There have been tensions between the FIDE organization and top players like Carlsen since the latter have been promoting an alternative chess organization around Freestyle chess (aka Chesss960), which has slightly different rules.
I.e. this is less about "dress code enforcement" and it is more about "Carlsen is fed up with the FIDE organization in general".
vikingerik 21 days ago [-]
Just to clarify on the facts, as gathered from reddit threads:
He wasn't trying to protest the dress code or make a scene, it wasn't on his mind at all. He had been out for an appearance with a sponsor during a break, then came back to the venue for the next round, and didn't notice that he was wearing jeans and it didn't cross his mind that that would be a violation.
Then he was told to change, and there wasn't enough time for him to go do that before the upcoming round. He thought he was told he could do it either after that round or for the next day, but then was told he would be excluded from that round, and at that point he said f--- it and withdrew entirely.
The controversy was about exactly how the penalty is imposed. The rule is a fine for the first violation and disqualification for multiple. It wasn't clear if his appearance for the day would count as one violation (so he could just incur the fine and wear correct clothing tomorrow), or if each round would be a separate violation. It also wasn't clear if he could play while in violation or would be excluded from each round until he changed. Precedent from other events wasn't clear for either of these.
The headline of "disqualified" is wrong and did not happen - he chose to withdraw.
QuantumGood 20 days ago [-]
Additional info:
• He chose not to contest it, for which there is a clear protocol, and simply withdrew.
• Based on two previous well-publicized incidents, it DID cross his mind that it would be a violation.
QuantumGood 20 days ago [-]
... and now FIDE has chosen to allow jeans in the remainder of the event. And it appears Magnus will play.
"The principle is simple: it is still required to follow the official dress-code, but elegant minor deviations (that may, in particular, include appropriate jeans matching the jacket) are allowed."
QuantumGood 19 days ago [-]
A key comment from Magnus:
"They were saying that jeans were generally not allowed. If it's generally not allowed, that must mean that there must be exceptions. And if I, with a decent attempt at an outfit apart from that, didn't meet that exception, I don't see what would, frankly."
epgui 21 days ago [-]
The only part of this that is totally implausible is the notion that Magnus wouldn't be super familiar with the rules.
I'm not saying I agree with the rule or the specific way it was applied... But Magnus definitely knows the rules.
Edit: for people downvoting... Can you please explain how the world's best chess player of all times wouldn't be familiar with FIDE rules? How is that even plausible? All of the players who compete at these events know the rules.
elif 21 days ago [-]
The rules themselves aren't clear. In fact the rules say that jeans themselves are allowed. The rule is about having frayed worn, or light portions on jeans.
Magnus pants were fine. He is absolutely correct that they were singling him out and you can look back to many recent tournaments to see the clear double standard.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
The rules say no such thing, and seem pretty clear to me.
4.10.1. The dress code is strictly observed for the
tournament and all the official events and press
conferences.
4.10.1.1. Dress code for men.
Shoes: Oxfords, loafers, leather shoes or boots, classic
suite shoes.
Dark-coloured pants: black, navy, grey, beige, brown, in
any case unicoloured. No bright colours.
Long-sleeved light-coloured (white, light blue, beige,
brown, etc.), blue or black shirt, in any case
unicoloured. No bright colours.
Dark-coloured jacket, waistcoat or cardigan with
buttons: black, navy, grey, beige, brown, in any case
unicoloured. No bright colours.
Jacket, waistcoat or cardigan may be taken off during
play.
Tie is not mandatory.
[...]
4.10.1.3. No players with t-shirts, jeans, shorts,
sneakers, baseball caps or inappropriate dress are allowed
in the playing area. Any requests to wear national or
traditional dress shall be approved by FIDE Supervisor.
[...]
4.10.9. If a player fails to fulfil his/her duties listed
in Articles 4.10.1, 4.10.4 – 4.10.8, he/she can be
penalised by FIDE Council as follows: 5% of his/her prize
money shall be forfeited to the Organiser and a further 5%
to FIDE for each breach. In cases of serious misconduct,
the player may be disqualified from the event.
So it says nothing about jeans at all? Magnus was wearing unicoloured navy jeans at the time, which fall within the rules you quoted.
Refusing to match him with a competitor because of this, effectively preventing him to compete, was disproportionate regardless.
Edit: I see you added a section that specifically disallows jeans after I posted my comment. We could have saved some time.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
I thought it was clear from the context and phrasing that "dark-coloured pants" excluded jeans, but in case there was any doubt:
4.10.1.3. No players with t-shirts, jeans, shorts,
sneakers, baseball caps or inappropriate dress are allowed
in the playing area. Any requests to wear national or
traditional dress shall be approved by FIDE Supervisor.
To a Norwegian reader, blue jeans are definitely included in "pants".
It's entirely possible to read 4.10.1.1, conclude that blue jeans are fine, and then skim over 4.10.1.3.
However the Carlsens read it, after reading it, years will have passed. Carlsen didn't dress like he did after a studious read of the rules. He just put on some nice clothes that were no different from what he usually wears at tournaments.
Except he forgot a belt. A proper organiser would have offered to lend him one.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
I would assume (but can't know for sure, of course) that Magnus receives the rules before every event, and that he probably has people to help prepare/brief him on anything he needs to know.
He's not a regular participant, Magnus is almost an institution of his own.
Either way, it's literally his job to follow the FIDE rules (which is unusual but true), and he's the best in the world at his job.
---
> "It's entirely possible to read 4.10.1.1, conclude that blue jeans are fine, and then skim over 4.10.1.3."
In all fairness I originally did the same, so I hear ya. But I'm not a pro at this.
wongarsu 21 days ago [-]
When you attend a conference, how much time do you dedicate to studying the terms of the event?
RandomThoughts3 21 days ago [-]
> He's not a regular participant, Magnus is almost an institution of his own.
He is also very much no in agreement with FIDE (a tradition for chess champions - see Fischer, Kasparov). And to be honest FIDE is on FIFA level when it comes to being dodgy as an organisation so it’s hardly surprising.
sdwr 21 days ago [-]
Presumably after years of coming to these events in dress pants and jackets, around other players all wearing suits, he would know the rules without having to read them. It's not like they changed the rules just to catch him out.
This is some combination of
- "I'm above the law"
- teenage rebellion
- protest against the system
jasonjmcghee 20 days ago [-]
He's in his 30s
david-gpu 21 days ago [-]
Thank you, I had missed the section about jeans. I stand corrected.
rasz 19 days ago [-]
>The dress code is strictly observed for the
tournament and all the official events and press
conferences.
Dvorkovich is putins puppet, covering for Medvedev when putin was pretending to take a break.
HarHarVeryFunny 20 days ago [-]
It's interesting how much simpler the dress code for women is.
4. 10. 1. 2. Dress code for women.
Classic shoes.
Trouser or skirt suit or dress, preferably unicoloured, but not mandatory
GuB-42 20 days ago [-]
Women in general have much more freedom in the way they can dress. There are also higher expectations and more unwritten rules.
HarHarVeryFunny 20 days ago [-]
Agreed, but on the surface of it one might think that given the more varied ways that women might dress, they need more rather than less written rules for women vs men to control the way they actually do dress (at FIDE events).
So, the logical conclusion is perhaps, no surprise, that FIDE don't really want to enforce a strict dress code, but rather want to promote the sport, and that translates differently into dress codes (or lack of them) for men vs women...
addicted 21 days ago [-]
Honestly, it doesn’t matter whether the rules are clear or not. FIDE isn’t a rule enforcement agency.
FIDE is an agency that exists to promote and develop chess.
Magnus Carlsen is the biggest draw in the chess world by far.
A minor dress code violation should have been dealt with a fine as the rules very much allow for the benefit of the game.
Also, I don’t think there’s a single player who would complain about that (well, other than Kramnik, but Kramnik complains that spectators breathe too loud and that’s cheating).
And then FIDE should have stepped back and thought about the recent growth in the popularity of chess, since the pandemic and thanks to the work of the likes of Magnus and Gothamchess and should have reconsidered the strict dress code rules in the first place.
stevage 21 days ago [-]
Not true at all. I've seen Hikaru talk about how he doesn't usually read the rules of tournaments and has been surprised by them.
KennyBlanken 21 days ago [-]
I have no sympathy for a professional player who can't be bothered, or thinks it's beneath them, to read the rules of the tournaments they're participating in. It is literally your job. I'm guessing these guys are sponsored, get income from speaking appearances, tutoring, and so on. If you're getting paid for what you do, you have no right to complain about having to read tournament rules. At the same time, it behooves tournament organizers to standardize on rules, or at least summarize how their rules differ from some standard.
It makes me wonder if he's been enabled by tournament organizers being lax about enforcement of the rules for top players, when it should be the opposite - those with the most experience should be held to the highest standards because they should know better.
Women athletes who are forced to wear what amounts to underwear when the men aren't - they have a valid complaint about uniform standards. This sounds like a bunch of whiny silver-spooned brats.
ddtaylor 21 days ago [-]
> Women athletes who are forced to wear what amounts to underwear when the men aren't - they have a valid complaint about uniform standards.
