Back to forum

Peter Unger    (2008-01-15)

Who won the tournament "FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_2_GROUP_04__000002" Peter Unger?

Andrew Stephenson    (2008-01-15 18:59:44)

The winner of tournament_FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_2_GROUP_04 was Robert Mueller because he had the highest TER of those on 4/6. Thats the rule!

Thibault de Vassal    (2008-01-15 20:29:21)

That's right, Robert Mueller qualifies for Stage 3.

Peter Unger    (2008-01-16 18:55:43)
Strange rules

Hi Thibault, my chessbase says this: FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_2_GROUP_04__0000 2007 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Unger,Peter 2086 +181 * 1 1 0 1 4.0/6 11.00 2 Mueller,Robert 2194 +55 0 * 1 1 1 4.0/6 9.75 3 Benitez,Ryan 2106 +158 0 * 1 1 1 4.0/6 9.25 4 Johansson,Mats 2309 -140 0 * 1 1 3.5/6 5 Repa,Jason 2232 -109 0 * 1 3.0/6 6 Moreira,Jose 2327 -278 1 0 0 0 * 1 2.5/6 7 Toutaoui,Khaled 1715 -306 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0.0/6 Where can I be informed about the rules? And what meaans "TER" (see the post from A. Stephenson)? I have won against Mueller!! I think I must be qualified for Stage 3!!! Best regards Peter Unger

Thibault de Vassal    (2008-01-16 19:32:31)
FICGS rules

Hello Peter, I understand your point of view. Correspondence chess is not OTB (over the board) chess and rules may not go the same way.

FICGS WCH rules can be found here :

... so you should have seen it before to enter the waiting list.

The idea in this correspondence chess championship is to find the best player, of course. In correspondence chess, rating is much more important than in OTB chess to know the "current" level of a player, and should be taken in account, just like performance. This rule is quite hard but this way we can organize a new cycle every 6 months, so more chances to reach the final stages. Anyway this issue will be discussed again and again.. and rules are just rules.

Best wishes, Thibault

Andrew Stephenson    (2008-01-17 14:04:20)

TER stands for tournament entry rating ie the rating you had when the tournament starts. It is shown in the tournament crosstable along with the current rating. This TER is what decides in the event of a tie. However there is a slight contradiction when this rule is applied in matches. In this situation in the event of a tie the higher TER wins EXCEPT if there has been a result on both sides ie not all games were drawn then the lower TER player goes through. By analogy with Peters situation I think the rule might be ammended so that the higher TER goes through except when one of the tied players has beaten another tied player and in this situation is deemed to have a higher TER (as between them)for the purpose of the tie break. The point of this ammendment is that it still gives a tie break winner BUT it reflects the result bewteen individuals for tie break purposes as the result might indicate that the entry TER is not reflective of current relative strength. To late for you Peter I am afraid but worth a thought.

Robert Mueller    (2008-01-17 18:43:01)

I am sorry for Peter that he was not qualified for the third round. Yes, he did win our game, but due to a blunder on my side when I lost a piece on move 4 because I read his move wrong. I am sorry for Peter, but the rules are quite clear about the TER qualifier.