PDA

View Full Version : Handshake to be enforced by FIDE



Kevin Bonham
01-07-2007, 05:43 PM
Thanks to Ian Rogers and TCG for this news:

http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1391


Behavioural norms of players in chess events

Having discussed several recent cases in different chess tournaments where the attitude of players toward their opponent or officials, journalists etc. was not acceptable under conventional social behaviour, the FIDE Presidential Board –at the suggestion of President Ilyumzhinov- decided on setting up strict rules regarding such behaviour.

Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.

Regarding a more comprehensive set of behavioural and ethical norms to be followed, FIDE Ethics Commission and the Arbiter’s Council are to elaborate guidelines for the players. The guidelines will be published on the FIDE website.

My initial view is that I'm not at all convinced of the merits of this change. I believe that the ability of a player to refuse the conventional handshake is a useful way for a player to demonstrate strong disapproval of their opponent's behaviour in other situations, in cases where refusing to play at all might otherwise be the only way to register that level of disgust. At least if players refuse to shake hands for whatever reason they are still playing the game.

Seems like FIDE want to blame everyone but themselves for the aggro in the K-T match when they played a major part in its escalation by giving it credibility it didn't deserve.

Garvinator
01-07-2007, 05:51 PM
From an anonymous poster on Susan Polgar's blog about this same issue:


which completely robs the handshake of any meaning

Seems a fair call to me from this anon.

Basil
01-07-2007, 06:58 PM
Recently, I had an opportunity to play a game against a person whose behaviour in chess has been substandard for some years. I have had the displeasure of his acquaintance for the last 12 months or so.

In the months prior to the referred game, that individual transgressed many personal boundaries, the most memorable being an occasion where he signed up 'anonymously' on a bulletin board I operate elsewhere. He took care not only to make a defamatory post, but importantly cite his profession in his forum profile as 'Cerebral Palsy Sufferer', a reference to my son.

I did not shake this man's hand - he had the good grace (or common sense) not to offer it; in fact he didn't once look me in the eyes (another excellent move). For the reasons already mentioned by others above, this specific handshake initiative from FIDE is folly, yet well-intentioned.

However I am in favour of chess being played at the highest of respect levels, and this is the reason, I uttered the genuine "Good game ____" to the vile wretch prior to making my first move. It was an effort, but it was the right thing to do.

Sunshine
01-07-2007, 07:50 PM
Of course the governing body should enforce the rules of common decency - particularly if the leading players fail to demonstrate them.

This will stop the game slipping into the gutter.

Miguel
01-07-2007, 09:48 PM
Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent [...] will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.
Seems like silly micromanagement to me.

CameronD
01-07-2007, 09:48 PM
conventional rules of their society

What does this mean. The society that its held in, the society the players are from, and where are these conventional rules published. Nice gray area to introduce. I'm sure there's greetings/hand movements in one society that are offensive in another.

Kevin Bonham
01-07-2007, 09:57 PM
conventional rules of their society

I think this is just put in to cover players from societies where a handshake is not a conventional greeting and something else (like bowing) might be a more natural gesture for that person.

But yes, it could be read as all sorts of things!

CameronD
01-07-2007, 10:08 PM
I'd see a wave of the hand as meeting whats above.
Some would be offended by that and others would think its totally acceptable. what about age barriers, whats socially acceptable to a 15 year old would not be to a 70 year old. Customs change depending on which era a person grew up in.

Ian Rout
02-07-2007, 11:54 AM
I think this is mainly about high profile events - I don't see how it is going to be enforced in low level tournaments. It's too vague. What is "their society" - for instance, in some religious groups it might be inappropriate for a male and female to touch, even though in the broader society in which they live it's acceptable. What arbiter or organiser is going to wrestle with the interpretation, so long as players are not being actively insulting or aggressive, or distracting their opponent or other players.

In any case in my society it's normal and in accordance with the conventional rules of the society for people who detest each not to shake hands.

Garvinator
02-07-2007, 01:50 PM
I wonder if fide are aware of the law of unintended consequences.

While this new 'rule' seems to have the right intention, it could lead to some unintended consequences which make the situation worse.

If there was no 'must handshake' rule, then two players who dont like each other can just get on with the game.

But with this rule, the following could realistically occur:

Player A doesnt want to shake his/her opponent hand, Player B also doesnt want to shake Player A's hand but is aware of the rule so informs that arbiter that Player A wont shake hands.

This then has the situation of either Player A has to do something he/she doesnt really want to do, or cause an argument.

Either way, Player B has already received an advantage.

Intuition
02-07-2007, 02:11 PM
This rule is insane :wall:

bergil
02-07-2007, 02:47 PM
This rule is insane :wall:Reminds me of the writing down your move before you play it rule; only a monkey would enforce it and forfeit a player! :P

Basil
02-07-2007, 02:57 PM
Reminds me of the writing down your move before you play it rule; only a monkey would enforce it and forfeit a player! :P
Ha! Welcome to the zoo. The (International) Brisbane Chess Club has a 3 warning system and then OUT she goes :lol:

Garvinator
02-07-2007, 06:35 PM
Ha! Welcome to the zoo. The (International) Brisbane Chess Club has a 3 warning system and then OUT she goes :lol:
2 warnings and then your gone.

