Forum Polskiego Stowarzyszenia Gomoku, Renju i Pente
Turnieje - TGWC 2018
zukole - 2017-07-31, 22:10
Temat postu: TGWC 2018
W trakcie GA (ale to może Usiek coś napisze) oraz w rozmowach po ceremonii zamknięcia tegorocznych mistrzostw świata w Gomoku pojawił się temat przyszłych turniejów, w tym największej imprezy 2018. roku - drużynowych mistrzostw świata. Rosjanie są w stanie zorganizować turnieje (Gomoku i Renju) na przełomie kwietnia i maja w Petersburgu. Renju wydaje się być bardzo-bardzo prawdopodobne (link), zaś organizacja w Gomoku zależy od tego, czy będzie pozytywny oddźwięk na tę propozycję. Węgrzy i Czesi są zainteresowani (zwłaszcza Kedlub z Martezem ).
Wątpię, by ktoś inny podjął się tego zadania, więc możemy do Rosji się wybrać lub nie. Puholek intensywnie sprawdzał połączenia w Pradze i o ile pamiętam, samolot z Okęcia (LOT) to kwestia 2 godzin i niecałe 1000 złotych w obie strony. Bus to prawie doba jazdy, ale i relatywnie niższy koszt.
angst - 2017-08-01, 15:30
A może to odpowiedni moment, aby wziąć się w garść i coś jednak w końcu zorganizować?
W mojej ocenie łatwiej chyba mimo wszystko TGWC niż GWC.
Ale oczywiście pozostaje kwestia znalezienia kilku osób, które pomogą w organizacji i zadeklarują dodatkowo możliwość wsparcia już podczas samej imprezy.
Ja w każdym razie na 99% do Rosji nie pojadę.
bromozel - 2017-08-01, 16:27
If you will decide to organize TGWC, it will be great! I think that Poland as a country also very good for russian and for european players.
Probably I can help with the organization of the tournament (at least with some financial support).
zukole - 2018-02-13, 20:31
Oficjalnej informacji na stronie RIF-u jeszcze nie ma, ale wiedzcie że w dniach 11-17 sierpnia drużynowe mistrzostwa świata w Gomoku odbędą się w Płocku
Więcej informacji wkrótce.
angst - 2018-02-24, 11:51
Więcej informacji (w tym tłumaczenie ) wkrótce!
sandra113 - 2018-02-25, 11:50
I recently recommended changing the word order in the championship name from "Team Gomoku World Championship" to "World Team Gomoku Championship," in analogy to the World Team Chess Championship.
Discussions of my recommendation are underway, and I was encouraged to write a post to explain the need for the change in detail, so I am writing this post
I would like to start with a simple fact - the recommended word order is the common one in sports. Apart from the World Team Chess Championship, mentioned above, I can give you the following examples:
- World Team Table Tennis Championship
- World Team Squash Championship
- World Team Badminton Championship
- World Team Go Championship
- World Team Disc Golf Championship
- World Team Poker Championship
If you google the exact phrase "team chess world championship," analogous to the current word order in the gomoku championship, you will get only 3 results, two of them being on Vietnamese websites, and one on a Chinese one.
So what makes that word order recommended by me so universally accepted in sports?
I would like to point out one obvious reason: The exact word order in a championship name affects how the latter is perceived, at least in English.
In English, nouns preceded by a series of adjectives are generally perceived in the following way: The noun itself and the adjective closest to it form together something that is perceived as a core, a single extended noun, and the other adjectives are perceived to merely clarify the meaning. The more to the left the adjective is, the more auxiliary role it plays. For example, in the expression "gomoku discussion board" the core is "discussion board," i.e., an Internet forum, and the word "gomoku" merely clarifies that the discussions on that forum are mainly about gomoku. If you change the word order to "discussion gomoku board," the perception will drastically change: The reader will imagine a gomoku board, most likely a wooden one, and then get puzzled how it could be used for discussions.
And this is why the current name of the championship looks weird, at least to me. Let us have a closer look.
In the current name, the core is "world championship," which very ambitiously puts the main emphasis on that the championship determines the best in the world, so the reader imagines a high-profile contest spectators, journalists, prize money, etc. These are natural associations triggered by "world championship."
The next adjective to the left is "gomoku," which clarifies that the best in the world will be determined in gomoku, and this sounds amusing, given that the gomoku ranklist contains only about 100 players and that gomoku is played by non-professionals only.
And the leftmost adjective, which is to be perceived as the most auxiliary one because of its position, is "team" and in fact significantly changes the whole thing, as team tournaments are a very special kind of gomoku tournaments.