For what it's worth that was the same organization - FIDE - that has made those terrible choices in the past as well.
stevage 21 days ago [-]
Magnus Carlsen is extremely wealthy due to part ownership in large chess sites. He does not need income from these tournaments.
Everyone is saying it's literally their job to know the rules, but for players like Hikaru and Magnus, this is not their job in any meaningful sense, it's a hobby.
Also, Magnus isn't lookirg for sympathy, he's just saying why he can't be bothered complying with these regulations, there's not that much in it for him.
8note 21 days ago [-]
hikaru's comment is that fide run stuff is not at all how chess players make money, if they make money.
for the most part theyre paying a lot for non-playimg middlemen to be in the way
ddtaylor 21 days ago [-]
> It is literally your job.
It's not his occupation in some ways. He makes a lot more money from every other venture, so there is not a major economic incentive for him. Likewise, he works with creators and platforms that pull in big numbers of engaged viewers.
emchammer 20 days ago [-]
> Women athletes who are forced to wear what amounts to underwear when the men aren't
What
epgui 21 days ago [-]
I would find that a bit surprising. Do you happen to remember where you heard him say this?
michaelt 21 days ago [-]
Sounds plausible enough to me.
I don’t read the license agreement of every bit of software or the privacy policy of every website, after all.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
I think this is more akin to reading the rules of a formal assembly before participating (eg.: a senate or a formal committee). These guys do chess events for a living. :shrug:
pdpi 21 days ago [-]
Exactly. They play chess for a living.
You need to care about the bits around the actual chess playing, but regulations for these things are overwhelmingly made of "play nice, be reasonable, don't be a dick" rules. If you try to play by those high-level rules, apologise if you break the nitty gritty of the low-level rules and fix things at the earliest opportunity, it shouldn't be a big issue. Also, things like dress code can easily be a "not an actual rule, just convention" sort of affair.
michaelt 21 days ago [-]
I’ve competed in many running races, and I’m not sure if they even have written rules. Presumably they do, but I’ve never read them. You don’t need to, everyone knows what a race is.
Likewise, I use GPL software daily, for a living - doesn’t mean I’ve ever read the license.
sampullman 21 days ago [-]
It depends on the race, sometimes there are rules that might surprise you. One that I recently signed up for has pretty specific gear requirements for 10k/21k/42k/60k. Trail races can have strict rules as well, like the type of compass and nutrients you need.
hnlmorg 21 days ago [-]
It’s very common for sports professionals not to have memorised the rules for every aspect of their sport.
They’re professionals because they understand the game and are in the top 1% of people who play it. Not because they are the best at memorising rules. The latter group are people
Who become umpires/referees instead.
anticensor 18 days ago [-]
One can be a professional champion and referee and professional referee, all at the same time, just not in the same game event.
17 days ago [-]
hnlmorg 17 days ago [-]
Sure, but I feel you’re missing the point with that comment.
wongarsu 21 days ago [-]
I get paid to attend conferences for my job, I rarely read the detailed rules of the conference and venue. I assume they all say common sense stuff and are mostly the same. It's no different for chess players
munch117 21 days ago [-]
I remember Hikaru saying such things too, on livestreams (twitch or kick). More than once.
thelock85 21 days ago [-]
Agreed. I’m just thinking about NFL players who have crazy wardrobe leeway in and out of games, but somehow adhere to the minutiae of game time uniform codes. Not because of the insane attention they put into their craft, but because of clear financial or competitive penalties for doing otherwise (that impacts people and time invested in them).
eszed 21 days ago [-]
That's because the team's equipment managers lay all of their gear out for them. I doubt any player could confidently answer a minutae-level question about the league's uniform policy.
FrustratedMonky 20 days ago [-]
Not totally true. All NFL teams have dress codes. Some of those players with flamboyant outfits actually pay fines every week. They justify the fines as part of the cost of promoting an individual brand over the team brand or image.
funyun5 21 days ago [-]
[dead]
wirrbel 21 days ago [-]
[flagged]
beepbopboopp 21 days ago [-]
How are you going to invent his intentions and then judge him for your inventions? This message board deserves better, the people deserve better.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
While I don't think it's fair to presume anything about his intentions, it's totally fair to presume he is aware of the rules. He's the world's best chess player of all time, and it's not his first FIDE event.
astrange 21 days ago [-]
> He's the world's best chess player of all time
This one is hard to tell because not all of them have been alive at the same time. Morphy was really, really good, but in the 1850s.
Currently there's Ivanchuk, who is good enough to beat anyone but has no stamina so can't win tournaments reliably enough to be world champion.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
There’s no way Morphy at his peak would beat Magnus at his peak (and the same goes for any of the old champions)— The way chess is played today is very different. Morphy would have needed to start from scratch and re-learn the game today from a young age to have any chance… But then he wouldn’t be the same Morphy.
gambiting 21 days ago [-]
Or maybe Magnus wouldn't be able to cope with how Morphy plays the game and would lose. Both of them were/are used to how the game was played in their time.
8note 21 days ago [-]
magnus likely has every game morphy ever played, along with all of his contemporaries memorized, along with at every position in each game, what a strong engine would prefer as a move. morphy would probably be an IM by todays standards, without modernizing
codr7 21 days ago [-]
I think it's totally fair to ask the question, given that he seems to be involved in starting a competing organization.
bbarnett 21 days ago [-]
I don't think the prior was a valid tact, but aren't people here inventing reasons for the jeans ban, and then judging the org for that too?
elif 21 days ago [-]
This is fully unsubstantiated and very unlikely supposition for anyone following the chess scene
monkey_monkey 21 days ago [-]
Given that he removed himself from the World Chess Championship, the thought that he needs a pretext to pull out of lesser competitions is ludicrous.
cjbprime 21 days ago [-]
Given the other ways he's currently in conflict in FIDE, the idea is that he finds being disqualified in this way strategically useful, and a way to garner public sentiment that delegitimizes them.
david-gpu 21 days ago [-]
Magnus didn't make FIDE enforce a particularly asinine interpretation of their own rules. If they wanted to, they could have issued a clarification or rectification in the 24 hours after the event, but they haven't.
Both parties could have handled this much better.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
> "a particularly asinine interpretation of their own rules"
It's pretty black and white.
4.10.1.3. No players with t-shirts, jeans, shorts,
sneakers, baseball caps or inappropriate dress are allowed
in the playing area. Any requests to wear national or
traditional dress shall be approved by FIDE Supervisor.
Thank you! I stand corrected. I had missed that portion of your quote.
epgui 21 days ago [-]
I apologize for twisting the knife but-- the proper thing to do would have been to research the rules at the source, not to make up stuff or repeat things from third parties.
Wish I had found that section earlier, but I'm less familiar with the chess regulations so it took me a bit to assemble all of the essential parts.
Dylan16807 21 days ago [-]
> the proper thing to do would have been to research the rules at the source, not to make up stuff or repeat things from third parties.
When you're the third party and they trusted your quoting skills, that criticism is pretty weak.
david-gpu 21 days ago [-]
> I apologize for twisting the knife but-- the proper thing to do would have been to research the rules at the source, not to make up stuff or repeat things from third parties.
Well, you are the one who posted the quote, which I used as the basis for my comment. I thought I had read it twice over, and saw no reference to jeans, hence my question. Not statement, question. I did not make anything up.
Did you by any chance add the relevant section of the rules to your comment after I asked a question? The proper thing to do would have been to quote the relevant portion of the rules, instead of adding that later.
So, no. Apologies not accepted. Sorry.
21 days ago [-]
yuvalr1 21 days ago [-]
[flagged]
veidr 21 days ago [-]
Facts are facts, in the same way rocks are rocks.
You can gather them from anywhere they exist. There might be places where it is easier to gather facts than Reddit.
But wherever you get purported facts, it's hard to know whether they are merely claims, or actual facts. Most of us do indeed short-circuit our evaluation of claims when we trust the source, and although this sometimes causes us to wrongly believe false claims are facts, I think it's probably a good optimization on balance.
Nevertheless, "who should we believe?" remains one of the most fundamental questions of human existence. The tremendous energy required to confirm the factuality of even a trivial claim makes me agree with what I think is your premise — the quoted poster was making a highly dubious assertion of "facts".
But I think s/facts/claims/ would suffice to fix it.
bryanrasmussen 21 days ago [-]
Facts are things that actually happened, (knowledge of) facts can be gathered from Reddit threads but so can (knowledge of) bullshit that is erroneously thought to be facts.
on edit: note I do not say anything about verification, as that is a different thing as to whether or not a thing is a fact. Verification is about how sure the knowledge we have is a fact, but whether a fact is verified or not it remains a fact even if we do not know it is a fact.
RansomStark 21 days ago [-]
> Facts can only be gathered from reliable sources.
Source?
How do you define reliable?
Why is the authors identity important?
Facts don't change because you know the authors name, or trust the source, or like the person telling lies.
The idea that anonymous sources, or "untrusted" sources (for someones definition of trusted) cannot be the source of facts is gaining ground right now, and it needs to be pushed back on wherever it is seen.
It's a lazy Ad hominem, and it's down right dangerous.
