It’s All In The Planning!

Young chess talents from around the world are making their mark in the sport.

IF I’m tasked with drawing up a wish list of the top three chess events to follow through the Internet this year, I wouldn’t have any problem in identifying the world chess championship match this April between Viswanathan Anand and Veselin Topalov, and the end-of-year Chess Olympiad in Khanty-Mansiysk, as among them.

The third? This has got to be a no-brainer choice for me. It can only be the annual tournament at Wijk aan Zee in the Netherlands. Chess people know it better as the Corus chess tournament.

The Corus chess tournament goes back a very long time but in those old days, the event wasn’t known as Corus. That came much later in year 2000. When the event began in 1938, it was known simply as the Hoogovens tournament, named after the Dutch steel and aluminium producer, Koninklijke Hoogovens.

In 1999, this company merged with British Steel and the new entity became the Corus Group.

So this tournament is steeped in history. Earlier this week, the latest in the long line of Corus chess tournaments ended in Wijk aan Zee. Its main attraction was the 14-man Group A event that featured some of the world’s top players, including Viswanathan Anand (the current world chess champion), Vladimir Kramnik (a previous classical chess world champion) and Magnus Carlsen (currently the highest-ranked player in the world).

The other participants included some of the most well-known veterans in international chess: Alexei Shirov, Vassily Ivanchuk, Peter Leko and the evergreen Nigel Short.

Chess today is dominated by younger players. Apart from Carlsen, 19, the other “babies” of the Group A tournament were Sergey Karjakin (20), Hikaru Nakamura (22) and Fabiano Caruana (17). But of course, how can I call Carlsen a baby when he is presently the highest ranked player in the world and was a co-winner at Corus two years ago?

And in all seriousness, Karjakin is no baby chess player either, because he has impeccable chess credentials. He started off in Corus this year as the defending champion but his crown was snatched away by Carlsen.

So there we have it, in the last three years the most significant feature of the Corus chess tournaments was the domination of teenaged chess grandmasters. Carlsen was only 17 when he became a joint winner in 2008.

Karjakin was 19 when he won the event in 2009. And now in 2010, Carlsen has won the tournament outright at 19.

By the way, Carlsen wasn’t the only teenager making a great splash at this year’s Corus event. In the Group B tournament, another teenager was creating a lot of interest: Anish Giri, 15, of the Netherlands. Giri, whose father is Nepalese, was born and raised in Russia. In February 2009, he qualified as a chess grandmaster and at that time, he was also the world’s youngest. Giri won the Group B event ahead of many of his contemporaries.

For good measure, I also want to mention that the Corus Group C tournament was won by Li Chao, 20, from China. Li will get his chance to play in the Group B tournament next year, just as Giri will also get his chance in next year’s Group A tournament.

This week, I’d like to feature an exciting game that was played in the final round of the Corus Group A tournament between Shirov and Leinier Dominguez.

At the critical point in the game when the two players agreed to a draw, Shirov was actually winning. However, chess is not played on position alone. There’s also the time factor to contend with and both players were tremendously short on time at that stage of the game.

After the game, Shirov discovered that had he pressed on to win the game, he would have won the tournament too, overtaking Carlsen at the top of the standings.

White: Alexei Shirov
Black: Leinier Dominguez

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.Bc4 Qb6 8.Bb3 e6 9.Qd2 Be7 10.0–0–0 Nc5 11.f3 Qc7 12.Kb1 0–0 13.g4 b5 14.a3 Rb8 15.h4 Bd7 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.g5 Bd8 18.h5 a5 19.g6 Nxb3 20.Nxb3 fxg6 21.hxg6 h6 22.Nxa5 (The start of all the complications. White could have chosen the straight-forward 22.Qxd6 and won a pawn) 22….Rxf3 23.e5 Be8 24.exd6 Qxa5 25.Rxh6 gxh6 26.Qxh6 Bf6 27.d7 Bxc3 28.dxe8Q+ Rxe8 (White needs to be very careful because a careless 29.Rd7 loses to 29….Rf1+ 30.Ka2 Ra1+ and he will be checkmated) 29.Qh1 (This could easily have been the Move Of The Game, a quiet sort of move that protects the back rank and now really threatening 30.Rd7 next) 29….Re7 30.Qxf3 Bg7 ½-½ (White should be winning after 31.b4 Qc7 22.Qa8+ Bf8 33.Rf1 etc)

