English Chess Forum

The 2019 tournament ended with an Armageddon between Xiong & Le Quang Liem. Its a very tense game with plenty going on in the background.

Chris Rice wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2019 7:02 am

It's a very tense game with plenty going on in the background.

I'll say. It would be a gross understatement to say that I was unimpressed.

The arbiter at the board was in a difficult position. In a game with a longer time limit, I am sure that the correct course of action would be to suspend play until acceptable playing conditions could be restored. In a Blitz game, the players are concentrating so hard that they notice noise surprisingly little.

Unfortunately it was just after the arbiter had left the board, presumably to try (unsuccessfully) to do something about the noise, that one of the players did appear to be disturbed.

I think many players would be disturbed by the guy in the blue shirt dancing about, and the "Director" doing semaphore to someone.

David Sedgwick wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:19 am

I'll say. It would be a gross understatement to say that I was unimpressed.

My impression is that Americans rather favour the gladiatorial atmosphere.

Armageddon finishes were exciting in cricket and tennis yesterday and the crowd noise was about the same...

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:06 am

Armageddon finishes were exciting in cricket and tennis yesterday and the crowd noise was about the same...

This raises an interesting point, which is perhaps where you were heading. Why is is important that chess should be played in silence?

I have personally never been very bothered by extraneous noise. Being required constantly to move my chair to allow a stream of people to climb over it is another story.

"This raises an interesting point, which is perhaps where you were heading. Why is is important that chess should be played in silence?"

That wasn't where I was heading - it was the coincidence of 2 Armageddon finishes on the same day! I suppose the problem with noise is that a general hubbub is not so bad, but sudden noises or shouted-out moves could be distracting. I used to write about chemical safety and found that if colleagues were making a racket I couldn't concentrate, and it was important not to make mistakes. I suspect cricketers and tennis players aren't really thinking in the heat of the moment - they are playing by instinct. You can't do much else if the ball is heading towards you at 100 mph. In cricket, even if the ball is only delivered at 70 mph, it's going to reach the batsman in about 0.7 seconds.

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:06 pm

they are playing by instinct.

That's probably what chess players do when playing 5 minute, in a "social" setting anyway. Blitz in a pub or bar for example.

There was some discussion of noise during the earlier rounds of the tennis. It was combined with a conversation about movement which is more obviously a distraction. I think it was suggested that in tennis 'hearing the ball hit the racquet' was useful information for the receiving player. Of course some tennis players are better able to focus than others and as with chess players I suspect if you are doing well, the noise is less of an issue. In the case of Dan Evans he was both doing well and being distracted.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:43 am

Why is is important that chess should be played in silence?

Compare the "best of order" BDO with the singing and chanting of the PDC which has overtaken it.

The concentration argument, if valid in chess should also be valid in other sports. Yet the fans make noise there. Another argument is: What do you do if the fan shouts out the winning move in a critical position?

Alex Holowczak wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:47 pm

Another argument is: What do you do if the fan shouts out the winning move in a critical position?

That, I think, is the key argument. In physical sports, it matters much less, because the decision as to what move to make is usually less critical than the ability to physically execute it.

"I think it was suggested that in tennis 'hearing the ball hit the racquet' was useful information for the receiving player. "

This is a very good point. I have given up watching snooker on BBC as the commentators (particularly Virgo) talk over the shot. I'm a fairly useless snooker player, but you do get info from hearing the contact. That probably applies to table-tennis as well, which I assume is why they banned stamping the foot whilst serving.

IM Jack Rudd wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:53 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:47 pm

Another argument is: What do you do if the fan shouts out the winning move in a critical position?

That, I think, is the key argument. In physical sports, it matters much less, because the decision as to what move to make is usually less critical than the ability to physically execute it.

I gather, from a mutual friend who is familiar with such things, that eSports got around the equivalent problem by insisting on the competitors wearing headphones to hear the in-game sounds, rather than the noise of the assembled crowd. Perhaps that could be the answer?

However, the image that chess seems quite keen to present is one of being dressed in formal shirts/suits. The reason I mention this is that it'll look a bit strange to turn up to a game of chess with a noisy crowd and headphones to drown their sound out while wearing a two-piece suit.

Selwyn Hamilton once showed up to the Frome Congress wearing ear defenders. Early on in his final round game, his opponent's mobile phone went off, and Selwyn was the only one who didn't realize why I was stopping his clock.