I don't care if it's elected officials claiming Russian malinformation or a random chess thread, this is the hill I choose to die on.
sambeau 21 days ago [-]
The tradition of journalists using anonymous sources doesn’t mean they use anonymous sources, it means that they know who the source is, considers them reliable, but agrees not to name them. Usually they require multiple independent sources.
Unknown sources on the internet are usually not reliable. Anonymous sources should not be trusted, even when there are more than one saying the same thing. Bots and deliberate misinformation abound.
This is not a hill you should die on as it’s a hill that can greatly harm democratic society.
braincat31415 20 days ago [-]
That's one possibility. The other possibility is that the journalist mentions anonymous sources because he/she does not have any and is simply making stuff up.
sambeau 19 days ago [-]
That’s not journalism, that’s something else. There used to be fact checkers and editors used to have to verify the sources. I realise that the press barons no longer have any integrity, but it certainly used to be the rule.
andreasmetsala 20 days ago [-]
That’s why you verify the information from other sources.
braincat31415 20 days ago [-]
Thank you Sherlock for this invaluable suggestion.
Quite often this is simply not possible.
Next time I read "according to our anonymous sources in the FBI", I'll make sure I reach out to them for verification.
andreasmetsala 16 days ago [-]
If you can’t verify it then that’s a rumor. The world doesn’t owe you an explanation and you can’t be informed of everything.
19 days ago [-]
verisimi 21 days ago [-]
Is democratic society the hill to die on? Sources?
littlestymaar 21 days ago [-]
Idk about here in particular, but many reddit threads do in fact source their infos from reliable sources (unlike the HN post you're quoting)
underlogic 20 days ago [-]
Common sense says that wearing jeans has exactly nothing to do with playing chess. No speculation necessary
ttyprintk 20 days ago [-]
I need to know what brand Magnus was wearing. Jeans so cool they were banned from chess.
ekianjo 21 days ago [-]
> Facts can only be gathered from reliable sources.
Which mythical reliable sources? Humans are known to make errors regardless where they work.
21 days ago [-]
afro88 21 days ago [-]
This is silly. Surely a GM knows the rules. You can't say the facts are he wasn't doing it in protest or wasn't trying to make a scene.
The facts are he violated the dress code rule and then withdrew when it was enforced. He then mentioned his FIDE alternative in the ensuing press coverage.
Edit: also, on paper, him attending a sponsor event and then violating a rule at the competition because he "didn't have time to change" speaks volumes about his priorities.
sobellian 21 days ago [-]
The rules themselves are silly. Jeans get tagged as a violation but you can wear a jacket that looks as if it belongs in NASCAR (i.e. every square inch belongs to a sponsor) and that flies. Looking at pictures from the event, Magnus looked fine.
I find it weird to witness all the drama, pomp, and circumstance around the professional chess scene. It is a board game. I couldn't care less if they decided to play pool-side with swimming trunks and flip-flops.
Magnus' priorities are clearly that he's won everything up for grabs and plays for fun. He doesn't need to worry about money nor rules set by a sport federation stuck about half a century in the past. If only the rest of us were so free!
afro88 21 days ago [-]
I didn't say it, but I agree the rules are silly. However, they are what they are.
What I was saying is that I think Magnus was protesting, and doing it as a publicity stunt. He didn't forget anything. He didn't expect to be given a pass.
And FIDE also weren't being dicks by enforcing the current rules.
Attending corporate sponsorship events sounds soul crushing for someone so free, not fun. His priority is keeping his sponsors happy as he tries to fire up his new thing.
Retric 21 days ago [-]
Being a GM doesn’t automatically clarify vague rules. FIDE has some things saying it’s appropriate as long as there’s no holes, others that limit them. Really this comes down to the tournament rather than being a uniform rule to follow.
The arbiter didn’t clarify what was going on first saying it’s a 200$ fine which was meaningless to him, then latter saying you need to change or skip the next round.
mvdtnz 21 days ago [-]
What's "silly" is that such a dress code exists at all in 2024. What a bunch of uptight dorkwads.
conception 21 days ago [-]
Dress-codes can be about more than morality. In a game of intense concentration having distracting clothing could be a distraction. It’s not like every professional sport doesn’t have a dress code.
rudiksz 21 days ago [-]
Yes, a resourceful chess player could gain an upper hand over any opponent who might have a jeans fetish. And we can't have that, can we.
ttyprintk 20 days ago [-]
We don’t know if someone complained to an official about Magnus’ pants. We don’t know who gained the most from this.
barbazoo 21 days ago [-]
> It is important to promote a good and positive image of chess. Attire worn during all
phases of the championships and events should be in good taste and appropriate to
such a prestigious chess event.
Clean jeans are normal for “smart casual” now. And the dress code shouldn’t be so prescriptive. If you can pass as “smart casual” somewhere else, should be legal.
hosh 21 days ago [-]
And we'll see if FIDE will be seen as a preserver of traditional values or out of touch with the new generation of chess players.
fwn 21 days ago [-]
The primary impression that most of the contemporary world has of FIDE is probably one of corruption and power games that are completely detached from the game of chess.
There are people who think that it can be reformed and there are people who don't think that FIDE can improve, but certainly no one argues that its past proves its commitment to professionalism.
I'd say you'd be hard-pressed to find a worse performing global sport federation.
hosh 19 days ago [-]
That puts a different tone to their justification that the dress code is meant to promote professionalism and be a good representative for chess!
bookofjoe 14 days ago [-]
How do you spell FIFA?
Seattle3503 21 days ago [-]
Yes, there is a limit in both directions. We probably would agree with disqualification a playet he showed up completely nude.
21 days ago [-]
wordofx 21 days ago [-]
What a load of crap. If someone is distracted by a persons attire then they probably are going to be distracted by other players playing, people walking around, noise.
This is nothing more than a dumb outdated rule. He wore jeans. Not a fluorescent jump suit.
altairprime 21 days ago [-]
I love your approach to this. Perhaps his example will inspire this attitude becoming more prevalent in professional settings. I really hope so - it is definitely just as dumb as women have been saying it is for decades now.
bluGill 21 days ago [-]
In the case of Carlson that is true. Female players who wear low cut shirts stastically do much better against males than other females who dress more modest.
I can only assume everyone here is going off their own experience - "I don't know the dress code off the top of my head, so he must not as well".
I think Magnus is under a lot of slow-burn pressure. He's the best, but chess is a grindy game, it only takes one mistake to lose, everyone is watching him, there's nowhere to go but down, and he wants to have fun instead of practice his ass off.
A few tantrums might be a way of getting out of the competitive scene on his own terms.
RandomThoughts3 21 days ago [-]
Magnus left the competitive scene on his own terms years ago when he forfeited the world championship.
pelorat 21 days ago [-]
The rules are dumb. It's similar to the F1 situation where drivers are protesting the FIA.
Clothes has nothing to do to with chess.
ngcc_hk 21 days ago [-]
Based on what you said, IMHO may I say this is just a way to disqualifying hime, as he cannot enter into the round in time. That is effective disqualifying. Do not know details but losing a whole round ... can he recover even. Hence, I still ok with disqualifying.
I am not sure knowing the rule but really have jean ... it is crazy rule in any case.
cjbprime 21 days ago [-]
There was no time shortage -- he was asked to change with hours to do it and a hotel that was three minutes away. He said he was refusing "as a matter of principle", not that he didn't have enough time to change.
ANewFormation 22 days ago [-]
Exactly, many top players (probably all of them, but some only speak on such issues indirectly) feel FIDE is increasingly power tripping and somewhat out of touch with both the game and the interests of the players.
During Kasparov's era sentiment was similar and ultimately an entirely new players' association with their own world championship cycle was created. In the end they reunified with FIDE, but we're back on the trajectory for something like that to happen again.
I would wager alot that chess.com is strategizing behind the scenes about ways to become that replacement.
sourcepluck 21 days ago [-]
Does anyone have any links to political analysis of what's going on with chess.com, and its involvement in various scandals? I think your wager has something to it, in any case.
I think there'd be material there for an investigative journalist (if such a thing still exists to get out the old whiteboard and start figuring out connections and trying to piece together what might be going on behind the scenes. In any case, there's a lot of money involved.
sourcepluck 20 days ago [-]
Eww, an unclosed parenthesis. Horrid! The Lisp gods will not be happy. Excuse me, HN people!
manmal 20 days ago [-]
Why didn’t you edit it at the time?
sourcepluck 19 days ago [-]
Didn't re-read, of course
oreilles 21 days ago [-]
Chesss960 doesn't have "slightly different rules" than chess, it's a variant where all the pieces are randomnly positioned at the start of each match... It's basically playing a completely different game, and one the FIDE has absolutely zero interest in. Freestyle and FIDE organization are not in competition.
david-gpu 21 days ago [-]
> Chesss960 doesn't have "slightly different rules" than chess, it's a variant where all the pieces are randomnly positioned at the start of each match
For the 99% people who don't know what it is, I figured than "slightly different rules" was a reasonable summary.
> Freestyle and FIDE organization are not in competition.
You may want to ask yourself why FIDE is acting like they are indeed in competition. Perhaps they see something that you don't? Several top players getting behind Freestyle chess probably has something to do with it.