A reuters report says that Hongkong police have arrested the feng shui master at the heart of a multi-billion dollar battle for the fortune of the late tycoon Nina Wang after a court ruled her will was likely forged. Police picked up Tony Chan from his luxury home late on Wednesday evening and seized some evidence.A police spokeswoman would only say that a 50-year-old man surnamed Chan had been arrested in Hong Kong’s luxury mid-levels district on suspicion of forging a document. She added he was kept in police custody overnight and is still under investigation. Police in Hong Kong tend not to name a suspect in full until formal charges are laid.

Chan had laid claim to Wang’s fortune as her former lover, presenting in court a 2006 will naming him as the sole heir of her estate. But after a marathon probate hearing, a high court judge ruled this week that the will is a forgery, while saying it was unlikely the tycoon would have left Chan all her money.

Chan’s will contradicted an earlier will drafted by Wang in 2002, leaving her fortune to the Chinachem Charitable Foundation, with links to her family.

Wang, known as “Little Sweetie” after a Japanese manga cartoon character and her giggly persona, was one of Asia’s wealthiest women with a business empire which included the Chinachem Group, Hong Kong’s largest private property developer. She died of cancer in 2007 aged 69.

A Reuters report says that a will leaving late Hong Kong tycoon Nina Wang’s entire US$4 billion estate to her former lover and feng shui master was declared a forgery today and the money will instead go to charity.Wang, known as “Little Sweetie”, was one of Asia’s wealthiest women with a business empire which included the Chinachem Group, Hong Kong’s largest private property developer. She died of cancer in 2007 aged 69.

After her death, former lover Tony Chan revealed a 2006 will which bequeathed Wang’s estate to him, contradicting an earlier will in 2002 which left the fortune to the Chinachem Charitable Foundation.

The high court described Wang and Chan as having a “relationship”, but said it could not have led to the tycoon leaving him all her money.

“The court does not believe the relationship was such that Nina was prepared to give her entire estate irrespective of her other commitments and responsibilities,” the court said in a summary of the judgment.

It ruled the 2006 will was a forgery and that signatures on that document which purported to belong to Wang and a witness were “highly skilled simulation(s)”.

“The court finds that he lied and withheld relevant information from the court regarding the circumstances leading to the preparation of the document,” the court judgment said.

Wang was dubbed “Little Sweetie” after a Japanese manga cartoon character and was known for her trademark braided pig-tails, mini-skirts and giggly persona.

Her brother, Kung Yan-sum, said the family would leave it to the government to decide if any action should be taken against Chan, whose lawyer said he would appeal.

“If they investigate, of course we will support, we are good citizens,” Kung said. “If there is a criminal element, the government will do something. I believe in the rule of law.”

The Shanghai-born Wang inherited most of her wealth from her husband, Teddy, who was kidnapped in 1990 and never seen alive again, despite the payment of a US$33 million ransom.

Wang later fought an acrimonious legal battle with her nonagenarian father-in-law amid claims of adultery and murder. She finally wrested control of Teddy’s estate in 2005.

From TimesOnline today, I’ve been reading that a retired civil servant in South London is bringing a High Court test case today over the fees charged to thousands of bereaved relatives each year by will-writing firms when they act as executor of a will.

David Khan, 69, from Norwood, South London, is taking legal action against Will Drafters, the Croydon-based firm, claiming that it will charge twice as much as a competitive quote obtained elsewhere.

His case will test whether families have a right to appoint whom they wish as executors to obtain probate and carry out the wishes of the deceased.

Will Drafters, was appointed executor when it drew up the will of Mr Khan’s late stepfather. It is refusing to stand down as executor so that Mr Khan can appoint solicitors of his choosing to administer the estate.

An estimated 90,000 people a year find themselves forced into accepting executors specified in their relatives’ wills, whether will-writing companies, solicitors or banks, and to accept the charges they impose.

The case to be heard today at the Royal Courts of Justice involves the estate of Dennis Griffiths, of Bromley, Kent, who died in October 2008.

In 1999 Will Drafters wrote a will for him which appointed itself the sole executor of his estate on his death. The company said they would charge a fee of 1.75 per cent of the estate — a total of £6,510 plus VAT.

