Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
-
Clive Blackburn
Post
by Clive Blackburn » Sun Apr 12, 2015 11:44 pm
Roger de Coverly wrote:Clive Blackburn wrote:
I don't see that he was doing anything wrong at all.
As the preface to Laws of Chess rightly suggest, not all circumstances are covered. Hence any distinctions between the official organiser supplied scoresheet and random doodles on a separate sheet aren't mentioned.You have to appeal to the conventions and history. Since when in a serious event such as the US Championship has it been permitted as a matter of custom to write random motivational slogans on a separate sheet of paper?
The only way that So could possibly have been breaking the laws of chess I think would be if he was distracting his opponent, deliberately or otherwise.
I understand that it was his opponent who complained to the arbiter but that was not the official reason given for defaulting him.
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Post
by Roger de Coverly » Sun Apr 12, 2015 11:57 pm
Clive Blackburn wrote:
I understand that it was his opponent who complained to the arbiter but that was not the official reason given for defaulting him.
The arbiter interpreted writing comments, even on a separate sheet of paper as "taking notes". There were two warnings that the practice was unacceptable in the opinion of the arbiter.
Whilst in a local league you might tolerate such eccentricities, this was the US Championships.
-
Clive Blackburn
Post
by Clive Blackburn » Mon Apr 13, 2015 12:05 am
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Whilst in a local league you might tolerate such eccentricities, this was the US Championships.
Exactly, so anything goes surely
-
Ian Thompson
- Posts: 3551
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Post
by Ian Thompson » Mon Apr 13, 2015 12:22 am
Clive Blackburn wrote:The notes that Wesley was making were purely motivational (or at least he claims they were) and did not contain analysis or other chess-related information which could be useful during the game.
...
I don't see that he was doing anything wrong at all.
So has disclosed what the note said "double check triple check use your time" (
http://en.chessbase.com/post/us-champ-r9-forfeit). It seems clear to me that these notes were intended to help him play better, so clearly in contravention of Law 11.3 a.
-
Jonathan Bryant
- Posts: 3452
- Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm
Post
by Jonathan Bryant » Mon Apr 13, 2015 6:47 am
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Whilst in a local league you might tolerate such eccentricities ....
I wouldn’t.
-
JustinHorton
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Post
by JustinHorton » Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:13 am
Roger de Coverly wrote:Clive Blackburn wrote:
I don't see that he was doing anything wrong at all.
Since when in a serious event such as the US Championship has it been permitted as a matter of custom to write random motivational slogans on a separate sheet of paper?
It's not clear to me that the notes were either random or motivational.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Post
by Roger de Coverly » Wed May 27, 2015 1:57 pm
Two of the FIDE Commissions have now issued a combined statement on this, endorsing the original decision.
http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... ssion.html
They got him under 8.1 b (permitted uses of scoresheet), 11.3 a ( use of notes) , 11.5 (annoying the opponent) and 11.7 ( refusal causes loss).
-
NickFaulks
- Posts: 8453
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Post
by NickFaulks » Sun May 31, 2015 11:50 am
For me, 11.7 has always been the killer in this case. If the Chief Arbiter tells you that you must stop doing something and that you will be forfeited if you persist, then you should stop doing it.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.