Scarblac 20 days ago [-]
FIDE has organized its own Chess 960 championships in the past, and organising championships is how FIDE makes money. It's direct competition.
(Freestyle chess, Chess 960 and Fischer Random are names for the same game)
clhodapp 21 days ago [-]
Given that the starting layout of the pieces and the movement rules of the pieces are the first things memorized by new chess players, that feels more than slightly different, even to this chess novice
8note 21 days ago [-]
you could compare it to say, Football, either football, and see that its almost the exact same game.
is there a game thats closer to fisher random than chess? checkers? pokemon the card game?
fisher random has the same pieces that move the same way, and at least half the pieces have same starting position as chess (the pawns)
if you compare to say, duck chess, only the opening of fisher random is different, and i imagine sometimes its the same? in duck chess, the openings, midgames, endgames and tactics are all different, whereas in fisher random, the midgames, endgames, and tactics are the same as in chess. fisher random is a superset of chess, and not by much.
engine chess is still considered chess, and similar to fisher random, the pieces and pawns start in different places than they do in chess
david-gpu 21 days ago [-]
The similarity is even more patently obvious given the fact that the top freestyle chess players are, unsurprisingly, the top chess players.
That is because the only rules that are updated are the position of the pieces in the back row, and castling.
It's a bit like painting with oils or acrylics.
8note 21 days ago [-]
i think its more similar than oils va acrylics. more like painint with acrylics either on a bleached canvas or an unbleached canvas
wongarsu 21 days ago [-]
Would a chess novice still recognize the difference in the midgame or endgame?
To me it seems like mostly the same game, just without the ability to study and memorize openings (the most tedious part of chess)
onion2k 21 days ago [-]
Freestyle and FIDE organization are not in competition.
They're competing for the time and attention of the players. If there are two competitions on the same day, players will have to choose which competition to play in. That in itself will determine where the sponsorship money goes unless they can agree not to put events on at the same time. They won't do that because it isn't in either group's interest.
sobriquet9 21 days ago [-]
If it is a completely different game, why are all strongest players the same?
swiftcoder 21 days ago [-]
FIDE did run a tournament in the variant as recently as 2019[1]
Chances are there also is a commercial angle to it. Magnus has commercial interests in https://playmagnusgroup.com/, which is somewhat at competition with the FIDE.
soegaard 21 days ago [-]
If I understand correctly Play Magnus Group was acquired by chess.com in 2022.
I googled Chess960 and you just made my day. The one thing I never liked about chess was the opening memorization; what an elegant solution.
8note 21 days ago [-]
its imperfect. people will still memorize the lot, and memorizing chess openings and tactical patterns will still apply frequently
FredPret 20 days ago [-]
I always play against my phone; I guess it now has the advantage of having yet another 959 sets of openings stored away that a casual player like me will never memorize.
Still, it seems like a step in the right direction.
SlonBog 22 days ago [-]
Also the context is Magnus wasn’t best at this tournament. He was somewhere in middle in table and had less chances of converting. He has history of throwing tantrums when on tilt (Seinqfield 2022)
delroth 22 days ago [-]
He was 2.5/3 the day he was fined (then forbidden to play) for his dress code violation, and was around rank 25 after game 8, one point behind first place. Not a winning performance but not particularly bad either.
22 days ago [-]
david-gpu 22 days ago [-]
It is also his first Christmas after his mother's passing, so I think it is fair to say that he's under a lot of stress already.
We will see how other players react today. Will they wear jeans in protest?
tromp 22 days ago [-]
Why would you protest against enforcement of the rules that everyone was aware of and agreed to by participating?
I agree that rules against jeans make limited sense. It makes more sense to forbid worn down or shabby looking attire. But one should abide by the rules one signs up to.
wizzwizz4 22 days ago [-]
> But one should abide by the rules one signs up to.
If it's the only competition in town, and the rules are unjust, and the organisation in question considers you #1 chess player in the world… I can hardly imagine better circumstances for civil disobedience.
sadeshmukh 21 days ago [-]
I thought this only happened 9 or so games in?
wongarsu 21 days ago [-]
Because Magnus only appeared in Jeans after a break. He was out doing something with a sponsor or such, and came back wearing the same pants
stavros 22 days ago [-]
How come? I thought he was the best in the world by a fair margin.
bluecalm 21 days ago [-]
He is by far the best in all formats but there is some luck in chess and the best player doesn't always win - like in most competitive games/sports.
elif 21 days ago [-]
Luck is an interesting way of phrasing what can be simply described as pure neurological deficiencies. Your opponents brain forgot to go down a crazy sacrifice line which was actually M6. Is that luck?
Or is it a comparative grey matter evaluation in time and pressure constraints?
8note 21 days ago [-]
there is atill hidden information in chess, and thus luck when you take a guess at what it is.
you provide an example, but the luck is in guessing what the opponent would check or not check.
a clearer example is trying to play out of your opponent's prep. you dont know what lines theyve prepared, and youre taking a gamble with each move on whether theyve prepped it or not. they cant prep every possible line in the available time, regardless of how long (ding wasnt prepared for most of gukesh's attacks, with months to prepare)
theres also luck in that your opponent may not have slept well the night before because a car alarm went off at 2AM, so their comparative grey matter evaluation in time was lower than usual, or they just played a tiring long game where they lost, right before this game.
hansvm 21 days ago [-]
With our current understanding of biology, if I model outcomes probabilistically (luck) and you model them any other non-equivalent way then I'll be more successful predicting those outcomes. The philosophy behind it is interesting, but "luck" isn't a bad way to describe what's happening to a layman when Carlsen loses.
noqc 21 days ago [-]
What?
TheRealNGenius 21 days ago [-]
[dead]
n2d4 22 days ago [-]
In classical chess, yes; in Blitz and Rapid he's still one of the best, but there's lots of good competition.
ANewFormation 21 days ago [-]
His edge in rapid/blitz is generally seen as much larger than in classical.
One of the biggest examples of this was in his title defense against Caruana. Every game of that match had been drawn, and in the final game Magnus had a very promising position where he could squeeze with basically no risk.
Instead he offered a draw which was immediately accepted. That sent the game to rapid tie breaks where he casually butchered Caruana 3-0.
n2d4 21 days ago [-]
That's because Caruana was a bad Blitz player though; on the elo rankings, Carlsen's lead is (and usually tends to be) smaller in Blitz.
ANewFormation 21 days ago [-]
The tie breaks were rapid, not blitz. And rapid is where Magnus' gap over #2 is the largest.
And no great player is bad at any time control - they're just 'less good'. Except Magnus - since he's #1 at everything he's just more or less dominant.
nameless_me 21 days ago [-]
Oh boy, offering a draw so he could annihilate Caruana in the next phase is a totally gangsta move. <whew>
21 days ago [-]
fastasucan 22 days ago [-]
He is both the current rapid (5 times) and blitz (7 times) world champion. He is more than one of the best.
n2d4 21 days ago [-]
Sure, but he's not invincible like in Classic; those 7 wins aren't consecutive (he lost in 2021 and won 22 & 23), meanwhile he's won every classical championship since 2013 (until he stopped playing in 2023).
elif 21 days ago [-]
And his freestyle performance was clearly shoulders ahead his peers
stavros 22 days ago [-]
Ahh I missed that this wasn't classical, thank you.
qq66 21 days ago [-]
The other piece of context that's worth noting is that Carlsen is not as good as he used to be (he's still the best player in the world, but not by as big of a margin as he was 5-10 years ago) and that he seems to getting increasingly exasperated with chess itself. Every GOAT eventually retires in a different type of way (Kasparov, Anand, Karpov, all did it a bit differently) and Carlsen's might be coming up soon.
Maxatar 21 days ago [-]
This doesn't hold up to a cursory analysis of Carlsen's rating. You can see Carlsen's historical ELO score on FIDE's website and look at it year over year and the difference between Carlsen and the #2, #3, #4, etc... is pretty consistent and very impressive. Usually the difference between a player ranked N and a player ranked N + 1 is about 5-10 ELO points, but Carlsen's is consistently 30+ including at this moment.
Carlsen is never again going to go 125 classical games without a defeat.
cjbprime 21 days ago [-]
Even Gukesh, crowned world champion recently, says Carlsen is the best player in the world.
epolanski 21 days ago [-]
Anand is still active.
elif 21 days ago [-]
While it's true that chess is a young man's game, Magnus has not lost his ability to flow absolute dookie positions into mate like no one else under any controls.
zmgsabst 21 days ago [-]
Very late concurring comment:
Hikaru mentioned there had been drama between FIDE and himself about having cameras at the same tournament — and he felt FIDE refused to give him airtime on their streams. Hikaru also had drama with FIDE about the Freestyle league.
I think both happening at the same tournament, which they had threatened to boycott if FIDE didn’t permit them to also play Freestyle league, indicates this is political.
14 21 days ago [-]
Couldn’t it also be worded - I.e this is less about “dress code enforcement “ and is more about FIDE fed up that Carlson is promoting alternative chess organizations - ?
fnqi8ckfek 22 days ago [-]
[dead]
FrustratedMonky 22 days ago [-]
Sure. Beef with an organization.