To me, the word order recommended by me puts the most natural logical emphases. The core is "gomoku championship," so the reader imagines a gomoku tournament, i.e., players sitting at gomoku boards and playing with each other. The next adjective to the left is "team," which clarifies the special character of the tournament, so the reader refines his perception by imagining that the tournament participants are united in teams. And the leftmost adjective, the most auxiliary by its position, further clarifies that the best gomoku team will be determined among teams from the whole world. Perfect!
I also see additional linguistic considerations favouring the recommended word order.
One of them is that in English, adjectives standing adjacent to each other in front of a noun are sometimes meant to form a single extended adjective, like in "red pepper soup" - it is a soup with red pepper and not a pepper soup of red colour. That is, "red" and "pepper" are first logically combined with each other and only then are logically attached to "soup." So if you write a text and put some adjectives in front of a noun, you should be careful with the adjective sequence in order to avoid that the reader sees an extended adjective you do not mean to introduce.
And for this reason I recommend placing the word "world" to the leftmost position, as "gomoku world" can, in principle, be perceived as "the world of gomoku," which is not the meaning you want to convey.
Another additional consideration is that in the recommended name, the reader first sees the word "world," which immediately creates a positive impression of globality. The word "team," which is what the current name starts with, is pretty restrictive and much less catchy.
Also, the Cambridge dictionary has an article about the order of adjectives, and that article says that even when we do not want to put any logical emphases, adjectives describing types are usually preceded by adjective describing sizes. The adjective "gomoku" is rather type-related, while "world" - rather size-related, so "world" should come first.
I think I may have bored you with linguistic considerations, so I now want to appeal to common sense: Guys, the FIDE (World Chess Federation) is a solid organisation spending big bucks for their top-level tournaments, so they must have very carefully chosen the word order for their world team championship. Let us not reinvent the wheel, let us simply copy their word order - it is not copyright protected
Or what reasons do we have to keep the current name?
The tradition? Come on, the traditions of the English language are a little bit older
Consistency with the RIF tournament names? Just show my arguments to the RIF and see what they say I am sure that they are very reasonable people, so they are unlikely to insist that we keep this wrong word order, and they may decide to change their tournament names, too And if they decide to do so, I would recommend simply copying the tournament names from the FIDE. Here is what the chess world has got:
- World Chess Championship,
- World Team Chess Championship,
- World Youth Chess Championship, and
- World Correspondence Chess Championship.
Anyway, just replace "chess" by "gomoku" or "renju" in those names, and, of course, replace "world" by "European" where needed, and voila, you get perfect tournament names
Okay guys, I have given you advice. Now I want to play a few gomoku games on Kurnik and will do some organisational duties in a tournament I co-organise, the World Blitz Cup, a tournament with a perfect word order
angst - 2018-02-25, 13:24
DRUŻYNOWE MISTRZOSTWA ŚWIATA GOMOKU 2018 W POLSCE: INFORMACJE WSTĘPNE
Drużynowe Mistrzostwa Świata Gomoku 2018 odbędą się w Płocku i z przyjemnością zapraszamy na tę ekscytującą rywalizację!
Przygotowania już się rozpoczęły i przekazujemy niniejszym podstawowe informacje w tym ogłoszeniu. Wszystkie niezbędne informacje będą aktualizowane, wraz ze zbliżaniem się do tego wydarzenia.
10-11.08. - przybycie uczestników
11,08. 18:00 - Ceremonia otwarcia
12.08. 09:15 - 1. runda
12.08. 15:45 - 2. runda
13.08. 09:15 - 3. runda
13.08. 15:45 - 4. runda
14,08. 09:15 - 5. runda
14,08. 15:45 - 6. runda
15.08. rano - odpoczynek, dyskusja Komisji Gomoku
15.08. 15:45 - 7. runda
16,08. 09:15 - 8. runda
16,08. 15:45 - 9. runda
17.08. 09:15 - 10. runda
17.08. 16:00 - Ceremonia zamknięcia
Do powyższego mogą jeszcze zostać wprowadzone zmiany, w zależności od dokładnej liczby uczestniczących drużyn, natomiast daty rozpoczęcia i zakończenia samego turnieju - 12 sierpnia (niedziela) i 17 sierpnia (sobota) - są już potwierdzone.
Każda drużyna musi składać się z czterech głównych graczy i może mieć maksymalnie 2 graczy rezerwowych. Pełne zasady turnieju zostaną ogłoszone później i będą zgodne z regulaminem RIF. Opłata turniejowa wyniesie 120 EUR za drużynę.
Tuż przed turniejem odbędą się Mistrzostwa Polski w Gomoku (10-11.08.) - ten turniej będzie otwarty, więc każdy zawodnik, który przyjedzie do Płocka, również może do niego dołączyć.
