I didn't say he shouldn't do anything. He had seven options to penalize So, and he chose poorly. The only worse choice was expelling him from the event.
What else could he have done? He already warned him. Write something on the chalkboard like Bart Simpson?
"What else could he have done?"
1. Increase the remaining time of the opponent
2. Reduce the remaining time of the offending player
3. Increase the points scored in the game by the opponent to the maximum available for that game
4. Reduce the points scored in the game by the offending person
5. Asses a fine
"1. Increase the remaining time of the opponent"
Benign.
"2. Reduce the remaining time of the offending player"
Benign.
If you play with less time, go for a draw not a win. So already figured this crap out.
"3. Increase the points scored in the game by the opponent to the maximum available for that game"
That would involve a major overhaul in the way we view chess.
"maximum available" is not much, 1 point, but if you want to go 3 pointers skeeters we could make a dealio. Get rid of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, ok?
"4. Reduce the points scored in the game by the offending person"
If they offended, they didn't score. Lame trick question/answer mofo crappio reply.
"5. Asses a fine"
Then it gets political. Who has more money?
Follow the rules and you won't be punished. Maybe retards can't understand this.
Yup forfeiting games is too harsh. They don't play for hobby. The arbiter should use his common sense, and read what he has written. If it doesn't look like cheating, let it go.
If you are not sure, ask somebody else. They need to catch up to the present day.
Maybe they should have diaries like in the Brady Bunch. Each player gets a diary to write private notes. Arbiters and opponents are not allowed to see.
Well, Shamkir Gashimov Memorial is coming up and it is going to be quite impressive. Let's see how So does. No need to ask "So" until So is done, rightey o mate?
"was using another piece of paper instead,which shows that he did comply."
So, if I smoke a cigarette in a public place and a cop tells me it is prohibited, I can pull out a cigar instead?
Actually, that might be a viable defense. The question is whether a cigar is a form of cigarette. I don't think that the answer is clear. There was a famous case where a local ordinance prohibited "vehicles" from entering a park, and the local police tried to ticket someone who pushed a baby carriage in the park, arguing that the baby carriage was a "vehicle." Technically, under a broad reading of "vehicle," the baby carriage is a vehicle, but does this really fit the intent of the legislation.
Similarly, was the rule intended to prevent So or other players from writing encouraging words to themselves? I would assert that So has good arguments that the rule is ambiguous on its face and the arbiter's interpretation of the rule is inconsistent with the purpose/intent of the rule.
Smoking is prohibited, so pulling out a cigar doesn't help.
Note taking is prohibited, so writing the same notes on a napkin or another sheet of paper after being told to stop doesn't help either.
Yes, So was cheating. He broke the rules. The arbiter went too far overboard with his initial threat to forfeit So if he did it again and got stuck. Here's hoping that both So and Rich will learn from this and it won't ever happen again.
It's surprising that players are allowed to use their hands to move the pieces in the modern game,
given how distracting hand movements can be to the current crop of pros.
So what? Are you expecting chess players to move the pieces with penises? And, how would the female chess players do? They are not blessed with this one important tool.
The only real way to be sure that an opponent wont cheat by covertly putting pieces on wrong squares when they make a move, is to request moves to a tournament arbiter and have them move the pieces for you and your opponent. Even if the opponent isn't going to cheat and move pieces around, the possibility of this happening is extremely distracting and makes it hard to focus. Adjusting pieces should be handled by the arbiter for similar anti-cheating and distraction reasons.
So broke the rules but I dont think what he was doing is cheating . If one believes all rule violations are cheating then they might say So was cheating but I am not one that believes all rule violations are cheating , but cheating is a rules violation .
So what? Are you expecting chess players to move the pieces with penises? And, how would the female chess players do? They are not blessed with this one important tool.
I'm sure you meant to say "cursed" with...especially ones so damn unruly it takes both hands and prehensile feet to...nevermind, no sense getting too personal.
Quamvis, you might suggest that to FIDE if you think it's a good idea.
Your sarcasm detection system may also need upgrading!
Hello, doppelgangsterII, I meant to say "blessed" instead of "cursed" because the rewards are worth much the trouble.
Dear frankiegoestovegas, cats are foods for the tiger albeit they share 95.6% of DNA. If you did not detect the sarcasm in post, you are just a kitty.
I agree with Kasparov. The rules should be changed.