But if you are going to bother signing up, is 'jeans' really the hill to die on?
If the beef is with the organization, just boycott altogether.
Otherwise, just put on some pants.
EDIT:
Perhaps the downvotes are because of disagreement with methods of protest?
What brings greater attention to your cause?
1. A boycott, you just don't go to the event? And make a press statement about it, that probably doesn't get any headlines.
or
2. Sign up, go, then angrily get disqualified, based on some stupid rule, which gets a lot of headlines, and attention focused on silly rules of the organization?
Guess, if the goal was to effect change, then maybe this was the correct move. But if it was just being pissi, then why bother signing up, you know the rules, so just don't go.
Enginerrrd 22 days ago [-]
Similarly, is a stupid rule about the type of fabric of a players pants really the hill to die on enforcement-wise? Discretion is a thing. Jeans has NOTHING to do with playing chess.
thatswrong0 22 days ago [-]
Especially when others are wearing chinos that look like jeans.
Discretion should be a thing.
This being a thing at all certainly proves Magnus’ point. Its not 1970.
reaperducer 22 days ago [-]
Otherwise, just put on some pants.
I agree. This isn't high school rebellion. Is the real world.
Adults dress appropriately for different places and different times. You can be denied admission to a restaurant, a business, an office meeting, or even a concert for not dressing appropriately. This is no different.
Grow up and put on some pants. Be sloppy in your own home.
ruthmarx 21 days ago [-]
Jeans are pants and wearing them isn't sloppy.
SoftTalker 21 days ago [-]
I've had jobs where I'd absolutely be sent home if I turned up wearing jeans. Might be a little less likely these days but there are many jobs and situations where this still applies.
It's also about showing respect to the host, you dress nicely. Would you wear jeans to church or to a wedding?
MrDrMcCoy 21 days ago [-]
> Would you wear jeans to church or a wedding?
Where I'm from, this is normal. There are even theological cases to be made against dress codes in church, beyond "don't show up naked" and similar basics.
If your "host" has unreasonable expectations, then it is on some level unreasonable to follow them.
BoxFour 21 days ago [-]
I was a groomsman at a wedding where someone showed up in jeans.
Japes abounded and some of the more conservative family members were giving severe side-eye, but at no point was it suggested that he be sent home. He showed up in jeans (offense), we gave him a lot of ribbing that he took in good stride (punishment).
The appropriate response to offenses like this doesn't have to be banishment.
jncfhnb 21 days ago [-]
You, as chump trying to get a a job, are not similar to Magnus, the greatest chess player of all time, trying to play in a chess tournament. FIDE is well within their rights to demand he not wear jeans. Magnus is well within his rights to tell them to fuck off. FIDE loses more here.
voidfunc 21 days ago [-]
It's been twenty years since I went to church... but yes I wore jeans.
FrustratedMonky 21 days ago [-]
I agree. Just a decade ago, jeans would have me escorted from work. The business dress code was 'pants', jeans were not allowed.
Everyone is arguing about 'jean's not being a big deal. And, all dress codes are wrong.
So, can a female player wear a bikini? By the arguments here, then yes, that should be allowed. Would it interfere with game play? I think yes.
Can someone wear a bright orange Sarang with blinking lights?
How do you draw the line? Doesn't there need to be a line somewhere so there isn't chaos? It's just that todays generation now thinks 'jeans' are ok. 20 years ago they were not.
ruthmarx 21 days ago [-]
> The business dress code was 'pants', jeans were not allowed.
> It's just that todays generation now thinks 'jeans' are ok.
'jeans' literally are 'pants' though. If a dress code specifies pants, jeans are fine, unless they specifically exclude jeans as a type of pants.
FrustratedMonky 20 days ago [-]
Obviously, you have never had to use that vacuous argument with an HR department.
This is completely not True.
Either
1. You know it is not true, and are just trolling.
or
2. You do believe this, and have just redefined these words to fit a particular world view. Which I guess can happen. If this generation has re-defined the words 'jeans' and 'pants', then guess, I can't argue against how people re-define words. Just goes to how the world is being divided by re-defining entire vocabularies.
ruthmarx 20 days ago [-]
I'm not trolling and correct, I've never had to use that argument. Are you British or something? In the US and most western countries, pants simply means some kind of full leg covering, and generally that's going to be jeans, chinos, or trousers/slacks. All are pants.
A companies dress code will generally exclude jeans if they are not acceptable.
I haven't redefined anything.
FrustratedMonky 20 days ago [-]
They were Unites States based HR Departments. Pants, did not include Jeans.
You are correct. Looked it up, and Jeans are sub-category of Pants. Though, I live in the US and have never had someone refer to jeans as pants. It seems a technical definition that I've never seen used that way. I know arguing with HR they did not see it that way.
Perhaps HR really meant 'slacks'. as in Dressy Pants.
ruthmarx 20 days ago [-]
So we just both have different anecdotal experiences. I live in the US also, and the places I've worked were pretty clear. For example, working at a big4 accounting firm, they specified pretty clearer in the dress code that pants didn't include jeans, as where at the consultancy arm of a fortune 500 tech company, it was fine and pants included jeans unless meeting with a client, but that was clearly specified.
FrustratedMonky 20 days ago [-]
Yep.
And, probably HR departments are also variable in their definitions, and accuracy.
Really, I had to look it up. I had always thought of 'pants' as 'dress pants'. So to have such a broad category of 'pants' seemed like an older technical definition I've never seen used commonly.
But, if you saw in other posts. For the Chess rules. There was another section of the rules that specified 'no jeans'. So for the current controversy, it didn't specifically hinge on this definition of 'pants'.
kevinventullo 22 days ago [-]
I wonder if there is even a single player in the tournament who cares about the dress code. It is hard to imagine anyone who was serious about chess caring about the material a player’s pants are made of. No, I think this falls squarely in the realm of bureaucratic administrators who have nothing better to do than assert their power and maintain the illusion of a connection between talent (great chess players) and the trivial signaling games of the upper class (the style of pants one is wearing).
JellyBeanThief 22 days ago [-]
> I think this falls squarely in the realm of bureaucratic administrators who have nothing better to do than assert their power and maintain the illusion of a connection between talent (great chess players) and the trivial signaling games of the upper class (the style of pants one is wearing).
I concur except about the bureaucratic administrators. I think they do this because the upper class will replace them if they don't do the work of asserting the upper class's power.
noisy_boy 21 days ago [-]
All the people rushing to their desk jobs were dressed perfectly. They had to play a part.
The billionaire they were working for wore stuff that was expensive, old and hence comfortable. He didn't have to play to anyone.
He did dress up to meet the president though, he had to play a part.
The president has to dress well all the time, he is always playing a part, in front of the whole world.
Wear your part. Or don't, if you don't want any part in all of this (which seems to be Magnus's motivation, or lack of it).
RandomThoughts3 21 days ago [-]
The upper class has been wearing expensive jeans for a very long time.
The upper class doesn’t need dress code. They know they are the upper class. Dress codes are for petit bourgeois and the upper middle class who try to pretend but everyone knows they are actually middle class.
antasvara 20 days ago [-]
The upper class, however, seems to care about making other people follow a dress code. Think uniforms for a chauffeur, the long-standing rules around wearing white at Wimbledon, etc.
RandomThoughts3 21 days ago [-]
The upper class has been wearing expensive jeans for a very long time.
tmalsburg2 21 days ago [-]
The only thing that's more ridiculous than an antiquated dress code is an antiquated dress code that's selectively applied to some players and not to others. Other players had to change, so FIDE could hardly make an exception for Carlsen. If Carlsen cares so little about the tournament that he can't even be bothered to change his pants, he should probably not have participated in the first place.
But I wonder if another player complained to the administrators.
glaugh 21 days ago [-]
Possibly this is not the actual dress code? Or I'm missing something.
3.a. The following is acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation.
-- Suits, ties, dressy pants, trousers, jeans...
3.b. The following is NOT acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation.
-- Beach-wear slips, profanity and nude or semi-nude pictures printed on shirts, torn pants or jeans...
philipwhiuk 21 days ago [-]
It's interesting that they are trying to enforce a different dress code for men and women. Surprising that's not seen some heat.
oofabz 21 days ago [-]
Beatriz Marinello is a professional chess player who was Chilean Women's Chess Champion in 1980 and was vice president of FIDE until 2018.
21 days ago [-]
malwrar 21 days ago [-]
The FIDE dress code [1] appears to only forbid torn jeans, but otherwise explicitly allows them:
> The following is acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation.
Suits, ties, dressy pants, trousers, *jeans*.
And then later:
> The following is NOT acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation.
Beach-wear slips, profanity and nude or semi-nude
pictures printed on shirts, torn pants or jeans.
Magnus did not wear torn jeans [2], I can’t see any justification for this enforcement choice.
Don’t even get me started on the sex differences in these rules.
That appears to be from 2013 which is before the rule change that Carlsen is being hit with was made. AFAIK the change happened only a couple of years later.
malwrar 20 days ago [-]
Thanks for catching that! I found a 2024 document [1] that indeed appears to explicitly forbid jeans.