The family has obtained a quote of half that figure from a firm called Final Duties who quoted £3,250 plus VAT. The family has asked Will Drafters to stand down as executor and be replaced by family members or to reduce their fees to a competitive quote.

Mr Khan said: “What happens in these cases is that the person making the will is visited by a will consultant, who draws up the will, but it is really a case of ticking boxes. You can see how, when it comes to who will be the executor, and the elderly person does not have anyone in mind, they might just suggest themselves.” He said that he and his sister, Ruth Savidge, had asked the firm if they would stand down as executors so they could appoint their own.

Will Writers, a large firm that was set up 20 years ago, prides itself on giving a quality will-writing and probate service, and rejects any suggestion that it persuaded Mr Griffiths to appoint it as executor for its benefit.

The firm says that at the time it drew up Mr Griffiths’ will in 1999, it was uncommon for it to be appointed executor and at the time it did so in less than 5 per cent of cases. But to step aside as executor would be in breach of Mr Griffiths’ wishes.

Its charges tend to be between 1.75 per cent and two per cent of the gross value of the estate, which it says compares favourably with the charges of other will writers, banks and solicitors.

Adam Walker, of Final Duties, is backing Mr Khan in his High Court action: He said: “This is an important test case that will determine whether beneficiaries in a will have the right to appoint executors of their choosing, or carry out the work themselves, or whether the court will compel them to accept a professional executor against their wishes where a suitable alternative has been proposed.”

He added that it was important that in this case the two beneficiaries were adults and were in full agreement with each other.

There is debate over whether will-writing companies should be regulated. The only will-writing association to offer accreditation — the Fellowship of Professional Willwriters and Probate Practitioners — says that its research shows that two thirds of people wrongly thought the willwriters they used were all trained solicitors.

A recent report on regulation of legal services by Lord Hunt of the Wirral expressed concern about the “fringe legal market” in will-writing, probate and claims handling.

The cost of being on the Fide rating list.

HEY, Greg,” I asked the Malaysian Chess Federation’s secretary when I bumped into him in Kuala Lumpur recently, “what’s become of our standing with the World Chess Federation (Fide)?”

In case you are not aware, Malaysia’s name had been missing from Fide’s list of member countries since the beginning of the year. Our Fide-rated players suddenly found themselves delisted from the Fide rating list. Gregory Lau, the MCF secretary, would be the best person to bring me up to date on this matter.

  Gregory Lau

“Oh, don’t you know,” he replied almost casually, “we are back on board Fide since last Friday at about 9pm. If you check the Fide website, all our players are back in the rating list.”

That was quite a relief to hear. We are again a member in benefit. At first, I wanted to say that MCF should shoulder the full blame for letting our membership lapse but on second thoughts, was it really MCF’s fault?

I don’t think so. In fact, MCF’s position is beyond envy. The federation receives so little or no funding from the Government and whatever little financial resources it has goes back to cover its administrative costs.

From what I know, Fide was owed in excess of €2,000. At today’s exchange rates, that’s at least RM10,000. While a chunk of it went towards settling the membership dues, there are also other obligations towards Fide.

For example, it costs €270 to register a team for the Chess Olympiad. If we send both the men’s and women’s teams, the cost is doubled. Then there are also the rating fees for our players. As long as a player is registered with Fide and he is in their “active” list, the federation is required to pay ?1 for that player.

Getting a chess title confirmed is also not cheap. For instance, an application for an international master title will cost the federation €165 and in the past year, we had two new international masters. Fide has the right to increase the fee by 50% to 100% if title applications are made after their deadline for submission.

And finally, if you want to organise a Fide-rated round-robin tournament, be prepared to pay the registration fee, too. It’s calculated based on the strength of the tournament. For Swiss tournaments, the fee is €1 per player. On top of that, if the organiser fails to submit the results to Fide, a penalty fee kicks in.

All in all, these fees simply add up to a lot of money. For voluntary organisations like the MCF, it digs a deep hole in the pocket. And this is just fees due to Fide alone. What about participation in regional events? They cost money, too, but only this time, the Asian Chess Federation is the beneficiary of the fees.

So don’t think that chess is a cheap game. If a federation is not careful, one fine day it will find itself temporarily excluded from Fide until the arrears are settled. That’s what happened to MCF. The big fear is this: okay, so our arrears have been settled for now but what will happen in the next one or two years? Nobody knows.