Bill Gletsos
02-07-2007, 07:13 PM
I think this is mainly about high profile events - I don't see how it is going to be enforced in low level tournaments.As it is currently worded it only applies "in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match".
As such it doesnt even seem to apply to FIDE rated events unless they are FIDE tournaments.

Axiom
02-07-2007, 08:16 PM
is handshaking a legal obligation in other pursuits, like tennis, for instance?

ER
02-07-2007, 08:43 PM
is handshaking a legal obligation in other pursuits, like tennis, for instance?

Some times they even jump over the net to do it! Can you imagine that happenind in Chess?
Cheers and good luck!

Garvinator
02-07-2007, 08:53 PM
Some times they even jump over the net to do it! Can you imagine that happenind in Chess?
Cheers and good luck!
jumping over a net in chess :hmm: :uhoh:

Basil
02-07-2007, 08:59 PM
jumping over a net in chess :hmm: :uhoh:
a mating net

ER
02-07-2007, 09:03 PM
a mating net

thanks for helping the old man son! :) By the way your new signiature is spot on! :) Although I think that you are a little harsh on your statement about "anyone of any standing"! ;)
Cheers and good luck! :)

ER
02-07-2007, 09:04 PM
jumping over a net in chess :hmm: :uhoh:

look at the heading of my posting Garvin!!! :whistle:
Cheers and good luck! :)

CameronD
02-07-2007, 09:24 PM
I dont think its required in tennis. I remember games where a player has refused to shake his opponents or umpires hand, dont think any action was taken against the player.

Intuition
03-07-2007, 09:41 AM
I dont think its required in tennis. I remember games where a player has refused to shake his opponents or umpires hand, dont think any action was taken against the player.

Can you imagine...'Federer loses wimbeldon by handshake forfeit'..lol :D

zigzag
04-07-2007, 01:15 PM
Can you imagine...'Federer loses wimbeldon by handshake forfeit'..lol :D

Can you imagine what would happen if Mark Latham took up tournament chess? :lol:

Phil Bourke
04-07-2007, 02:19 PM
Can you imagine what would happen if Mark Latham took up tournament chess? :lol:
There would be a chess book that we would all have to read :)

Igor_Goldenberg
04-07-2007, 02:25 PM
Some players wear gloves. Will they be required to take the glove off for handshake? If they don't have to take it off, am I still obliged to shake hands with them?
Do I have to give palm for the handshake or just the finger? (I am aware of all the jokes that can be made from this sentence:D )
Personally I never refused to shake hands with with people I may found contemptible and I also view refusal to shake hands before and after the game a very rude behavior, but making it compulsory goes way too far.

Trent Parker
04-07-2007, 03:55 PM
Campbelltown Chess Club would like to announce a new addition to their ranks:

Former leader of the Opposition Mark Latham!!!!

Just kidding :D


O0oOoOoOoh I got a situation:

Duggan is to play [Alex] in a match

Duggans running late. [Alex] is sitting at the table and starts his clock makes his move

Duggan approaches the table walks away from the table:

"Mr Arbiter, Mr Arbiter, [Alex] wouldnt shake my hand. Can you forfeit him?"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Kevin Bonham
20-01-2008, 11:35 PM
First victim: Topalov's second, Ivan Cheparinov. Short today won the following positional masterpiece:

1.e4 c5 1-0

(see there chilluns, I always told you the Sicilian was rubbish.)

Aaron Guthrie
20-01-2008, 11:41 PM
First victim: Topalov's second, Ivan Cheparinov. Short today won the following positional masterpiece:

1.e4 c5 1-0

(see there chilluns, I always told you the Sicilian was rubbish.)Clearly if he intended to play c5, he would not have instantly resigned. And clearly if he meant to play something else, it would have been c6. Also clearly, he must have been overwhelmed by the shame of even considering such a move, and thus, his resignation.

Garvinator
20-01-2008, 11:50 PM
KB: what are you talking about?

Capablanca-Fan
20-01-2008, 11:50 PM
2 warnings and then your gone.
Analogous to the chess rule that should properly be called a draw by twofold repetition, so the position appears three times?

Capablanca-Fan
20-01-2008, 11:52 PM
Seems like silly micromanagement to me.
Of course, the "small laws" that G.K. Chesterton warned us about.

Kevin Bonham
20-01-2008, 11:53 PM
KB: what are you talking about?

Cheparinov has forfeited to Short at Corus for refusing to shake his hand at the start of the game. After the opening moves were played and Cheparinov had twice refused to shake Short's hand, Short complained to the arbiters. The arbiters were initially unsure what to do but checked the rules which required Cheparinov to lose the game. Cheparinov at this stage was willing to shake hands but the rules say that refusal to shake equals immediate loss of game.