Zarówno sala turniejowa, jak i noclegi, mieszczą się w Hotelu Płock (http://www.hotelplock.pl), który znajduje się w Płocku, historycznej stolicy Polski, położonej około 100 km od Warszawy.
Hotel znajduje się w samym centrum miasta, 50 m od przystanku autobusowego i około 1,5 km od głównego dworca autobusowego i kolejowego (w Płocku nie ma lotniska, w związku z czym można tam dojechać samochodem, autobusem lub pociągiem). W pobliżu hotelu znajdują się sklepy i restauracje, a Stare Miasto oddalone jest o niecały kilometr.
Zagwarantowaliśmy dobre ceny - 80 PLN i 100 PLN za osobę, odpowiednio za noc w pokoju dwuosobowym i jednoosobowym (ze śniadaniem).
W przypadku zaakceptowania tych warunków i decyzji o nocowaniu w proponowanym hotelu, prosimy o informację do 15 kwietnia, a my dokonamy ostatecznej rezerwacji. W razie potrzeby pomożemy znaleźć tańsze zakwaterowanie, ale zdecydowanie rekomendujemy sugerowany wyżej hotel.
Prosimy o potwierdzenie chęci wzięcia udziału w tym wydarzeniu, a także o informację o członkach drużyny i towarzyszących im osobach, w najszybszym możliwym terminie.
Będziemy bardzo wdzięczni za wskazanie głównego przedstawiciela do kontaktu z danego kraju. To bardzo nam pomoże.
Lizymy na spotkanie w Płocku!
Komitet Organizacyjny TGWC 2018
Dyrektor Turnieju - Paweł Tarasiński, firstname.lastname@example.org, https://www.facebook.com/gharvelt
Asystent Dyrektora Turnieju - Piotr Małowiejski, email@example.com, https://www.facebook.com/dtangst
zukole - 2018-03-27, 22:20
Zapisy - https://bit.ly/2pFeyce
Strona - https://sites.google.com/view/2ndgtwc/home
Chaosu - 2018-05-16, 23:23
. . .Jak tam zgłoszenia drużyn?
angst - 2018-05-17, 13:29
Na ten moment wygląda to mniej więcej tak:
Raczej będzie tylko jedna drużyna z Polski, być może dodatkowo jeszcze uda się utworzyć team international (szuka graczy Iec). Kolejna niepewność związana jest z Estonią, która deklaruje nawet 3 drużyny, ale nie mamy oficjalnego zgłoszenia.
zukole - 2018-08-13, 01:06
Od wczoraj trwa turniej drużynowy. Gramy w składzie: 1# Usiek, 2# Zukole, 3# Puholek i 4# Alicecooper. Rolę rezerwowego pełni Maestro.
Wyniki pierwszej rundy.
Wyniki drugiej rundy.
Tabela po drugiej rundzie:
1. Poland 7 p.
2. Russia I 6 p.
3. Hungary 6 p.
4. Czech Republic I 5,5 p.
5. Czech Republic II 5 p.
6. Team International 3 p.
7. Russia II 3 p.
8. Russia III 2 p.
9. Estonia 1,5 p.
10. Czech Republic III 1 p.
- adres do transmisji.
zukole - 2018-08-17, 20:38
Tabela drugich drużynowych mistrzostw świata w Gomoku:
1. Russia I 27,5 p.
2. Hungary 22,5 (Team match points 6,5 / Berger 355,25)
3. Poland 22,5 (Team match points 6,5 / 354)
4. Czech Republic I 22,5 p. (Team match points 5,5)
5. Russia II 19,5 p.
6. Russia III 16 p.
7. Estonia 14,5 p.
8. Team International 13,5 p.
9. Czech Republic II 12 p.
10. Czech Republic III 9,5 p.
Klasyfikacja graczy na stołach w załączniku (medale dla puhola za drugie miejsce na trzecim stole, zukole trzecie miejsce na drugim stole i alice'a trzecie miejsce na czwartym stole).
Chaosu - 2018-08-17, 23:48
. . .Zanim pojawi się relacja Angsta którą każdy będzie czytał chciałem podziękować koledze z pracy, Radkowi za pomoc w zorganizowaniu transmisji z turnieju i za pożyczenie części sprzętu do transmisji. Radek zajmuje się fotografią i filmem hobbistycznie i można się lepiej z nim zapoznać tutaj.
Ece - 2018-08-18, 11:51
Zaczynając od wyniku, to 2 lata temu było złoto, ale zdawaliśmy sobie sprawę, że w tym roku było to mało prawdopodobne. Nawet podium nie było pewne i jak widać, z jednej strony było bardzo blisko do srebra, z drugiej pół punktu mniej i medalu by nie było. Cel został osiągnięty i powinniśmy być z siebie zadowoleni.
