Consultation on the Draft FIDE Live Moves Broadcasting Policy

[Mick Norris]

Capitalism sux. We get it. But somehow Premier League football has managed to get more money into football without giving any games away for free on terrestrial TV.

That's not true; if you go down the local pitches, you'll find kids having games postponed because the pitches aren't in a fit state for them to play

You also have only to look at the number of professional clubs that have gone into administration since 1992; the club in the town I live in, and the club I support, are both in serious financial difficulties; I was told that the England team would benefit, and it has been mostly crap since 1992; the connection between the supporters (the ones who turn up at grounds) and the clubs/players has gone; players, agents and some (mostly foreign) owners have got rich

Chess has got worse over that period too, and as Nick says, so has cricket

[NickFaulks]

This is so, but it's not as if they have prepared a paper for comment on the theme "we propose to suggest to Agon that they stop being so enormously stupid".

They've probably come as close to that as they can without inviting legal action from Agon. You are certainly not discouraged from suggesting that they should do that.

[Chris Goodall]

What's a polite way of saying to FIDE "Look, we know you're trying to do what's best for chess, but we're the English and we don't actually want anyone (including ourselves) to succeed at anything, so the only way you're going to make us happy is to crawl into a hole and die"?

[NickFaulks]

What's a polite way of saying to FIDE "Look, we know you're trying to do what's best for chess, but we're the English and we don't actually want anyone (including ourselves) to succeed at anything, so just crawl into a hole and die please?"

You can say whatever you like, it doesn't have to be polite. I'm not sure how your proposed response would help them to make a decision. I can't say that I understand it myself.

[JustinHorton]

This is so, but it's not as if they have prepared a paper for comment on the theme "we propose to suggest to Agon that they stop being so enormously stupid".

They've probably come as close to that as they can without inviting legal action from Agon. You are certainly not discouraged from suggesting that they should do that.

Well, such is my intention (though not before next weekend, I shouldn't think)

[Chris Goodall]

What's a polite way of saying to FIDE "Look, we know you're trying to do what's best for chess, but we're the English and we don't actually want anyone (including ourselves) to succeed at anything, so the only way you're going to make us happy is to crawl into a hole and die"?

You can say whatever you like, it doesn't have to be polite. I'm not sure how your proposed response would help them to make a decision. I can't say that I understand it myself.

It was sarcasm, Nick. A flippant summary of the forum's general feeling.

[Paolo Casaschi]

What's a polite way of saying to FIDE "Look, we know you're trying to do what's best for chess, but we're the English and we don't actually want anyone (including ourselves) to succeed at anything, so the only way you're going to make us happy is to crawl into a hole and die"?

Sarcasm aside, I find this very interesting, especially the use of the word "succeed".

Let's assume the current proposal goes through and it's applied for the world championship match later this year. Would you agree that despite the broadcast exclusivity, it's extremely unlikely that any major sponsor will be found with so little time and as a result the world championship will be organized more or less like the previous ones? Folllowing recent experience with candidates and world championships we'll have only minor sponsors, an official website that is not fit for purpose and, because of the new FIDE policy, there won't be any alternative broadcasts than the official website. In other words, the next world championship match will be WORSE than the previous ones for the chess fans (I'd surely miss Peter Svidler and Jan Gustafsson live commentary).

So it seems to me that you are suggesting that, if we accept to make things worse in the short term, then things might actually get better in the long-term. Is this what you expect when using the word "succeed"?

If this is the case, allow me to be skeptical. Very skeptical. And I'm not even English (your stereotyping, not mine, to be clear).

In other matters, this country is already trying the "things will have to get worse for a while for things to get eventually better" and it does not seems to work as planned. Moreover, in all likelihood most of the people now making long term promises might not be there in the long run when the benefits are expected to come through.

[Chris Goodall]

What's a polite way of saying to FIDE "Look, we know you're trying to do what's best for chess, but we're the English and we don't actually want anyone (including ourselves) to succeed at anything, so the only way you're going to make us happy is to crawl into a hole and die"?

Sarcasm aside, I find this very interesting, especially the use of the word "succeed".

Let's assume the current proposal goes through and it's applied for the world championship match later this year. Would you agree that despite the broadcast exclusivity, it's extremely unlikely that any major sponsor will be found with so little time and as a result the world championship will be organized more or less like the previous ones? Following recent experience with candidates and world championships we'll have only minor sponsors, an official website that is not fit for purpose and, because of the new FIDE policy, there won't be any alternative broadcasts than the official website. In other words, the next world championship match will be WORSE than the previous ones for the chess fans (I'd surely miss Peter Svidler and Jan Gustafsson live commentary).

