II. Corona-Cup 2020 Rules

[RobertJasiek]

SoDesuNe, initial ignorance of the relation between sports courts and ordinary courts leads to cases such as of Claudia Pechstein. From them we learn that sports jurisdiction is bound by the rights granted by ordinary law.

Since a federation and other organisations are (somehow) involved in this tournament, it is not a "privately organised event". Nor is it a "small" event.

Anti-doping and anti-cheating mechanisms must not be constructed to produce convicted persons for its own sake. We must not destroy life-long reputations in the name of anti-doping or anti-cheating. Neither is as harmless as earlier go disputes, which usually were about the outcome of just one game. Life-long reputations or life-long bans have an uncomparably greater impact. Therefore, do not dismiss the topic as a joke while in fact it is extremely serious to judge whether somebody cheats. This can even have implications of fraud under regular law.

[HermanHiddema]

> it is not a "privately organised event".

Quick correction here: Privately organized means organized by a private entity as opposed to organized by by a public entity (the government).

To quote one definition: "Private entity" means any entity that is not a unit of government, including but not limited to a corporation, partnership, company, nonprofit organization or other legal entity or a natural person.

[SoDesuNe]

SoDesuNe, initial ignorance of the relation between sports courts and ordinary courts leads to cases such as of Claudia Pechstein. From them we learn that sports jurisdiction is bound by the rights granted by ordinary law.

Since a federation and other organisations are (somehow) involved in this tournament, it is not a "privately organised event". Nor is it a "small" event.

Anti-doping and anti-cheating mechanisms must not be constructed to produce convicted persons for its own sake. We must not destroy life-long reputations in the name of anti-doping or anti-cheating. Neither is as harmless as earlier go disputes, which usually were about the outcome of just one game. Life-long reputations or life-long bans have an uncomparably greater impact. Therefore, do not dismiss the topic as a joke while in fact it is extremely serious to judge whether somebody cheats. This can even have implications of fraud under regular law.

Lukas Podpera is no organisation governing your right to participate in go tournaments and make a living from it (ie not like in the Pechstein case). The (somehow) involvement of the EGF as a sponsor does not make this an EGF tournament (only the European Championship is technically a EGF tournament?).

If you cheat in the Corona Cup the only repercussion is you get disqualified from this tournament - there are not even legal repercussions mentioned (ie not like in the Pechstein case).

So please don't just drop law terms and on the surface comparable cases when you actually want to discuss morales and ethics. (Even in the Pechstein case she went all the way before the European Court of Human Rights and they ultimately dismissed her case. The initial ruling was therefore legally correct.)

[RobertJasiek]

The EGF is more than a sponsor: it supports the tournament, includes it in the European Grand Prix and sets a rating class for it. From an outsider, it is still an open question whether this is an EGF tournament.

Being disqualified from a tournament for cheating has effects on rating and, much more important, reputation.

Of course, the Pechstein case is not 1:1 identical. (Her trial before the Bundesverfassungsgericht is still active but probably not so relevant. The European Court of Human Rights identifying a procedural mistake in the CAS procedure but with minor impact on her case.)

Her basic case at CAS then at the Swiss courts is closed and mostly legally binding. However, this does not mean that the CAS judgement would have been right. CAS found guilt in high values of red blood particles interpreting them as doping but failed to consider all possible causes. A very likely cause is a blood anomaly inherited from her father.

We can discuss morales and ethics but I do indeed also want to discuss the laws and basic rights.

[Javaness2]

I think a tournament which is part of the EGF Grand Prix has to be considered as an EGF tournament. Organisers are, after all, normally paying money to the EGF to include their tournaments. In that respect, it does seem normal that they anyone thrown out for cheating ought to be able to take an appeal through the normal stages.

The other questions of Robert's don't seem as important to me. The Japanese rules will be whatever the server has implemented, and the exact set up for webcams ought to be easily clarified by the Tournament Director.

