Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube
Home Blog Page 9974

Assessment and 2019 nCoV

The Department of Health (DoH) confirmed on Thursday, Jan. 30, the first case of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in the Philippines. This alarmed many Filipinos.

Yesterday, I heard on the radio that the DoH reported the first death in the Philippines due to epidemic. It was the first confirmed death outside of China due to 2019 nCoV. This prompted the government to order a travel ban for foreigners coming from China to the Philippines.

The news was so alarming and some people may be freaking out. But according to the DoH, we should all be calm. What we need to do is practice good personal hygiene such as regular hand washing, as a preventive measure. Aside from this, we should start wearing surgical masks when going around crowded areas, or if possible, avoid crowded areas.

In most cases, if we do not know what to do, the tendency is to panic. The same thing may also happen when you receive an assessment from the BIR, especially if the amount is enormous.

But being calm and knowing what do is the key to handling the assessment.

The first thing you should do is to evaluate whether the assessment is valid. For an assessment to be valid, some of the factors that you should determine is if whether the assessment was issued within the prescriptive period; the BIR followed due process; and the Final Assessment Notice (FAN) and the letter of demand (FLD) must comply with the requisites provided under the existing tax laws, among others.

The FAN and FLD must be issued by the Commissioner or his duly authorized representative. It must also state the facts, the law, rules and regulations, or jurisprudence on which the assessment is based. Otherwise, it shall be considered void.

The FAN contains the name, address, and tax identification number (TIN) of the taxpayer; kind of tax; period covered; basic tax assessed, surcharge, interest and compromise penalty, if any; and the date when such deficiency tax must be paid (which is normally 30 days from the date of mailing or release thereof). This information, however, is not sufficient to comply with the requirement under tax law that the taxpayer must be informed in writing of the law and the facts on which the assessment is based, otherwise the assessment is void. The objective of this provision is to ensure that the taxpayer can properly evaluate the correctness of the assessment.

To comply with the provision of the tax law, the FAN is issued together with the FLD. The FLD contains details of the assessments and explains why the taxpayer is liable for such deficiency taxes. The definite amount of tax liabilities and date for payment thereof are also critical for an assessment to be considered valid.

In the case decided by the Supreme Court (SC) (G.R. No. 128315, June 29, 1999), the SC emphasized the importance of indicating the definite due date for payment of an assessment. According the SC, “[a]n assessment contains not only a computation of tax liabilities, but also a demand for payment within a prescribed period. It also signals the time in which penalties and interests begin to accrue against the taxpayer. To enable the taxpayer to determine his remedies thereon, due process requires that it must serve on and received by the taxpayer.”

The SC decision was also cited by the Court of the Tax Appeals (CTA) when it rendered a recent decision in the CTA Case no. 9046. The CTA invalidated a BIR assessment due to the absence of the specific period on which the assessment should be settled. In its ruling, the CTA found that “to be considered valid, the FANs must not only indicate the legal and factual bases of the assessments but must also state a clear and categorical demand for payment of the computed tax liabilities within a specific period. The requirement to indicate a fixed and definite period or a date certain within which a taxpayer must pay the assessed deficiency tax liabilities is indispensable to the validity of the FAN.”

It is also equally important that the assessment contain a definite amount of tax liabilities. The term “definite” is defined as “having distinct or certain limits; free of all ambiguity, uncertainty or obscurity.” Given this definition, the question is, if the assessment contains a specific amount of tax liabilities but final amount may be adjusted depending on the date of payment of such liabilities, would you consider this a definite liability?

Most people would probably say “yes,” since the amount is determinable. If the debt is subject to interest, the amount is normally being adjusted depending on the date of payment. But the same seems not applicable to tax liabilities.

In CTA Case No. 9609, dated Jan. 15, 2020, the CTA invalidated assessment since the amount of tax liabilities is deemed indefinite. The amount will remain indefinite if the tax due is still subject to modification, depending on the date of payment. In this particular case, the FLD received by the taxpayer contains a statement that the interest will have to be adjusted if paid beyond Nov. 20, 2015. While the FLD provided for the computation of the tax liability, the CTA ruled that the amount is deemed indefinite since the tax assessment is still subject to modification or adjustment, depending on the date of payment by the petitioner.

Staying calm and knowing what do is the key to handling the assessment. The first thing you should do is to evaluate whether the assessment is valid. You could also seek the advice of experts to properly guide you.

Both the 2019 nCoV and assessment may be alarming and might even cause death. But to overcome the worst, we need to learn how to respond to every situation. As Charles Swindoll once said, “Life is 10% what happens to me and 90% how I react to it.”

Let’s Talk Tax is a weekly newspaper column of P&A Grant Thornton that aims to keep the public informed of various developments in taxation. This article is not intended to be a substitute for competent professional advice.

 

Edward L. Roguel is a partner of Tax Advisory & Compliance division of P&A Grant Thornton, the Philippine member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd.

pagrantthornton@ph.gt.com

Post RTL: Rice can be profitable

This article is an update of a previous article published under MAP insights in BusinessWorld on Aug. 31, 2017. The objective is to provide new insights after the passage of the Rice Tariffication Law (RTL) in early 2019.

In 2015, the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) and the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), with funding support from the Department of Agriculture (DA), released a landmark six-country study of rice production in Asia.

The study was titled “Benchmarking the Philippine Rice Economy Relative to Major Rice-Producing Countries in Asia.” Comparative studies were done in sites representing irrigated and intensively cultivated areas in six countries: the Philippines, China, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam.

The selected sites have similar climatic conditions: all are irrigated with at least two crops a year. Of the six countries, three are global exporters — India, Thailand, and Vietnam. Three are large importers — China, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

To summarize:

YIELD COMPARISON
The Philippines is third to last after Thailand and India in high-yield season (dry season crop in the Philippines). It is 34% lower than highest yielder Vietnam (5.68 tons/hectare (ha) vs. 8.56 tons/ha).

The Philippines is lowest in low-yield season (wet season in the Philippines). It is 39% lower than that of Vietnam (3.84 tons/ha vs. 6.33 tons/ha).

FARM COST COMPARISON
Yield affects unit farm costs. For the high-yield season, the Philippines recorded the third highest farm cost of P11.13 per kilogram (kg) compared to Vietnam’s P5.14/kg, Thailand’s P9.07/kg, and India’s P9.27/kg. In effect, the Philippines is uncompetitive with rice exporters

In the low-yield season, the Philippines’ cost is the second highest after Indonesia. It is, however, two times that of Vietnam, and 1.6 times higher than Thailand’s.