Co do organizacji, to miałem pewne obawy na początku. Ale summa summarum wyszło naprawdę super, atmosfera była świetna, transmisja w Internecie to był super pomysł. Przygotowanie turnieju kosztowało dużo wysiłku i szacunek dla wszystkich za to.
Szkoda że tak mało osób z Polski, ale nie można mieć wszystkiego - stan Gomoku w Polsce to zupełnie osobny temat. Ale jestem przekonany, że nasi goście z zagranicy wyjechali od nas zadowoleni i pozostaliśmy po sobie bardzo dobre wrażenie.
A na osobistym gruncie, to bardzo się cieszę że po latach mogłem się z Wami spotkać. Mam nadzieję że następny raz nie będzie za kolejne 10 lat.
sandra113 - 2018-08-27, 19:07
Do gomoku players always respect the rules and act in the spirit of good sportsmanship?
Until recently, bad behaviour in gomoku seemed to be confined to the online world, but in the last world team championship, held in Poland in August 2018, there was an incident that caused much disturbance and heavy debates.
In a nutshell, in the middle of a game one player erroneously pressed the clock without putting a stone, and his opponent immediately claimed this to be a pass (i.e., claimed that the player who had erroneously pressed the clock had given up the right to put a stone) and then put his own stone, so the game continued with two stones of one colour put consecutively, but after a few further moves the referees intervened, reinstated the position in which the clock had been erroneously pressed, and let the player who had erroneously pressed the clock put his stone and play further as usual. He went on to win the game, but almost definitely would have lost it if the referees had not intervened.
The player who erroneously pressed the clock was Maxim Karasev, a famous Russian renju player, and his opponent was Dmitry Epifanov, a vice president of the RIF (Renju International Federation) and the Russian renju champion of 2013 and 2014.
Given many conflicting opinions on that incident, I got interested to investigate the case. I talked with witnesses, read debates on the Russian gomoku forum, read the accounts publicly given by both conflicting parties, and carefully analysed the incident from the standpoint of the relevant rules as well as from the standpoint of sportsmanship.
Having made a careful analysis, I am now sharing my findings with the gomoku community. My motivation is threefold: (I) to cross all Ts and dot all Is regarding the incident, (ii) to broadly inform the gomoku community about the incident as well as about the current state of various existing rules in the gomoku world, and (iii) to give food for thought, and hopefully good ideas, about what is ethically acceptable and what is not.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The accounts of both parties as well as of witnesses confirm each other, so here are the facts of the case:
1. Maxim made move 20 and left the table.
2. When Maxim was away, Dmitry made move 21.
3. With Dmitry sitting at the table, Maxim rejoined the table and pressed the clock without putting a stone on the board. According to Maxim, he pressed the clock because he saw his clock ticking and Dmitry thinking and, failing to notice the 21st stone, concluded that he, Maxim, had not pressed the clock since putting his last stone and that it was still Dmitry's turn.
4. Dmitry told Maxim that the latter had thereby passed, i.e., that the latter had given up the right to put a stone. Dmitry showed Maxim the 21st stone, wrote "22-pass" in the protocol, and started thinking about the next move.
5. Maxim contacted the referees, and some time later Dmitry put a black stone and joined the discussion, which was also joined by other players.
6. As the clock was not stopped, the players had to continue playing for a while and made a few more moves before the referees stopped the clock.
7. Then, after a period of further discussions, the referees eventually came to the decision stated in the beginning of this article - they reinstated the position in which the clock had been erroneously pressed, let Maxim put stone 22, and let the players play further as usual. According to Dmitry, he said many times that he disagreed with the decision. The referees also added to Dmitry an amount of time approximately equal to the amount of time he had expended since the error by Maxim. The referees did not add time to Maxim, but, according to Dmitry, Maxim had not expended any significant amount of time since his error.
8. The game continued, and, as written above, Maxim won it. Here is the game record: http://gomokuworld.com/tournaments/218/14519
WHAT DOCUMENTS WITH RULES ARE THERE?
Finding the relevant documents turned out to be an interesting task on its own.
The gomoku community still does not have its own international federation, so the world team championship is considered to be formally organised by the RIF. The latter was founded in 1988 in Sweden and registered there as a non-profit organisation (ideella föreningar) in 2006, with the registration data being available at the Swedish registry at: https://www.allabolag.se/...onal-federation Interestingly, the RIF includes a gomoku commission, but, according to the RIF statutes available at http://renju.net/organiza...02017-10-25.pdf , the gomoku commission does not have any power inside the RIF and can only give advice.
