Should one wake a sleeping chess player?
Before we come to the op-eds let us take a look at the current standings in
the tournament:
Rk. |
Name |
Ti |
FED |
Rtg |
Pts. |
TB1 |
TB2 |
TB3 |
1 |
Le Quang Liem |
GM |
VIE |
2602 |
6.0 |
30.0 |
27.0 |
23.5 |
2 |
Sandipan Chanda |
GM |
IND |
2611 |
5.5 |
33.0 |
30.0 |
26.0 |
3 |
Laznicka Viktor |
GM |
CZE |
2634 |
5.5 |
26.5 |
24.5 |
22.0 |
4 |
Filippov Anton |
GM |
UZB |
2595 |
5.5 |
22.5 |
21.0 |
18.5 |
5.0 |
Safarli Eltaj |
GM |
AZE |
2587 |
5.0 |
30.0 |
27.0 |
23.0 |
6 |
Khusnutdinov Rustam |
GM |
KAZ |
2506 |
5.0 |
30.0 |
26.5 |
23.0 |
7 |
Adhiban B |
IM |
IND |
2490 |
5.0 |
29.0 |
26.5 |
23.0 |
8 |
Mchedlishvili Mikheil |
GM |
GEO |
2613 |
5.0 |
28.5 |
26.0 |
22.5 |
9 |
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar |
GM |
AZE |
2721 |
5.0 |
28.5 |
25.5 |
22.0 |
10 |
Laxman R R |
IM |
IND |
2486 |
5.0 |
28.0 |
26.0 |
22.5 |
11 |
Satyapragyan Swayangsu |
IM |
IND |
2439 |
5.0 |
28.0 |
25.0 |
21.5 |
12 |
Mamedov Rauf |
GM |
AZE |
2626 |
5.0 |
28.0 |
24.5 |
20.5 |
13 |
Negi Parimarjan |
GM |
IND |
2615 |
5.0 |
26.5 |
24.0 |
21.0 |
14 |
Aleksandrov Aleksej |
GM |
BLR |
2639 |
5.0 |
26.0 |
24.0 |
21.0 |
15 |
Markos Jan |
GM |
SVK |
2565 |
5.0 |
26.0 |
23.0 |
20.0 |
16 |
Postny Evgeny |
GM |
ISR |
2651 |
5.0 |
24.5 |
22.0 |
19.5 |
17 |
Short Nigel D |
GM |
ENG |
2706 |
4.5 |
31.5 |
28.5 |
25.0 |
18 |
Ganguly Surya Shekhar |
GM |
IND |
2634 |
4.5 |
31.5 |
28.5 |
24.5 |
|
Panchanathan Magesh C. |
GM |
IND |
2532 |
4.5 |
31.5 |
28.5 |
24.5 |
20 |
Himanshu Sharma |
IM |
IND |
2471 |
4.5 |
30.5 |
28.0 |
24.5 |
21 |
Konguvel Ponnuswamy |
IM |
IND |
2440 |
4.5 |
30.0 |
27.5 |
24.0 |
22 |
Gagunashvili Merab |
GM |
GEO |
2564 |
4.5 |
28.0 |
25.5 |
22.0 |
23 |
Grover Sahaj |
FM |
IND |
2288 |
4.5 |
27.5 |
24.5 |
21.0 |
24 |
Sundararajan Kidambi |
GM |
IND |
2516 |
4.5 |
24.5 |
23.0 |
20.5 |
25 |
Geetha Narayanan Gopal |
GM |
IND |
2598 |
4.5 |
24.5 |
22.0 |
19.5 |
: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
Tkachiev Vladislav |
GM |
FRA |
2669 |
4.0 |
23.0 |
20.5 |
18.0 |
Nigel Short: "An example must be made!"
Professor R. Anantharam, is a most charming man, but it is hard to understand
how his actions during the infamous "Inebriated Tkachiev Game" adhere
to the Laws of Chess. In his attempt
at self exculpation, he quotes the two laws (Article 13.6 : "The arbiter
shall refrain from informing a player that his opponent has made a move, or
that he has failed to press the clock." and Article 13.7 "Spectators
and players in other games are not to speak about or otherwise interfere in
a game.") that show EXACTLY why nobody should have been allowed to interfere
with Tkachiev's slumbers. Professor Anantharam's tenous justification apparently
rests not with the Laws of Chess themselves, but apparently to an answer given
by Geurt Gijjsen to a correspondent Dave Burtonshaw on an Internet website in
2000.
The comparison is bogus. The Tkachiev case differs from the Burtonshaw case
mentioned by in one crucial respect: Tkachiev had not merely fallen asleep,
but was deeply drunk. This is, of course, the nub of the matter. Unlike Burtonshaw's
poor opponent who inadvertently dozed off (and who incidentally was snoring
– unlike Tkachiev – disturbing other players and therfeore needed
to be woken up), the Champion of France was in a self-induced, near-comatose
state. Short of actually vomiting on his opponent, it is hard to think of a
more flagrant breach Article 12.1 of the FIDE Rules:
Article 12: The conduct of the players
12.1 "The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess
into disrepute."
The (extraordinarily wide-ranging) punishments for such a transgression are:
a) warning
b) increasing the remaining time of the opponent
c) reducing the remaining time of the offending player
d) declaring the game to be lost
e) reducing the points scored in the game by the offending party
f) increasing the points scored in the game by the opponent to the maximum
available for that game
g) expulsion from the event.
In view of the seriousness of the breach, (g) was the most appropriate response.