Nueva Ecija in Central Luzon is the “gold standard” when it comes to high-yield rice production. The study reports that the high cost of producing palay (unmilled rice) in Nueva Ecija is due to the high labor requirement in manual transplanting (25 man-days) and harvesting and threshing (21 man-days). Vietnam, by contrast, which has the lowest production cost, uses direct seeding (two man-days) and combine harvesters (two man-days) resulting in increased productivity and higher efficiency.

This labor differential of 42 man-days translates to a cost-disadvantage for the Philippines of about P13,000/ha per season, or P2.30 to P3.40/kg.

The study also noted higher milling efficiency in rice-exporting countries leading to fewer broken grains and higher milling recovery. This is due to rice varieties that have similar grain size.

Are there solutions in the horizon for irrigated rice in the Philippines? SL Agritech, a leading hybrid seeds provider, claims this is possible.

In Nueva Ecija, hybrid users average 8.5 tons/ha in the dry season and seven tons/ha in the wet season. Exception farmers make over 10 tons/ha. The farm cost with mechanization can be reduced to P50,000/ha. This means an average farm cost of P6/kg and P7/kg, respectively, making it cost-competitive with Vietnam and Thailand in the dry season and with Thailand in the wet season.

By 2022, the Philippines will have a small surplus of 200,000 tons. However, using a buffer stock of, say, 60 days, the total requirement would be around 2.1 million tons. Sufficiency will not be reached at those yield assumptions and per capita demand.

Since rice demand declines with higher incomes and hoping that government achieves its poverty target of 14% in 2022 from 21.6% in 2015, it is possible to achieve sufficiency at high yields and lower per capita demand of below 100 kg. The high yield assumes adequate supply of water and good irrigation efficiency. Strategically, there is a need to consider benefit-cost trade-offs of public investments in other crops for poverty reduction.

POST RICE TARIFFICATION LAW
The Rice Tariffication Law (RTL), with a budget of P10 billion per year, including P5 billion for farm mechanization, opens windows of opportunity.

But “new” paradigms must proliferate.

1. High impact farm mechanization is possible with farm consolidation, or better.

2. Value chain upgrading across the chain.

Competitive rice farming can learn from existing models.

Malaysia has the largest rice estate with 4,000 ha in Perak state. It is fully integrated, from land preparation to harvesting to milling. It is being operated for small farmers by FELCRA.

In the Philippines, there are three operating models:

1. Piddig, Ilocos Norte. A coop-based LGU-supported model with full range of interventions from soil analysis and irrigation schedule to optimize water use, full fertilization and mechanization, rice milling and marketing of 1,000 consolidated one-hectare farms

2. Alang Alang, Leyte. The Chenyi group of Rachel and Patrick Renucci, private investors. Through the Partnership program, Chen Yi organizes the farmers by providing low-interest loans in kind: fertilizers, pesticides, and one kind of high-yielding seed. Chen Yi also extends high-tech planting and harvesting equipment to all farmer members of the Partnership program, thereby increasing the quantity and the quality of their palay and better farm prices.

3. Nation-wide rice farms clustering by SL Agritech. It is promoting agri entrepreneurs who have track records of achieving high yields up to 10 to 15 tons per hectare.

Thus far, the average income for the models has surpassed poverty threshold of P120,000 per family of one hectare farms. And competitive at that.

Under RTL, can the Philippines expand the operating models and succeed?

What is the missing link? Integrated value chain-based management system. To do this one must engage:

1. LGUs in rice producing provinces. The LGUs should build a team of expert consultants. The LGUs lead in farm consolidation.

2. Investors to bring technical expertise and value chain familiarity. But to enter the area, the LGU must be in full support of farm consolidation.

Meanwhile, the Department of Agriculture’s Hybrid Rice Program will establish three pilot hybrid rice farm clusters in Regions 3, 6, and 11 where the government will extend subsidies amounting to P30 million. Each cluster will consist of 100 hectares, to be managed by farmers’ cooperatives to realize the agriculture department’s vision of turning planters into “agripreneurs.”

Farm consolidation is voluntary for small farmers. But the message is this: rice can be profitable and competitive when farms have economies of scale.

This article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines.

 

Rolando T. Dy is the Co-Vice-Chair of the MAP AgriBusiness Committee, and the Executive Director of the Center for Food and AgriBusiness of the University of Asia & the Pacific.

map@map.org.ph

rdyster@gmail.com

http://map.org.ph

Public opinion survey respondents not competent

The Social Weather Stations (SWS) latest report that 76% of Filipinos see many human rights abuses in President Duterte’s war on illegal drugs and that 78% of Filipino adults believe the accusation that there are “ninja cops” among members of the police force raised many a curious eyebrow. To political pundits, SWS’ findings seem to go against the results of past SWS surveys that show that a great majority of the population find President Rodrigo Duterte’s performance satisfactory. An earlier survey showed that 93% disapprove of his inaction towards Chinese aggression in the West Philippine Sea.

How can people find his performance satisfactory when the same people say his centrepiece program has gone awry, the political observers ask. The seeming contradiction between the high rating of President Duterte’s performance and the poor assessment of his programs and policies caused netizens to overwhelm social media with negative comments about SWS itself and about its survey method. Some netizens say SWS has been co-opted by the President. I do not think so. Mahar Mangahas’ academic and professional credentials leave no doubt about his integrity. I met Mr. Mahar Mangahas of SWS at a BusinessWorld anniversary party, I think in 2005. I never saw or talked to him since then. I was invited to the 2020 Survey Review last Thursday. Much as I wanted to attend to be able to share my thoughts on SWS surveys with him, I could not go. The thoughts I wanted to share with him are the subject of this article.

I have no doubt about the integrity of SWS surveys either. I do know its survey method is in accordance with accepted general practice in the field of public opinion. That is why its election projections have been borne out by the actual results of the general elections.

Some say the survey respondents are not truly representative of the population. I was with Robot Statistics, the country’s first independent public opinion pollster/market research firm and Gallup affiliate, in the early 1960s. It was my first job. I learned then how respondents to public opinion polls are drawn at random so that the entire lot is representative of the voting population. SWS draws its respondents the same way.

I say that precisely because the respondents are truly representative of the entire voting population that a contradiction between the respondents’ positive perception of the President’s performance and their negative assessment of his programs and policies surfaces. The great majority of the respondents are not competent to pass judgment on the performances of public officials and government institutions.