So it seems to me that you are suggesting that, if we accept to make things worse in the short term, then things might actually get better in the long-term. Is this what you expect when using the word "succeed"?

If this is the case, allow me to be skeptical. Very skeptical. And I'm not even English (your stereotyping, not mine, to be clear).

In other matters, this country is already trying the "things will have to get worse for a while for things to get eventually better" and it does not seems to work as planned. Moreover, in all likelihood most of the people now making long term promises might not be there in the long run when the benefits are expected to come through.

I apologise for implying that you were English, that was an unnecessary attack on your character By complete coincidence, I saw your post as I was looking for an embeddable .pgn viewer for my blog, and had just stumbled upon pgn4web. I think it's a brilliant resource, exactly what I was looking for and more. Congrats! Is there a "donate to keep this thing online" button?

I don't think it really comes down to short-term pain, long-term gain. Because you could flip that around and say: short-term pain for long-term gain is exactly what "building the audience" would be. The tournament loses money, FIDE's financial position deteriorates, but we see an extra 1,000 people join the grading list, one of whom becomes an International Master in 2030 and pays 100 Euros back to FIDE.

Let me ask you a question: why do you think FIDE persists in staging tournaments in Khanty-Mansiysk and Saudi Arabia, if holding tournaments is profitable in its own right?

I was using the word "succeed" simply to mean staging a world championship match well - by whatever criteria you want to use, audience, revenue, media interest - as opposed to staging it badly. Let's say you're correct and the website isn't fit for purpose - are we going to be disappointed about that because it gives the casual fans a bad impression of chess, or are we going to be secretly delighted because it proves us right? Like the QPR fans on the Twitter who complained when the team salvaged a draw from 2-0 down against Brentford, because it meant the manager probably wouldn't be sacked?

[IM Jack Rudd]

FIDE earns money every time a FIDE-rated tournament is played, and the amount earned is proportional to the number of players in the tournament.

[Chris Goodall]

Sure. But beginners don't play in FIDE-rated tournaments, if they play in any tournaments. So it's still long-term gain.

[Paolo Casaschi]

I apologise for implying that you were English, that was an unnecessary attack on your character By complete coincidence, I saw your post as I was looking for an embeddable .pgn viewer for my blog, and had just stumbled upon pgn4web. I think it's a brilliant resource, exactly what I was looking for and more. Congrats! Is there a "donate to keep this thing online" button?

There's a "donations" link on the pgn4web homepage but it's nothing else than a redirect to the homepage of the international federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, I'd rather suggest you donate to them (or to the charity of your choice) than to pgn4web. Thank you.

Incidentally, since you mention pgn4web, I find it amusing to see how Agon is committed to the principle of defending at any cost the copyright they think they have on chess moves, while at the same time Agon used in the past an open source software for the live broadcast of their events and "forgot" to mention or credit in any way where that software came from... "open source" should be a two way street...

Let me ask you a question: why do you think FIDE persists in staging tournaments in Khanty-Mansiysk and Saudi Arabia, if holding tournaments is profitable in its own right?

The candidates this year is in Berlin, previously Moscow, then London. This year world championship will be in London, previously New York, then Sochi and Chennai. It's not as bad as you seem to be afraid of.
At the same time, let's assume things go the Agon way. What do you think will happen with unprofitable tournaments like the GrandPrix series? Will Agon keep throwing good money to bad business or will those events simply disappear... after all if the selection of the candidates and the world championship challenger is left to the organizers we all know what happens: no qualification process to hand-picked candidates, then Shirov wins the candidates selection but the organizers decides Kramnik should play instead because the latter opponent makes the match much more commercially appealing than the former. Deja-vu?

I was using the word "succeed" simply to mean staging a world championship match well - by whatever criteria you want to use, audience, revenue, media interest - as opposed to staging it badly. Let's say you're correct and the website isn't fit for purpose - are we going to be disappointed about that because it gives the casual fans a bad impression of chess, or are we going to be secretly delighted because it proves us right?

Personally, I'm happy there are alternatives available from chess sites that have proven to know how chess broadcasts should be done.

[Chris Goodall]

Incidentally, since you mention pgn4web, I find it amusing to see how Agon is committed to the principle of defending at any cost the copyright they think they have on chess moves, while at the same time Agon used in the past an open source software for the live broadcast of their events and "forgot" to mention or credit in any way where that software came from... "open source" should be a two way street...

