Candidates Tournament | Round 14 | Alireza and Vidit

[Ben Z]

Hello,

I attended round 14 of the Candidates Tournament in Toronto. It was nice. The accoustics in the ante-room were rough. Big congrats to Gukesh and Tan.

So I'm just wondering whether anyone would agree that the Alireza/Vidit game result was prearranged? Because I believe it is more likely than not that the game result was prearranged.

To be clear my belief that the game result was prearranged is based on nothing but a mathamatical fact that their game's result did not affect who could win first place and that their game was played/drawn in just minutes (e.g. circumstantial evidence). And to be clear I also know of no real evidence that the game tesult was prearranged e.g. communication between the players regarding a prearranged result; or how the players answered the question (if the question was asked by the arbiter) whether the game result was prearranged.

That said I do appreciate that the result of their game could have no bearing on who would win the tournament, so it could be said that if Vidit and Alireza prearranged the result of their game, nothing important was disturbed. But another way to look at this is that it is collision. And collusion is not ever appropriate because it violates principles of fair play. And cheaters suck.

I suppose that there is some unwritten rule that the arbiter or FIDE or the organizer has discretion to allow for prearranged results if nothing important is affected. If it is indeed the case that there is such discretion, maybe it should be actually stated somewhere.

Better still, if it is "no big deal to prearrange a result," then the practice should be completely allowed with the provision that both players publically disclose and admit that the game result will be prearranged.

Then again, maybe it's just another case of who cares.

Then again, maybe just because it's been that way
since the beginning of chess tournaments, it should stay that way.

Then again, maybe the people who bought a ticket to see professional chess played in-person instead bought a ticket to professional wrestling.

Then again, maybe a prearranged result is like mercy-ing a team when the score is lopsided.

Then again, maybe preaaranged results are the first love of gangsters and gamblers.

Then again, maybe Fischer was wrong about the Soviet chess machine in the 60s.

Then again, maybe Fischer was right about the Soviet chess machine in the 60s.

Then again, who cares...

[Stephen Wright]

I was ready to say something about your comments about possible collusion but I see said comments have disappeared. I will only note that this "game" has become a standard way of obtaining a peaceful result with a minimum of effort; Nakamura alone has played it at least eighty times, with both colours. Personally I feel it comes close to falling into the category of bringing "the game of chess into disrepute" but that's just me.

[Gordon Taylor]

There are multiple examples of openings you can use to make a draw and not offend the authorities. Here is one example used multiple times by the Kosintseva sisters (Nadezhda and Tatiana):

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.O-O Bg4 6.h3 h5 7.c3 Qd3 8.hxg4 hxg4 9.Nxe5 Bd6 10.Nxd3 Bxh2+ 11.Kh1 Bg3+ with perpetual check.

You can repeat this a few times to satisfy the arbiters, but all the formalities have been observed, so no good reason to deny the draw. We may suspect collusion but cannot prove it. For the Firouzja - Vidit game there was probably no collusion in my opinion. When there is really nothing to play for the players will sit down, play a few moves, and if black plays the Berlin defence they will both know about this forcing line leading to a a three-fold repetition. They will share a glance, one player draws breath, looks up and away, and the decision is made, without a word being spoken.

[Alex Ferreira]

Hi,

Certainly doesn't look great. I don't know if the word "collusion" would apply here anyway. My understanding of collusion is that there'd be some ill-intent to benefit some party. There was no gain here, nor beneficiary.
As others commented, there are ways players use to "get away with it legally", sort of.

The Candidates was a qualification tournament for the World Championship Cycle. Players qualified their way through it. Not the same as an invitational, this event was going to have 1 winner and 7 losers.
But... organizers do remember these things, and take notes. Nobody likes to have players come out and play a game like that. Or market the event, sell tickets for such a lame showing.

Organizers will be aware, that when there was nothing at stake / up for personal gain:
- Firouzja and Vidit wanted to go home early, played out a quick draw
- Abasov and Pragg wanted to play chess, and continued to deliver

Sadly, the Abasov vs Pragg got practically no coverage.


Alex F.