SWS usually interviews 1,200 respondents for its public opinion surveys. It uses the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) population figures broken down by socio-economic classes. According to the PSA, the Philippine population breaks down into 1% AB, 9% C, 60% D, and 30% E. If the sample of 1,200 respondents is representative of the voting population, as it should be, then only 12 respondents come from the socio-economic class AB and 108 from Class C. The bulk of the interviews therefore come from among the lower socio-economic classes — 720 from class D and 360 from class E.

SWS describes the AB socio-economic class as the most affluent group. It refers to the C class as the middle class whose lifestyles reflect comfortable living, the D class as the Lower Class who basically thrive on a hand-to-mouth existence, and the E class as the Extremely Lower Class who face great difficulties in meeting their survival needs.

Maybe it can be safely said that based on their circumstances in life, the highest educational attainment of the 1,080 respondents from the Lower Classes do not go beyond Grade 6. Their main source of information regarding the national government must be the broadcast media. They may not own a TV set or a radio, but there is always someone in their neighborhood who has his TV set or radio turned on at high volume for everybody to hear what is being aired.

The usual wording of the question asked in surveys about the President’s performance is as follows: “Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, undecided if satisfied or dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied, or you have not ever heard or read anything about Rodrigo Duterte?”

Each respondent interprets the question from his own viewpoint. The understanding of a respondent from socio-economic Class AB who would have gone to college would be different from that of a respondent from Class DE who would not have gone beyond grade school. As 90% of the respondents come from Class DE, their frame of reference when asked about the performance of the President could be the performance of something unrelated to governance, like his long speeches spiced with racy adlibs or his expletive-laden tirades against the fabulously rich and Catholic Church dignitaries or his presence in calamity areas.

It is not improbable that a number of respondents do not understand the question at all and simply choose from possible answers presented them one they feel is a safe answer, like what they think the interviewer wants to hear or what would please the President himself.

In contrast, the questions on the war on drugs are more specific on the frame of reference. They are:

1. How much do you agree or disagree with this statement: “The removal as ICAD Co-Chairperson of Vice-President Leni Robredo, who is in the political opposition and has been a critic of the administration’s war on illegal drugs, is an admission by the administration that its war is failing?”

2. In your opinion is Presiddent Duterte: definitely sincere; somewhat sincere somewhat insincere; definitely insincere in appointing Vice-President Leni Robredo as Co-Chairperson of ICAD?

3. Compared to July 2016, when Rodrigo Duterte became President, would you say that the present number of users of illegal drugs has risen a lot, risen somewhat, stayed the same, fallen somewhat, or fallen a lot?

4. In the course of the administration’s war on illegal drugs, would you say that the number of abuses of human rights, for example the Extrajudicial Killings or EJKs, has been very many, somewhat many, only a few, or very few?

The question on “ninja cops” is also specific. “Do you believe or not believe that accusation that there are ‘ninja cops’ or police who allegedly sell illegal drugs that they confiscate during their operations?”

To extract more accurate information about the people’s opinion of the performance of the President, a number of questions may be required. In addition to the first question on the degree of satisfaction about the President’s performance, the following open questions (not multiple choice) may have to be asked:

1. What makes you feel the way you do about the president’s performance?

2. Can you cite the act of the president you are most satisfied with?

The same questions may have to be asked in surveys on the performance of the vice-president, Senate president, and speaker of the House of Representatives.

During episodes of DZMM TeleRadyo series last year on senatorial candidates, the station’s field reporters asked ordinary folks in the streets who they would vote for senator. Many said they would vote for candidates who can provide them benefits like jobs or livelihood, or access to the government housing program. Others said they would choose candidates who can do them a favor like assistance if and when they have to deal with government offices or when in conflict with the law. Such answers implied that most of the respondents of DZMM’s random survey do not know what the function of a senator is.

It can be safely assumed that the overwhelming majority of the respondents of SWS surveys perceive a senator the same way the DZMM Teleradyo interviewees do. I am certain they do not know what the function of the Senate president, and for that matter the Speaker of the House, is.

If the common folks do not know what the real role of the Senate is in spite of the wide and frequent mass media exposure the chamber gets, how much more ignorant are the folks about the functions of the Supreme Court and the Cabinet as what these two institutions do are not given the same exposure that the work of the legislative bodies is given.

In surveys on the Supreme Court, the question “What decision of the Supreme Court are you most satisfied with?” may have to be asked. With regard to the Cabinet, these two questions may have to be added to the questionnaire:

1. What decision of the Cabinet are you most satisfied with?

2. Who among the Cabinet members whose performance you are most satisfied with?

On the Supreme Court, can you add: What decision of the Supreme Court are you most satisfied with?

The addition of open questions in various SWS public opinion surveys will determine if the respondents are competent to weigh in on public issues, and in turn determine the usefulness of those surveys.

 

Oscar P. Lagman, Jr. is a retired corporate executive, business consultant, and management professor. He has been a politicized citizen since his college days in the late 1950s.

Musings on Identity and the Internationalization of Higher Education Institutions

Internationalization “at the national, sector, and institutional levels is defined as the process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of postsecondary education” (Knight, J. 2015).

As the wave of internationalization sets its course and positions Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the developing world, we pose questions that are felt but not directly answered: Does internationalization collide against the identity and mission of, particularly, HEIs in the global south? Do the forces of internationalization, enveloped by the rules and the norms that govern HEIs in the global north — actors that currently lead the discourse and practices on global rankings — diminish, alter, or hybridize the identities of HEIs in the global south? How do HEIs respond?

HEIs with religious affiliation may present an additional concern: Does internationalization infringe upon the objectives of teaching as mission and as formation? Educators from HEIs in the global south have argued that formation programs are not one of those that are counted in the global rankings, but instead, metrics based on the number of inbound and outbound students, faculty mobility, number of visiting professors, faculty-to-student ratio, amount of external grants, and the number of research collaborations, etc. are surveyed to quantify and measure internationalization.

To answer the question of how internationalization impacts on the HEI’s identity is not an easy task. Defined as one’s conception of the self, identity is concurrently formed by how others perceive the self. The notion of multiple identities, in which each role attaches differing expectations is illustrated in the role of a professor, who is at the same time a parent at home and a volunteer in his/her community. One’s identity, is thus constructed and shaped by context. While the context dictates, the actor plays a primary role in configuring and re-configuring one’s identity (Wendt, A. 1992).