Absolutely, Agon screwed up there. You have my sympathy. I don't think it says anything about Agon's philosophy towards free stuff, any more than a thing Steve Giddins said 6 years ago says about Steve Giddins' philosophy towards free stuff. I think people just sort of trundle along making one decision at a time. And then chess players come along and see patterns in it because seeing patterns is what we like to do.

What do you think will happen with unprofitable tournaments like the GrandPrix series? Will Agon keep throwing good money to bad business or will those events simply disappear... after all if the selection of the candidates and the world championship challenger is left to the organizers we all know what happens: no qualification process to hand-picked candidates, then Shirov wins the candidates selection but the organizers decides Kramnik should play instead because the latter opponent makes the match much more commercially appealing than the former. Deja-vu?

There's a lot of blue sky in between "the Grand Prix events disappearing" and "boxing-style hand-picked opponents" though, isn't there. You could cut the Grand Prix events down to 1 Interzonal tournament with no loss of fidelity whatsoever. Or they could disappear and you could pick the semi-finalists from the World Cup instead, MVL and Wesley, which means Shakh getting in on rating. Or you could pick 4 places on rating, and the extra 2 would be... MVL and Wesley. The Grand Prix basically qualified Grischuk the world no.12 over MVL the world no.5. Is that an improvement?

Personally, I'm happy there are alternatives available from chess sites that have proven to know how chess broadcasts should be done.

Since I didn't see the Agon broadcast - what was it that you didn't like about it?

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Sure. But beginners don't play in FIDE-rated tournaments"

http://chess-results.com/tnr304881.aspx ... ilen=99999

Look at the bottom end - they may not be complete beginners, but they are not strong. (I applaud the fact they're having a go.)

My taxi driver from Heathrow to home after this event said he watched chess on YouTube and really liked it although he didn't necessarily follow what was going on, and he certainly didn't play club chess.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Since I didn't see the Agon broadcast - what was it that you didn't like about it?

That's surprising... first you advocate FIDE/Agon should be allowed to charge any arbitrary amount for an exclusive live games broadcast and then you are not a subscriber of their services? How odd. Unless you are not interested in the live broadcasts at all and you are happy for OTHER chess fans to pay for it, that would make some sense like asking the government to raise taxes, but only someone else's.

In any case, unless you intentionally hid under a rock, there have been reports about the Agon inability for the first few rounds of the 2018 candidates to show live chessboards; apparently they even published a notice on their website advising their customers to look at live chessboards on competing chess sites until they fix their website. Once their website was fixed, someone reported their live chessboard did show incorrectly an en-passant sequence (I saw a twitter video on this showing how the en-passant captured pawn was not taken off the board). This follows similar history in the past, most notably the major crash of their website at the beginning of a previous event (last candidates maybe, not sure) when they claimed being victim of a DDOS attack (that looked to me more like a lot of users coming at the beginning of the first round to look at the moves). That to me is enough to turn me away and be glad there are alternatives like chess24

[Chris Goodall]

That's surprising... first you advocate FIDE/Agon should be allowed to charge any arbitrary amount for an exclusive live games broadcast and then you are not a subscriber of their services? How odd. Unless you are not interested in the live broadcasts at all and you are happy for OTHER chess fans to pay for it, that would make some sense like asking the government to raise taxes, but only someone else's.

So you're saying that whether or not you're in favour of free stuff comes down to whether you personally benefit from it?

In any case, unless you intentionally hid under a rock, there have been reports about the Agon inability for the first few rounds of the 2018 candidates to show live chessboards; apparently they even published a notice on their website advising their customers to look at live chessboards on competing chess sites until they fix their website. Once their website was fixed, someone reported their live chessboard did show incorrectly an en-passant sequence (I saw a twitter video on this showing how the en-passant captured pawn was not taken off the board). This follows similar history in the past, most notably the major crash of their website at the beginning of a previous event (last candidates maybe, not sure) when they claimed being victim of a DDOS attack (that looked to me more like a lot of users coming at the beginning of the first round to look at the moves). That to me is enough to turn me away and be glad there are alternatives like chess24

Ohhhhhhh boy. You're going to love this.

The en passant glitch?

That was Chess24.

(You can check out part of the WorldChess coverage of the same game on YouTube: Neil deGrasse Tyson in the studio. Judit starts demonstrating moves at 4:30. Where is this shockingly bad coverage from WorldChess? You can actually see the current position clearly. It's not all about the two hilarious bros and their top bantz.)