breakfast wrote:
Robert Jasiek made Top Koreans very unhappy.
As usual and unfortunate, you confuse my actions with the actions of others and the valid rules at that time.
The most responsible were the AGMs of 2004 and earlier years that by their inactivity (despite the known facts of the EC 2003 and Rules Commission's attempts to do something soon in view of that changed situation) let the existing rules be valid also in 2005. The next important responsibility was at the hands of the Tournament Supervisors body, which - be careful you understand this well - consisted of, IIRC, three (or was it four or five?) members, i.e., did not consist of - as you implicitly suggest - only one member (myself).
The valid rules of 2005 did not have a provision that would have allowed the Tournament Supervisors to replace their responsibility by substituting it with that of the EGC Committee members present at the congress. The valid rules of 2005 specified 8 to be the maximal number of strong non-Europeans, provided that the number of strong local (Czech) players and of strong young improving Europeans was 0.
What you call a mistake was a correct application of the valid rules! I am proud to have applied the valid rules correctly! It is a shame that you suggest intentional breaking of the valid rules!
The AGM delegates of the following years did not become active by themselves. It was I in 2008 to get the AGM change to rules (from up to 8 to up to ca. 8) so that the same practical problem (a few more present strong non-Europeans than may be in the supergroup) will not occur again. Instead of thanking me for having been the one to solve the problem, you accuse me of having caused the harm at all and alone.
Now what was the situation in 2005 when the Tournament Supervisors were forming the supergroup? I have to recall most from the memory, so slight inaccuries in the memorized facts are possible.
The Tournament Supervisors were (IIRC) Matti Siivola, Geoff Kaniuk, I. Ales Cieply was asked whether the Czech insisted on having a local player admitted; he did not want it. (That Matti Siivola and Ales Cieply were also EGF Committee members does not play a relevant role; they did not act in that function during the supergroup formation.)
We had some EGF-rated Korean 7d, some EGF-unrated Korean 7d, some EGF-rated Korean 6d, some EGF-unrated Korean 6d, some rated Japanese 5d-6d with rating clearly below the rated Korean 7d ratings.
First we decided not to admit any strong local player nor any young improving European. We decided so as to allow the maximal legally valid number 8 of strong non-Europeans.
Since there were enough Korean 7d and we trusted the rank information, we decided to disregard, among whichever Koreans we would admit, the Korean 6d.
Half of the Korean 7d were rated - the other half was unrated. Park Jong-Wook was not registered / signed as a supergroup candidate yet. (To me it is unknown for what reason he had missed to register for that thus far.)
Since we could not know and could not get conclusive information about that whether the rated Koreans or the unrated Koreans might be stronger relatively to each other, we decided to select, for the Koreans, half from the rated and half from the unrated Koreans.
We had to decide of how to compare different Asian countries to each other. Mainly we knew from the EC 2003 that the Koreans would be mostly or totally stronger than the Japanese. This suggested that one of the following country distributions of Koreans : Japanese (top Chinese or Taiwanese or others were not present) would be the most appropriate: 8:0, 7:1, 6:2. When unrated players are involved, it is particularly hard to find the necessarily best option. All we could do is to make some partly political decision for some suitable reasons. Although the Tournament Supergroup meeting was not public (everything else would not allow sufficiently time efficient decision making), I think that the reasoning is in everybody's interest; therefore I make it public (or have I done so before?), although I would not need to do so.
Geoff Kaniuk and Matti Siivola supported the vote for 6:2 on the grounds that the many (and regularly many) Japanese congress participants would not understand a yet more unfavourable proportion. I supported the vote 7:1 because of the very apparent superiority of the Koreans in the EC 2003 and their greater ratings (as far as known). IOW, I was voted down. Considering that I supported more Koreans than the other Tournament Supervisors, Alexander, it is particularly inappropriate and unreasonable for you trying to blame me and only me.
Given the 6:2 distribution, we could now apply it and take 3 rated and unrated Koreans each. Supergroup solved, so we tought.