Multiple layers of self-identification — the global, national, and organizational/university levels on which the HEI is anchored — interact with each other. At the global level, identity, anchored on one’s global position, shapes the HEI’s practice of internationalization, and is recursively shaped by it. Accordingly, a disparity in the motivations to internationalize between the global north and global south HEIs exists, where HEIs in the global north pursue internationalization to advance global citizenship education. They differ from the motivations of HEIs in the south, which internationalize, by and large, in order to promote mobility (Morosini, M.C., et al, 2017).

Global south countries also assume the role and identity as “senders” of outbound students to mainly English speaking and “branded” HEIs of the global north, namely, the US, UK, and Australia. This characteristic flow of international students from south to north among global south HEIs is reinforced in ASEAN countries where intra-regional student mobility remains low (UNESCO 2013). In further illustrating the influence of internationalization on identity, the cases of Malaysia and Singapore, on the one hand, are illustrative of their role transitions in international student mobility from senders to receivers or “exporters” of higher education in Asia (Malaysia) and Australia, Europe, and the US (Singapore) (UNESCO, 2013).

The impact of internationalization on identity is further shaped by the HEI’s location in the hierarchy of HEIs at the national realm. Ranked and seeded by global rankings, “first tier” HEIs (in the north), refer to research-based universities. They are differentiated from “second tier” counterparts in terms of their orientation to applied learning, reputational and academic ranking, curriculum, prestige and selectivity (De Wit, H., et al, 2015). However, these definitions do not necessarily resonate in the first tier universities of the global south, some of which are relatively smaller when measured in terms of population and size of program offerings.

As a consequence of globalization, first tier universities in the global south experience tensions caused in balancing the benefits and costs of internationalizing higher education. At the national level, regulatory regimes on internationalization are viewed to have institutionalized certain elements of managerialism (Holmes, C. and Lindsay, D., 2018): standardization and increased roles of business and technology in learning have evolved as the prerequisites for international and regional assessments and accreditation. Emergent transnational higher education (TNE), ushering the beginnings of branch and international branch campuses, is perceived to have marketized higher education or the competition by HEIs for an international student market share (UNESCO, 2013).

How have specific HEIs in the Philippines responded? A type of response at the organizational/university level is based on the assertion of “traditional identity.” For HEIs with religious affiliations, this may include the following responses: reflexive measures that seek to assess levels of mission and/or religious tradition-based identification as reflected in the institution’s vision, governance, instruction, assessment, research and service; a related response is anchored on the deepening of conversations between lay leaders and networked religious order-based organizations on topics centered on the notion of “global identifiers” and how these translate to “institutional identity” (ICAJE, 2019); identity assertion is also demonstrated in the institution of a “core” curriculum anchored on social formation and mission and reflective of a specific educational philosophy; and, integration of social formation in a curricular framework that includes the core, major, and co-curricular courses.

These meaningful and continuing exercises on self assertions are designed to address the homogenizing impact of educational globalization on identity.

 

Alma Maria Salvador, PhD is an Assistant Professor of Political Science in Ateneo de Manila University. This piece is inspired by an article written by one of the university’s educational leaders as a framed response to global rankings in 2006.

Power security and competition

Last week I attended two energy fora where some important data and issues were discussed. First the “Market Operations 2019,” a media briefing by the Independent Electricity Market Operator of the Philippines (IEMOP), on Jan. 30 at the trading floor of the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM). Second, the Keynote Speech of Senator Sherwin Gatchalian, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy, at the “Forum on Competition in Developing Countries” on Jan. 31 at Sofitel Philippine Plaza, sponsored by the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC).

During the IEMOP briefing, an important chart was shown where power undersupply relative to rising power demand in April-July 2019 resulted in high generation prices expressed as Effective Spot Settlement Price (ESSP) in WESM of P5 to P6+ per kWh, vs average prices of P2-P4/kWh in non-peak demand months.

See that the rising average ESSP from 2016 to 2019 in the Luzon-Visayas grids as both annual electricity consumption and system peak demand keep rising. I added here data from the Department of Energy (DOE) on dependable capacity (see Table 1). The bottom line — insufficient supply when demand is high and rising would lead to both higher prices and frequent “yellow-red” alerts by the National Grid Corp. of the Philippines (NGCP).

At Mr. Gatchalian’s presentation, he focused on “limited competition” by the few big domestic players, and that retail electricity suppliers (RES) and distribution utilities (DUs) are supposed to compete with each other by offering more affordable rates but does not happen in some cases. I summarized his three charts here (see Table 2).

Other competition issues during the good and cool PCC conference, I will discuss in the next few weeks.

Now, three points to clarify in Mr. Gatchalian’s claim of limited competition from the “big five.”

One, prices spike mainly because of power undersupply thanks to old, ageing baseload plants that go on unscheduled or extended shutdowns and no new peaking plants to provide the sudden big supply gap. This was very clear in March-July 2019, five months of occasional, sometimes daily, “yellow-red” alerts by NGCP.

Two, DUs are already highly regulated by the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), the Department of Energy, and even Congress because they need a Congressional franchise to operate. RES are less regulated but Retail Competition and Open Access provision of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 — better known as the EPIRA law — remains suspended by the Supreme Court for three years now.

Three, the Philippines’ “big” power companies are actually medium-sized, even small, when compared with energy companies in the region. See the total power generation in terawatt-hours (TWH) of the Philippines in 2018, which was only 47% to 59% of our neighbors Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. I include here portions of Platts’ 250 biggest energy companies in the world, I did not include largely oil-gas producers and manufacturers (see Table 3).

We need to significantly expand our power generation capacity, from conventional, stable, reliable, and dispatchable power sources, baseload to peaking plants. To do that, government, especially the ERC, should step back from too much regulation especially in pricing.

Sector deregulation will allow the small and medium companies to become big, the big companies to become bigger — without state favoritism via subsidies and climate cronyism — and the Philippines’ overall power generation will significantly expand.

Finally, bottlenecks from the biggest power monopoly in the country, the NGCP, should be relaxed so that more power plants, baseload to peaking plants, will be positioned near the high demand cities and provinces.

 

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the president of Minimal Government Thinkers.

minimalgovernment@gmail.com

Preventing climate change is a human rights issue

BRGFX / FREEPIK

By Andrew Gilmour

EVERY SOCIETY in the world is going to pay a price for global warming. But it’s the poorest countries and communities who will suffer the most from rising seas and burning lands — and likely also from any drastic measures taken to prevent climate change. The environmental crisis is closely linked to the humanitarian one, and requires the joint action of climate and human rights activists.

