|Aug-17-07|| ||xeroxmachine: My first thought was wow, then I reconsider the strenght of Stellwagens opponent Sayed Jav... say what? Then I see he has a win over Radjabov but then I rethought once again and noticed he was only ten years old at the time.|
|Nov-07-08|| ||amadeus: Concerning this tournament:
<In the Spanish town of Oropesa del
Mar, ten world championships were held together: for under ten,
twelve, fourteen, sixteen and eighteen, and all this both for girls
and boys. The Dutch great hope was Daniel Stellwagen, twelve
There was a tense situation before the last round in the under-12
section. Stellwagen was equal with the Chinese Wang with 8 out of
12. If both drew or both won, Stellwagen would be world
champion on tie-break. He had to play with White against the
Russian Tomashevsky; Wang was Black against his countryman
Black, white, green or red, it would really make no difference, because
the Chinese have a reputation to be indecently helpful to each other
if it suits the common cause. And so it happened. Stellwagen made
a draw. The two Chinese had done little in their game, moving
their pieces to and fro. Huang had been a bit better all the time, but
during the last few moves the advantage had changed hands and
now it was Wang who was a bit better. But in fact it made no
difference at all who had the advantage.
Within a minute after Stellwagen had agreed the draw, Huang
resigned his game. No question of time trouble - he had half an
hour left for two moves in a drawn position. Wang was world
Of course the Dutch delegation filed a protest. This was rejected,
although the appeals committee went out of its way to show
sympathy for the Dutch side, declaring that cases like this were
unfortunately all too common but impossible to act against,
because hard proof was always lacking. Yes indeed, it always is.
Better proof than in this obvious case of cheating you will never
One cannot blame the Chinese boys. They are twelve years old or
younger. No doubt they had older and more experienced attendants
who had instructed them as to their duties to the Fatherland.>
|Nov-07-08|| ||amadeus: Wang is Wang Yue|
They'll meet each other in Corus 2009.
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: yes,this phenomenon is indeed popular in chinese officialdom,since chinese sports is in the political system firstly,it woul d be no surprise for me if it was true...
but chinese public would stand for the justice of course..|
|Jan-20-09|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: <Ladolcevita>
I understand, and also the "practice" is by no means exclusive to the Chinese- or to chess.
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: but this is hard to distinguish between the verity and suspicion....since the whole game could be faked and agreed in advance,and if i decided to fake it,why not fake it just like a real game?A real loss against brilliant WangYue is sheerly believable,and nobody can criticize if "he" can only draw to not ensure the champion.So firstly i doubt whether its faked or not,becasue westerners also have the reputation of cheating and evil---you should not doubt this certainly,because the examples are immense----but if its true,i think it doesnt mean that chinese have such a reputation,its just the individual idea of that teamleader or coach or the little boys if you want them to be....|
Just the opposite,i would like to raise an example just happened at the first world mind sports game in the last year.I remember vaguely(i mean maybe some names are interchanged wrongly,but the deed is clear) there was a condition that if HuangQian lost to XuYuhua,then XuYuhua would certainly make to the semifinal together with HouYifan in that half square,but HuangQian won against XuYuhua,and makes Kosteniuk(Or Stefanova) with HouYifan into the semifinal.And if as you said,HuangQian must be the alien in chinese.Nevertheless i would say chinese formed its moral standard thousand years ago,and if there are some bad chinese,that should only be ascribed to the large population...
Methinks every country has criminals and shames.
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: <setnoescapeon>
yep...its a shared weakness of all human creatures.....
|Jan-20-09|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: The game is here: Huang vs Wang Yue, 1999|
Judge for yourself if the final position is resignable for White, even against the "brilliant Wang Yue".
Re: proof, I think Tim Krabbé put it best:
<No proof of what? Wasn't 39.resign proof that he resigned? Two hundred people saw the man hold the gun against his wife's head and pull the trigger. Acquitted. No proof he shot her.>
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: ok,i see
they are too young to fake it like a real defeat....
so its very obvious they are asked/forced to conduct such a drama...
but i think its not a big deal,its just like short draws agreed,can you blame them ?If you want to lose/draw,then you can lose/draw,its totally the freedom of a chess player.The process justice is higher than the moral/emotional justice.
As viewed from this,i think they are not wrong,since i have said,you can never tell whats the win/loss of a chess game,a blunder,can you say its agreed or the brain skipped a common sense?
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: Yes,he resigned,but what do you get and what can you ensure?
Someone asked him,who??where?how do you know?Its not about proof of resignation,its about proof of verity.
Maybe Huang is the best friend of Wang,and he wanted to lose to make his friend world champion,albeit Wang tried to persuad all the time...
or,Huang is just too tired,and he resigned as a child always do.....|
Clearly justice is very important,but the point is not in this case,since here we see nothing is wrong in the process.We cannot conclude its true motif only by judging the appearance,and considered it in a certain way.If we indulge ourselves in subjecting to such logic,we would be dangerous.
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: Of course,its not so fair for Stellwagen,if Huang lost to Wang for some different things....But if Huang is dying to lose,how can you prevent it?He can resign as naive as a child,and he can also realize it by blunder,by choosing the bad line,by wasting the time....Then what should you say?In my opinion,this just manifests something most important.|
|Jan-20-09|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Very well. Let us imagine a slightly different scenario.|
It is the last day of the World Championship double round robin tournament in Elista, Kalmykia, and the winner will be crowned the sole and undisputed Chess World Champion for the next five years (not to mention the winner-takes-all prize money of US$8,000,000.00). Sharing the lead, with nine points, are Wang Yue of China and Veselin Topalov of Bulgaria. In the event they remain tied at the end, a match will be played between the two. Wang is to play his last game with White against Daniel Stellwagen of the Netherlands,
while Topalov has Black against his countryman Ivan Cheparinov.
Wang-Stellwagen is a balanced game and agreed drawn shortly after time control. Meanwhile, Cheparinov-Topalov has also reached a rather balanced position...
click for larger view
...both players having played nearly perfectly up to now, White to move with 58 minutes on the clock here unbelievably overlooks a mate in one: 42.Qe6?? Qh2#, handing Topalov the World Championship and eight million US dollars.
The Chinese file a protest, claiming that Cheparinov (whose only other loss in the tournament was also against Topalov) allowed the mate on purpose to let his friend Topalov win the Championship, also citing the timing of the event mere seconds after the draw agreement by Wang and Stellwagen. The Chief Arbiter, one Silvio Danailov, offers words of sympathy but notes that proof is sadly lacking. Wang is shattered and retires from chess.
Would you side with the Chinese or with Danailov?
(Disclaimer: the appearance of Topalov and Cheparinov in the post above is merely because they come from the same country, and does not in any way aim to insinuate that this is what we'd expect to happen were the two truly found in such a situation.)
|Jan-20-09|| ||Ladolcevita: <switching>
You are right,,Its bad to infringe the justice,but its a pity that the regulation can do nothing helpful....
Morality is so vague and unreliable.