Finally, still on the topic of ratings, I have some quick statistics here based on the latest January 2010 list. Malaysia has three players rated above 2400 in Mas Hafizulhelmi (2420), Mok Tze Meng (2414) and Wong Zijing (2410).

We also have four players above 2300: Nicholas Chan (2398), Ooi Chern Ee (2336), Peter Long (2331) and Jimmy Liew (2315).

Then comes 26 players with ratings of above 2200, followed by 37 players rated above 2100. The rest are below 2100.

What does it take to nudge chess to the next level?

IT WAS like déjà vu. Way back in 1974, I was part of a group of chess enthusiasts who came to Kuala Lumpur to attend the first official meeting of the Malaysian Chess Federation.

Last Sunday, I was again part of a group of chess enthusiasts who had come to Kuala Lumpur to participate in an informal discussion with like-minded people.

In both cases, the objectives were the same. At both meetings, we tried to find ways to take Malaysian chess forward. However, there was a difference. Then, chess was only known in a few pockets of the country, notably in Kuala Lumpur, Johor Baru and Penang. But now, I can say that the game is played in all the states and there is considerable interest everywhere.

But despite the wider recognition of chess in today’s society, we are unable to take the game to a higher level.

Today, we have five international masters but we are still way off the target for a grandmaster. We may have close to 200 players on the World Chess Federation’s rating list but this is a trickle compared to the hundreds of thousands of players listed there.

We have players rated 2400 or above, but the international rating list is full of players with ratings of at least 2600. Today, we have chess organisers holding enough events to fill up our local chess calendar but we are not uncovering enough talents.

So the meeting in Kuala Lumpur on Sunday was to brainstorm on the ways to move chess forward. Though the meeting attracted close to 40 people who were mostly from the Klang Valley, the numbers could have been higher. Chess players and organisers from beyond this region were greatly missed. Their input could have been very important.

Nevertheless, a lot of good ideas were heard. What I particularly liked was Jimmy Liew’s contention that chess, like other games, needed a hero. We needed people whom our young players can look up to and emulate.

But, in my opinion, the closest we have ever come to having one is Mas Hafizulhelmi. Yes, for sure he is a nice guy and works very hard at his chess. But he is still not visible enough to produce excellent results and he doesn’t have the results to become more visible. It is a vicious cycle and a way must be found to break it.

There was also talk of branding and marketing. Everyone agreed with one point, that chess has never been an easy game to promote. Maybe it is time that our chess organisers adopted a more business-like approach to the matter and think about the benefits and advantages of chess, and use them to promote and market the game.

The persons running chess centres need not even be chess players as long as they are good in marketing and turning their ideas into concrete courses of action.

As for product branding, the suggestion was that chess centres like the Datuk Arthur Tan Chess Centre (DATCC) must present a face to their names so that people can associate better with their activities. No point calling it the DATCC when nobody knows what Arthur Tan looked like.

There was also talk of making chess centres a safer and friendlier place to attract both children and working adults. They could be places for adults to hang out and relax with friends after work over a few chess games as well as a place parents would want to bring their children to for evening visits.

But at the end of the day, I suppose the most critical question would be: how would the suggestions be implemented and who would be spearheading them?

I think that it is out of the question for the Malaysian Chess Federation (MCF) to implement them. The MCF’s role is only governing and administering. This leaves the operations side of chess, and this should involve the people on the ground. But unless they are in a position to raise their own funds for their own chess promotion and marketing, I think much of the proposals will ultimately be left unfulfilled. Sad but true.

Don’t think you can solve problems that arise in the job search all by yourself. The price to pay for ignorance or passive attitude is too high to bear. You may end up not getting any job offer after attending many interviews and sending out many resumes. Without proper guidance, you will find not only frustration, but constant failure in your job search.

So how should you be preparing yourself? Fresh graduates should get career counselling or professional advice from their universities on techniques to apply for jobs, on the organisations to contact, arranging interviews, organising visits or making contacts with the personnel-in-charge.

If you are not so sure about what you want to become, try to discuss with your parents and friends who know your characters. Tell them which career you want to go in for, why you chose to pursue a certain degree or course, what makes you think you can do better than others in certain jobs, what is your future plan besides working for an organisation, and ask their opinions about your plan. All these are important bearings that help you focus in your career, so do not shy away from talking about them.