Wonder if it will be rated. :hmm:

Capablanca-Fan
20-01-2008, 11:53 PM
And what if a villain happens to be much physically stronger, and uses the handshake to cause pain?

Garvinator
20-01-2008, 11:58 PM
From www.coruschess.com


News - Ivan Cheparinov forfeited over handshake (English)

January 20 2008 - Corus Chess Press

At the start of round 8 of the Corus Chess Tournament, Ivan Cheparinov, top seed in Grandmaster Group B, lost his game against Nigel Short for refusing to shake the Brit’s hand. According to the FIDE Handbook:

“Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.”

Chief Arbiter Thomas van Beekum was a witness when Cheparinov refused Short’s offer to shake hands twice and the Bulgarian’s game was declared a loss as a result.

Basil
21-01-2008, 12:03 AM
And what if a villain happens to be much physically stronger, and uses the handshake to cause pain?
Or even a creature so vile and revolting* outside of chess with whom one has the misfortune to be paired against?

*Vileness and revulsion proven and personalised to members of one's family but the present legal system prevents a solid and possibly enduring smack in the head as retribution.

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 12:04 AM
OK, so do we know that Cheparinov was asked to shake hands by the arbiter?

CameronD
21-01-2008, 12:09 AM
Cheparinov has forfeited to Short at Corus for refusing to shake his hand at the start of the game. After the opening moves were played and Cheparinov had twice refused to shake Short's hand, Short complained to the arbiters. The arbiters were initially unsure what to do but checked the rules which required Cheparinov to lose the game. Cheparinov at this stage was willing to shake hands but the rules say that refusal to shake equals immediate loss of game.

Wonder if it will be rated. :hmm:


How can it, the game never started as DQ event occured before the first move

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 12:12 AM
How can it, the game never started as DQ event occured before the first move

That could be so, or it could be like this: Short offers handshake, Cheparinov declines, Short moves, Cheparinov replies, Short attempts handshake again.

Garvinator
21-01-2008, 12:16 AM
That could be so, or it could be like this: Short offers handshake, Cheparinov declines, Short moves, Cheparinov replies, Short attempts handshake again.
I would imagine that more details will come out in the next few hours/days.

Of course now Short should contact Kamsky to be his second for Kamsky's match with Topalov ;) ;) ;) :P

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 12:21 AM
Of course now Short should contact Kamsky to be his second for Kamsky's match with Topalov ;) ;) ;) :P

:lol:

Yes please. :cool:

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 12:29 AM
Bill mentions that the letter in this link has been cited in this case:

http://rules.chessdom.com/anna-rudolf-case

(For those unfamiliar with the Rudolf case, she performed extremely well in a tournament and was accused, without remotely adequate evidence, of computer-cheating.)

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 12:43 AM
Or even a creature so vile and revolting* outside of chess with whom one has the misfortune to be paired against?

*Vileness and revulsion proven and personalised to members of one's family but the present legal system prevents a solid and possibly enduring smack in the head as retribution.

What an utter churl, a fellow of basest imagining, for bringing in innocent family members :evil:

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 12:48 AM
Bill has pointed out that the rule is in the FIDE Grand Prix rules:

http://fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=DD10

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 12:53 AM
How can it, the game never started as DQ event occured before the first move

Actually the opponent was absent from the board at the start of the game so Short played 1.e4, Cheparinov showed up and played 1...c5, then it happened.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4397

Garvinator
21-01-2008, 01:02 AM
Actually the opponent was absent from the board at the start of the game so Short played 1.e4, Cheparinov showed up and played 1...c5, then it happened.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4397
I see at the bottom that Short is saying the Kramnik is part of the appeals committee :whistle: :whistle:

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 01:37 AM
Actually the opponent was absent from the board at the start of the game so Short played 1.e4, Cheparinov showed up and played 1...c5, then it happened.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4397
If that report is correct, then the forfeit was against the new rule anyway:


As regular readers of my reports will know, I usually try to start with a light-hearted digression. Today, however, I have to report something far more serious, indeed, one of the most extraordinary episodes I have ever heard of, let alone witnessed, at an international chess tournament. It occurred in the B Group, where Britain’s Nigel Short is playing. Today he faced Ivan Cheparinov, with the white pieces. Short came to the board, and with his opponent absent, he played the move 1.e4, and walked away. A few minutes later, Cheparinov came to the board, sat down, and played 1…c5. As Short came over, and held out his hand for the traditional pre-game handshake, Cheparinov pointedly kept his head down over the board and his scoresheet. After a few moments, Short sat down, and waited for Cheparinov to raise his head. When he did so, Short again extended his hand, only for Cheparinov to shrug in refusal.

