|Posted by Matthew Anderson on February 20, 2010 at 10:50 PM|
Game Of The Week
If you don’t belong to the CSCN Yahoo! Group, you will have to read the rest of this to understand the following two articles. Then they might make a little more sense…maybe.
The controversy started as the team event was winding down. Of course, it is important to note that this was not a typical team event. Actually, it was the club’s attempt to promote a little known chess variant where “2 partners alternate moves without consultation.”
The lack of popularity for this variant is evident by the fact that the name is somewhat of a mystery. The club has tested this event 3 times now. Twice, it had the description “team” (2/22/05 and 05/15/07). Once, it was referred to as “tandem” (4/11/06).
Neither name is really appropriate, as the club already has a team event, where partners play their own games but combine their scores, and the more popular use of tandem chess is for a bughouse variant.
Of course, this week’s controversy has probably only helped to put one of the final nails in the coffin of this game. The other nails being the lack of a decent name and the equally mysterious rules about what the legal ramifications of the phrase “without consultation” means. If you don’t have a panel of Supreme Court Justices handy, you could run across the same controversy we had. So, I assembled a panel of judges from the Yahoo! Group to hear the case and settle the controversy. Here is how it went:
Since the final game of the Team event ended in controversy and the only permanent record of the results will be the CSCN archives, you get to choose how it gets recorded for posterity.
With seconds left on both teams' clocks, chaos ensues as multiple players move pieces out of turn, players fail to hit the clock, and the constant refrain of "Is it my turn?" echoes throughout the playing hall. Amidst the turmoil, Joe Pahk (black), in a sportsmanlike gesture, asks for a ruling about whether he can offer a draw, receives approval, and offers the white team a draw.
Charles Martin and Paul Anderson (white) stare blankly at each other as precious seconds tick away. Finally, Paul Anderson jumps in with a "We accept!” Charles makes his move, Bill Whinemiller (black) disputes the draw and moves, and white goes on to run out of time. Now you be the judge.
CHOICES AND RESULTS-
I was pleasantly surprised by the results. Clearly the first two choices were the legitimate ones, but I couldn’t help myself from throwing in a silly winning scenario as well. It is nice to know that in the court of public opinion, I won.
But, in all honesty, I wasn’t going to change the result, and it wasn’t even my joke. The credit goes to Joe Pahk who was nice enough to lighten the mood after the game with the comment, “Now, you’re not going to claim the win on your website are you?”
I thought, “Well, I can do the next best thing and pretend to and see what kind of reaction I get.” There is nothing like a little controversy to spark some involvement from my mostly silent readers.
Of course, the only meaningful input was that of the tournament director, Dean Brown. I recently had the chance to direct a Redemption Trading Card Game tournament and have a greater appreciation for the role of TD. It is not an easy job and doesn’t pay well (if at all), but without it there would be no tournament to play in.
So, I respect Dean’s decision and hope that I can make his job an easy one, as I have always enjoyed his tireless commitment to the chess community (Thanks Dean!).
Also, the game has no importance (no money, no title, no rating) to make a fuss over other than perhaps as something humorous to fill a chess column.
In the words of Solomon:
“’Meaningless! Meaningless!’ says the Teacher. ‘Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless.’”
But don’t tell Bill, I still like him to think it is controversial.
The Most Controversial Game Ever Published!
[Event "CSCC Team"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. a3 Nc6 5. Bc4 e5 6. d3 d6 7. Ng5 Nh6 8. h3 O-O