They’d seem to be natural allies. They both regard (with good reason) today’s situation as the worst in their movements’ existence. Second, they share common foes: Leading climate change deniers and environmental despoilers tend to be dismissive of human rights (Presidents Rodrigo Duterte, Donald Trump, or Jair Bolsonaro, to name but three). Third, both movements are accused of being “elitist” by their opponents, a charge neither group of activists has done enough to overcome. But the two groups haven’t historically worked closely together.

The early conservation movement promoted nature at the expense of people (even to the extent of expelling native populations from Yellowstone and Yosemite in the late 19th Century). And while there’s much more understanding today that the two movements are complementary, this has not translated into enough concrete joint actions.

Human rights must be at the front and center of every effort to fight climate change. Not just because climate change will threaten the rights to food, water, housing, livelihood, and health for hundreds of millions of people, exponentially increasing the number of refugees. But also because, sooner or later, world leaders will finally wake up to the scale of the impending disaster. At which point they will likely respond with “states of emergency” that hugely undermine human rights, as with the internment of Americans of Japanese descent in the 1940s or justification of torture after 9/11. In a seminal UN report last spring, Philip Alston castigated the human rights community for its failure to face up to the fact that “human rights might not survive the coming upheaval.” The idea that democratic systems failed to prevent global heating may well take hold, with a resulting urge to strengthen state powers at the cost of rights and freedoms.

To prevent this from happening, human rights advocates and environmentalists both need to broaden their mobilization campaigns by reaching out to groups who have traditionally not been allies of either movement.

From Europe to the US to Australia, an alliance of populist leaders, corporate lobbyists, and the Murdoch-owned press have pushed the idea that any gains for human rights or environmental protection will come at the expense of jobs. For example, the “gilets jaunes” protests in France were provoked, in part, by a fuel tax hike designed to reduce carbon emissions. (“Fin du monde, fin du mois” was one rallying cry — stop talking about the end of the world, when we’re just trying to get to the end of the month.)

Fossil fuel workers, cattle farmers and others need to know that they will still have livelihoods after serious measures have been taken to reduce global heating. Governments, NGOs, and the private sector can offer such assurances through reskilling programs and subsidies for alternative land management and carbon sequestration. Without job security, too many people will remain vulnerable to wealthy climate science deniers — such as the Koch brothers — who have been able to convince them that climate change is basically a hoax against the “people” perpetrated by the “elite.”

Activists and sympathetic local officials must also work harder to win over indigenous people. In many countries, including Brazil, the Philippines, and Honduras, there are examples of indigenous groups resisting renewable energy projects. Not because they are politically opposed to renewable energy, but because they have traditionally not been consulted about enterprises inflicted on them within their traditional lands and waters.

Climate and human rights activists should be reaching out to these groups to get their buy-in. Governments should be transferring ownership of forested land back to the indigenous communities who have proven time and again to be the most effective guardians of their own ecosystems. Instead, indigenous people are being attacked — literally. In 2017, an average of three indigenous, environmental, or land rights defenders were killed every week.

Collaboration between human rights advocates and environmentalists will make it more likely that we come together to reduce emissions and mitigate the worst effects of climate change — and that we do so equitably. But the first step is to create far stronger bonds between the leaders and activists of each cause. Until both sides have fully recognized that neither agenda can be achieved without the other, they will continue to under-perform against their powerful opponents.

 

BLOOMBERG OPINION

Djokovic beats Thiem in 5-set thriller

MELBOURNE — Novak Djokovic endured a fierce challenge to his Melbourne Park reign before overhauling Dominic Thiem 6-4 4-6 2-6 6-3 6-4 in a thriller on Sunday to clinch an eighth Australian Open crown and reclaim the world number one ranking.

Under siege for much of a riveting four-hour slog, the defending champion found himself behind after three sets for the first time in eight finals at Rod Laver Arena.

But as he so often does, the steely-eyed Serb found a way to win, defying a crowd that was shamelessly behind the underdog Austrian.

He captured the decisive break in the third game of the final set, then locked down the match to secure his 17th Grand Slam title as a tiring Thiem bowed out with guns blazing.

“This is definitely my favorite court, my favorite stadium in the world and I am blessed to hold this trophy again,” said Djokovic after being handed the Norman Brookes Challenge Cup by 2005 winner Marat Safin.

Claiming the win when the fifth seed fired wide, Djokovic dropped his racket, spread his arms wide and walked to the net in a subdued celebration.

It had easily been his toughest battle in a Melbourne decider since the near six-hour epic against Rafa Nadal in 2012.

“I was on the brink of losing the match,” he told reporters. “Could have gone a different way.”

The Serb’s triumph meant tennis’ Big Three of Djokovic, Nadal and Roger Federer have now shared the last 13 majors between them — dating back to the Swiss’s 2017 Melbourne win.

Thiem was consigned to his third defeat in a Grand Slam final following losses in the last two French Open deciders to Nadal.

REVENGE SOON
“Unreal what you are doing through all these years. You and two other guys have brought men’s tennis to a completely new level,” the 26-year-old told Djokovic at the trophy ceremony.

“Well I fell a little bit short but I hope I can get revenge soon.”

While Thiem started heavy-legged after needing a combined eight hours to beat Nadal and Alexander Zverev in his previous two matches, Djokovic charged out of the blocks to take the first set.

But the match turned on its head at 4-4 in the second when he became flustered after being called twice for breaching the service clock.

As he returned to his chair fuming, he paused to sarcastically pat chair umpire Damien Dumusois’s sneaker, telling the Frenchman: “Great job man, you made yourself famous in this match, especially for the second one. Well done.”

Conceding the set with a terrible backhand, a shellshocked Djokovic lost six games in a row as Thiem, blasting winners virtually at will, roared to a 4-0 lead in the third.

Djokovic appeared listless and sapped of energy, and he called for the trainer after holding serve. But he underwent no treatment and resumed after an exchange of words.

He later left the court for a medical time-out which prompted tennis pundits to accuse him of gamesmanship, not for the first time in the Serb’s decorated career.

It looked gloomy for Djokovic as an energized Thiem took the third set, but the match turned again when the Austrian double-faulted to concede two break points, then blasted a forehand long to fall 5-3 behind in the fourth.

In a flash, Djokovic had served out the set to love, sealing it with an ace.

Having spent about six hours more on court than Djokovic at the tournament, the strain of a long campaign took its toll on Thiem — but he refused to crumble in the fifth.