Short then stood up and approached the arbiter, pointing out that his opponent’s actions are a breach of FIDE rules, which prescribe an immediate forfeit as the penalty for refusing the handshake. The arbiter was not even aware of this rule, which was announced only recently. He was asked to check, and after going away to do so, he duly found it on the FIDE website. After consulting with Cheparinov, and explaining the situation, the arbiter told Short that Cheparinov was now prepared to shake hands after all. However, given that he had already twice refused to do so, and that Short’s equanimity had by now been totally destroyed, the latter insisted that the offence had already occurred, and that Cheparinov should be forfeited. “It was clearly a calculated insult”, said Short. The arbiter was forced to agree, and the official tournament record now shows the game Short-Cheparinov as having gone 1.e4 c5 1-0.

Compare the rule:


“Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.”

Chep did not refuse after being asked by the arbiter, so he should not have been forfeited. Can't these arbiters even read??

Garvinator
21-01-2008, 01:42 AM
If that report is correct, then the forfeit was against the new rule anyway:


As regular readers of my reports will know, I usually try to start with a light-hearted digression. Today, however, I have to report something far more serious, indeed, one of the most extraordinary episodes I have ever heard of, let alone witnessed, at an international chess tournament. It occurred in the B Group, where Britain’s Nigel Short is playing. Today he faced Ivan Cheparinov, with the white pieces. Short came to the board, and with his opponent absent, he played the move 1.e4, and walked away. A few minutes later, Cheparinov came to the board, sat down, and played 1…c5. As Short came over, and held out his hand for the traditional pre-game handshake, Cheparinov pointedly kept his head down over the board and his scoresheet. After a few moments, Short sat down, and waited for Cheparinov to raise his head. When he did so, Short again extended his hand, only for Cheparinov to shrug in refusal.

Short then stood up and approached the arbiter, pointing out that his opponent’s actions are a breach of FIDE rules, which prescribe an immediate forfeit as the penalty for refusing the handshake. The arbiter was not even aware of this rule, which was announced only recently. He was asked to check, and after going away to do so, he duly found it on the FIDE website. After consulting with Cheparinov, and explaining the situation, the arbiter told Short that Cheparinov was now prepared to shake hands after all. However, given that he had already twice refused to do so, and that Short’s equanimity had by now been totally destroyed, the latter insisted that the offence had already occurred, and that Cheparinov should be forfeited. “It was clearly a calculated insult”, said Short. The arbiter was forced to agree, and the official tournament record now shows the game Short-Cheparinov as having gone 1.e4 c5 1-0.

Compare the rule:


“Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.”

Chep did not refuse after being asked by the arbiter, so he should not have been forfeited. Can't these arbiters even read??
I would have also been bolding: The arbiter was not even aware of this rule.

Bill Gletsos
21-01-2008, 02:05 AM
Official appeal by Ivan Cheparinov as posted by Mig on his blog.

To the Appeal Committee January 20th,2008
Corus chess tournament 2008

Mr.Adams, Mr.Kramnik, Mrs.Polgar

APPEAL

Dear All,

Today during the start of the round the following accident happened.

Mr. Cheparinov refused to shake hands with Mr. Short before the game. The reason was: some time ago in one of his interviews Mr. Short insulted him and our team gravelly.

After that, Mr.Short complained to the Chief Arbiter of the Tournament, who without previous warning immediately decide to put defeat to Mr. Cheparinov.

According to the rules of FIDE, this decision is illegal. There is a recommendation from the FIDE Presidential Board in Tallin June 2007 about the Behavioural norms of players in chess events: http://fide.com/news.asp?id=1391

First of all, this is only recommendation, not an official FIDE rule because this recommendation must be approved on FIDE congress during the chess Olympiad in Dresden, November 2008.

Even more, if the Arbiter would like to follow the recommendation of the FIDE PB in Tallin, he made a big mistake, because obviously he did not even check carefully the recommendation. Before to defeat the player he must ask him officially on the stage, that if he does not shake hand again he will be defeated.

Instead of this, the Chief Arbiter call Mr.Cheparinov to the private room and told him that he lost the game. Mr.Cheparinov replay ['replied', no doubt. -Mig], that according to the recommendation (!) of FIDE he should ask him to shake hands ,before to take any decision. Even more, Mr.Cheparinov told him very clearly that if he oblige him to do this, he is ready to do it. Unexpectedly, the Arbiter did not pay any attention to his explanations and took the decision to defeat him.

We protest this illegal decision ,and kindly ask to replay the game in one of the following rest days.

Best regards, Silvio Danailov
Manager GM Ivan Cheparinov

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 02:26 AM
I would have also been bolding: The arbiter was not even aware of this rule.
As well as "before the game starts". The report clearly states that the game was in progress with 1. e4 c5. Does FIDE award IA titles by lottery now, just like recent FM titles?

Bill Gletsos
21-01-2008, 02:50 AM
As well as "before the game starts". The report clearly states that the game was in progress with 1. e4 c5. Does FIDE award IA titles by lottery now, just like recent FM titles?Cheparinov arrived late.

