Russland gewinnt, Indien protestiert, Russland und Indien gewinnen

6 Antworten

  1. Olaf Steffens sagt:

    Ja, das stimmt – grundsätzlich eine sehr sympathische Entscheidung mit den Joint Winners, und letztlich tut es keinem weh. Es musste offenbar auch schnell gehen, und dann ergibt sich so ein Ergebnis.

    (Goldene Regel – wie man es macht, macht man es verkehrt. Aber hier hat glaube ich niemand einen dramatischen Schaden davon, und das ganze Turnier war ja auch so eine Art phantastischer Testballon.)

  2. Arturs Neiksans: “I don’t think India appreciates such gold medals as well”

    Laut Twitter waren sie überglücklich: Anand, Vidit und Harikrishna schrieben (mit etwas zeitlichem Abstand, wohl unabhängig voneinander) “We are the champions!” und dann “Congrats Russia” – fast als ob Russland Zweiter wurde. Nur Harika sagte “Joint Champions”.

    Betrifft Matteo Zoldan (wer ist das denn?): Was Kandidatenturnier betrifft, hinterher ist man immer schlauer – persönlich denke ich “einen Versuch war es wert”. Unabhängig davon: auch Manager, die das hauptberuflich machen “und sonst nichts können” machen mal Fehler.

  3. Franz Jittenmeier sagt:

    Matteo Zoldan schrieb auf Facebook

    Main problem is people attitude that frequently immediately brings them to point out what didn’t work and don’t make them to appreciate what worked and efforts provided. Who does can make mistakes who doesn’t do anything at all surely will not make any. On my personal point of view I appreciate event despite of unfortunate end and what I think has been a nice but wrong decision by FIDE President.
    This is the second time in few months that FIDE takes a wrong strategic decision and then is forced to find a way to escape from and make impossible corrective adjustments: the first one was definitely let Candidates tournament starting on last March.
    Someone in the management side probably overstimates his skills, being a strong player not automatically means being a super manager who never fails.

  4. Franz Jittenmeier sagt:

    Arturs Neikšāns schrieb auf Facebook:

    Unfortunately the Online Olympiad ended with a scandal – after a global internet outage two Indian players disconnected, and FIDE President decided to award both teams (Russia and India) gold medals. This caused some major turbulence in the social networks as Russian’s clearly felt they were just robbed, and Armenians, having lost because of connectivity issues a couple of days ago, had to say something in this matter as well, mainly with such keywords as double standards. A wonderful game ended in a stalemate, so to speak.

    I will start that I sympathize for the Russian team – they were leading the match by one point and I wouldn’t say that it was crystal clear that India would get 1.5 points of of the 2 remaining games. Divya had a big advantage against Shuvalova but I don’t care if the engine says it’s +2.5. There’s a whole game ahead and one can’t call the final position as simply winning for White. Esipenko had just blown away a big advantage against Nihal Sarin while still pushing for it – not a 100% draw either.

    Thus I think that Dvorkovich’s decision unfortunately was a bad call. I can absolutely understand it, it must have felt like all of the choices were bad, but then again awarding Russia a sole gold medal made more sense. They were actually leading the match and it’s not their fault that the opponents are disconnected because of force majeure.

    I suppose the president was concerned that awarding Russia a win might cause some serious PR backlash because of his supposedly biased position (being Russian) and India with a huge chess boom lately, so he chose a diplomatic way, to please both. But as you can see, the result is worse, that nobody anticipated – the Russians are not pleased, I don’t think India appreciates such gold medals as well, and the most of the audience wanted to see a true winner. Why didn’t they agree to restart the remaining two games?

    However, I wouldn’t be so harsh to call the olympiad as a circus or 80% or 100% failure, as I read in certain comments. I think it was a wonderful event, an attempt to do something groundbreaking that stays in the history and without the efforts of FIDE and Chess.com – we wouldn’t have it at all. This was a first try to organize something of this scale online, and I think we have to give the organizers who spent countless days and months to make it happen, some real credit. I hope we can learn from the mistakes and organize it even better the next time. Thank you for the olympiad!

  5. Das Appeals-Committee hat ja anscheinend getagt, aber traf keine einstimmige Entscheidung. Offizielle Version ist, dass es diesmal eine globale Internet-Störung war. Laut einer Grafik in einem Kommentar auf chess.com war neben Teilen von Indien und dem Osten der USA vor allem Deutschland betroffen – mir ist nichts aufgefallen.

    Ohnehin ist es aus Sicht der Nutzer (hier Schachspieler) generell egal, ob das Internet ohne eigene Schuld in der eigenen Straße, der eigenen Stadt, dem eigenen Land oder auch anderswo ausfällt. Aber es beeinflusst das Schachergebnis im Internet.

  6. Olaf Steffens sagt:

    Toller Artikel, vielen Dank, Thomas!

    Das ist ja, wie man so schön sagt, ein dicker Hund – erst scheitert im Halbfinale Armenien mit einem Protest in ähnlicher Konstellation, dann winkt Dvorkovich den indischen Protest präsidentiell durch zum geteilten Gold. Und ohne das Appeals-Kommittee abzuwarten? Oha.