Or similarly, how he was accused of 'bringing the game of snooker into disrepute' by taking a shot with his left hand (and then playing three perfect games left-handed)
http://en.espn.co.uk/snooker/sport/player/1241.html
ivanjermakov 21 days ago [-]
Ironically he himself inspired thousands to watch and play snooker, myself included.
OJFord 22 days ago [-]
> [Carlsen] it became a point of principle
I think if anybody's to be commended for their principle it's probably the organisers? They have their dress code, he violated it, was warned, continued to violate it, and they enforced the rule despite his name.
judofyr 22 days ago [-]
The principle here isn’t about the dress code per se (Carlsen hasn’t made much fuss about it earlier[1]), but the fact that a minor mistake on his part (he chose the wrong pants) is being punished severely. What would would be wrong with giving him a $200 fine and warning him he would be disqualified if he didn’t abide by it next day? Why is it so important to change immediately when you’re still very much dressed acceptable? Stressing about your clothing is not what you want to do when you’re focused on making a come back.
The reason is (according to Carlsen) of course that FIDE is driven by a strict adherence of «rules» which are defined by a small set of people in power. Whenever something happens they always say «oh, but these are the rules», but the process for changing the rules is very one-sided and power driven. This was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Yet another example of a silly unnecessary rule.
[1]: In an earlier WC he got stuck in traffic and arrived in ski clothing, but changed after the first round.
FrustratedMonky 21 days ago [-]
" that FIDE is driven by a strict adherence of «rules» which are defined by a small set of people in power. Whenever something happens they always say «oh, but these are the rules», but the process for changing the rules is very one-sided and power driven. "
This every government or organization that has ever existed. Every human group from beginning of time. Left or Right, up or down.
cjbprime 21 days ago [-]
The hotel is three minutes away. He wasn't asked to change immediately, but he was asked to change on the same day.
matsemann 21 days ago [-]
How is "it's a few minutes to the next game, if you play that in jeans you will be unlisted" not the same as "change immediately"?
cjbprime 21 days ago [-]
That is not what happened. Carlsen refused to change on the same day because it was "a matter of principle" (his words) -- not because there was insufficient time to.
sammy2255 22 days ago [-]
Disagree. FIDE's dress code has double standards, there was a dude in chinos made to look like jeans and they were allowed. To me it seems like a very antiquated rule that needs to be reworked/abolished to keep up with the times.
sapiogram 22 days ago [-]
This rule is new, by the way. There used to be no dress code at all, and it's become increasingly strict in the last few years.
beyondCritics 21 days ago [-]
>This rule is new, by the way.
You can't call a rule new, which is nagging them for nearly a decade now:
en passant is still considered a new rule, and it was there in the 16th century
swiftcoder 21 days ago [-]
Even at that time, it does not appear that the dress code explicitly forbade what the contestant was wearing?
astura 22 days ago [-]
Was there a reason for implementing it?
OJFord 22 days ago [-]
It's not that I think the dress code is great, I just think it is what it is, and the one's who can say 'it's a matter of principle' (and get my sympathy anyway) are the ones that uphold that written code of the event, and don't waive it for a famous participant; not the famous participant who.. just wants to violate it basically.
wavemode 22 days ago [-]
He didn't protest being fined. Rather, he (and many other pundits) think being forfeited for a dress code violation is outrageous. (And it doesn't even follow the letter of the law - nowhere is it explicitly stated that violating the dress code can lead to forfeiting a round.)
ttyprintk 22 days ago [-]
Not explicitly, but you’re “not allowed to play”.
throw9383838 22 days ago [-]
In my experience "dress code" is very selectively enforced. Men are expected to wear very formal dress, that may limit their breathing and body cooling!
While women get away with tshirts, sweat pants and flip flops!
This is sport event after all, and he is an athlete!
It is like asking female athletes to wear corset and long dress, because that was traditional dress in Victorian England!
golli 21 days ago [-]
Considering last year at the same event a female player was fined for wearing the wrong shoes I have to disagree with your claim.
If "wearing jeans is not okay for someone playing chess" is a principle, it's a pretty stupid one. Being consistent about enforcing dumb rules is not a virtue when the alternative is not to have dumb rules in the first place
more_corn 22 days ago [-]
The principal is “I should be allowed to wear reasonable everyday attire”
Standing by the principle was when faced with an ultimatum:
“Change now or else.”
He chose
“Naw, I’ll just leave.”
lenkite 22 days ago [-]
Also, this is a world rapid blitz tournament - not a "classical" chess tournament. Full length jeans is effectively business casual by today's standards. If a player said they made a mistake because they were late and confirmed that they would change their attire the next day, they should be fined but permitted to play with a warning.
OJFord 22 days ago [-]
I understand that, and I'm saying the organisers also have the dress code principle, and stood by it when faced with 'oh but the violator is a very famous player, and this might make the news tomorrow'.
I think they come off better, personally. I'm not saying that should be the dress code, he shouldn't be allowed to wear jeans or whatever, or even that it's bad of him to decide not to play rather than to play in jeans. I just don't think 'it became a matter of principle' is a great argument for him, because it just makes me think better of the organisers for similarly standing by theirs.
jstanley 21 days ago [-]
If two people have conflicting principles and both choose to stand by their principles then they'll be in conflict, but you're not obliged to pick a winner.
8note 21 days ago [-]
the sense check i get from hammer's interview with hikaru is that they think magnus was targetted, and that where typically they wouldnt mind and the "oh, yeah ill wear fancy pants tomorrow" would typically be fine, magnus was targetted because of the freestyle chess negotiations.
another player was not fined or punished at all for wearing basically the same thing
Erikun 22 days ago [-]
‘[…]Carlsen said: “I said I’ll change tomorrow … but they said you have to change now it became a matter of principle for me so here we are. […]’
I can’t even figure out what the principle was.
adastra22 22 days ago [-]
They fined/censored him. He accepted the consequence and said "ok, I'll change as soon as I'm back at my hotel." They then hit him with a second infraction, for still being out of dress code.
I'm not a chess dress code rules lawyer, but I think the principle here is that the judge was power tripping and hit him twice for a single dress code violation.
PokemonNoGo 22 days ago [-]
I'm sorry but now we surely have lost the meaning of the word censored. Now it means not getting to play chess in a tournament?
chucksmash 22 days ago [-]
Perhaps they meant censure instead of censor.
o11c 21 days ago [-]
Note especially that in many languages "censor" and "censure" are the same word.
adastra22 21 days ago [-]
I did indeed.
astura 22 days ago [-]
>I'm sorry but now we surely have lost the meaning of the word censored. Now it means not getting to play chess in a tournament?
Yes, we have. That ship has sailed long ago.
But, in this context, specifically, the GP might have meant 'censured' instead of 'censored' and it was autocorrect or mental confusion.
PokemonNoGo 21 days ago [-]
That makes more sense. Sorry about that.
llm_nerd 22 days ago [-]
Precisely this. The dress code was not a secret. Once Carlsen had little chance of winning the event he decided to make it about himself with this display. No one should commend this selfish arrogance, and in no universe is it "principle" to exhibit such prima donna behaviour for attention (and to conveniently exit from a likely loss).
Magnus is a tremendous chess player. He's also, by all evidence, a massive asshole, and continuously shows boorish behaviour and terrible sportsmanship.
carrychains 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
llm_nerd 22 days ago [-]
I assure you, Magnus is quite good at chess.
And yes, he is a massive asshole, at least in regards to chess. He is an incredibly sore loser, constantly makes it about himself (at the cost of every other competitor, such as in this case: they can't have beaten him, but instead he had to do this spectacle to give himself an excuse to exit and to asterisk their win). He has done this sort of thing again and again.
He has loads and loads of fanboys who will always excuse this behaviour. Who'll say that he has earned the right to be like this. They'll adulate poor sportsmanship like showing up terribly late "like a boss", as if this isn't contemptible behaviour. Eh.
And he can. He might be the greatest chess player ever. Doesn't change that he's obnoxious and boorish.
threatofrain 22 days ago [-]
The reason why Magnus leaving is a spectacle is because of us and what we want out of our superstars, otherwise he's just another player, and players drop out all the time for any reason and nobody cares.
The masses are the ones who elevate him and assume that because he plays a game so well then the spotlight must be on him. Magnus did not seize the spotlight of our attention and he never owned it.
llm_nerd 22 days ago [-]
No one is asking him to act like this. Many other greats across many domains manage to not be like this. His performance alone gets him loads of attention, and this is all just distractions.
And yes, people do drop out. It happens. Magnus is famously a very sore loser, however, so when he suddenly is a Dress Code Liberty Fighter to drop out, it should be called out for the ridiculous ruse it is. That people are actually celebrating it and talking about his principles...how profoundly gullible can people be?
The guy has an insane number of fanboys, however. It's absolutely bizarre.
thaw24612107 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
unsupp0rted 22 days ago [-]
Chess is supposed to be a game for smart people.
Why would smart people care about denim vs. trousers?
Let competitors wear pajamas- it makes no difference.
menotyou 22 days ago [-]
> Why would smart people care about denim vs. trousers?