From Chessbase:

Today he faced Ivan Cheparinov, with the white pieces. Short came to the board, and with his opponent absent, he played the move 1.e4, and walked away. A few minutes later, Cheparinov came to the board, sat down, and played 1…c5. As Short came over, and held out his hand for the traditional pre-game handshake, Cheparinov pointedly kept his head down over the board and his scoresheet. After a few moments, Short sat down, and waited for Cheparinov to raise his head. When he did so, Short again extended his hand, only for Cheparinov to shrug in refusal.

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 07:57 AM
TWIC reports that Cheparinov won the appeal for a replay and Short says he will not play. The appeal committee was Krasenkow, Polgar and ...Kramnik! However, Cheparinov is required to make a "handwritten excuse" (apparently this means apology) for his behaviour.

Appeal committee decision here: http://www.coruschess.com/article.php?s=n157

If Cheparinov was indeed not warned then in my view the forfeit was excessive and the overturning of it on appeal is correct. It is a serious matter but loss of game is more than a little bit dubious when the Laws do not yet explicitly prescribe it as the penalty.

In the same situation as an arbiter I would have declared that Cheparinov intentionally and severely distracted Short and penalised him by taking, say, one hour from his clock and adding it to Short's. That would have given Nigel plenty of time to recover his equanimity. :lol:

Ian Rout
21-01-2008, 08:08 AM
Presumably Short was making the point that it's a silly rule, rather than being especially concerned that somebody doesn't like him.

Intuition
21-01-2008, 09:02 AM
no wonder chess players have a bad reputation :wall:

Ian Rout
21-01-2008, 09:21 AM
no wonder chess players have a bad reputation :wall:
Let's keep a bit of perspective. Is it worse than cricketers appealing for catches that clearly missed the bat or calling other players monkeys, tennis players abusing umpires, soccer players' diving and match fixing, cyclists and athletes taking steroids, AFL and Rugby League players' numerous incidents etc.

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 09:32 AM
Appeal committee decision here: http://www.coruschess.com/article.php?s=n157
This doesn't make it much easier as to the penalty. The rule says "loses", while the appeal says "forfeits", so what rating adjustment?


If Cheparinov was indeed not warned then in my view the forfeit was excessive and the overturning of it on appeal is correct. It is a serious matter but loss of game is more than a little bit dubious when the Laws do not yet explicitly prescribe it as the penalty.
It seems that Chep was warned and then complied, and it was Short who insisted on a forfeit, and the arbiter, who had just learned of the new rule, didn't read the parenthesis properly and was bullied into forfeiting.


In the same situation as an arbiter I would have declared that Cheparinov intentionally and severely distracted Short and penalised him by taking, say, one hour from his clock and adding it to Short's. That would have given Nigel plenty of time to recover his equanimity. :lol:
Maybe less time (say 15 min) but seems reasonable overall.

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 09:35 AM
no wonder chess players have a bad reputation :wall:
No wonder some chess players make unsupported assertions. :wall:

Intuition
21-01-2008, 09:54 AM
No wonder some chess players make unsupported assertions. :wall:

step into the real world jono :) most people think chessplayers are nutty and they would be right 75% of the time from my experience

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 11:16 AM
step into the real world jono :) most people think chessplayers are nutty and they would be right 75% of the time from my experience
In my experience, chessplayers are given a lot of respect for intelligence, probably too much.

Any bad reputation has nothing to do with refusal to shake hands, and a lot to do with regarding the late Bobby Fischer as normative rather than anomalous.

eclectic
21-01-2008, 11:35 AM
if fide were really concerned about pre game courtesy the option of turning up for a game up to an hour late would have been eliminated long ago

pax
21-01-2008, 12:35 PM
I see that Cheparinov is required to make an "excuse" to short in writing for his refusal. This will be very interesting. I still reckon Nige will quit the tournament in a huff.

Bill Gletsos
21-01-2008, 01:12 PM
The following wording from the Appeals Committee is interesting as it would seem to put a spanner in the works to Danailov's earlier statement that Topalov would not shake hands with Kramnik.


In order to avoid any conflicts in future we suggest the following procedure in similar cases: if one of the players deliberately refuses to shake his/her opponent’s offered hand at the start of the game, the arbiter shall officially warn him/her and demand him/her to do so. Only if the player again refuses to shake hand, he/she automatically forfeits the game.

Garvinator
21-01-2008, 04:44 PM
What happens if Short or the appeals committee thinks that Ivan's letter is a load of bullocks?

CameronD
21-01-2008, 07:17 PM
What happens if Short or the appeals committee thinks that Ivan's letter is a load of bullocks?

I'm sure he wont write the letter...

... his management team will in an appropiate manner with his signature attached.

