Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:39:46 02/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2000 at 11:42:47, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>On February 17, 2000 at 11:33:33, Andrew Dados wrote:
>
>>On February 17, 2000 at 11:24:51, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On February 17, 2000 at 11:21:15, Andrew Dados wrote:
>>>
>>>> In case of OTB tourney a player himself is responsible for showing up on time.
>>>>Now, for internet-based tourneys, that may mean he can be forfeited if his ISP
>>>>is down. However, since tourney organizers put effort into installing arbiter
>>>>with each player during the game ('serious event'), that arbiter can see that
>>>>player has shown on time and is ready for the game. In that case organizer
>>>>should be held responsible for any alternate connection in case ISP is down
>>>>(simply phone connetion would do here) or for rescheduling. Forfeit *should not*
>>>>be granted if player is phisically on time and in the place where he's supposed
>>>>to be and it's verifiable.
>>>>
>>>>-Andrew-
>>>
>>>At the world champs who was responsible in my case?
>>>
>>>The problem the first game was at an ISP somewhere in germany, NOT in paderborn,
>>>and it was NOT my ISP.
>>>
>>>The problem the first game was elsewhere in paderborn, some dude had turned
>>>OFF the computer in the weekend, and that computer was always inside my route
>>>to the crafty machine.
>>>
>>>In both cases the organization nor me could be blamed.
>>>
>>>Yet i had to play a game... ...what do i do?
>>>
>>>It's a technical sport, just like motor and car racing. If your machine
>>>is broke for whatever reason, then it's your fault simply. You can complain
>>>loud on fora like these, but it doesn't change that you have a problem
>>>during that game to find another machine.
>>
>>No... During WCCC you used a remote comp, so it was your sole responsibility for
>>connection. You had an option provided by organizers to use their equipment (not
>>a thrill, I know...). Here organizers took effort to place an arbiter 'on site',
>>so organizers have to take every effort to make sure there is an alternate
>>connection, since *both players were present and ready* for play at places they
>>were supposed to be (you were 'not ready' to play on WCCC as I see it due to
>>your choice).
>
>Well the issue remains the same. Remote computer or remote connection,
>there is no difference!
>
>Suppose i play in a tournament and first a car hits me, then a second car
>hits me. Still i try to get to the tournament hall, with an arm and a
>leg less. Then a third car simply crushes me. I get to hospital.
>
>Accident happens outside the tournament hall, but as i have a mobile phone
>i can call and say that i'm delayed a bit.
>
>What happens?
>
>Well i can tell you what happens, because as one of the biggest clubs in
>Netherlands we are confronted each year with a few of these cases.
>
>You forfeit.
>
>Vincent
This has nothing to do with this event. _all_ players were using the internet.
Forfeit due to internet problems turns it into a lottery, with the person in
the most internet-aware country having a big advantage due to alternate routes.
It makes no sense to host an event using the internet, but not having any sort
of plan in place to handle the occasional outages that happen. All the ACM
events allowed us to stop the clock _anytime_ a communication failure happened,
since the phone company was not involved in the event. The same should have
happened here. Perhaps with a 1-day delay due to fatigue, who knows. But to
let a network glitch lose a game is ridiculous..
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.