Indeed why does such a provision exist if not for extreme cases like this? On
a number of occasions, over the years, I have seen players who have arrived
to a game somewhat worse for wear, but I have never seen anyone even close to
being as paralytic at a chessboard as Tkachiev. The reaction to his condition
was one of amusement to a few, but indignation and disgust to a great many others.
His behaviour set a shocking example to the many children present. It is to
see how we expect to see chess treated seriously as a sport (and, naturally,
the incident generated world-wide publicity) if firm action is not taken in
a case like this.
Professor Anantharam mentions that when Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (an Appeals
Committee member) was taking a stroll he mentioned the subject to him and that
Mamedyarov himself volunteered to wake up Tkachiev. This somehow gives the impression
that the action was casual, spur-of-the-moment one. Not so: Professor Anantharam
spoke to at least one other member of the Appeals Committee during the round
to seek support for his position. Lest it be forgotten these people were busy
playing and did not have the rulebook to hand. To the best of my knowledge,
no one was informed that interfering with the game was against the FIDE Rules
(Articles 13.6 and 13.7 above). Furthermore not only Mamedyarov, but various
other people also tried to wake Tkachiev. This was done, if not explicitly at
the Chief Arbiter's behest, then at least with his tacit approval.
As Professor Anantharam rightly argued, there was, in fact, a good argument
for waking Tkachiev up, as the commotion caused by his methylated somnolence
was disturbing to overyone. However this should have been done to forfeit him
and to remove him from the playing venue, NOT to render him assistance.
Lastly, on a personal note: I have on many occasions enjoyed Vladislav Tkachiev's
entertaining company. He is vivacious and witty when still sober. What he chooses
to do in the company of friends in his own room is, of course, his own business.
However when he brings the game into disrepute, causing widespread public embarrassment,
as he most certainly did on this occasion, an example must be made.
Nigel Short
Reader feedback
Kevin Cotreau, Nashua, NH USA
While this is clearly a bit of a gray area, I could not disagree more with the
arbiter. I think that it is clear that here you can have two or three rules
that are conflicting, so what to do? Well, I would say that the more definitive
are the following rules, and therefore should be followed strictly:
Article 13.6 says: "The arbiter shall refrain from informing a player
that his opponent has made a move, or that he has failed to press the clock."
Article 13.7 says: "Spectators and players in other games are not to
speak about or otherwise interfere in a game."
While it does not specifically mention sleeping, the general sense of these
rules would be clearly the same with regards to sleeping: You don't wake him
up since that is helping that player, and that is forbidden. If the arbiter
wishes to impose the following rule from the Laws of Chess
Article 13.2: "The arbiter shall act in the best interest of the competition.
He should ensure that a good playing environment is maintained and that the
players are not disturbed"
then he should consider forfeiting the player outright, especially if the player
is making noise, such as snoring, or is falling out of the chair. If he does
not wish to go this far, and the player is quietly sleeping, then just let him
sleep and let his flag fall if the player does not wake up. In any case, you
do not wake him up since that is outside help. I think that most tournament
players would believe that waking a player is the more serious violation of
the rules.
While I disagree with the arbiter's reasoning, since the opponent requested
that the GM be woken up, I am not as inclined to judge so harshly, although
it would still be a breach of the rules, since they do not exempt help from
your opponent.
Trevor Davies, Glasgow, Scotland
As an arbiter, I would always wake a sleeping player. How am I to tell that
the player is merely intoxicated (itself a life-threatening condition in extreme
circumstances) or tired and not gravely ill? The laws of common-sense always
take precedence over the Laws of Chess.
Paul McGaugh, Las Vegas, NV USA
I think GM Tkachiev should be congratulated for raising the spirits of the game.
Géraud Moulas, Toulouse, France
I don't want to apologize Vladimir Tkachiev but to remind people of the circumstances.
One day before the opening of the open, Tkachiev became French Champion ahead
of Vachier-Lagrave and Fressinet, who were both ranked higher. He probably spent
the night in the plane (let's think about the jetlag). Two days after his arrival,
he is alone, totally jetlagged and he learns that his Elo increased by 18 points,
thanks to the French Championship. In this context, we all know now that Mister
Vlad enjoys (local?) alcohol after receiving such good news.
Milen Petrov, Varna, Bulgaria
My personal opinion as FIDE IA and having experience facing such cases in my
practice in local tournaments is that the Chief Arbiter acted in a best way.
What is missing from other opinions is the FIDE Laws of Chess Preface where
it is stated:
"Preface: The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible
situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative
questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws,
it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations
which are discussed in the Laws. The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary
competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule
might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him
from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special
factors."
So my opinion is that the arbiters of the competitions acted according to
the Rules and in the best way of interests of the competition and the players.
Previous articles on the subject

|
The Tkachiev incident: the arbiter replies
06.09.2009 – At the Kolkata
Grandmaster Open one of the top seeds, GM Vladislav Tkachiev, appeared
for his round three game in an intoxicated state, fell asleep at the
board and was ultimately declared the loser. In our previous report
we published a letter from one of the participants criticising the arbiter
for waking the grandmaster. Is that a breach of the rules? Not
so, says R. Anantharam. |

|
Kolkata Open: inebriated grandmaster forfeits game
05.09.2009 – An incident
at this grandmaster tournament in India has made it to the national
and now the international broadsheets: one of the top seeds, GM Vladislav
Tkachiev, who recently won the French Championship, appeared for his
round three game in an intoxicated state, fell asleep a number of times
at the board and was ultimately declared the loser. Details.
|