Since, IIRC, we had exactly 3 signed Tournament Agreements each from rated and unrated Korean 7d, this fit particularly well. Now you see some more Korean 7d having played all 10 rounds in the result table. There can be different reasons why they did not sign the Tournament Agreement with application for the supergroup: a) They intended to stay for a shorter period and later changed their mind. b) They knew about the meaning of applying for the supergroup but chose not to apply. c) They did not know about the meaning of applying for the supergroup because of language difficulties and the congress organizers at the registration desks failed to do their job properly with them. Since, as a regular Tournament Supervisor, I am well aware of the possiblity (c), every year I tell the congress organizers to ensure proper handling and translation help with the Tournament Agreement forms. I tell the organizers very clearly and often I do so before the congress starts and when I arrive the congress venue myself. Congress organizers make mistakes though and so one can never exclude the possibility of (c) for some non-English speaking top players. During the formation of the supergroup, the Tournament Supervisors can never really solve those problems. Especially not when time is short, as it was in 2005. Nevertheless we did work very hard and delayed the start of round 1 by letting some congress organizers help us, running around the particularly wide congress venue in search of top Koreans etc. and we even ran around ourselves for that purpose, as far as time still allowed us. (The only way to do yet "better" at that time is to delay the round 1 start by yet further hours by pretending a done pairing, let everybody sit down, then revealing the intention of a fake round start and interview the interesting players.)
Then (pretty delayed way beyond the deadline!) came Park Jong-Wook with translator and signed the Tournament Agreement form with application to the supergroup. IIRC, he belonged to the unrated Korean 7d. We told him we would make a decision. This we did as follows: Since we were aware of possible congress organizers problems, we assumed Park not to have been responsible for his delay; so we treated him equally within the other given context. We took the now 4 unrated Korean 7d and drew a lot whom to exclude from the supergroup. That lot hit Park Jong-Wook himself. (Strange coincidence.)
Quote:
He played in the supergroup himself
Are you implying that I would make prejudiced decisions about being in the supergroup in favour of myself? I do not do such! Rather I apply the valid rules. Anybody else applying the valid rules of 2005 would have had to include me in the supergroup.
Quote:
(as usual, without any success),
Actually with 6 wins in the EC and other good achievements (like an overwhelming success of 9-7 fuseki) let the 2005 congress be a successful one for me.
Quote:
but lot of Koreans who can give him 3-5 handicap stones started from the next group.
I am willing to prove the opposite under similar playing conditions: 2.5 hours basic time, real world games, dynamic handicap. Organize such matches and I shall uphold the power of European 5d's!:)
In the following reference table, A means Asian, AS means Asian In Supergroup.
Code:
1 Dinerstein, Alexandr 7d RU 32 8 13+ 2+ 14+ 8+ 7+ 3- 54+ 12- 9+ 5+ 8 306 244
2 Cho, Seok-bin 7d KR AS32 8 30+ 1- 9+ 59+ 5+ 10+ 4+ 3- 12+ 15+ 8 305 241
3 Park, Jong-Wook 7d KR A 32 9 96+ 58+ 11+ 16+ 6+ 1+ 13+ 2+ 5- 4+ 9 302 271
4 Lee, Hong-bok 7d KR AS31 7 6- 128+ 21+ 15+ 17+ 7+ 2- 18+ 13+ 3- 7 303 208
5 Kim, Dong Chan 7d KR A 31 8 41+ 70+ 32+ 20+ 2- 15+ 27+ 14+ 3+ 1- 8 301 237
6 Lee, Ki-bong 7d KR AS31 7 4+ 20+ 7- 12+ 3- 11- 64+ 21+ 43+ 14+ 7 301 208
7 Taranu, Catalin 7d RO 31 7 58+ 27+ 6+ 17+ 1- 4- 9- 40+ 19+ 11+ 7 301 207
8 Shikshin, Ilja 6d RU 31 7 31+ 11+ 28+ 1- 10- 21+ 12- 23+ 17+ 44+ 7 300 207
9 Yoon, Kwang-sun 7d KR A 31 8 207+ 23+ 2- 35+ 22+ 39+ 7+ 10+ 1- 13+ 8 299 235
10 Kim, Kyung-rae 6d KR A 31 8 103+ 29+ 87+ 27+ 8+ 2- 11+ 9- 16+ 12+ 8 297 234
11 Yoon, Sa-Youn 7d KR AS30 6 37+ 8- 3- 128+ 24+ 6+ 10- 20+ 18+ 7- 6 302 177
12 Kim, Se Young 7d KR A 30 7 111+ 85+ 18+ 6- 16+ 28+ 8+ 1+ 2- 10- 7 301 207
13 Zhao, Pei 6d DE 30 6 1- 40+ 34+ 22+ 30+ 14+ 3- 57+ 4- 9- 6 301 175
14 Lim, Yeon-sik 7d KR AS30 6 63+ 18+ 1- 53+ 28+ 13- 19+ 5- 22+ 6- 6 299 175
15 Shikshina, Svetlana 7d RU 30 6 42+ 55+ 17- 4- 41+ 5- 36+ 27+ 25+ 2- 6 298 174
16 Silt, Ondrej 6d CZ 30 6 35+ 28- 36+ 3- 12- 69+ 24+ 34+ 10- 33+ 6 296 174
17 Colmez, Pierre 5d FR 30 6 87+ 32+ 15+ 7- 4- 25+ 18- 54+ 8- 91+ 6 296 173
18 Pop, Cristian 7d RO 30 6 19+ 14- 12- 133+ 37+ 30+ 17+ 4- 11- 31+ 6 295 174
Kai, Naoyuki 6d JP AS30 6 18- 38+ 22- 66+ 23+ 32+ 14- 29+ 7- 30+ 6 295 174
20 Gerlach, Christoph 6d DE 30 6 25+ 6- 54+ 5- 26- 77+ 61+ 11- 40+ 28+ 6 294 172
21 Cho, Chang-sam 5d KR A 30 7 102+ 98+ 4- 38+ 29+ 8- 32+ 6- 36+ 35+ 7 292 199
22 Kulkov, Andrej 6d RU 30 6 27- 57+ 19+ 13- 9- 43+ 66+ 55+ 14- 32+ 6 292 172
23 Kim, Jong-min 6d KR A 30 7 45+ 9- 61+ 57+ 19- 75+ 37+ 8- 53+ 27+ 7 291 199
24 Lee, Sung-keun 6d KR A 30 7 101+ 30- 51+ 45+ 11- 63+ 16- 62+ 75+ 29+ 7 287 198
25 Jasiek, Robert 5d DE 30 6 20- 60+ 55- 102+ 96+ 17- 53+ 31+ 15- 41+ 6 286 168
26 Ichikawa, Suguru 5d JP A 30 4 -- 74+ 33+ 58+ 20+ -- -- -- -- -- 4 253 115
27 Heiser, Laurent 6d LU 29 5 22+ 7- 65+ 10- 168+ 56+ 5- 15- 39+ 23- 5 294 141
28 Kang, Na-yeon 7d KR AS29 5 97+ 16+ 8- 39+ 14- 12- 40- 91+ 47+ 20- 5 293 143
29 Soldan, Leszek 5d PL 29 5 55- 10- 64+ 44+ 21- 60+ 35+ 19- 45+ 24- 5 292 143
30 Corlan, Lucian 4d RO 29 5 2- 24+ 35+ 55+ 13- 18- 57- 183+ 38+ 19- 5 292 142
31 Nemlij, Igor 5d RU 29 5 8- 52+ 53- 40+ 56- 44+ 39+ 25- 55+ 18- 5 291 144
32 Dach, Zbynek 4d CZ 29 5 46+ 17- 5- 144+ 84+ 19- 21- 85+ 54+ 22- 5 291 140
33 Kim, Hye-soon 6d KR A 29 6 49+ 35- 26- 67+ 47+ 65+ 55- 48+ 34+ 16- 6 289 172
34 Ohmori, Hirobumi 5d JP A 29 6 71+ 37+ 13- 47+ 54- 41+ 56+ 16- 33- 90+ 6 288 171
35 Jacenko, Dmitrij 5d UA 29 5 16- 33+ 30- 9- 150+ 62+ 29- 90+ 57+ 21- 5 288 139
36 Cheburakhov, Andrej 5d RU 29 6 68+ 136+ 16- 52- 45+ 84+ 15- 60+ 21- 56+ 6 287 168
37 Dugin, Artem 4d RU 29 5 11- 34- 48+ 70+ 18- 100+ 23- 97+ 44- 57+ 5 287 139
38 Giedrojc, Krzysztof 4d PL 29 6 137+ 19- 49+ 21- 48+ 53- 67+ 73+ 30- 71+ 6 286 169
39 Yoshida, Takao 6d JP A 29 6 93+ 56+ 97+ 28- 59+ 9- 31- 69+ 27- 53+ 6 285 167
40 Kim, Han Ul 6d KR A 29 6 117+ 13- 152+ 31- 107+ 97+ 28+ 7- 20- 67+ 6 284 164
41 Cipra, Petr 4d CZ 29 6 5- 210+ 184+ 98+ 15- 34- 72+ 74+ 42+ 25- 6 283 163
42 Tanaka, Masanori 5d JP AS29 5 15- 47+ 59- 46- 105+ 66+ 97- 64+ 41- 80+ 5 283 140