Consultation on the Draft FIDE Live Moves Broadcasting Policy

[Roger de Coverly]

I strongly agree with Paolo that this discussion has run its course.

The question remains as to whether the ECF will respond in public or private if at all and what its response should be.

In his various other capacities, the ECF International Director and FIDE Delegate has been a proponent of unrestricted access to live broadcasting. That even applied to the FIDE Rapid and Blitz Championships when Agon was unable to organise them.

[Chris Goodall]

So all I can conclude is:

• Chess players like free stuff

• Chess players hate Agon regardless of what they do

My conclusions are:

• Agon are rubbish. This view is shared by just about everyone who has been exposed to their work. I would be happy to commend them on anything they had done well, but nothing springs to mind.

• They will not change, because they do not wish to change. Comments ranging from "I can't tell the queens from the rooks on my fancy tablet" ( London Candidates ) to "I would like to drink something at the opening ceremony that isn't an exotic alcoholic cocktail" ( Berlin Candidates ) are met with "that's the way we do things, you'll get used to it".

One individual, who by his own admission has no first hand experience of their products, has chosen to tell everybody who has that they are all wrong. His motivation for doing so remains obscure.

It's called a discussion. I tell you that you're wrong, you tell me that I'm wrong. Because if either you or I were always right, word would have gotten out.

Let's say Agon are rubbish. Okay, what advice would you give them for the next elite tournament they run? "Stop being rubbish" is not useful advice. Nor is "disappear into a hole". In what specific way would you like them to stop being rubbish ahead of the WCC 2018? What calamity can you predict that Agon can't?

Or is it a case of "do less of what you want to do and more of the stuff that we've been doing for 25 years that's led to a long-term decline in participation and interest"?

[Chris Goodall]

Well, unless and until Agon choose to test that thesis by changing their policy - which they have had ample opportunity to do - I strongly agree with Paolo that this discussion has run its course.

Okay. You find the part in Agon's policy document where it says "just be rubbish for no reason" and cross it out, then.

[Roger de Coverly]

In what specific way would you like them to stop being rubbish ahead of the WCC 2018? What calamity can you predict that Agon can't?

They can drop their assertion that a text record of the moves played belongs exclusively to them and work with established on-line sites rather than against them. Not having dubious gimmicks and thorough load testing before the start of the match would help.

It's been a recurring problem that whilst there aren't the Agon claimed 600 million chess players queueing up to watch World Championships, there can be sufficient demand to overload servers not configured to cope.

[NickFaulks]

Okay, what advice would you give them for the next elite tournament they run?

I wouldn't, because that has been tried now for long enough. They have made it quite clear that they have no interest in receiving advice from the chess community, whom they regard with contempt. At some point you have to stop wasting your time.

[NickFaulks]

At some point you have to stop wasting your time.

That applies to this discussion too, insofar as it relates to Agon. They are not the main issue.

Even if FIDE found a satisfactory sub-contractor or took their events back in-house ( and did a good job ), the issue of free transmission of moves would still be important. I would remain in favour, but I can see there are arguments both ways.

[Chris Goodall]

They can drop their assertion that a text record of the moves played belongs exclusively to them and work with established on-line sites rather than against them. Not having dubious gimmicks and thorough load testing before the start of the match would help.

It's been a recurring problem that whilst there aren't the Agon claimed 600 million chess players queueing up to watch World Championships, there can be sufficient demand to overload servers not configured to cope.

So in order:
"Working with established sites" is more ethically dubious than just declaring your own online coverage exclusive. Collusion and cartels are bad things!
Like I said to Justin, no-one at Agon wakes up in the morning and thinks "what kind of gimmicks should we have today? How about some dubious gimmicks!" If you can find the bit in their policy document that says dubious gimmicks are a good idea, I will be the first to suggest to them that they cross it out.
You're assuming that "so many people wanted to watch our broadcast, it crashed the server!" is a message Agon's PR team would want to avoid. Not so. Casual fan hears that the official broadcaster has had to upgrade their server to cope with the fan interest, casual fan doesn't think any less of Agon (if casual fan knows who Agon are, which he doesn't). Casual fan thinks "wow, this must be a really popular event, I'll have a look what all the buzz is about!" Net result, greater interest in chess. Marketing textbook, page 1: "Err on the side of less capacity. Worse-case scenario, the media will report that you've been overwhelmed by the demand."

[IM Jack Rudd]

You're assuming that "so many people wanted to watch our broadcast, it crashed the server!" is a message Agon's PR team would want to avoid.

Well, I don't know about wanting to avoid it, but they didn't use that message - which could indeed have played well - when it happened. They instead went straight for the DDoS explanation.

[Roger de Coverly]

They instead went straight for the DDoS explanation.

Evil chess24 etc. seemed to be what they were suggesting. There's a very long thread on this site about the Moscow Candidates. So obsessed did they become with the "theft" of the pgn, that they didn't even put a move list on their site. So anyone observing "that's an interesting position, I wonder how they got there" was frustrated.

[Roger de Coverly]

"Working with established sites" is more ethically dubious than just declaring your own online coverage exclusive.

That might be your view, but not mine and not I think widely shared.

[Chris Goodall]

"Working with established sites" is more ethically dubious than just declaring your own online coverage exclusive.

That might be your view, but not mine and not I think widely shared.

Really? If by "work with" you mean put official coverage of the match on sites other than the site Agon are running, why on earth would they do that? Why on earth would their partners let them do that? If by "work with" you mean sign a secret agreement that the established site will gain some reward from Agon for not competing too much with Agon's site, then yes, that would be illegal under anti-cartel laws.

[Roger de Coverly]

Really? If by "work with" you mean put official coverage of the match on sites other than the site Agon are running, why on earth would they do that?

What I mean is that they make the feed of the moves available to all who request them. Video and commentary but not moves are their intellectual property so they can impose conditions on their unauthorised use.

They might even host a press room where representatives of the sites can be present in person. As to why they would do this, it's to promote the event to a wider world rather than be obsessed by trying to maintain a monopoly of coverage. It's usually regarded as being in a sponsor's interest to have the event promoted as widely as possible. For that matter Agon's coverage as never been particularly multi-language. You get that thrown in with a multitude of broadcast outlets.

[Chris Goodall]

As to why they would do this, it's to promote the event to a wider world rather than be obsessed by trying to maintain a monopoly of coverage. It's usually regarded as being in a sponsor's interest to have the event promoted as widely as possible.

For certain values of "promoted". It's usually not regarded as being in a sponsor's interest to drive eyeballs away from the coverage that has the sponsor's logo on it, towards the coverage that doesn't have the sponsor's logo on it. Question: if you'd been watching the chess24 coverage exclusively, would you have known that PhosAgro had anything to do with the event?

[Roger de Coverly]

Question: if you'd been watching the chess24 coverage exclusively, would you have known that PhosAgro had anything to do with the event?

I use the plain pgn, stockfish and play through of chessbomb, so others would have to answer. If Agon made a video feed available to chess24, that could contain sponsor logos.

[Chris Goodall]

Question: if you'd been watching the chess24 coverage exclusively, would you have known that PhosAgro had anything to do with the event?

I use the plain pgn, stockfish and play through of chessbomb, so others would have to answer. If Agon made a video feed available to chess24, that could contain sponsor logos.

Modified question: if you'd been watching the chessbomb coverage exclusively, would you have known that PhosAgro had anything to do with the event?

Agon aren't going to make a video feed available to chess24. We can rule that out.