Mostly it's about the sponsors. It's much more difficult to get sponsors for an event if the participants are dressed like they slept in their clothes. That's why organizers try to impose minimal standards on dresscodes.
Jeans and sneakers are maybe debatable, but players showed up with cargo pants, shorts or tank tops on other events.
In the FIDE regulation for that event jeans were explicitly mentioned as not allowed. FIDE would have made a fool out of themselves when allowing Magnus to wear the jeans.
trollied 22 days ago [-]
Not sure I agree. Chess has moved towards a much younger audience over the last 5 years, and is incredibly popular now. Gets 10s of thousands of viewers on Twitch, for example & there are many players that could be seen as modern day celebrities in their own right.
FIDE needs to embrace the younger generation that think the game is cool. Ancient dress codes are a distraction.
bluGill 21 days ago [-]
But money still belongs to old folks so they need to attract them to get money to pay large prizes.
jhghikvhu 21 days ago [-]
Not only still. It increasingly belongs to old people. Old people have capital, young people salaries. Capital has grown faster than salaries for a while, and ai should make the difference even bigger.
dist-epoch 22 days ago [-]
Where do you draw the line though. Is dressing in a swim suit allowable?
motorest 22 days ago [-]
> Where do you draw the line though. Is dressing in a swim suit allowable?
There’s quite a difference between casual clothes and dressing indecently. IMO jeans are fine as long as they’re inconspicuous (such as raggy jeans with holes in them or worn in such a way that the buttocks are showing) for such an event. Swimsuits are for a different type of event where if you’re showing up in trousers they would disqualify you.
foldr 22 days ago [-]
Other environments manage more casual dress codes without too much difficulty. I can’t wear a swimsuit to the office but I can wear jeans. No-one seems especially confused about where the line is.
saghm 21 days ago [-]
Having never read any formal dress code rules for any office, hospital, or place of worship I've been inside in my life, I've never gotten kicked out for wearing the wrong thing, and I've also never seen someone wearing a swimsuit in any of those places. This isn't some uniquely problem that only chess tournaments have, and it's not nearly as hard to solve as you're making it out to be.
saghm 21 days ago [-]
> It's much more difficult to get sponsors for an event if the participants are dressed like they slept in their clothes.
Anyone who considers jeans to look like "clothes someone would sleep in" is immediately dubious in my book. Jeans are so extraordinarily uncomfortable to sleep in that I don't think I've ever intentionally done that in my life.
GuB-42 20 days ago [-]
Many jeans today are not the stiff and sturdy work clothes they used to be. They have the appearance of it, but are actually made of a relatively thin, stretchy fabric that is more comfortable, and much less durable.
gpm 21 days ago [-]
It seems rather harder to get sponsors when you can no longer attract the best player in the world to your tournaments. That they made much more of a fool out of themselves by holding "world championships" without attracting the undisputed best player in the world to them.
This looks to me like a case where FIDE got greedy and forgot to balance the talents interests with the sponsors.
pixelatedindex 22 days ago [-]
> Mostly it's about the sponsors. It's much more difficult to get sponsors for an event if the participants are dressed like they slept in their clothes.
Would be interesting if they can get mattress companies or apparel companies that have good comfy clothes as sponsors. Why not play chess on a firm mattress?
elif 21 days ago [-]
My brother was wearing a formal shirt and suit jacket.
PUSH_AX 22 days ago [-]
You’ve stated this as a matter of fact, but do you have a source, or are you speculating?
jncfhnb 21 days ago [-]
FIDE looks a lot more foolish having the greatest and most famous chess player reject them over a dispute about clothing.
Also, he looked very sharp in his outfit with the jeans. Frankly it was a better ensemble than I’d look in one of my suits.
tacone 20 days ago [-]
We'll see how easy it gets to get them when Magnus is playing at some parallel tournament, though. Nakamura, for instance, has already made a point about that.
8note 21 days ago [-]
id think the venue more than the sponsors. the media sponsor being the norway public broadcast to specifically put magnus on tv means theyve ticked off at least one sponsor by disqualifying him
Modified3019 22 days ago [-]
They’d made a fool out of themselves by disallowing jeans
DrewADesign 21 days ago [-]
> Why would smart people care about denim vs. trousers?
Prescriptive contest rules suck, but I don’t like the attitude endemic to nerds that truly smart people don’t care about personal aesthetic. There’s no more honor in not caring how you look than there is in not caring about food or fine art. I have friends that are smart, capable professionals that look like they only get new clothes when their mom notices their shirts exceed the totinos pizza roll stain threshold and drags them to Bob’s— whether it’s at home, work, wedding, date night, court, the gym, the club, a con, etc. You’d expect them to reject people’s tendency to judge people on their looks, but ironically, they deem anyone that puts any effort into their appearance (a.k.a. doesn’t solely dress for comfort) shallow, unintelligent, and boring. Predictably, gender expectations play a huge part.
> I don’t like the attitude endemic to nerds that truly smart people don’t care about personal aesthetic.
Then IMO you should be on Magnus' side here. He is a truly smart person and IMO he looked clean, groomed, and ready for business in those jeans. He wears a mindfully put together outfit of good quality. This is good character, is it not?
DrewADesign 8 days ago [-]
Honestly, I couldn’t care less. I just hate the attitude in the nerdosphere that anyone that cares about their appearance is an idiot.
Invictus0 21 days ago [-]
It's a shibboleth for ugly people; since they can't "win" on their looks, they opt not to play that game at all and need to loudly brag about their superiority over the vapid "fashion police".
anonzzzies 21 days ago [-]
It's a shibboleth for poor and dumb people; they don't have anything going for them (maybe they are not ugly but that doesn't help anymore after a certain age), so they need to play dress up to appear more than they are (and ever will be) and act like it too. Always funny to see.
gradus_ad 22 days ago [-]
Why wouldn't smart people care about appearances? If the organization and participants desire to present themselves as dignified and worthy of respect, a certain standard of dress is appropriate.
More generally, appearances are important because they are clear signs of attention and care. Something worth our respect is worth dressing up for, and a collective dressing up reinforces the importance and elevation of a given event or moment over other events or moments of lesser import.
trollied 22 days ago [-]
Times have changed. Offices used to be full of people in full suits, with trousers. Now it is common for CEOs to wear jeans, and offices are much more tailored to working comfortably, rather than having a "posh" facade.
nottorp 21 days ago [-]
> More generally, appearances are important because they are clear signs of attention and care.
Attention and care for appearances, not for the job to be done.
One could interpret it that the sharp looks are there as a cover for ... less than stellar competence.
You cannot win with statements like that.
notfed 21 days ago [-]
Are jeans undignified or disrespectful?
epgui 21 days ago [-]
It doesn't really matter, regardless of whether or not we agree with the rules, jeans are clearly prohibited in the tournament:
4.10.1.3. No players with t-shirts, jeans, shorts,
sneakers, baseball caps or inappropriate dress are allowed
in the playing area. Any requests to wear national or
traditional dress shall be approved by FIDE Supervisor.
Having bad rules written down doesn't make them immune to criticism. It's a silly unnecessary rule that shouldn't exist, and while Carlsen doesn't deserve any special treatment, being consistent in enforcing a bad rule isn't better than not having the rule in the first place.
8note 21 days ago [-]
i dont think people who wear jeans should be considered as undignified or unworthy of respect.
its kinda cruel that you think homeless people who have maybe less than jeans should be given no respect, because they dont have a suit
mrweasel 22 days ago [-]
Most sports have dress codes. Some for obvious reasons, such as team sports where the players need to be able to identify each other, but others because they want things to look professional and more organised.
Take a sport like rowing. Technically there's no reason why all the rowers in a boat needs to be dressed identically, but it looks more professional.
kybernetyk 22 days ago [-]
>Chess is supposed to be a game for smart people.
Rather for people with a really good memory. Which, to me, makes the game extremely boring and bland.
paulcole 22 days ago [-]
I agree with you in a way.
Chess to me is boring because the better player should win/draw unless they blunder. And we (generally) know who the better player is because of ratings.
I’ve always much preferred games that in the short run have a luck component that can create massive swings (poker, backgammon, Scrabble) and inequality.
nottorp 21 days ago [-]
Something like that. I was interested in chess until i realized you have to memorize all those openings to play with the 'serious' people.
I'd play some Go but I have almost no one to play with casually. And since I play for fun, online isn't so good.
bluGill 21 days ago [-]
Memorizing openings is a waste of time unless/until you have a shot at good enough to make a living playing chess - about 1000 people and most of them live in poor countries where cost of living means they don't need to earn much to live.
learn your tactics and end games instead.
nottorp 21 days ago [-]
learning end games isn't also memorization?
bluGill 20 days ago [-]
Not really. there is some but a lot of it is how this pattern looks in different places on the board. You never see a text book endgame so you have to see how to win no matter where the pieces hapyen to be.
thatswrong0 22 days ago [-]
It’s funny because that’s partly what this a LOT about. FIDE, the defacto governing body of chess, wants freestyle chess (aka 960 aka Fischer random, which does lot to fix the memory issue you’re talking about) to not be allowed to have a “world championship”.
And that attitude led us to these honestly inane events.