In clause 1.5 of the RIF statuses, the RIF states that it issues gomoku rules, but ironically enough, there are currently no gomoku rules issued by the RIF, despite that already 30 years have elapsed since the RIF was founded. At least I was unable to find any gomoku rules on the RIF website (renju.net), and also Dmitry Epifanov himself, a vice president of the RIF, made it clear in his own account of the incident that he was unaware of any official gomoku rules.
There are, however, national gomoku federations with their own rules, and since the tournament was held in Poland and de facto organised by the Polish Federation of Gomoku, Renju, and Pente, the rules of that organisation are of particular importance to the case:
- Rules of gomoku on the website of the organisation: http://gomoku.pl/joomla/i...id=51&Itemid=62
- Tournament rules on the website of the organisation: http://gomoku.pl/joomla/i...id=61&Itemid=70
Also, the Czech Federation of Gomoku and Renju has very detailed official gomoku rules ("oficiální pravidla pikvorek") provided at: http://www.piskvorky.cz/f...vidla-piskvorek Do not be confused by the name - the Czechs call gomoku pikvorky and, in particular, called the world gomoku championship 2017 "Mistrovství světa v pikvorkách 2017." The rules were created on 03 Feb 2007 and last modified on 02 Feb 2008, so they are pretty established.
There are also gomoku rules at Gomokuworld, the central gomoku website: http://gomokuworld.com/gomoku/1
Additionally, the world team gomoku championship 2018 itself has a website containing the rules of the tournament: https://sites.google.com/view/2ndgtwc/home/regulations These rules are largely a copy of the RIF document entitled "Example of Tournament Rules" (http://www.renju.net/media/tournrulesexample.php ), but after the incident the sentence saying that a draw can be achieved by two consecutive passes was removed from the tournament website. This sentence is present in the original RIF document. A printed copy of the rules of the tournament was available in the hotel in which the tournament was held. A similar copy, but still containing that sentence, is provided at the Czech website as the rules of the world championship 2017: http://www.piskvorky.cz/en/gwc-2017/rules
Of some interest are considerations of what would have happened if it had been a renju game, and here are the RIF renju rules: http://renju.net/study/rifrules.php
ANALYSIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF RULES
The rules of the tournament as well as the original RIF document from which they were copied say, "If at any time the clock button is pressed by mistake, the referee has to be called immediately! The opponent's clock should not be pressed to fix the mistake because it would cause adding 30 seconds to both players." I also see exactly the same sentence in the rules of the world championship 2017, so it clear that this sentence was already present in the rules of the world team championship 2018 before the incident.
Therefore, according to the rules of the tournament, erroneously pressing the clock does not mean a pass, at least does not automatically mean, as otherwise there would be no need to call a referee - the players could simply write "pass" in their protocols and continue the game. The rules even contain the expression "fix the mistake" and imply that the referee will fix this technical mistake in such a way that no time is added to any of the players.
Thus Dmitry had no right to claim that Maxim had lost the right to put a stone, and Dmitry had no right to continue playing like he did. By doing these things, he violated the rules of the tournament.
Also, the gomoku rules of the Polish Federation of Gomoku, Renju, and Pente, the gomoku rules of the Czech Federation of Gomoku and Renju, and the gomoku rules at Gomokuworld's website do not allow passes at all. All these rules simply say that the players put stones alternately, and contain no hint whatsoever that any of the players is allowed to refuse to put a stone. I quote:
- The Polish rules say, "Każdy z dwóch graczy ma do dyspozycji kamienie: jeden koloru białego, drugi - czarnego, które układają na przemian na wolnych polach planszy."
- The Czech rules say, "Hráči se střídají v tazích... Provést tah znamená poloit kámen na jeden z průsečíků na desce."
- Gomokuworld's rules say, "The players alternate in placing a stone of their colour on an empty intersection."
We know that there are no passes in chess, so I decided to have a look at the FIDE Laws of Chess (https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article ) to find out exactly how passes are forbidden there (i.e., to find out the exact wording), and it turned out that just like in all of the above gomoku rules, there is no other statement than a statement that the players move pieces alternately: "The player with the light-coloured pieces (White) makes the first move, then the players move alternately, with the player with the dark-coloured pieces (Black) making the next move." It is very hard to see any reason to interpret the FIDE Laws of Chess and the existing gomoku rules in different ways as the wording is essentially the same.
Thus, according to the existing rules of gomoku as they stand, there are no passes in gomoku, and hence, according to these rules, pressing the clock without putting a stone means a technical mistake rather than a pass.
And it is very unfortunate that the rules of the tournament contained the following sentence: "The game ends with draw when ... there are two consecutive passes in a row (player 1 passes and player 2 passes)." The sentence was removed after the incident. The same sentence is also present in the rules of the world gomoku championship 2017.
