TalkChess.com

You can write a novel if you wish.
It is supposed that a chess player, even more a pro, knows how to concentrate en his game.
If he is distracted by anything, well, he should try some medications...

fern

fern wrote: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.

Who has the delicate skin here? The majority of serious chess players that do not allow take backs and expect their opponents to abide by the rules? Or those bystanders that call serious players "morons" and "assholes" for spoiling the fun of those that have chosen to play with the serious players, but show disrespect for their opponents?

Have you ever been in a tournament, Ronald?
I have been.
I won the tittle.
I know about chess behavior.
You do not.
In any case, Ron, as I said before -but I was dragged into this again- the issue became boring to me. I already know what you think. Same for you.
Anything extra is redundant.
So I will not answer any other post from you or anyone about this theme.
Any other from you, happy to answer and talk.

Fern

http://www.chess-news.ru/en/node/18612

At the end, he made his most controversial statement: "There is no doubt that Akobian just wanted a gift point".

"But Varuzhan said you are friends!" - retorted the interviewer.

"We were once", - Wesley corrected him.


* * *

Hikaru Nakamura reacted at once to this final comment, calling it "shameful" and "disrespectful". "He blames everyone except himself for breaking the rules".

Very shameful and disrespectful comments by So about Varuzhan Akobian. Blame everyone except yourself for breaking the rules.
— Hikaru Nakamura (@GMHikaru) 11 апреля 2015

syzygy wrote:http://www.chess-news.ru/en/node/18612

At the end, he made his most controversial statement: "There is no doubt that Akobian just wanted a gift point".

"But Varuzhan said you are friends!" - retorted the interviewer.

"We were once", - Wesley corrected him.


* * *

Hikaru Nakamura reacted at once to this final comment, calling it "shameful" and "disrespectful". "He blames everyone except himself for breaking the rules".

Very shameful and disrespectful comments by So about Varuzhan Akobian. Blame everyone except yourself for breaking the rules.
— Hikaru Nakamura (@GMHikaru) 11 апреля 2015

SzG wrote:I can't see why an opponent should feel obliged to complain about note taking.

He was not obliged and I'm sure he did not feel obliged.

But should he be castigated for asserting his right to have his opponent respect the rules of the game? Rules that are there to protect players against their opponents?

In other words: chess players play chess, arbiters enforce the rules. No need to share the duties.

Obviously it is always the arbiter that enforces the rule. That is why a player must inform the arbiter if he wants corrective action to be taken against his opponent. In a chess tournament, the arbiter cannot monitor all games simultaneously.

So lost a game due to his own misbehaviour. Big deal. He got a nice lesson and hopefully he'll learn from it. It's not like he will be called a cheater for the rest of his life. This is something that everybody will forget about in just a few weeks time.

GABOR, that simple thing is not understood.

fern wrote:GABOR, that simple thing is not understood.

Not even FIDE understands it...

FIDE Tournament Rules wrote:12. Conduct of the Players

(a) Once a player has formally accepted an invitation, he must play except in cases of force majeure, such as illness or incapacity. Acceptance of another invitation is not considered to be a valid reason for not participating or withdrawing.
(b) All the participants should be dressed in a suitable manner.
(c) A player who does not wish to continue a game and leaves without resigning or notifying the arbiter is discourteous. He may be penalised, at the discretion of the CA, for poor sportsmanship.
(d) A player may not speak about his game while it is in progress.
(e) All complaints concerning the behaviour of players or captains must be made to the arbiter. A player is not permitted to complain directly to his opponent.

SzG wrote:I can't see why an opponent should feel obliged to complain about note taking.
If the arbiter notices it, that's another story. It belongs to the duties of an arbiter.

In other words: chess players play chess, arbiters enforce the rules. No need to share the duties. Would you not find it odd if an arbiter went up to you and asked you to let him make a move for you?

It is the same in all sports so why not in chess?

In other sports you have one at least referee per game. In chess, you don't. For that reason, it is ingrained in the rules the act of calling the TD for several reasons. That is why the etiquette in chess is that you do not try to bend the rules just because there is a chance the TD may not see you. That puts your opponent in the awkward position of having to call the TD. Many chess players push it too far like So, sometimes to irritate your opponent. Once you have been warned, whether that was the intention or not it becomes irrelevant.

Miguel

I am still not even sure the decision was correct at all.
Behind the rules there is a certain intention, of course, they are not random or malicious.
The scoresheet is a document, so yes, we keep it clean and tidy. Good boy.
We dont bring "notes", for example chess books, and "use" them. Yes Agreed.
We don't analyse during the game, for example in a separate room with another chessboard, an engine, whatever.

So now, "that being said", what is the purpose of a rule that says: Don't write anything, anything at all, during the game. A player may want to make a quick note "Call my wife after the unavoidable loss that I'll come home heavily drunken". Or "Come on, you can make it, dont be a pussy". He writes it on another piece of paper, not the scoresheet. He does not wipe his opponents face with this piece of paper. I don't think anybody ever wanted a rule against that. It may simply be a case of bad wording, a wrong or too strong interpretation of the word "use" in
"11.3 During play the players are forbidden to use any notes, sources of information or advice ..."