9. Nd5 Nd4 10. Be3 Ne6 11. Qd2 Nd4 12. Nf3 Nxf3+ 13. gxf3 Qh4 14. O-O-O Bd7 15.
Bg5 Qh5 16. Nf6+ Bxf6 17. Bxf6 b5 18. Bd5 Rae8 19. Bg5 Kg7 20. Rdg1 Be6 21. Bc6
Rb8 22. f4 exf4 23. Qxf4 f6 24. Bxh6+ Qxh6 25. Qxh6+ Kxh6 26. f4 Rb6 27. Bd5
Bxd5 28. exd5 f5 29. Rg3 Re8 30. Kd2 Rb7 31. Rhg1 Rbe7 32. R1g2 0-1
This Week In Chess
Tuesday May 22, 2007
On May 15, the CSCC had 11 members in attendance. The main event was a team, single round-robin tournament (G15). The teams were made up of 2 partners who had to alternate moves without consultation. Here are the results:
Joe Pahk & Bill Whinemiller 3.0
Paul Anderson & Charles Martin 2.0
Buck Buchanan & Marco Calderon 1.0
Jason Caldwell & Ken Micklich 0.0
Comments From Email
Dean Wm Brown, Wednesday, May 16, 2007 1:16 PM
Paul Anderson mentioned his three games listed on the ChessBase database. Curious, I researched that database to see if any of my games merited worldwide listing. Proving the "Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut" theory, of my thousands of rated and correspondance games, 6 showed up in the database (2 wins, 2 draws, 2 loses):
Brown,D-Knudson,John, 1992, ASPCC corr, eco:C02 0-1
KnudsonJohn-Brown,Dean, 1995, ASPCC corr, eco:C21, 0-1
Brown,Dean-Toomey,Terrance, 1997, Albuquerque Open, eco:C01, 1-0
Brown,Dean-Anderson,RobertL, 1999, NW CO Open, eco:B06, 1/2-1/2
Cohen,Peter-Brown,Dean, 1999, Winter Springs Open, eco:A22, 1/2-1/2
Rubi,Aaron-Brown,Dean, 1999, Winter Springs Open, eco:C34, 1-0
Either Chessbase has been more selctive in their games this century or my qulaity has suffered since 1999...none of my games have been listed since.
[Comment is about this newsletter: (http:/cschess.webs.com/apps/blog/show/2929337-once-bitten)]
Ray Fourzan, El Paso, TX, Thursday, May 17, 2007 4:16 PM
I can't wait until I get a chance to come up to Colorado to play in one of your tournaments. They look like fun. Unfortunately, that's all I can do right now, just wait. Oh well, keep up the good work with your newsletter. I really enjoy reading it. Ray Fourzan (ps. I am especially waiting for a tournament in Pueblo.)
Mr. Bill Announces His New Chess Column!
By Bill Whinemiller, Monday, May 21, 2007 9:34 PM
"Actually, Joe asked Dean whether he could offer a draw and was told 'if the players agree.' To me, that meant he couldn't offer a draw without asking me first. Then he says 'Do you want a draw?' to the other team. If you say yes, he still has to come to me to see if WE are offering a draw. It was a time trouble situation. I was busy analyzing, but had no role in whatever the rest of you were wondering about. I was to move next (Joe already had moved). I understand losing is very annoying in time trouble, BUTN THE BOARD, I FELT WE HAD A WIN. So when it finally got around to me, I DIDN'T want a draw. Good thing. We won. So sorry.
I guess I've got to start a column so I can fabricate controversies when I lose.
There wasn't any controversy, Paul. We won. The rule of this team format was that we weren't supposed to consult. Which doesn't mean I need to appreciate your efforts to confuse the junior member of my team. Sportsmanship lessons from someone who will try to win Championship games on time ...When he's a Queen, a Rook, a Bishop and a Pawn down! It takes class to resign and it takes class to admit you've lost when you're beaten. By the way, Joe played well in this tournament."
Just When You Thought Mr. Bill Was Done!
By Bill Whinemiller, Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:42 AM
"Besides, if your partner's still moving, you guys haven't even agreed to accept the bad offer!"
5/22 Eccentric Pairings tournament: 4-SS, G/15, CSCC
5/23,30 Poor Richard's Book Store May Open Final Rounds, CSCC
5/26 DCC Denker/Polgar Fundraiser, DCC
5/26-28 Territory Days. Play in club booth in Bancroft Park. Register with Buck. Dress “Western.”, CSCC
5/29 G/15 tournament: 4-SS, CSCC
6/2-3 David Reynolds Memorial, CSCA
Colorado Springs Chess Club: CSCC (http://springschess.org/)
Denver Chess Club: DCC (http://www.denverchessclub.org/)
Boulder Chess Club: BCC (http://www.geocities.com/boulderchessclub/)
Colorado State Chess Association: CSCA (http://colorado-chess.com/)
Wyoming Chess Association: WCA (http://www.wyomingchess.com/)
The words you entered did not match the given text. Please try again.
Oops, you forgot something.