Thus there is an unfortunate collision between the existing rules of gomoku and the original version of the rules of the tournament, but this collision is very easy to resolve by making the following two observations:
(1) It is not the aim of that sentence to allow passes or clarify whether passes are allowed - the aim of that sentence is to allow draws due to passes, while passes themselves are not introduced anywhere in the rules of the tournament or any existing gomoku rules.
(2) The sentence was simply copied from a RIF document and not written independently. The RIF document itself is based, as written there, on the rules of the world renju championship 2005.
From these observations, it is evident that it was not the organisers' intent to make passes legal, so the sentence is clearly a result of careless copying and/or of an organiser's erroneous assumption that passes are allowed in gomoku like in renju.
Thus if anyone had considered that sentence to be legalisation of passes, he would have been wrong, but even if it had been right to consider that sentence to be legalisation of passes, Dmitry would still have had no right to continue the game like he did, as explained in the beginning of this section.
And I was especially surprised to find out that even according to the RIF renju rules, where passes are explicitly allowed, what Maxim did cannot be deemed a pass, at least if the RIF renju rules are applied strictly as they stand.
According to the RIF renju rules, you have to either put a stone or make a declaration that you pass, and only thereafter you have to press the clock. I quote from the RIF renju rules: "5. The conception move. A move consists of either the putting of a stone on one of the intersections of the board or of the declaration by the player to play that he gives up his right to put a stone on the board (he passes). 6. Making a move. The making of a move is considered to be ended when the player has released the stone. When a player passes the move is ended when he has declared that he passes. ... 14.3. At the time when the game begins Black's clock will be started. Henceforth after making a move each player has to stop his own clock with the same hand as he used for making the move."
Maxim did not make a declaration of pass, so even according to the RIF renju rules what happened is not a pass.
Dmitry argued on the Russian gomoku forum that the act of pressing the clock is the declaration required by the RIF renju rules, but this very clearly contradicts the rules as they stand: (1) The rules state that a MOVE is either an act of putting a stone or a declaration of refusal to put a stone, (2) the rules state that AFTER MAKING A MOVE the player presses the clock, (3) since the clock has to be pressed AFTER making a move, pressing the clock cannot be a part of a move or constitute a move, (4) since pressing the clock is not a part of a move and cannot constitute a move, pressing the clock cannot be a declaration of refusal to put a stone, because such a declaration is a move (see (1)). After I wrote this reasoning on the Russian forum, Mikhail Kozhin, who is also a famous renju player, added his like to my post.
To summarise, I can say that by claiming that Maxim had lost the right to put a stone and by putting a black stone when there were 21 stones on the board, Dmitry violated the rules of the tournament and the existing rules of gomoku as they stand on the website of the Polish Federation of Gomoku, Renju, and Pente, on the website of the Czech Fderation of Gomoku and Renju, and on the central international gomoku website Gomokuworld. And he would have violated the RIF renju rules if it had been a renju game.
ANALYSIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF SPORTSMANSHIP
It is for a reason that there are such terms as sportsmanship, sport ethics, misuse of the rules, letter and spirit of the rules, etc. It is extremely difficult to write rules that cover all possible situations in an abundantly precise manner and are free from loopholes, so sportsmen are expected not only to respect the rules, but also to act in the spirit of good sportsmanship, and referees have the power to prevent critical misuse of the rules and act upon critical violations of sportsmanship - for example, the EL (Euroleague) rules (http://euroleague.cz/php/simplepage.php?text=rules ) say, "The Organizers of EL are allowed to change the EL Rules or make exceptions to the rules, if a situation requires this."
Are Dmitry's actions consistent with the spirit of good sportsmanship?
Dmitry himself said on the Russian forum (as translated by me from Russian), "My first idea was to pass in response and make a draw by doing so. If it had been an individual tournament, I would have definitely done so, especially as it was one of the first rounds. But I was in a team."
This is nothing but a confession that during the incident, he himself felt that he was doing an ethically questionable thing, as otherwise he would not have got the idea to pass in return and would have had no hesitation to exploit the mistake made by his opponent. He even implies that his team was more important to him than fairness.
And here is how Denis Osipov, the current Russian champion and the highest rated Russian player, publicly commented the incident from the standpoint of sportsmanship (as translated by me from Russian): "I want to consider the incident in terms of basic respect to opponents, in terms of desire to play fair and win fair, in terms of what is called sportsmanship. And in these terms, Dmitry turns out to be an egoistic unprincipled game and rating point hunter. During the incident, Dmitry was almost prepared to physically fight to impose his point of view on others. I cannot even suspect that any of the players known to me would stoop to using such tricks and machinations. There have been various technical issues and similar situations, but as far as I remember, they were always resolved by the involved players themselves, by talking across the board, and what was given the highest priority was the game on the board, the correctness and integrity of the game being played, and not a desire to bite off a point at any cost. Dmitry should think about the meaning of the phrase 'may the strongest win.' I personally think he understands this phrase wrongly."
