Muadhib: "What is that line before K and C (in 20th move)?"
The tails of "f" from the previous moves :)

The 40th move in unambiguous because "Kp" is the only two-letter piece in Russian notation; I suppose the shape of "K" depends on the succeeding letter for many people.

All in all, remember that a scoresheet, even a printed one, is by definition not readable without playing the moves on board (or at least imagining the position if you are good enough at blindfold). That is, unless long notation is used, but that is rare and actually discouraged, if I understand correctly.

"The tails of “f” from the previous moves "

Bliming, it really is.

Talking about scoresheets; here's Fischer's:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/Fischer_Score_Card.jpg

What a beautiful picture!

Things apparently got increasingly tense during the game - maybe that's the reason for showing a picture of the score sheet in the first place? There may have been some time trouble starting around move 30?
But before the game, Tiviakov was relatively relaxed: the date and the names Tiviakov and Polgar are clearly legible :) .

It's a 2. That's the only thing I could decipher :)

What is that line before K and C (in 20th move)? It looks like a T to me. So it looks like it is written 20.TKa2 TCd7. And how come the K in white's 20th move is completely different than K in white's 40th move.

So all in all it's a game of guessing. this is NOT readable. When someone who doesn't have a clue about chess notation can undubiously read the letters and numbers THEN AND ONLY THEN the writting is readable.

Can the arbiter reject the scoresheet if it's unreadable? If not, what is the purpose of notating the moves down if nobody can read it afterwards?

Of course the arbiter can't reject it. The purpose is for the player to have notation sheet.

It would be sad if +1 wins this event.

But why does the player need a notation sheet? He must give it to the arbiter afterwards. What exactly is the purpose of this?

Okay, honestly, from the scoresheet:

Russian:
20. Ka? Cd7
40. Kpg1

English:
20. Na? Bd7
40. Kg1

i.e. I cannot decipher the number in White's 20th move.

Jesse Kraai !? Say high from Brian. He used to frequent Oxford Cowley chess club when I was there and have fierce 5minuters against Simon Ansell. He may remember going with me to the Cardiff chess congress, staying in the house of a Spanish friend, arriving by rickety bikes at the congress pretty late and both just missing out on first in our respective divisions. He lost to Chris Beaumont I remember who tanked for 40 mins on d4 i think, God knows why i remember that. Anyway, say hi if you see him. I'm on bngimages@googlemail.com if he wants to be in touch. I often wondered what happened to him.

For the record, Tiviakov's scoresheet, as pictured, is perfectly legible, especially if one reads Cyrillic.

The last picture is fantastic. Ivanchuk, rated 2756, sitting on the ground racking his brains over a simple mate-in-3. We love you Chuck.

Fantastic photo of Giri and Ivanchuck! Professionals who haven't lost the child like amateur thrill and wonder of solving problems. Thank you for another excellent report.

Who the hell said that it is something wrong with Tiviakov's scoresheet?

Although, please read what the 40th white's move was (and don't cheat by looking at the game viewer). Or 20th move by both players? :)

Good old Tivi.
I think he won because Polgar doesn't play enough. She really should play more often. Otherwise she will slowly slip down futher and further.

In a junior tournament I recently took my son to, the arbiters collected all the scoresheets, but most of them were illegible...

In comparison, Tiviakov's writing is very neat! :)

i agree. love the picture of giri and ivanchuk.

i also feel happy - was watching the game on icc and pointed out the b3 rc8 rb1 line as fun fun! : )

Nice discussion out of nothing: Beyond the cases mentioned by CAL|Daniel, I guess the main reason for handing the score sheet to the arbiter after the game is your signature acknowledging the result - whether the signature has to be legible is another story.

A related anecdote from my own amateur club: It was recently proposed to spend (part of) the club evening after external matches discussing and analysing our games. Someone objected: "It doesn't make sense: some score sheets are impossible to decipher even for the author." (And not every amateur player could reconstruct his game from memory two days later).

Tiviakov’s scoresheet is (not perfectly but anyway) legible.
You should see those of some players I know!
And of course it's not Cyrillic :-)

The point of a notation sheet is to be able to claim 50 move draw, 3 fold repetition and (outside of elite events) be able to replay the game for those with poor memory or organizers that want to give the games out publicly at a later date.