He had two chances to break back in the fourth game but Djokovic nervelessly cancelled the threat before grinding to the finish.

He became the third man to win the same Grand Slam at least eight times, joining Nadal with his 12 French Open crowns and Federer who has triumphed eight times at Wimbledon. — Reuters

Chiefs end 50-year Super Bowl drought

MIAMI — The Kansas City Chiefs ended a half-century Super Bowl drought with a dramatic 31-20 comeback win over the San Francisco 49ers on Sunday in a breathtaking finish to the National Football League’s 100th season.

With the Chiefs trailing 20-10 in the fourth quarter, quarterback Patrick Mahomes engineered three scoring drives in just over five minutes, hitting Travis Kelce and Damien Williams with short touchdown passes to take the lead.

Williams then raced 38 yards for the clinching score, sparking wild celebration for long-suffering Chiefs fans who had not seen their team hoist the Lombardi trophy since their victory over the Minnesota Vikings in Super Bowl IV.

“We never lost faith, I mean that’s the biggest thing,” said Mahomes. “Everybody on this team, no one had their head down and we believed in each other and that’s what we preached all year long … we found a way to get it in the end.

“Those guys around us, the leaders of this team, they have the mindset that we never give up.

“We’re going to fight to the end.”

San Francisco had looked well on their way to a first Super Bowl in 25 years, holding a 10-point advantage and with time running down, but few leads are ever safe from Mahomes and the explosive Chiefs offense.

In the divisional playoffs, the Chiefs fought back from 24-0 down to beat the Houston Texans and then erased a 10-0 Tennessee Titans advantage in the AFC championship.

The 24-year-old Mahomes becomes the second-youngest quarterback to win a Super Bowl adding to his credentials as the NFL’s next superstar.

Mahomes, who completed 26 of 42 attempts for 286 yards and two touchdowns, appeared out of sorts for nearly three quarters of the game but stepped up and took charge when it mattered to earn the Super Bowl Most Valuable Player (MVP) honours.

Mahomes is the youngest to win both the NFL and Super Bowl MVP awards.

The win was also validation for Chiefs coach Andy Reid, who had more career regular-season wins (207) than any coach without a Super Bowl win until Sunday. — Reuters

Generational sports heroes to be feted by Philippine Sportswriters Association

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

FILIPINO sports heroes, both old and new, will be celebrated at the Philippine Sportswriters Association (PSA) Awards Night in March.

Billiards legend Efren “Bata” Reyes and Tokyo Olympics-bound gymnast Carlos “Caloy” Yulo are among those to be feted in ceremonies organized to channel well-deserved focus on the athletes who brought so much to the country in the year that just passed.

In the case of Mr. Reyes, 65, he is to be honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award in recognition of his illustrious career spanning five decades.

The Pampanga native Reyes recently competed at the 30th Southeast Asian Games held here.

And while he admitted to have struggled with his eyesight throughout the men’s carom (1 cushion) competition, it did not stop him from winning a bronze medal and add to the 12 total medal haul of the Philippine billiards team, four of which were gold.

The bronze was not the elusive first-ever gold medal he was angling for in his SEA Games career but it was nonetheless a testament to the winning mindset he has always embodied throughout his legendary career.

Mr. Reyes will serve as special guest speaker during the gala night, which many are anticipating since the billiards legend is not one big on talking.

But he is no stranger to being honored by the PSA as he was named Athlete of the Year by the sportswriting body for 1999, 2001, and 2006.

The long list of achievements of Mr. Reyes include being the best player to win world championships in two different pool disciplines — eight-ball and nine-ball — becoming the first non-American to win the US Open 9-Ball Championship, the inaugural winner of the World Cup of Pool in tandem with good friend Francisco “Django” Bustamante, acknowledged as the winningest player in the history of the Annual Derby City Classic with five titles, and won the largest prize money in the history of pocket billiards after topping the IPT World Open 8-Ball Championship worth $500K.

Mr. Reyes follows bowling legend Bong Coo and cycling champion Paquito Rivas, who were bestowed the Lifetime Achievement Award last year.

PRESIDENT’S AWARD
Meanwhile. Mr. Yulo will receive the President’s Award at the PSA Awards Night in recognition of a stellar 2019 outing, highlighted by his qualification for the Olympic Games later this year.

Nineteen-year-old Yulo made history by becoming the first Filipino gymnast in half a century to qualify for the Summer Games after winning the gold in the men’s floor exercise of the World Artistic Gymnastics Championships in Stuttgart, Germany.

He capped the historic year by winning seven medals — two gold and five silver — in gymnastics at the 30th SEA Games.

With the winning momentum he is having, many are optimistic that he could well deliver the first-ever gold medal for the country in the Olympics, including his mother federation, the Gymnastics Association of the Philippines (GAP).

“We are confident of his chances and hopefully he stays healthy all the way to the Olympics. Given the preparation he is having and the mindset he has now as well as the support of the government, the federation, his family and others, he has all the ‘tools’ going in and just needs to go for it and give his best shot,” said GAP secretary-general Bettina Pou in an interview.

“In winning gold in the world championships he showed what he is capable of and the Olympics could be the next thing,” the GAP official further said.

Apart from Messrs. Reyes and Yulo also to be recognized is Team Philippines as “Athlete of the Year” for winning the overall championship in the SEA Games after 14 years.

The Philippines won 149 gold medals, to go along with 117 silver and 121 bronze in the biennial regional sporting meet.

The PSA Awards Night is set for March 6 at the Centennial Hall of the Manila Hotel.

Karateka Tsukii determined to make it to the Olympics

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

WHILE a spot in the 2020 Olympic Games in Tokyo, Japan, is not yet guaranteed for her, Filipino-Japanese karateka Junna Tsukii is in no way deterred by it and still very much focused on seeing her push completed.

Speaking to reporters at the launch last week of sports nutrition brand AminoVital, which she is one of the ambassadors, Ms. Tsukii shared that she is still in the thick of her Olympic push and touted that she has a strong chance of making it to the global sporting spectacle provided things go her way.

“There is a strong chance of me qualifying. I still have to go through the qualifiers but with hard work and determination we will get there,” said Ms. Tsukii, 29.

It will be a busy stretch for the bemedalled karateka beginning this month till April with Olympic qualifying tournaments coming in succession.

Ms. Tsukii, ranked 10th in the World Karatedo Federation list, is to see action in Karate 1 Premier League tournaments in Dubai (Feb. 14–16), Austria (Feb. 29–March 1), Morocco (March 13–15) and Spain (April–19).