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 07:30 PM
I see that Cheparinov is required to make an "excuse" to short in writing for his refusal. This will be very interesting. I still reckon Nige will quit the tournament in a huff.
Then he could be penalized himself. The rule, crass as it is, is crystal clear that he is NOT entitled to win by forfeit since Chep didn't refuse the arbiter's direction.

pax
21-01-2008, 07:39 PM
Then he could be penalized himself. The rule, crass as it is, is crystal clear that he is NOT entitled to win by forfeit since Chep didn't refuse the arbiter's direction.
Yes, I totally agree. All of this just goes to show how foolish it was of Short to try to win on a technicality in such a petty fashion.

MichaelBaron
21-01-2008, 08:15 PM
I see that Cheparinov is required to make an "excuse" to short in writing for his refusal. This will be very interesting. I still reckon Nige will quit the tournament in a huff.

If Nigel quits, it will be his problem...not Cheparinov's.

While Cheparinov's behaviour is not perfect and he is no angel...i guess in the light of some of Short's recent articles about "toiletgate" it can be understood.


Furthemore, it was Short who insisted he should be given a full point for handshake refusal. Is that what we call good sportsmanship?

Capablanca-Fan
21-01-2008, 08:34 PM
If Nigel quits, it will be his problem...not Cheparinov's.
Yeah. Those who live by the technicality will die by the technicality.


While Cheparinov's behaviour is not perfect and he is no angel...i guess in the light of some of Short's recent articles about "toiletgate" it can be understood.
Which ones are these?

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2008, 11:19 PM
Yes, I totally agree. All of this just goes to show how foolish it was of Short to try to win on a technicality in such a petty fashion.

Agreed; he overplayed his hand and would have been better off trying to get the arbiter to penalise Cheparinov more lightly, or reprimand him and delay the start of the game, or something like that.

I think the Danailov camp have now realised they can exploit FIDE's cluelessness by creating these situations that result in incorrect arbiting decisions.

bergil
21-01-2008, 11:26 PM
The Set up
M1Gb4lJeXqI
Short
0YI-zIo4AzQ
Danailov
0Rsm3fWvRQ8
The Letter

To the Organizing Committee Corus chess tournament

CC : Appeal Committee

STATEMENT

Dear All,

I accept the decision of the Appeal Committee and on the name of chess ,the chess fans and showing respect to the opinion of my colleagues would like to state the following:

I apologize officially to Mr. Short, to the Organizing Committee and the sponsors of Corus chess tournament.

I am ready to play the game today at 13’30 and will shake hands with Mr.Short according to the decision of the Appeal Committee.

Best regards,

Ivan Cheparinov

Adamski
21-01-2008, 11:47 PM
The Set up
First video suggests a new theory - the camera-man was at fault!!

Trent Parker
22-01-2008, 12:03 AM
Muffled in background "cant handshake, Cant play chess". lol

Ian Rout
22-01-2008, 08:36 AM
Yes, I totally agree. All of this just goes to show how foolish it was of Short to try to win on a technicality in such a petty fashion.
I don't think this is necessarily right. He had to make an immediate decision and by taking an uncompromising stand he achieves three things, other than a win. He makes the point that if these rules are brought in they have to be enforced, though he didn't exactly get the wording of the rule right. He prevents the tactic achieving its aim of gaining an advantage by creating a scene. And he nips in the bud any similar performances in the future.

Moreover by claiming the win he keeps his options open. If he decides later that he was wrong he can offer to play the game; if he plays on and loses that's the end of it.

On the other hand there can be no argument that he was right to back down and play after the Appeals Committee decision. Legally the arbiter was wrong to forfeit Cheparinov; and by not carrying on with it Short ensures that he is not seen as being in the wrong and the the ire of the organisers and sponsors will be mainly directed at Cheparinov for instigating the incident.

Adamski
22-01-2008, 12:31 PM
See http://closetgrandmaster.blogspot.com/.

Thanks Arosar.

Basil
22-01-2008, 01:28 PM
He had to make an immediate decision and by taking an uncompromising stand he achieves three things, other than a win. He makes the point that if these rules are brought in they have to be enforced, though he didn't exactly get the wording of the rule right. He prevents the tactic achieving its aim of gaining an advantage by creating a scene. And he nips in the bud any similar performances in the future.

Moreover by claiming the win he keeps his options open. If he decides later that he was wrong he can offer to play the game; if he plays on and loses that's the end of it.

On the other hand there can be no argument that he was right to back down and play after the Appeals Committee decision. Legally the arbiter was wrong to forfeit Cheparinov; and by not carrying on with it Short ensures that he is not seen as being in the wrong and the the ire of the organisers and sponsors will be mainly directed at Cheparinov for instigating the incident.
Good post.

eclectic
22-01-2008, 02:40 PM
i'm waiting for online chess sites to have as a condition of playing on them that you must provide images of your hands which are then transformed into holographs or 3d animation for pre and/or post match handshaking purposes :rolleyes: :eek:

1min_grandmaster
22-01-2008, 03:07 PM
Although Cheparinov decided to shake hands after being informed by the arbiter that refusal would lose the game, I believe that Short was insisting that Cheparinov be forfeited anyway because his initial refusals to shake hands (twice) was a deliberate insult to his opponent.

