning this topic.

I don't have any other information, but this is the only explanation that makes some sense to me.

Also, another bit of info that helped me to make sense of what happened was Kirby's discovery about the AGA rules regarding "if one has info about clock malfunctioning, if they don't report early they may lose the privilege to complain later". As long as there is this precedent in some rules (even if not the rules of the Translatlantic tournament), I feel better about the decision made.

Otherwise, morally, of course I think Mateusz should have won that game.
But practically: Mateusz lost on time, we should just move on.

[k0n0]

But practically: Mateusz lost on time, we should just move on.

players should move on, but the public won't be easily placated.
I can agree with Hajin Lee that go fans are sometimes very discourteous towards Myungwan.
But organizers are somewhat discourteous towards go fans, as they don't share information with public. And that lack of information implies anger and disrespect in the crowd.

[tneva82]

One way to reduce the costs could be:

• Play a few rounds online, but each side uses a real board and a real clock, the proctor relays moves on KGS.
• For the final rounds, use an international event (e.g. IMSA) that most players attend to anyway, and stay 2-3 more days.

Kazan? Howabout finland on various sites. Happens to me as well. It's not just Kazan. It's INTERNET.

I know, I should have said "at least in Kazan there is a serious lag problem which may cause delays of more than 10 seconds".

Rather than say "at least in Kazan" you should have said "at least in the whole world...". There's not one computer in the world 100% proof from lag regardless of where they are. Even those connected to internet by best gear money can buy. And you know what? That doesn't even factor in server side! You can have super most reliable connection imaginable(which stil isn't 100% proof) but that connection only goes so far reliably. Eventually it can go over continents(like here) and of course server can say "whoops". I have had occasional lags _with server literally next door in internal network_ when server decided to slow down for some reason.

And real clock then hits into issue that now we are dependant on proctors hand speed. And besides 2 clocks would hardly be in sync then now would they? Both proctors won't be pressing button in sync.

[k0n0]

No need to sync clock. In each location, only the clock of the local player would be valid.
Proctors would have to inform players about opponent's clock status.

[Bojanic]

I doubt there would have been significant discontent from either side if the game would have been resumed.

Yes. Or even if Mateusz lost on time, case closed.

Sorin's view is also correct (that it is just loss on time, move on), but I think that what infuriated men was bad handling by referee and organizers.

[jlt]

@tneva82

Not in the whole world. When I am connected with a cable (and not with WiFi) I never encounter lag problems.

With real clocks: player A makes a move, presses clock A, proctor A clicks on KGS and pauses clock A. When proctor A sees the move of player B on his screen, he restarts the clock, places the stone and presses the clock.

Edit: simpler version. For clock A, set 1h+5x60s for player A and 12h for player B.
Player A makes a moves, presses clock A, proctor A clicks on KGS. When proctor A sees the move of player B on his screen, he places the stone and presses the clock.

[tneva82]

@tneva82

Not in the whole world. When I am connected with a cable (and not with WiFi) I never encounter lag problems.

With real clocks : player A makes a move, presses clock A, proctor A clicks on KGS and pauses clock A. When proctor A sees the move of player B on his screen, he restarts the clock, places the stone and presses the clock.

Then you have been lucky. You know what your cable connection does not protect you from? Lag when your packets go say across continents. Or server lag. Your connection can be best connection money can buy and it doesn't help when server lags. I have had lag when I'm directly connected to server. Can't get much faster connection than that.

Your connection doesn't go directly to every server. Packets from your computer goes through your cable only so far. After that it goes across the globe and not neccessarily even most direct route. Packets will get delayed and lost requiring resending of individual packets(which are then assembled for whole message once every individual packet has done). That's just how things go.

If you claim you have no lag whatsoever either you have been lucky, ********, or are talking about private network and not internet we are talking in.

[admin]
Minor deletion of text that was a violation of the TOS.
-JB
[/admin]

[jlt]

@tneva82: believe me or not, I have played over 1000 games on various servers (KGS, OGS, IGS, Tygem, Fox), with two different internet connections, and never noticed a lag. I don't know if I am lucky.

[admin]
Minor deletion of text that referenced another poster's a violation of the TOS.
-JB
[/admin]