Through these tournaments she hopes to gain valuable points to emerge on top of her division in Asia and earn a spot in the Olympic Games. Currently she is number four in Asia.

She is also preparing for the last Olympic qualifier in Paris, France, in May if ever she falls short in her quest to emerge on top in the continent in the prior qualifying tournaments.

Ms. Tsukii recently won two bronze medals in a Premier League competition in Paris.

Prior to that, she won gold at the 30th Southeast Asian Games.

The Philippine Sports Commission has vowed to support her in her mission to make it to the Olympic Games.

Stephen Loman named Brave fighter of the year

BOOSTED BY two quality victories in 2019, bantamweight champion Stephen “The Sniper” Loman of Team Lakay was adjudged “fighter of the year” in Brave Combat Federation for the second year in a row.

Won the Brave bantamweight title in 2017, Mr. Loman (13-2) fortified his position in the division by winning his two fights last year on his way to becoming the longest-reigning champion in the promotion.

The Sniper took on former featherweight champion Elias Boudegzdame and ran through the French-Algerian fighter in their title clash in Brave’s first-ever live event in the Philippines on March 15.

Mr. Loman stopped his opponent in the fourth round with a violent TKO that sent shockwaves through the division.

He then travelled to India in November and came away with a unanimous decision victory over Canadian Louie Sanoudakis.

To date he is the only champion in bantamweight the promotion has seen with no signs of slowing down.

Mr. Loman said after his fight with Mr. Sanoudakis that he has no immediate plans to move up in weight, saying that he will stay in bantamweight and battle whoever is lined up for him.

“Right now, I have a lot of people to fight still [in the division], maybe one day [I’ll go up in weight],” he said. — Michael Angelo S. Murillo

Caruana wins Tata Steel Masters

82nd Tata Steel Masters
Wijk aan Zee, Netherlands
Jan. 10–26, 2020

Final Standings:

1. Fabiano Caruana USA 2822, 10.0/13

2. Magnus Carlsen NOR 2872, 8.0/13

3. Wesley So USA 2765, 7.5/13

4.–5. Jorden Van Foreest NED 2644, Daniil Dubov RUS 2683, 7.0/13

6–9. Anish Giri NED 2768, Viswanathan Anand IND 2758, Jan-Krzysztof Duda POL 2758, Alireza Firouzja FIDE 2723, 6.5/13

10–11. Jeffery Xiong USA 2712, Vladislav Artemiev RUS 2731, 6.0/13

12. Nikita Vitiugov RUS 2747, 5.0/13

13. Yu Yangyi CHN 2726, 4.5/13

14. Vladislav Kovalev BLR 2660, 4.0/13

Average Rating: 2740 Category 20

Time Control: 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, then 50 minutes for the next 20 moves followed by 15 minutes for the rest of the game with 30 seconds added to your clock after every move starting move 1

The chess tournament in Wijk aan Zee, Netherlands is traditionally the first Super GM (Grandmaster) event of the year. The main sponsor of the chess festival, which started in 1938, remains the steel factory in Ijmuiden, which is now part of the Tata Group, one of India’s oldest and largest business empires with subsidiaries involved in steel, power, chemicals, communications, beverages, motor vehicles, hotels, and many more.

There is the Masters’ Tournament where the world no. 1 (Magnus Carlsen) and no. 2 (Fabiano Caruana) will be taking part, a Challengers’ event which will qualify the winner to next year’s Masters’ Tournament, several Qualifier’s events to determine the participants in next year’s Challengers’ tournament, and several other opens for amateurs, club players and top professionals to compete in.

All these events are held in the giant De Moriaan sports hall in the center of town. You can walk around the tournament hall during playing time and maybe even bump into Magnus Carlsen or other members of the chess elite similarly wandering around the hall.

This is a great attraction of the annual Wijk aan Zee event — almost without exception chess players welcome each other in a close-knit chess brotherhood and in no time you might be chatting with Vishy Anand or drinking coffee with Svidler, elbow-to-elbow with other chessplayers talking about anything under the sun.

This year, aside of course from world champion Magnus Carlsen, two players are under the microscope — Fabiano Caruana, the world no. 2, and Anish Giri. These two will be playing in the March Candidates’ Tournament in Yekaterinburg. As BW readers know whoever wins the Candidates’ will then challenge world champion Magnus later this year for the world title. Most people did not expect Fabiano Caruana or Anish Giri to be showing their best. Normally the soon-to-be competitors in such an important tournament as the Candidates’ would hide the openings and the special developing schemes that they would use and instead resort to safe and solid openings just so as to avoid loss.

It started out that way too. Caruana had a pretty normal first half of the tournament with two wins (against a totally out-of-form Yu Yangyi and Daniil Dubov) but then came his game with Viswanathan Anand.

Caruana, Fabiano (2822) — Anand, Viswanathan (2758) [D38]
Tata Steel Masters Wijk aan Zee (8.6), 19.01.2020

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4

Queen’s Gambit Declined + Bb4 = Ragozin’s Defense. I mention this because a lot of us were brought up in the Fred Reinfeld and Irving Chernev generation of chess books in the 60s when the Ragozin Opening did not exist. Ragozin is the Russian GM who sacrificed his career to serve as full-time second to world champion Mikhail Botvinnik. He was also the 2nd World Correspondence Chess Champion.

5.cxd5 exd5 6.Bf4 0–0 7.e3 Bf5 8.Qb3 Nc6 9.Bg5 a5

Can’t White win the d5–pawn?

10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.a3

Timing is not right yet. If 11.Qxd5 right away Black has 11…Rfd8 12.Qc4 (12.Qb3? a4 13.Qd1 a3 Black will win material; 12.Qb5 Nxd4! followed by …c7–c5 whichever way White recaptures on d4) 12…b5! 13.Qxb5 Nxd4! 14.Nxd4 c5 White’s weakness on the long diagonal a1–h8 will cost him. 15.Nf3 Bxc3+ 16.bxc3 Qxc3+ etc.

11…a4 12.Qxd5 Bxc3+ 13.bxc3 Na5 14.Qe5 Qc6! 15.c4 Nb3

The threat to the rook is not so easy to parry. If 16.Rd1? then simply 16…Bc2. This, plus the fact that obviously Anand is still within his preparation made Caruana look for something more complicated. After half an hour’s thought he decides to give up the exchange.

16.Qxf5!? Nxa1 17.Bd3 g6 18.Qf4

For the exchange Fabi gets to castle his king into safety and go on the attack.

