EGF vs AGA pros win-and-continue match

[k0n0]

While I liked, and still kind of like the idea of resumption, it does create an ambiguity.

In this scenario, resuming is quite fair. The game was effectively over, so it changes nothing to resume the game. But in another situation, you are giving one player time to study the position, and potentially change the game. So, the decision to resume is (in general) either going to sometimes be very unfair, or rely on the referee's judgment to pick circumstances where it is fair. That seems like a valid reason to dislike resumption.

Resuming play sets a precedent for future tournaments. I can imagine future scenarios where players may use this example as an excuse for a loss on time.

i really don't understand why should resuming play set a precedent?

Now we are in an unique and unfortunate situation, where tournament organizers forgot to create rules about lags and chose KGS which counts time at server's side.
This situation will never repeat: rules for this tournament are being created and kgs client will be hacked for purpose of this tournament.
Of course different tournaments have their own rules.

[Uberdude]

As I see it, the match rules are the match rules. Everyone (organizers, players, coaches, team managers) could/should have known that time was kept on the server, not by the client, all the problems that implies regarding netlag.

Does that extend to other actions KGS may take as the venue? What about the following situation:
- Mateusz has lag of 5 seconds in his penultimate byo-yomi period
- He can read Myungwan Kim's mind from the future, so leaves the game to pause the clock and sends a private message to the tournament director informing them of his lag, asking how he should proceed.
- Unfortunately, as he has left many games on KGS before (10 over the last 6 months IIRC) KGS has he flagged him (internally, there is no way to see this) as a chronic escaper. Thus leaving this game means KGS declares he has lost by Forfeit.

To me that means that Surma timed out, it is that simple, no matter how upset Surma and some European fans may be.

Plenty of American fans are upset too, to quote a few:

This is a f***ing disgrace- I’m so sorry Mateusz

Congratulations on the superb high level games you played. 4 straight well deserved wins. This has been a tremendously entertaining tournament to watch.
It sounds like playing a new game is the best idea. This way there is still something lost due to the unfortunate technical issue. Don't understand the final decision, seems way too biased.

[dsatkas]

Email screenshot:


So, let me get this straight;
It was announced that the game will resume and he (and however else agreed with him) appealed for a restart instead. The reason he preferred a restart, was because a lot of time had passed and by then, the game would most probably had been analysed to the end and after the resumption it wouldn't be Mateuz again Eric, but leela1 against leela2. Ok, fair enough, i couldn't agree more.

But, does it matter? If they were still in middlegame or early yose or late yose obviously they couldn't resume. But the game was in late-late yose. Now, i'm just a kyu player and to my eyes it seemed that basically 10 moves remained and after that it's just dame, so like most people, i thought it's a done deal (i mean, come on, look at the final position, even a DDK couldn't screw up Mateuz' lead), so i believe resuming is most fair decision.

But, none cares about my opinion, what does he think? He says: "By resuming the match, the organizers are indirectly affecting the outcome of the game" and later that it's basically a win by black, but i want to emphasize that particular sentence.

If Mateuz didn't lag, he would have won, that much is clear. If the organizers resumed the game, Mateuz would have won and now for the other case, if the organizers didn't interfere, Mat would have lost on time (still due to lag, but it's a time loss). Now, that the organizers have interfered, Mat still lost on time. William says that a compromise must be made between restarting and resuming for fairness.

Tell me, what compromise is between loss by time and loss by time? If a compromise should be made for the AGA team, why not also for the EGF team? Where is the fairness?


ps1. If someone has leela-zero or is a high dan player, it would be nice to inform us of how many moves were left and how many of them were dame. Maybe, the difference of the points between excellent and "mediocre" play could be calculated and compared with the 10 point lead by black.

ps2. I stopped commenting, because i wanted to hear AGA's point of view and most importantly the reason of the AGA appeal. The key to the whole mess, is the reason behind the first appeal. Now, that i know more details my conclusion is this: If the referee did not exist we would have gotten the same result 5 days ago. The AGA team did not advocate for a time loss, but also for resuming the game and in my eyes their sportsmanship is questionable.

ps3. I don't really care which team wins, as long as their its victory is based on skill. The only important thing is that, this tournament continue in the coming years, preferably live and this whole fiasco be forgotten.

