London Chess Classic FIDE Open

[LawrenceCooper]

First round underway with commentary by the mighty Peter Svidler and the also present Laurence Trent https://www.youtube.com/live/jK0xhCHmQaY

Like me, his name is with a w though, not a u.

[Ian Thompson]

I'm curious to know what people think about players livestreaming their games. The 53rd seed in the U2000 tournament is doing that and, according to chess results, has a reserved place on board 1 in the event, presumably as a result of streaming her game.

[LawrenceCooper]

I'm curious to know what people think about players livestreaming their games. The 53rd seed in the U2000 tournament is doing that and, according to chess results, has a reserved place on board 1 in the event, presumably as a result of streaming her game.

I'm very much in favour, speaking as someone who spends far too much time on Twitch.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I'd be happy with it, not that I'm in her section.

[Roger de Coverly]

I'm curious to know what people think about players livestreaming their games.

How do you ensure that someone or something accessible to the player isn't making move suggestions or offering evaluations? Can a paranoid opponent demand a 15 minute delay?

[Leonard Barden]

Congratulations to Jack, who has demolished the No 2 seed 2571-rated Ilya Smirin, apparently ending up with the trademark Rudd feat of more time than when he started.
https://lichess.org/broadcast/2024-xtx- ... B/voTB8MMR

[Ian Thompson]

I'm curious to know what people think about players livestreaming their games. The 53rd seed in the U2000 tournament is doing that and, according to chess results, has a reserved place on board 1 in the event, presumably as a result of streaming her game.

I'm very much in favour, speaking as someone who spends far too much time on Twitch.

I was asking more from the point of view of other players in the tournament, and the streamer's opponent in particular, rather than whether there might be any spectators interested in watching the streaming.

[Ian Thompson]

I'm curious to know what people think about players livestreaming their games.

How do you ensure that someone or something accessible to the player isn't making move suggestions or offering evaluations?

That's certainly a question the organisers need to be able to answer. How do they justify the need for a 15 minutes delay on move transmissions to lichess, etc,., but no delay on the streaming broadcast?

[Paul Cooksey]

I suppose you could argue that a person recording themselves for the duration of the game is enhanced security in itself. But applying the same delay seems right to me too.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"I was asking more from the point of view of other players in the tournament, and the streamer's opponent in particular, rather than whether there might be any spectators interested in watching the streaming."

There is the possibility of distraction as well. Anna Cramling did a broadcast where her opponent did not appear on screen as he had asked not to be shown. But even having cameras everywhere could be distracting. I played a county match where one of the players set up a camera behind him and filmed the game. That was worse as the camera was just over his shoulder, so every time the opponent looked up, he could see the camera. Some of the other players appearing in the background were annoyed as well. A note with the invitation for the next match said filming was not allowed if anyone objected...

[Ian Thompson]

I suppose you could argue that a person recording themselves for the duration of the game is enhanced security in itself.

I don't think so. An accomplice to that person watching the stream can see an up-to-date board position and the streamer can easily pass signals to the accomplice as they're on camera.

Signalling also applies to anyone else playing in the room. Their accomplice can watch the stream waiting for their player to walk into the field of view of the camera and pass them a signal.

[LawrenceCooper]

I suppose you could argue that a person recording themselves for the duration of the game is enhanced security in itself.

I don't think so. An accomplice to that person watching the stream can see an up-to-date board position and the streamer can easily pass signals to the accomplice as they're on camera.

Signalling also applies to anyone else playing in the room. Their accomplice can watch the stream waiting for their player to walk into the field of view of the camera and pass them a signal.

Using that logic, so could her opponents.

[Ian Thompson]

I suppose you could argue that a person recording themselves for the duration of the game is enhanced security in itself.

I don't think so. An accomplice to that person watching the stream can see an up-to-date board position and the streamer can easily pass signals to the accomplice as they're on camera.

Signalling also applies to anyone else playing in the room. Their accomplice can watch the stream waiting for their player to walk into the field of view of the camera and pass them a signal.

Using that logic, so could her opponents.

Yes.

[Jonathan Rogers]

It strikes me as a circus which should not be forced on any opponent. It is different from ordinary cameras at a sporting event, which are there because the event is sponsored and the competitors are generally getting some advantage from that - not to mention that the broadcaster is (usually) neutral. But in these situations, all the benefit goes to the streamer and absolutely none to the opponent, who gets distracted into the bargain. (Does that mean that the streamer should at least offer some money to the distracted opponent - well, why not?).

[LawrenceCooper]

It strikes me as a circus which should not be forced on any opponent. It is different from ordinary cameras at a sporting event, which are there because the event is sponsored and the competitors are generally getting some advantage from that - not to mention that the broadcaster is (usually) neutral. But in these situations, all the benefit goes to the streamer and absolutely none to the opponent, who gets distracted into the bargain. (Does that mean that the streamer should at least offer some money to the distracted opponent - well, why not?).

As far as I know, it's never forced, the opponent can choose not to appear on stream.

I see it as positive, it's helping to promote chess and female players. It's certainly something I would like to have in some of my events in the future.