The organizer under no circumstances can forfeit a player because they can't read a scoresheet. They could I suppose reject a 3 move draw claim though not a 50 move draw claim.

Your question is beyond silly.

the last photo is indeed a nice piece....also another one with Giri and smiling face of Ivanchuk..we rarely see this on his face (particulary after a unsatisfied game!) ....he is a great player and a nice guy as well...hopefully Giri will learn a lot from this event....

@CAL|Daniel: Players are required to keep a legible score sheet during a game. The arbiter can give warnings during the game, and if really necessary, forfeit a player. It's akin to not writing down the moves at all, which is mandatory except when you have less than five minutes left.

In one game so far (was it Ivanchuk-Polgar?) the arbiter gave Ivanchuk several warnings for illegible writing, but decided further penalties wouldn't be in the interest of the tournament. But under the rules, he certainly could have given them.

What is this talk about illegit scoresheets about? There appears to be nothing wrong with Tiviakov's sheet, with the hardly possible exception of being written in Russian (I would not say Cyrillic because in Russian notation, the file letters are still Latin, only the pieces are noted in Cyrillic).

May I also add to the praise about the last photograph :)

My question is beyond silly???

What if a player makes some random scratches instead of notating his moves? NOBODY could read anything from it, even the author himself (he would know the moves by memory and could reproduce the game if he was asked to "read" his scratches). So whatz the hell is the purpose of giving the scoresheet to the arbiter if it doesn't need to be readable???

And where exactly did I mention Tiviakov or any other player??? I asked a simple question and noone really answered.

And the question is:
What is the purpose of a scoresheet if it doesn't have to be readable?

Oh, I see RemcoG answered.

Thank you for your answer.

I'm sorry but what might be illegiable to one arbiter could be readable to someone else. You can't fault the player for the author either A) not knowing how to read B) not wanting to try to read difficult hand writing C) not knowing the the player's language D) or the player just having a disease like dysgraphia. For all these reasons the Arbiter cannot forfeit a player because he can't read the hand writing. He could however deny claims such as three repetition fold if he can't follow the score sheet to prove it.

Believe me this dispute comes up all the time here because there is a local GM that just writes pen scratches as his notation.

I myself actually have dysgraphia so in a 3 fold repetition claim I had 10 TDs claim they couldn't read my hand writing unfortunately for those TD the chief TD (and organizer) not only could but berated those very people by citing the same rule I am citing to you now.

You're right in that "The organizer under no circumstances can forfeit a player because they can’t read a scoresheet", except that they CAN make agnoleaging the result not being a 0 for the player depend on him imediately writing a new, legible, scoresheet. If he refuses, a loss he gets! :-)
And that is valid throughout the whole game, not merely after ending! If the arbiter is observing the games and scoresheets, and finds an ilegible move entrance in one of them, he CAN and SHOULD imediately force the player to turn it legible --- in his own time!
Most of the times, though, all agents take this lightly, as rarely big problems arise...

Ah! And if it is a refusal at the end of the game, he gets a loss, even if the opponent resigned! 0-0 is a plausible result for the game, then.

Since writing down the moves is mandatory, it must be readable. To me "readable" means that someone who is completely ignorant to chess and chess notation can read the lettewrs and numbers properly.

Otherwise just forget the whole thing. In high level competitions DGT boards store the moves anyway. In lower levels where DGT boards aren't used.......who cares about those games.

you're crazy muadhib.

Did you even read my post? You don't even have a point. Readable to who? Why?

Score sheets a protection for the player not a play thing for the arbiter. Who cares about those games? LOL. Just stop.

Readable to anyone who can read. A 'K' must be a ''K', not a 'H' or any other scratch. One has to be able to recognize the letter without knowing anything about chess or chess notation.

Why? Because otherwise we don't need the notation anyway. What is the purpose of the notation if it's not readable.

What rotection of the players? Why does a player need a notation which is not readable? How is he "protected" with his scratches?

If I'm crazy, then you are f...ing nuts!

Nope, i'm perfectly normal. It is just you. Looney bin r'us.

???