[k0n0]

Calvin’s arguments were similar.

Could anyone copy/link Calvin's post here?

[hyperpape]

i really don't understand why should resuming play set a precedent?

Every ruling creates a precedent. That's what a precedent is.

Now we are in an unique and unfortunate situation, where tournament organizers forgot to create rules about lags and chose KGS which counts time at server's side.
This situation will never repeat: rules for this tournament are being created

Assuming rules are corrected, you're right about it being a one-time situation. I do understand the desire to rule in a way that creates no precedent. If the referee is not in a position to force new rules, he will decide without that assumption.

and kgs client will be hacked for purpose of this tournament.

Is that being proposed by anyone except a few people on L19? As a developer, I do not think that's a good idea. I actually think a purpose built server that uses the client to track time would be a modest investment and make sense. The games would be played there, and relayed to KGS or other servers for spectators.

That said, the EGF and AGA presumably don't have the resources to properly create such a server unless someone volunteers to do it.

[Bojanic]

ps1. If someone has leela-zero or is a high dan player, it would be nice to inform us of how many moves were left and how many of them were dame. Maybe, the difference of the points between excellent and "mediocre" play could be calculated and compared with the 10 point lead by black.

This should be good enough, I hope.
viewtopic.php?p=243678#p243678

[Bojanic]

i really don't understand why should resuming play set a precedent?

Rules say that if you run out of time you lose.
This case would be precedent, because it goes against this rule.

It could be later added as addition to current rule as:
"If a player tries to play on time, but he is stopped by technical malfunction, and loses on time, referee can order game to be resumed."
It can also be written differently.

You can never take into account all situations that could occur in the game.
That is why precedent principle could be useful.

For instance, someone could try to misuse this rule I wrote as example (ie fakes to push the button during fight, then claims it was malfunction, in order to get more time for thinking). With precedent, we could take into consideration all circumstances - ie in this situation game was practically over so we could rule out misuse.

------

Regarding appeals etc, I was surprised that referee ordered so quickly to resume game, because it is precedent (As a player I prefer that match should be decided by skill of play, but rules have to be carefully created).
More surprising is that AGA team did not appeal on this precedent, but sent whatever stupidities they wrote about their proctor, and even more surprising referee agreed to it.

[mhlepore]

Since both the AGA and EGF professionals seem to prefer a rematch to the current result, can't they somewhat take matters into their own hands?

Have a rematch on their own. If Mateusz wins the rematch, then Eric forfeits the next match. If Eric wins the rematch, he continues.

[k0n0]

First similar question for both hyperpape and Bojanic:

i really don't understand why should resuming play set a precedent?

Every ruling creates a precedent. That's what a precedent is.

If you talk about a precedent, you must specify a legal system/legal environment you are talking about. Which one do you mean?
(For example I don't think that Myungwan's decision may become a precedent for next chess championships.
Do you mean the legal system of this Transatlantic tournament, of all future Transatlantic tournaments, of all go tournaments in the world ...?)

i really don't understand why should resuming play set a precedent?

Rules say that if you run out of time you lose.
This case would be precedent, because it goes against this rule.

Which rules do you mean? Rules of KGS? Rules of Transatlantic tournament? Other rules?

_________________
and another point:
Rules that "say that if you run out of time you lose" are bad rules. Imagine you run out of time because someone just overturned a table with a goban.

[jann]

Rules say that if you run out of time you lose.
This case would be precedent, because it goes against this rule.

I don't know the typical wordings of the rule, but would guess it says something about not making the move (including pressing the clock) within the time limit. That is NOT what happened here.

It's possible to run out of time even if you make your move in time? A worse precedent.

[Joaz Banbeck]

...The AGA and EGF pros both have sat down and agreed that we would all prefer to have a rematch as it would be the most fair decision. Ultimately the decision rests upon the organizers and the referees and I think as professionals we should also agree to follow the rules and final decisions made by them...