Besides your plan, your interests and hobbies outside your studies are important indicators of what you want to achieve in career and in life. And since you are fresh from campus and have no previous work experience, this is one of the many yardsticks which a prospective employer has of judging your initiative and your ability, apart from your academic achievement.

Particularly valuable are those activities in which you had some organising functions and where you had to get along with and work with others. Examples of such activities are various clubs, sports team, debating society, youth group, college magazine, voluntary service and charity work. Unless you are asked to comment on certain political issues, try to keep off the subject of political activities as this could set up a strong prejudice against you.

Last but not least, see yourself as a unique person with desirable characters – someone who is honest, hardworking, responsible, caring, helpful, disciplined and open-minded. Only when you see yourself as a valuable person, you can have pride in yourself and convince others of your value. See things positively so that you open up yourself to more options while learning painfully from your job searching experiences.

When assets get frozen, who suffers? The beneficiaries are the ultimate sufferers but along the way. the executors may also find themselves in a bind. Here’s an old but interesting story from an online newspaper:

KEITH WEBB found he had a battle on his hands after he was appointed an executor of his late uncle’s estate in April.

To help to pay initial death duties of £105,000 he asked Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) to release £103,000 lying in a Power of Attorney (POA) account that he managed on behalf of his uncle.

However the RBS branch in Winchester said he could not have access to the money as all accounts were “frozen” at the time of an individual’s death and would remain so until probate was granted.

Mr Webb replied that he was in an impossible situation. He would be unable to obtain probate until he had paid the first tranche of death duties, but could not obtain the money to make the payment because the funds had been frozen by RBS until probate had been granted.

After a month-long battle Mr Webb’s solicitor finally persuaded RBS that it could release funds from the POA account to pay taxes under the same proviso that allows money to be taken out of a deceased person’s estate to pay undertaker’s bills.

An RBS spokeswoman says: “The money should have been released sooner and we apologise to Mr Webb. The information he was given at branch level was wrong. We have, in fact, brought in a new system to tackle the problem he has highlighted.”

She says that last year the Law Society, Inland Revenue and major banks all agreed to operate a new method of allowing funds to be unfrozen from an estate to pay tax while ensuring that it went specifically to the Revenue and nowhere else.

A D20 form was produced in March 2003, which allows executors such as Mr Webb to pay inheritance tax demands by completing the form, after which the bank makes the payment directly to the Revenue.

The RBS says: “It appears that, in Mr Webb’s case, we failed to follow the new procedure. This only came to light after the matter had been brought to our attention at a higher level.

“We can only apologise to Mr Webb for his experience. We do have new guidelines and procedures in place.”

Budget slash a setback for development of chess in schools.

SO it happens yet again. The rumour that I have been hearing for the past few months has been confirmed. Chess is out from this year’s national schools’ sports programme, a victim of the drastic cost-cutting measures by the Education Ministry.

According to a news report last week, the ministry had slashed its annual grant to the Malaysian Schools Sports Council (MSSM) from RM6mil to a measly RM1.5mil. As a result, the MSSM is forced to reduce the number of sports in its calendar from 24 to 13.

Of course, I’m disappointed with the consequences of the budget slash. Who wouldn’t be? A student’s all-round education should encompass both academic and non-academic activities.

While emphasis should rightly focus on academic results, non-academic activities should not be overlooked. This nation is not built on bookworms alone.

So chess is one of the sports affected. There won’t be an MSSM chess tournament at the national level this year. No doubt, there may still be some school chess tournaments on a state-wide level if the states can find the funds themselves, but without a school competition at national level, it will never be the same.

More than 10 years ago when the country was hit by recession, chess was also a convenient victim. Funds were also withdrawn from chess at the MSSM and it was only many years later that the game was re-instated into the programme.

In the process, we lost more than a generation of chess players. The luckier states like Selangor and Penang were able to continue nurturing their young crop of players but in most of the other states, chess development in the schools was practically at a stand-still. These states suffered the most.

Losing this generation of chess players meant that many of our young citizens never had the opportunity to uncover or develop their full potential. Goodness knows how many of them were wasted.

Then, when chess was re-introduced into the national sports programme a few years ago, it took a while before the game got back into its natural groove. No doubt, the same thing is going to happen again. There’ll be another generation lost.

The only comfort which chess players can perhaps derive from this setback is that we are not alone. Together with chess, other sports like bowling, squash, archery, table tennis, rugby, cricket, sailing, softball, handball and cross country have been axed from the programme.

But is this the time for self-pity? No! Not for chess or any of the other games that were taken off the MSSM calendar. If anything, this is the opportunity for the state sport associations and the national sport federations to do something positive on their own to maintain the interest and momentum in the sport they profess to represent.

If a state education department cannot organise a state-wide school chess competition, come in with your expertise to hold your own state-level age group tournaments. If there is no MSSM competition for your game, the federation should step in to help out with a national age group event.

In this sense, perhaps chess is a little fortunate because the Malaysian Chess Federation (MCF) has had an annual national age group chess competition running for a few years already. It started about the same time that chess went off the MSSM radar in the last decade.

It just grew from there. The national age group competitions never stopped, even when chess was re-instated into the MSSM calendar. They simply co-existed, one event complementing the other.

So this year, the national age group competition in March will be taking on a special importance again. It will be a premier junior tournament to judge the chess abilities of our youth on a national platform. I would urge them – all the chess players who are still below the age of 18 – to come and give your support to this event. It will be your chance to demonstrate that scholastic chess can continue growing despite this momentary setback.

Incidentally, I shall be in Kuala Lumpur this weekend to attend a meeting at the Datuk Arthur Tan Chess Centre – initiated by the grand old man of Malaysian chess, Datuk Tan Chin Nam – of interested chess parties in an effort to find a common ground for chess organisations and chess personalities to grow together.

I laud his efforts in organising a brain-storming session. We have to take the cue from the axing of MSSM chess. It is imperative for everyone connected with chess to cooperate and take the game to the next level. In the face of shrinking grants, chess in this country should look to more efficiency. By working together, we’ll find that the chess pie is large enough for everyone to share.

See you at the meeting on Sunday morning.

Kudos to Malaysia’s two new international masters.

NEW Year’s Day brought some mixed news for the Malaysian chess scene. I don’t like to use well-worn clichés but anyway, the good news should come first and it is that two new International Masters were confirmed by the World Chess Federation last November.

  Lim Yee Weng achieved his three IM title norms at the Turin Chess Olympiad in 2006 and two of the Malaysia open tournaments in 2007 and 2008.

Last September, we knew that Mok Tze Meng had been awarded a provisional IM title pending his rating points jumping above 2,400. Well, his title has now been confirmed.

The other player who now also has a confirm­­­­ed IM title is Lim Yee Weng. His application to Fide was made in November 2008 after he had achieved his three IM title norms at the Turin Chess Olympiad in 2006 and two of the Malaysia open tournaments in 2007 and 2008. At that time, Fide agreed to the application but made his IM title conditional upon his rating rising above 2,400 points. He did achieve this subsequently and the title was finally confirmed in last November’s rating list.

Good for the two of them because they had put in a lot of hard work to get their titles.

As it stands right now, Malaysia has five international masters.

Jimmy Liew was the first to achieve this title so there is always a special place reserved for him whenever this subject of international masters is raised locally. Mas Hafizulhelmi was our second player to gain this title and he also has a special place in Malaysian chess because after all these years, he remains our strongest player.

Apart from Liew, Mas Hafizul, Mok and Lim, our other international master is Wong Zijing who is unfortunately inactive because he’s totally caught up with his studies overseas. Hopefully, we shall be able to see him return to active chess duties sometime in the future.

The bad news is that, suddenly, I discover that Malaysia’s name has disappeared from the Fide list of member nations. For that to happen, it can only mean one thing: that the Malaysian Chess Federation’s (MCF) membership standing with Fide has not been regularised in the past one year. The MCF has been such a long-standing member of the world body since 1974 (even longer if we consider the days of the old Chess Association of Malaysia, which was the MCF’s predecessor) that it is embarrassing that this should happen.

  New level: Mok Tze Meng, who was awarded a provisional International Master title pending his rating points jumping above 2,400, has finally achieved that.

Unfortunately, such delistings do happen once in a while even to more active chess federations. The least that the MCF should do now is to take steps to rectify this hiccup as soon as possible.