[SoDesuNe]

To get it all in here : )

Article 21. Organization of Official European Events
The schedules for all Official European Events must clearly state that the EGF Statutes, General Regulations, and Agonistic Regulations apply.

Article 16. Appeals
Appeals can be filed by an affected party against decisions of the EGF, including its organs and
disciplinary instances, unless such appeal is expressly excluded in these bylaws or in the
regulations of the EGF.
Appeals concerning go matters can be filed by players or legal persons:

• ● who have completed the internal juridical procedure within the go organization in
  Europe, to which they are affiliated (provided there was an internal procedure which
  could be followed) or
  ● against decisions of the go organization in Europe to which they are affiliated, when this
  go organization has no internal juridical procedure.

Appeal to a decision of General Meeting is not possible, since General Meeting is the highest
authority of the EGF.

And it seems I missed it before, but according to the rules of the II. Corona-Cup "the appeals committee will be determined right before the start of the tournament".

[Javaness2]

Article 21. Organization of Official European Events
The schedules for all Official European Events must clearly state that the EGF Statutes, General Regulations, and Agonistic Regulations apply.

I wonder if all official European Events do actually state this. Later on there is also this, and I wonder who actually checks this.

All participants must be registered with a Member of the EGF, before they can be entered and
permitted to take part in Official European Events, unless otherwise specified by any specific
rules that may be established by the relevant Technical Commission.

[RobertJasiek]

EGF tournament means EGF General Tournament Rules apply, whose §7 specifies the arbitration bodies and procedure incl. a tournament's Appeals Committee formed for the tournament.

The EGF General Regulations §21 simply mean that texts such as EGF General Tournament Rules, EGF Tournament System Rules, specific tournament rules of the tournament, rating guidelines etc. apply because those are General Regulations etc.

§16, however, is for organisational appeals (such as a member country complaining against the EGF) other than tournament rules questions, and is handled by the EGF Appeals Commission. For the unfortunate sake of confusion, §16 and the EGF Appeals Commission also speak of appeals but the permanent EGF Appeals Commission is not a particular tournament's appeals committee, is not the third instance EGF Rules Commission of a tournament rules dispute and does not refer to those appeals according to §7 of the EGF General Tournament Rules. The EGF Appeals Commission and §16 were formed to solve such disputes as the Italian federations trouble.

(I know because I was in the EGF Rules Commission for ca. 16 years.)

[SoDesuNe]

It seems EGF also has some professional standardisation to do. At least when it comes to the regulatory outline of "their" tournaments.

[jlt]

More details in an email sent by Lukas Podpera to participants:

-- begin quote --

You have two choices on how to make the video recording. You can either connect online with your opponent (by Skype, Discord or any other application) or you can make the recording offline and keep it available for the opponent or organisation team, if necessary. You have also two choices for recording: Sharing your screen and face would be a simpler option. However, the preferred option is to place your camera on the side and make sure it records your screen, face and your hand on the mouse. Attached you can find an example picture, how to do it.

This time we will also have an anti-cheating committee. Antti Tormanen and Su Yang are very experienced in this field and they will use a special application for detecting cheating. It has already revealed a lot of cheaters in the past. They will be really strict and merciless in this matter, so if they find probable, that cheating happened, it will result in forfeited game and eventual disqualification. You can of course send me a protest, if you believe such dishonest behaviour has happened, but I hope that will not be necessary.

-- end quote --

[RobertJasiek]

a special application for detecting cheating. It has already revealed a lot of cheaters in the past.

AFAIK, only one alleged go AI cheater has been revealed. Therefore, apparently this software's revealing of a lot of alleged cheaters in the past must refer to other games, such as chess. A software's findings for any other game(s) does not qualify the software for go. That the software has determined alleged cheaters in other games says nothing about whether its assessments have been correct. Trusting such a software produces false findings.

