if the name of the game, is entertainment..
then there is "bad news is good news"
the "bringing the game of chess into disrepute" is so 19th century. yes, chess isn't the dry intellectual activity some make it out to be; and that Helps it gain fame in noisy, raucous wold of sports.
IfPatriotGames: I don't think this is a self-correcting problem. The reason is that chess is trying to get into the mainstream and make money by selling tickets and having people watch online. Having people throw games hurts you in the eyes of the public. How would you feel if you went to a tennis match (like tubebender wrote) and one player threw the match and lost in a few minutes? You'd probably feel cheated. Throwing games hurts the sport as a whole and the finances of the people who compete. It hurts chess develop and grow economically.
In this case, she was already out of the prize money (I believe, although perhaps she could have won one of the lower women's prizes) but it affects ratings, the opponent, and possible tiebreaks, which can depend on the results of lower boards and the performance rating of previous opponents. She may not be invited to future events, but as the top women's player she'll qualify for all of those events by rating and given how many organizers want to look "inclusive" nowadays, I'm sure she'll get invites as the top active female player. I think a fine would be appropriate. She did violate the rules by attempting to lose the game and probably by bringing the game of chess into disrepute.
I didn't say it was self correcting problem, I said it was a self correcting non problem. It's so trivial, it doesn't qualify as a problem. And because she is the one who has to deal with the consequences, it's self correcting. Chess is not trying to get into the mainstream. Some of the people who play it might be though. I wouldn't care if a tennis player threw a match because it doesn't affect me. I'm not the one being cheated. In fact, it would make it more interesting if you never knew if someone was going to hurt their own future. NASCAR is kinda like that, you never know who is going to wreck. And because chess is a game, not a sport, the concern over it being hurt financially isn't really an issue. It's still a game and people will play it if they like it regardless if someone else makes money or not. Besides, most people dont even know how to play chess, and if they do, they dont play it very often. Which is why viewership is so low and there is no worry about bringing the game into disrepute. The VAST majority of people simply dont care.
But chess is trying to get more viewers and more sponsors and top level chess is trying to become more mainstream. Most high level events sell tickets and that's part of how they make money. Ticket buyers don't want to see thrown games. It also makes chess look less reputable/professional. Your arguments seem more applicable to amateur or casual chess, not professional chess. The top players play professionally and they may lose out on a prize because someone throws a game. It's not trivial if you lose thousands of dollars because someone else throws a game. She wasn't the only one affected. Her opponent got a free point and her loss affected the tiebreak score of everyone she played. You said that most people don't care, but people in the pro chess world do care. No offense, but your responses seem to demonstrate no knowledge of top level chess
P.S. NASCAR drivers don't wreck on purpose
But chess is trying to get more viewers and more sponsors and top level chess is trying to become more mainstream. Most high level events sell tickets and that's part of how they make money. Ticket buyers don't want to see thrown games. It also makes chess look less reputable/professional. Your arguments seem more applicable to amateur or casual chess, not professional chess. The top players play professionally and they may lose out on a prize because someone throws a game. It's not trivial if you lose thousands of dollars because someone else throws a game. She wasn't the only one affected. Her opponent got a free point and her loss affected the tiebreak score of everyone she played. You said that most people don't care, but people in the pro chess world do care. No offense, but your responses seem to demonstrate no knowledge of top level chess
P.S. NASCAR drivers don't wreck on purpose
People who play chess may be trying to get more viewers or sponsors, but it's chess, a game, not something most people will ever be interested in. As far as it appearing less reputable, again, almost no one cares. Ask the first 20 people you see tomorrow. And yes, it's trivial. Maybe not to the couple people directly involved, but in the grand scheme of things, a non event.
PS: I didnt say NASCAR drivers wreck on purpose. I said you never know who is going to wreck. Never knowing what's going to happen is what makes competition exciting to watch. Her antics were probably childish and futile, but if anyone was watching it, at least they got the unexpected.
IfPatriotGames: I don't think this is a self-correcting problem. The reason is that chess is trying to get into the mainstream and make money by selling tickets and having people watch online. Having people throw games hurts you in the eyes of the public. How would you feel if you went to a tennis match (like tubebender wrote) and one player threw the match and lost in a few minutes? You'd probably feel cheated. Throwing games hurts the sport as a whole and the finances of the people who compete. It hurts chess develop and grow economically.
In this case, she was already out of the prize money (I believe, although perhaps she could have won one of the lower women's prizes) but it affects ratings, the opponent, and possible tiebreaks, which can depend on the results of lower boards and the performance rating of previous opponents. She may not be invited to future events, but as the top women's player she'll qualify for all of those events by rating and given how many organizers want to look "inclusive" nowadays, I'm sure she'll get invites as the top active female player. I think a fine would be appropriate. She did violate the rules by attempting to lose the game and probably by bringing the game of chess into disrepute.