18…Nb3 19.0–0 Qd6 20.Qh6 Qf6 21.c5 b6 22.cxb6 cxb6 23.Ne5

White’s plan is now Bd3–c4 followed by f2–f4–f5. Anand eases the tension a bit by forcing an exchange of rooks.

23…Rfc8 24.f4 Rc1! 25.Rxc1 Nxc1 26.Bc4 Ra7 27.Ng4 Qd6 28.Qg5 Qe7

Taking the pawn on a3 would clear the way for his passed a-pawn, but at this time it is not feasible: 28…Qxa3 29.Qd8+

29…Kg7? 30.Qf6+ Kf8 31.Qh8+ Ke7 32.Qe5+ Kd7 (the king has to stick to the 7th rank otherwise Qb8 is check and the rook on a7 is lost) 33.Qb8 Rc7 34.Ne5+ followed by mate).

29…Qf8 30.Qxb6 Ra8 31.Qf6 Ra7 (31…a3 is met by 32.Bxf7+ Qxf7 33.Nh6+) 32.f5 Qg7 33.Qd8+ Qf8 34.Nh6+ Kg7 35.f6+ wins the black queen.

29.Qb5 Kg7 30.f5 f6 31.Qd5 Qf8 32.fxg6 hxg6 33.e4

With everything defended Anand is the one who can play for the win.

33…Qc8 34.h3 Rd7 35.Qe6 Qd8 36.e5 [36.d5? Rd6 traps the queen]

36…f5 37.Qf6+?

After the game Fabi remarked that this move was a mistake. He should have played 37.Nf6 On the surface 37…Re7 looks safer but it fails because of some spectacular chess: 38.Qd6! Qxd6 39.exd6 Rb7 40.Ne8+ Kf8 41.Nc7 (this is really impressive — the Black king cannot approach white’s passed pawn because all squares are covered by the white knight and bishop) 41…Rb8 42.Ne6+ Ke8 43.Bb5+ Kf7 44.d5 Nb3 45.d7 Ke7 46.Kf2 Nc5 47.d8Q+ Rxd8 48.Nxd8 Kxd8 49.Ke3 White is clearly better, if not winning;

37…Rxd4 38.Bd5 Ne2+ 39.Kf2 Nc3 40.Qf7+ Kh6 41.Qh7+ Kg5 42.g3 Rd2+ 43.Kf1 Rd1+ 44.Kf2 Rd2+ with a draw. If White tries to avoid the repetition then 45.Ke3? Nxd5+ 46.Kxd2 Nxf6+ with a horrible death.

37…Qxf6 38.exf6+ Kh7

Not 38…Kf8? 39.Ne5 Rc7 40.Nxg6+ Ke8 41.Ne5 Black has to give up his rook for the bishop.

39.Ne5 Rd6

[39…Rxd4 40.f7 Rd8 41.Nd7 Kg7 42.f8Q+ Rxf8 43.Nxf8 Kxf8 44.Bb5 followed by Bb5+ and equalizes material by taking the a4–pawn.]

40.f7 Kg7 41.Nf3 Nb3! 42.Ng5 Nd2! 43.Be6

Only move. If 43.Ba2 Nb3! the bishop’s all-important diagonal is blocked.

43…Rd8 44.Kf2 Kf6? <D>

Anand had to neutralize white’s passed d-pawn with 44…Nb3! 45.d5 (45.Bxf5 intending Ne6+ is refuted by 45…Rd5) 45…b5 46.d6 Nc5! Black is clearly winning.

POSITION AFTER 44…KF6

45.Bd7!

Perhaps Anand had counted on 45.f8Q+? Rxf8 46.Nh7+ Kxe6 47.Nxf8+ Kf7 48.Nd7 Nc4 49.Ke2 b5 50.Kd3 Nxa3 with a win.

45…Ne4+

[45…Kxg5 46.Be8 the pawn queens]

46.Nxe4+ fxe4?

[46…Kxf7!! 47.Bxa4 fxe4 48.Ke3 Ra8 Black is playing for a win]

47.Be8 Ke7 48.Ke3 Rb8 49.Bxa4 b5?

I don’t understand why Viswanathan Anand did not take the f7 pawn. Now he will pay.

50.Bb3 Ra8 51.Kxe4 Rxa3 52.Be6 Ra1 53.d5 Rd1 54.Ke5 Rf1 55.d6+ Kf8 56.Kd5 Rf6 57.d7 Ke7 58.Kc6! Rf2

[58…Rxe6+ 59.Kc7 Rd6 60.f8Q+ Kxf8 61.Kxd6]

59.Kxb5 Rb2+ 60.Kc6 Rb8 61.Kc7 1–0

The finish after 61.Kc7 would have been 61…Ra8 (61…Rf8 62.h4 Rd8 [62…Kxe6? 63.d8Q Rxd8 64.Kxd8 Kxf7 65.g4 White wins] 63.g4 Rf8 64.g5 Rd8 65.h5 gxh5 66.g6 h4 67.f8Q+ Rxf8 68.g7 Ra8 69.g8Q) 62.Bd5 Rd8 63.Kc6 g5 64.g4 Ra8 65.h4 gxh4 66.g5 h3 67.g6 h2 68.g7 h1Q 69.f8Q+ Rxf8 70.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 71.d8Q+ Kg7 72.Bxh1.

After this very satisfying win Fabi took a short draw with Vitiugov and then, completely revived, won his four remaining games (against Alireza Firouzja, versus Kovalev, vs. Duda, and against Artemiev) to run away with the tournament. He tied Magnus Carlsen (2013) and Garry Kasparov (1999) with a dominating final winning score of 10/13, 2 full points ahead of runner-up Magnus Carlsen.

The Tata Steel Masters victorious Fabiano Caruana’s final tally of seven wins and six draws in a category 20 tournament equals an awesome performing rating of 2943. Mr. Caruana is starting to resemble Caruana of 2014 where he started off with 7-0 in the Sinquefield Cup and finally finished with 8.5/10, a performance rating of 3080, possibly the best tournament result of all time. It looks like he is on target for the March candidates.

 

Bobby Ang is a founding member of the National Chess Federation of the Philippines (NCFP) and its first Executive Director. A Certified Public Accountant (CPA), he taught accounting in the University of Santo Tomas (UST) for 25 years and is currently Chief Audit Executive of the Equicom Group of Companies.

bobby@cpamd.net

1...9,9739,9749,975...14,285Page 9,974 of 14,285
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube