Wesley So Forfeited In U.S. Championship Round 9

[chessico]

... and he had been laughing away for years all the warnings that he had received from his coach and friends?

I don't see why you are so aggressive.
I had not known about that before, of course, but there seems to be a clear psychological issue with So regarding self-confidence. Were it just a fun thing he would not have done it. He will have to adapt and may come out a even stronger player if he manages to get things straigtened out.

btw, I am sure Fabiano Caruana will watch with interest how Wesley is treated by his new American colleagues.

[fern]

So called "Serious players" are a pest for me. Yes, even in a tourn -which I won- I alouded in a case a take back. He clearly was committing a stupid mistake that was going to make ugly an interesting game.
But, yes, it is easy: I do not play to win 25 bucks...
I play for fun, so I am not a "serious" player. I am so lacking of seriousness that i earn my life outside the chess scene.
Anyone that take seriously just a game is not really a serious persona, Ronald, but a moron.

Fern

[syzygy]

... and he had been laughing away for years all the warnings that he had received from his coach and friends?

I don't see why you are so aggressive.

Aggressive? Just relating what I understand to be a fact. I can give a source if you wish.

I had not known about that before, of course, but there seems to be a clear psychological issue with So regarding self-confidence. Were it just a fun thing he would not have done it. He will have to adapt and may come out a even stronger player if he manages to get things straigtened out.

I'm not a psychologist, but I don't think he needs this to perform well. It's probably just a habit that he (wrongly) considers to be fine.

Maybe this tournament it was different because of the personal problems that have been reported. But in general the "problem" seems to be that he's been too concise with respect to rules, and that he does not sufficiently realise that being concise about the rules is disrespectful towards his opponents.

It seems to me this was something that was bound to happen to him at some point. Apparently he needed to be woken up, let's just hope this is enough. And better now than when playing Carlsen for the world title!

Let me be clear: I do not consider So to be an "asshole" for making this mistake. He made a mistake, but has already been punished for it (and quite severely). No need for any further bad feelings towards him. My "aggressiveness", if that is what you want to call it (I prefer: lack of understanding), is only directed at those that now feel the need to call his opponents "assholes".

btw, I am sure Fabiano Caruana will watch with interest how Wesley is treated by his new American colleagues.

Again, I don't understand the "is treated by". He treated himself.

[syzygy]

So called "Serious players" are a pest for me. Yes, even in a tourn -which I won- I alouded in a case a take back. He clearly was committing a stupid mistake that was going to make ugly an interesting game.
But, yes, it is easy: I do not play to win 25 bucks...
I play for fun, so I am not a "serious" player. I am so lacking of seriousness that i earn my life outside the chess scene.

This is all very fine. You should live your life as you see fit (within the laws of your country).

Anyone that take seriously just a game is not really a serious persona, Ronald, but a moron.

But this seems to be a bad sign of a lack of tolerance and respect for other people who want to live their life and play their serious game of chess as they see fit.

[fern]

Tolerance is NOT equal to be indifferent, Ronald, but to tolerate an alien way of life without trying to change it.
I consider that kind of chess playing as moronic, that is my feeling, BUT I do not participate or begin a campaign to stop them to play as they wish.
Tolerance in engineering terms is the capacity to resist something beyond limits, not to be pleased with something.

Fern

[syzygy]

Tolerance is NOT equal to be indifferent, Ronald, but to tolerate an alien way of life without trying to change it.
I consider that kind of chess playing as moronic, that is my feeling, BUT I do not participate or begin a campaign to stop them to play as they wish.

tolerance

: willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own

Calling other people morons and "assholes" because they choose to play chess in a serious manner is not a sign of tolerance in my book.

[fern]

Well, Ronald, certainly we use different books. But even in your book, note that it is told that the issue is "acceptance". Again, this term is not equal to indifference. It is normal that human beings qualify in this or that manner habits and uses that shock them as nasty or unpleasant, but even so you can accept them in the sense you do not try with facts to change them.
I have not gone to a tournament hall to say to the guys over there that they give too much importance to what they do and that, in average, they are nasty guys full of maniatic tricks and bad behavior. I leave them doing his stuff. I accept they exist. And I accept they qualify me as a despicable amateur, non serious person, etc.
More than that is going too far.

Fern

[gordonr]

Tolerance is NOT equal to be indifferent, Ronald, but to tolerate an alien way of life without trying to change it.
I consider that kind of chess playing as moronic, that is my feeling, BUT I do not participate or begin a campaign to stop them to play as they wish.

tolerance

: willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own

Calling other people morons and "assholes" because they choose to play chess in a serious manner is not a sign of tolerance in my book.

Well said.

Regarding the thread discussion in general...

I am all for casual chess with plenty of sportsmanship replacing some hard-fixed rules when I play my amateur games. But this is a national championship played by professional players - not some fun game in a coffee shop.

If some noting taking was allowed, what if another player uses a little more notes in his games and the issue grows. Where do you draw the line? There is only one place to draw the line in professional chess and that is with the rule book. Some people on here would allow the problem to esculate rather that stop the trend, and that turns a professional sport into a farce.

Wesley So only has himself to blame. It's a professional player's responsibility to know the rules and abide by them.

[fern]

The fact that something is professional does not means that every sense of sportsmanship must or can be banned. Everyone understand the difference between a casual game and a game played for the points, but that should not means that taking some notes or perhaps saying a word or just moving the table or anything like that should be used a s a pretext to forfeit the adversary, calling in tears and in all seriousness for the arbiter. No matter how important the event is, to do that is base, low and despicable. Even in tennis, where lot of money is at stake, players respect certain unwritten laws of sportsmanship and they does not serve until they are sure the rival is ready. Neither they ask to punish the other guy if he crush the racket . And so on in many really moneyed sports.
Pity that in chess, where scanty money is on the table, the lack of good behavior, the predisposition to use anything to get the point, the delicate skin showed by many sometimes very dirty and unpleasant guys appears now as a law brought by Moses.

So as I said I prefer my computers.
They does not call an arbiter when I leave them to drink a beer.

Fern

[gordonr]

that should not means that taking some notes or perhaps saying a word or just moving the table or anything like that should be used a s a pretext to forfeit the adversary

Can you define what you'd allow in terms of taking some notes? If I write a checklist to go over before I make a move, is that ok? Can I write down some analysis lines in case I forget them? Can I draw a picture of a chessboard and some arrows, etc.?

The rule about having no notes is clear, consistent and enforceable. If you want to allow some tolerance, how do you define that?