EDIT: I do not know about Asian go servers. Maybe the software has been used for some of them. The point remains on what grounds the software's findings should be correct or false.

[John Fairbairn]

I honestly can't get my head round this. It's one of the longest threads of recent times - on what?

As far as I can see from the EGF website we are dealing with the following:

1. Because of the hopefully one-off "emergency" of coronavirus, a group of amateur organisers have volunteered purely out of the goodness of their hearts, for the sake of fellow lockdown sufferers, to organise a amateur (="for the love of the game") tournament.

2. Fellow amateurs are invited to participate by paying 6 euros - two cups of coffee (or a mouthful if you are in Scandinavia) and a biscuit. You play at home, so that is your total outlay.

3. If you are one of the very few who will have a serious chance of winning, you will get, at the most, a mere 300 euros.

Yet we have here a long debate, talk of federal courts, and hints at involvement of the CAS. And that's before anything, apart from CV, has happened.

Isn't it time for some sanity?

Let us be clear. If someone cheats, the most each participant risks is two cups of coffee (let's not waffle about the extra theoretical opportunity loss of a trivial prize, which will apply to so few). The organisers, however, who are more numerous than usual because of anticipation of cheating allegations, face a loss of their voluntary time that will surely far, far exceed even 300 euros, in dealing with someone who merely has suspicions.

Recall the days of your childhood and kick-about football. You provide the ball, you get to pick your team. If any other kid doesn't like that, he can go and play elsewhere. I think the kind-natured EGF organisers should likewise threaten to take their ball home if there's even the slightest aggro.

(Even if I've misread something and, say, pros can take part, the call for sanity still applies in full.)

[RobertJasiek]

John, arguing "amateurs, only €6, free time, little to lose" might go further: just trust all participants, keep arbitration simple (referee only would do), simply clarify the rules that absolutely must be clarified (territory in seki). I would understand your opinion if you went all the way in such a direction. However, it is not the way this tournament is set out; instead, it is "federations / organisations involved, Grand Prix, three or more arbitration bodies, ratings, webcam requirements, strict anti-cheating intention".

Then such tournaments set precedents for how anti-cheating is treated. If uncommented, such might evolve into the standard. Now, when everything is new, is the best time to discuss matters. Much better than letting bad standards establish themselves and then trying to overcome them.

[John Fairbairn]

However, it is not the way this tournament is set out; instead, it is "federations / organisations involved, Grand Prix, three or more arbitration bodies, ratings, webcam requirements, strict anti-cheating intention".

An important word is missing in that list: amateurs.

But if this list is indeed to be taken seriously, I would argue that it is for one of two reasons:

1. The organisers have felt themselves pushed into such an over-the-top reaction because of over-the-top actions of some players in the past.

2. The organisers are themselves rules mavens, and so deserve to lie on the bed they have made for themselves.

Either way, I think they should take a large step back and re-insert the word amateur into all their thinking.

By all means continue work on finding a vaccine for the virus of cheating, but don't ruin ordinary go life in the process. And I remind everyone again the word "emergency" on the tournament's website. Now is not the time to be a dog with bone.

[SoDesuNe]

I honestly can't get my head round this. It's one of the longest threads of recent times - on what?

Online cheating. See the last "eight pages in 14 days"-thread. It just gets one's blood boiling.

Justifiable? Maybe not. Right now online go servers do not have anti-cheating tools as far as I know and I don't know either how existing "reporting tools" are used to mark cheaters.

So without actual numbers we are left alone with our emotions. And emotions amplify easily and readily. That's why we see The Grim everywhere.

I think the kind-natured EGF organisers should likewise threaten to take their ball home if there's even the slightest aggro.

Like in any good bubble opinions on L19 do not really reflect opinions elsewhere. The tournament has 385 participants and I strongly believe the organisers are oblivious to our posts here - unless proxies are involved. And even then they could care less because well, they have 385 participants.

Welcome to the ivory tower!