"...The AGA and EGF pros both have sat down and agreed that we would all prefer to have a rematch..."

I can support this. I'd like to see the organizers respect the players wishes.

[AloneAgainstAll]

It must be clearly stated that lag even if can be foreseeable is sth beyond player control.Exactly same as earthquake, rain etc. Punishing player for things beyond his control is strongly against spirit of game.

For everybody who is OK with decision some similar situation to think:

Game between A and B, there is scorer who is noting game. Player A leaves table, player B is in last period of Byo-yomi and he made a move on board however when trying to press clock he is forcefully stoped by someone (C), then C leaves room and cant be caught. The clock stops indicating loss on time. Player A was outside room when incident occured but now got back and declare loss by B by time. B protest and call referee.Referee comes in, scorer and B who both noticed whole incident tells same story. Referee calls lost on time, cuz scorer job was not to observe if game is not interrupted by outside circumastances but just note game moves.

Also, several ppl commented that state on board should not be considered when delivering ruling.Lets assume that this principle stands.Suppose if in game Lui-Surma, it was Lui who had irreversable huge lead (and same as in real Surma lagged).How now looks decision to declare game void and rematch? AGA pros said that they are sure that rematch would be fair decision, but how the hell i am pretty sure in that situation they would protest strongly every other decision than Lui+time or resume game (maybe with additional time for someone)?

More - rules of match are not japanese rules of KGS server, but japanese rules (no mention if 1949 or 1989).Its clearly stated that KGS is only a venue, and nothing more.Frankly japanese 1989 rules says nothing about clock malfunctioning.But says sth about spirit of game, and mutual trust.Those rules had been severly broken.

Btw, if there will be blackout in one of players cities, i guess player will default cuz he should have engine+generator combo (or move to city with better electricity)?

[Kirby]

It must be clearly stated that lag even if can be foreseeable is sth beyond player control.Exactly same as earthquake, rain etc. Punishing player for things beyond his control is strongly against spirit of game.

That's why the initial ruling was not a loss by time. But I don't think it's as straightforward as you're suggesting.

I probably have less sympathy for Mateusz than the average person, mostly since he mentioned losing a byo-yomi period in an earlier game. While lag cannot be avoided, it can be mitigated. This is obvious to me, because I've tried playing KGS games at my parent's house in rural Michigan - it doesn't work.

Fact: It's much riskier for me to play a game there than at my home, where the lag is much less common.
Fact: Mateusz saw the risk of losing byo-yomi periods when it happened to him in his earlier game.

Had Mateusz brought up the lag issue and/or tried to play in an area with a better internet connection, was this situation preventable? This is the part where I have to resort to my own opinion - I think it probably was, and I know a lot of people think it probably wasn't.

[k0n0]

Did sides agree on any rules for this tournament, besides the very brief principles on the main tournament page?

An example:
EGF tournaments are based on EGF General Tournament Rules
These rules may be overruled by "Particular Tournament Rules", that are specific for a concrete tournament.
These rules include also "Rules of Play" (Ing rules, verbal European-Japanese rules...)

Are there any equivalents of EGF General Tournament Rules or Particular tournament rules determined for Transatlantic tournament?

[AloneAgainstAll]

Had Mateusz brought up the lag issue and/or tried to play in an area with a better internet connection, was this situation preventable? This is the part where I have to resort to my own opinion - I think it probably was, and I know a lot of people think it probably wasn't.

Situation would be easily preventable if referee would be present during the game and tournament rules had anti-lag/crash/disruption policy.Basically if we assume its Surma fault (sth you are suggesting on many pages), the only option for EGF now is cancel match, because they are handicapped.

Also suggesting that Mateusz should play in area with better connctivity assumes that lag occured in Kazan or near.What if lag occured in NY server?Would that change your mind?

You try to suggest that its Matuesz job to prevent lag, but its not.Its organizers job, exactly same as provide functioning clock.

@k0n0
On event side only thing about rules is that they play under japanese rules with 6,5 komi.Nothing more.