Once again, quoting the rule:

“Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.”

So I don't think it's so clear that Short insisting the forfeit is incorrect. The only question is can the refusal of shaking hands when being offered it can be considered an insult.

Capablanca-Fan
22-01-2008, 03:49 PM
Although Cheparinov decided to shake hands after being informed by the arbiter that refusal would lose the game, I believe that Short was insisting that Cheparinov be forfeited anyway because his initial refusals to shake hands (twice) was a deliberate insult to his opponent.

Once again, quoting the rule:

“Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.”

So I don't think it's so clear that Short insisting the forfeit is incorrect. The only question is can the refusal of shaking hands when being offered it can be considered an insult.
But the appeals committee clearly treated the "insults" clause as something separate from the refusal to shake hands, taking the "or" as an exclusive disjunction. So they had no choice but to apply the parenthesis to the refusal to handshake, i.e. Chep had agreed to comply with the arbiters request, so doesn't fulfil the criteria for a loss, and he had not otherwise insulted Short.

Garvinator
22-01-2008, 04:26 PM
I think it is a poorly worded rule.

bergil
22-01-2008, 05:15 PM
White:Nigel Short (2645)
Black: Ivan Cheparinov (2713)
Result: 1-0

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8.O-O O-O 9.Be3 Be6 10.Nd5 Nbd7 11.Qd3 Bxd5 12.exd5 Rc8 13.c4 a5 14.Kh1 Re8 15.Rad1 Bf8 16.Nd2 g6 17.b3 Bg7 18.a3 h5 19.f3 b6 20.b4 axb4 21.axb4 e4 22.fxe4 Ne5 23.Qb3 Neg4 24.Bg5 Qd7 25.Qb1 Ra8 26.h3 Nh7 27.Bf4 Ne5 28.c5 bxc5 29.bxc5 Reb8 30.Qc2 dxc5 31.Qxc5 Rc8 32.Qe3 Nf8 33.Qg3 Qe8 34.Bb5 Qe7 35.Nf3 Nxf3 36.Qxf3 Rc3 37.Rd3 Raa3 38.e5 Rxd3 39.Bxd3 Nd7 40.e6 fxe6 41.Qe2 Nf8 42.Bc4 Rc3 43.dxe6 Rxc4 44.Qxc4 Qxe6 45.Qxe6+ Nxe6 46.Be3 Nd4 47.Kg1 Nf5 48.Bc5 Be5 49.Re1 Bc3 50.Re4 Kf7 51.Kf2 Bf6 52.Ra4 Ke6 53.Ke2 Kf7 54.Bf2 Ke6 55.Kd3 Kf7 56.Ra7+ Ke6 57.Ra6+ Kf7 58.Ke4 Bb2 59.Rc6 Bg7 60.Be1 Bf6 61.Bc3 Bh4 62.Be5 Bg5 63.Ra6 Bh4 64.Bf4 Bf6 65.g4 hxg4 66.hxg4 Ng7 67.Be5 Be7 68.Kd5 Ne8 69.Ra7 Nf6+ 70.Bxf6 Kxf6 71.g5+ Kf7 72.Rxe7+

Capablanca-Fan
22-01-2008, 05:26 PM
White:Nigel Short (2645)
Black: Ivan Cheparinov (2713)
Result: 1-0

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8.O-O O-O 9.Be3 Be6 10.Nd5 Nbd7 11.Qd3 Bxd5 12.exd5 Rc8 13.c4 a5 14.Kh1 Re8 15.Rad1 Bf8 16.Nd2 g6 17.b3 Bg7 18.a3 h5 19.f3 b6 20.b4 axb4 21.axb4 e4 22.fxe4 Ne5 23.Qb3 Neg4 24.Bg5 Qd7 25.Qb1 Ra8 26.h3 Nh7 27.Bf4 Ne5 28.c5 bxc5 29.bxc5 Reb8 30.Qc2 dxc5 31.Qxc5 Rc8 32.Qe3 Nf8 33.Qg3 Qe8 34.Bb5 Qe7 35.Nf3 Nxf3 36.Qxf3 Rc3 37.Rd3 Raa3 38.e5 Rxd3 39.Bxd3 Nd7 40.e6 fxe6 41.Qe2 Nf8 42.Bc4 Rc3 43.dxe6 Rxc4 44.Qxc4 Qxe6 45.Qxe6+ Nxe6 46.Be3 Nd4 47.Kg1 Nf5 48.Bc5 Be5 49.Re1 Bc3 50.Re4 Kf7 51.Kf2 Bf6 52.Ra4 Ke6 53.Ke2 Kf7 54.Bf2 Ke6 55.Kd3 Kf7 56.Ra7+ Ke6 57.Ra6+ Kf7 58.Ke4 Bb2 59.Rc6 Bg7 60.Be1 Bf6 61.Bc3 Bh4 62.Be5 Bg5 63.Ra6 Bh4 64.Bf4 Bf6 65.g4 hxg4 66.hxg4 Ng7 67.Be5 Be7 68.Kd5 Ne8 69.Ra7 Nf6+ 70.Bxf6 Kxf6 71.g5+ Kf7 72.Rxe7+
Looks very smartly played by Short. Did Chep shake hands upon resignation? ;):doh: :rolleyes:

Bill Gletsos
22-01-2008, 05:32 PM
Looks very smartly played by Short. Did Chep shake hands upon resignation? ;):doh: :rolleyes:It is reported that he did.

bergil
22-01-2008, 05:42 PM
It is reported that he did.
The First Handshake
zbIheG-mztI

Kevin Bonham
22-01-2008, 06:00 PM
Any player who does not shake hands with the opponent (or greets the opponent in a normal social manner in accordance with the conventional rules of their society) before the game starts in a FIDE tournament or during a FIDE match (and does not do it after being asked to do so by the arbiter) or deliberately insults his/her opponent or the officials of the event, will immediately and finally lose the relevant game.

So what happens when both players don't want to shake hands? 0-0 forfeit? In such a situation what is the test of whether each player is individually responsible? If one player holds his hand out a quarter of the way to his opponent and the other doesn't grasp it, has he discharged his handshake obligations? What if they both hold their hands out but miss each other?

There is speculation that neither Kramnik nor Topalov will offer their hand today and that they may instead be fined for not shaking hands. More money FIDE doesn't deserve when its own mismanagement of the conflict between those two players has only served to exacerbate it.

It's a silly rule and should be abolished. If the concern is that not shaking hands will lead to worse violations then punish the players harshly for those worse violations when they occur. If the concern is that refusing to shake hands at the start of the game alone is some kind of big deal, get over it. :hand:

Bill Gletsos
22-01-2008, 06:09 PM
There is speculation that neither Kramnik nor Topalov will offer their hand today and that they may instead be fined for not shaking hands.Such speculation seems to being fueled by comments by Danailov, rather than anything being said by the Krannik camp.
Also fining is not an option here as the Appeals Committee in its decision made it clear that for the remainder of the Corus event players must shake hands if directed to do so by the arbiter or face being forfeited.


In order to avoid any conflicts in future we suggest the following procedure in similar cases: if one of the players deliberately refuses to shake his/her opponent’s offered hand at the start of the game, the arbiter shall officially warn him/her and demand him/her to do so. Only if the player again refuses to shake hand, he/she automatically forfeits the game.

Kevin Bonham
22-01-2008, 07:38 PM
Such speculation seems to being fueled by comments by Danailov, rather than anything being said by the Krannik camp.

Yes. I suspect Kramnik will offer a handshake, despite the speculation. Kramnik tends to be very rule-abiding, and furthermore if he does not offer a handshake he somewhat contradicts his own stance as part of the appeals committee.


Also fining is not an option here as the Appeals Committee in its decision made it clear that for the remainder of the Corus event players must shake hands if directed to do so by the arbiter or face being forfeited.

The Appeals Committee comment explicitly refers only to a situation where an offered handshake is refused. This is not necessarily the same as a situation where both players do not offer to shake hands:

In order to avoid any conflicts in future we suggest the following procedure in similar cases: if one of the players deliberately refuses to shake his/her opponent’s offered hand at the start of the game, the arbiter shall officially warn him/her and demand him/her to do so. Only if the player again refuses to shake hand, he/she automatically forfeits the game. (my bold)

Adamski
22-01-2008, 07:52 PM
The First Handshake
Gotta say the photographers get pretty close to the action in some top Super-GM events. Its enough to put a Super-GM off, maybe even forget to shake hands!

Bill Gletsos
22-01-2008, 08:51 PM
Moments after the game Nigel was heard to say: "There is a God. And he is not Bulgarian!"

Basil
22-01-2008, 09:16 PM
Nigel's flag was much better looking than Chep's.

bergil
22-01-2008, 09:33 PM
Nigel's flag was much better looking than Chep's.Can't say the same about his head! :P

Sunshine
24-01-2008, 03:56 PM
I agree with the rule and wished more areas would set minimum standards of sportsmanship and civility/respect for its combatants.

Standards drop too quickly if the elite level cannot respect the game and their opponents.

Basil
15-06-2008, 10:09 PM
• Are there any here who did believe that handshakes should be mandatory, but have now changed their mind?
• Are there any here who did believe that handshakes should be mandatory, but retain their position?

eclectic
15-06-2008, 10:16 PM
i would prefer an exchange of polite head bows rather than a handshake simply because i have this strange idea that the latter due to its physical contact dissipates the combative tension one likes to build up before the game