Further in his message, Denis Osipov added, "Leaving aside the question whether Dmitry acted correctly in terms of rules, I want to point out how Dmitry discussed the incident with other players and with the organisers. In this aspect, he impressed me in a way I did not expect at all. I wanted to ask, 'Dear Dmitry, who were you raised by? How can you be so rude and allow yourself to use such expressions? Especially in your very first gomoku tournament, just having learned the rules. And towards not random people, but players who are respected by the community and contributed a lot to the development of the game.' Of course, I mean rude expressions said to Ilya Muratov, like curses containing the F word. The opinion of such a person as Ilya, who, so to speak, was there at the beginning of gomoku in Russia, is valuable by itself and has to be respected."
Denis also wrote in the same message, "Now about the essence of the incident. To me, the following indisputable things are obvious, and any reasonable person who reads them will get a very clear idea as to what decision is fair and right in this situation: 1. The situation fully belongs to the area of technical issues. 2. Technical issues have to be resolved, but they must not affect the results of the competition. 3. The most important thing is the game and revealing the strongest by means of the game. There is nothing else to add."
Maxim Karasev publicly wrote in his account of the incident (as translated by me from Russian), "Many people who learned about the incident in private communications during the championship were puzzled as to what had been there to think about. To them, it was obvious that the right decision is to give the opportunity to put stone 22."
I publicly asked Mikhail Kozhin what he would do if his opponent erroneously pressed the clock like Maxim did, and Mikhail publicly answered (as translated by me from Russian), "I would ask my opponent to press my clock, and the game would continue. If I myself pressed my clock in response, my opponent might demand a draw. Such a nuance is there "
We see that Mikhail, who obviously thought that pressing the clock without putting a stone may mean a pass, would simply let the opponent fix the mistake and would not try to exploit the mistake. Mikhail's choice is not dictated by any rules - it is dictated by ethical considerations.
So we see that people clearly feel, based on common sense, that what Dmitry did is ethically wrong regardless of whether the rules say that a player can pass by simply pressing the clock.
But it is also pretty interesting to contemplate in detail and on the conscious level exactly why what Dmitry did is ethically wrong. This exercise is very helpful in strengthening the ability to distinguish between ethically good things and ethically bad things in mind sports in general, so let us do this exercise.
I start with the notion that laws should be regarded taking into account their intended purposes as well as the context, and this is what the expressions "letter and spirit of the law" and "misuse of the law" are about.
The spirit of gomoku is that gomoku is a battle of minds, like chess - the FIDE Laws of Chess even say, "If a player is unable to move the pieces, an assistant, who shall be acceptable to the arbiter, may be provided by the player to perform this operation." In other words, chess is not about physically capturing the opponent's physical figure of the king on a physical board - it is about a battle of the minds, and the same applies to gomoku.
So gomoku is a battle of minds, and thus the physical board and stones are merely means of communication between the minds. People can play gomoku using any means of communication of their choice - e.g., pens and squared paper, the virtual board on playok.com, or mail. People can even play blindfold games without any equipment at all - it is still gomoku! Equipment is not an element of the game - mental concepts like threes, fours, and VCFs are.
The clock is there merely to help count time. This is the purpose of the clock. The clock is just a helping tool. It is just a time counter and not an element of the game. Time, not the clock, is an element of the game. People can as well play gomoku without any clock at all, just following their senses of fair time usage - it is still gomoku, and this is actually how many people played gomoku at school. And if the clock starts working wrongly, the players discard its indications. Time, not the clock itself, is what is important.
Physically putting a stone on the physical board and pressing the clock are acts performed outside the actual battlefield, because the actual battle is being fought in the minds. The real purpose of the game is to outplay the opponent inside his own mind as well as inside one's own mind rather than to make a five on the physical board no matter how. A player experiences joy and satisfaction not because he makes a row of five physical stones - he experience joy and satisfaction because he wins the intellectual battle inside the minds. Physical stones by themselves are worth nothing, and it is only their virtual attachment to the minds that creates a value.
Thus, philosophically speaking, there is a very clear unmistakable natural border line separating two distinct areas - (1) the battle of the minds and (2) technical things.
The first area contains such concepts as threes, fours, VCF threats, time management, etc., and is regulated by the rules of gomoku as a logical game - the board size, the aim of the battle (five-in-a-row and whether overlines count as wins), the alternating order of moves, the opening rule, and the time limit. This is the area where we actually fight.
The second area contains such things as physical stones, clock buttons, game protocols, physically putting a stone on the physical board, adjusting physical stones, etc. Such things are things or actions that we use or make in order to make the battle of the minds happen and to physically record the game. These things do not belong to the essence of gomoku and, as explained above, can take very different forms - physical stones and board, pen and squared paper, computer and mouse, etc. This area covers communicating moves, recording the game, arranging the game, providing proper physical conditions to play the game, etc.
Accordingly, one of the very central ethical principles in gomoku is that we fight only in the first area and cooperate in the second one. Failure to reasonably cooperate in the second area or extending the fight to the second area is a serious ethical offence.
This principle requires, in particular, that you clearly communicate moves from your mind to the mind of your opponent and resolve miscommunications without exploiting them.
Speaking in these terms, Dmitry's move accidentally was not delivered to Maxim's mind, so as soon as Dmitry realised this, he had got the ethical duty to strive to resolve this miscommunication without exploiting it - a duty Dmitry deliberately failed to perform.
Of course, there is a very special case - blitz, especially when the time control is as low as 1-3 min, but the nature of blitz is different from that of normal games: In blitz, the ability to physically make quick and precise movements by the hand is unavoidably a factor, and, more importantly, technical mistakes like accidentally pressing the clock seriously disrupt blitz games, especially the thought process, and thus cannot be tolerated. Blitz is de facto a different kind of sport with its own spirit, and this is reflected in that in chess, the FIDE regulations for normal games and blitz games are very different, especially regarding illegal moves. In a blitz chess game an illegal move results in an instant loss, while in a normal chess game the players have to reinstate the position immediately before the illegal move even if the illegal move was a few moves ago.
But the time control in the tournament was 120+30, so considerations about blitz are irrelevant here.
Of course, if a player makes a blunder like failing to block a three, he is not allowed to undo his move, even if it is a normal game, because it is this move that his mind has elected to make, i.e., the mistake is in the area of the battle of the minds.
But Maxim did not intend to pass at all. His mind obviously did not elect to refuse to put a stone. By claiming that pressing the clock was a pass, Dmitry deliberately misinterpreted Maxim's action and thereby clearly violated the above ethical principle.
I want to conclude these ethical considerations with a popular Russian joke that well illustrates the kind of behaviour demonstrated by Dmitry. "Karpov and Kasparov are playing a game of their match for the world chess championship title. Karpov is in a bad position, sees a homeless dog through the window, and melancholically asks Kasparov, 'Whose dog is it?' Kasparov replies, 'Nichya' - in Russian, this means 'none's,' but is also the word for 'draw,' and Karpov says, 'Draw offer accepted!'"
1. By claiming that his opponent had lost the right to put a stone and by putting a black stone when there were 21 stones on the board, Dmitry Epifanov violated the rules of the tournament and the existing rules of gomoku as they stand on the website of the Polish Federation of Gomoku, Renju, and Pente, on the website of the Czech Fderation of Gomoku and Renju, and on the central international gomoku website Gomokuworld. And he would have violated the RIF renju rules if it had been a renju game.
2. Dmitry also violated the spirit of good sportsmanship, as his actions were an attempt to ruthlessly exploit a technical issue to gain a decisive advantage.
3. The referees made a good decision. Good job, guys.
I hope that my article will not be taken by Dmitry as an offence, as I do not fight against Dmitry - I fight against unfair and unethical behaviour, against violations of the spirit of good sportsmanship, against disregard of the rules, against disrespect to gomoku and opponents. And I do so because gomoku is my hobby and because I therefore do not want bad behaviour to germinate, flourish, and disseminate in the gomoku world.
I believe that when a vice-president of the RIF, whose actions are supposed to set best ethical standards, behaves like Dmitry did during the incident, a reaction is needed, and Denis Osipov and I have put effort to publicly explain on the Russian forum that Dmitry is wrong.
Dmitry does many good things for gomoku (for example, the International Correspondence Gomoku Tournament as well as the recent youth gomoku tournament in Turkey), so in view of the incident with Maxim and in view of some other past incidents (e.g., Dmitry's posting my English translation of his very long review of a match as his own translation without any acknowledgement of the true authorship of the translation) I wish that the ethical component of Dmitry's personality became as developed as his best components such as intellect and activity.
I want to conclude my article with an excellent quote from Warren Buffett: "It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently." Remember - just one episode of bad sportsmanship can damage your reputation as a fair player and permanently change how people perceive you. Play fair - respect the rules and act in the spirit of good sportsmanship. Your absolute resolution to always follow this principle will not only guard your reputation, but also help you enjoy your games as much as possible.