PUSH_AX 22 days ago [-]
> Chess is supposed to be a game for smart people.
Chess is for everyone, my 5 year old plays chess. Being world class is another thing.
ilbeeper 22 days ago [-]
Basketball is a game for tall people. Lifting is a sport for strong people. Chess is a game for smart people. Is that controversial or incompatible with 5 year old kids playing chess?
bluGill 21 days ago [-]
short people enjoy playing basketball. They will never go pro but they don't care.
PUSH_AX 22 days ago [-]
It’s false is what it is.
ilbeeper 21 days ago [-]
All three sentences or only the one about chess?
aprilthird2021 22 days ago [-]
Because smart people realize that all associations and organizations have rules and showing strangers that you follow the rules is an easy way to signal across languages and cultures that you are all there for the same reason
jfengel 22 days ago [-]
Chess itself is a collection of very arbitrary rules.
They happen to be rules that people decided are fun, or interesting, or something. If the dress code isn't fun they should change it.
And for that matter... this tournament is a blitz game, itself a change of rules. Perhaps it would be well suited to a change in dress code. Formal clothes for classic chess. Show up in your PJs for a game that takes as long as brushing your teeth.
ttyprintk 22 days ago [-]
On the womens’ side, the biggest FIDE sponsor is breast enhancement surgery. That makes women’s choice of shirts important for the sponsor’s marketing. Maybe these rules are trying to signal that the attention is spread across men as well.
m463 20 days ago [-]
Sounds a little like academics. Smart people living game of thrones...
frou_dh 22 days ago [-]
> Let competitors wear pajamas- it makes no difference.
Ah yes the wonderful "everything is equally valid" postmodernism. Why don't the organisers subscribe to that? They must be dumb-dumbs.
CarlitosHighway 20 days ago [-]
[flagged]
unsupp0rted 20 days ago [-]
> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
Not only Magnus was saying he would withdraw if FIDE didn’t approve them also participating in the Freestyle league. Hikaru Nakamura was also saying he’d withdraw if FIDE forced them to choose between leagues.
FIDE conceded — and then punished Magnus for his jeans and refused to allow Hikaru to have cameras. It’s hard not to see it as political, given the context and fact FIDE went after multiple top level players.
searealist 22 days ago [-]
Yep. He was also performing extremely poorly in this tournament.
laserlight 22 days ago [-]
You can listen to Magnus's own account, including his acknowledgment of his lower-than-expected performance and tensions with FIDE:
Magnus Carlsen Got KICKED OUT Of World Championship (5 min)
If chess is a sport,
then the mind deserves its own professional chess shoes
"Earlier in the day, another participant, Mr. Ian Nepomniachtchi, was also fined for breaching the dress code by wearing sports shoes. However, Mr. Nepomniachtchi complied, changed into approved attire, and continued to play in the tournament," the statement added."
daxfohl 22 days ago [-]
Though "Air Magnus" rolls off the tongue better than "Air Nepomniachtchi".
anticensor 18 days ago [-]
Chess is played with hands not feet, hence chess gloves might be more appropriate.
Brian_K_White 22 days ago [-]
A simple question. Why do people watch chess tournaments?
A: To see administrators administrate.
B: To see chess players play chess.
Someone somewhere has lost sight of a most basic fundamental that everything else they may care about rests on.
linsomniac 21 days ago [-]
C: To see well dressed people play chess.
Brian_K_White 21 days ago [-]
Might as well add "D: for the coffee in the lobby". It's the same level of true and the same level of relevant.
8note 21 days ago [-]
technically no. theres only a camera feed on magnus, really. everyone is just watching the board. i know i was, for Rosen's games this weekend
hikaru was trying to get camera feed of his games to stream, and fide said no
linsomniac 20 days ago [-]
Also, technically, I'm watching video feeds of various players, and also seeing camera angles with an audience... :-)
ffitch 22 days ago [-]
World Rapid and Blitz Championship downgraded itself to the World Rapid and Blitz Candidates Tournament. Hope sponsors are not too pissed.
cool_dude85 22 days ago [-]
Maybe the World Blitz Candidates Tournament but Magnus was practically eliminated from contention in Rapid before this.
That's decent dress jeans too, not like some baggy, hole-y or sloppy jeans.
matsemann 22 days ago [-]
Some other guy interviewed by Norwegian television also came out from the arbiter room, but he didn't get fined. His pants looked like worn jeans, but since it wasn't denim material (only made to look like ugly jeans) it was ok. Highlights how weird the rules are.
TacticalCoder 22 days ago [-]
I used to frequent fancy private parties with people who mostly all had money and nobility titles (EU). Unless it was a ball (which I used to go to do) that had a strict dress code, most men had nice cars, nice shoes and... Dress jeans.
Modified3019 22 days ago [-]
I love a new anarchy chess meta
beyondCritics 21 days ago [-]
Tasteful and elegant, but somewhat thought provoking at the same time.
yesyesyawl 21 days ago [-]
[dead]
gapan 21 days ago [-]
Oh, Douglas Adams would have had a blast with this.
Carslen: "But you can't disqualify me! This is outrageous! I've been planning for this tournament for months, and now you're telling me I can't play because of my pants?"
FIDE: "I'm afraid the rules are quite clear, dear fellow. Proper dress code is required, and jeans simply won't do. You should have read the fine print."
Carslen: "Fine print? What fine print? This is a travesty! A complete and utter waste of my time. Do you have any idea how much effort I've put into preparing for this tournament?"
FIDE: "I understand your frustration, but rules are rules. Now, if you'll just step aside, we have a schedule to keep. The tournament must go on without you."
Carslen: "Without me? But I'm the best player here! You can't just kick me out like this. It's not fair!"
FIDE: "Life's not fair, my friend. Now, if you'll excuse us, we have some important work to do. Good day to you."
Carslen: "But wait! You can't just leave me here. What am I supposed to do now?"
FIDE: "That's not my problem. Perhaps you could try your hand at some other hobby. Knitting, perhaps? Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a tournament to run."
Carslen: "You know what? Forget it. I'm withdrawing from this tournament. And you know what else? I'm going to take my jeans and start my own chess tournament. With blackjack. And hookers. Actually, forget the chess tournament. I'm just going to start a jeans-only nightclub. That'll show you!"
FIDE: "What? You can't do that! You've already been disqualified for the dress code violation."
Carslen: "Oh, I can do it. And I'm going to do it. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some plans to make. Toodle-oo!"
For God's sake, no pictures of the shoes in that article, just a link to a long ass video where she allegedly holds them up. Im not watching a 20 minute video to see shoes.
Those look like pricey converse knock-offs, which implies the organisers are operating under a different definition of "sport shoes" than the rest of us...
3eb7988a1663 21 days ago [-]
Doing a real service to humanity.
Also - those shoes are ugly. Yet, I would not think twice about appropriateness. Would seem fine to wear to work, a funeral, or a state function.
boothby 22 days ago [-]
The rules specifically said "dress to impress" and she wore thousand dollar shoes. Ridiculous. Good for Magnus, somebody needs to take a stand and he's got the clout to do so.
reaperducer 22 days ago [-]
The rules specifically said "dress to impress" and she wore thousand dollar shoes.
Maybe not everyone is impressed by money?
boothby 21 days ago [-]
That's an abuse of quantifiers, and an interesting one. You suggest that the judges become literal fashion police, each individual with the authority to remove a contestant whose clothes are not impressive in their personal opinion. That should indeed be protested against; it's a chess tournament and not a fashion show.
The word "to" is commonly interpreted to mean "for the purpose of" in this context. That is, the contestant should put effort into making their appearance impressive. Which, I also find offensive, but to a lesser degree.
I'd propose that they certainly aren't "sport" sneakers, which is what she got dinged for. Unless you're a multi-millionaire playing tennis in a country club, I guess -- but the only reason a person would wear those particular shoes in sport would be to impress their peers.
And if you're not personally impressed by money, how would you interpret the "dress to impress" guideline? Would you find any shoes to be impressive? Perhaps no shoes at all? I'd lean towards 6" platforms, myself, as some people find tallness impressive.
reaperducer 21 days ago [-]
You suggest that the judges become literal fashion police, each individual with the authority to remove a contestant whose clothes are not impressive in their personal opinion.
See also: Tennis. Schools. Restaurants. Courtrooms. Offices. Stores. Even public sidewalks.
Welcome to society.
jval43 21 days ago [-]
Yes, and it's wrong in all those cases as well.
The rules aren't even universal, tennis clubs, schools, and even countries have different rules altogether, which highlights the absurdity of it all.
If you're going to enforce arbitrary rules, they must at least be objectively defined. Otherwise it just becomes a power trip for whomever decides.
21 days ago [-]
tremon 22 days ago [-]
Then the rules should have been more specific?
causality0 21 days ago [-]
This applies equally to everyone is always the rallying cry when a rule applies to everyone while not being equally onerous to everyone. It's like dress codes in schools that are much easier for girls to violate than boys, or office hairstyle bans that seem to only target styles used by black people.
abduhl 21 days ago [-]
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”
deskr 22 days ago [-]
What kind of a savage plays competitive chess in jeans‽
rf15 22 days ago [-]
I know right? You need a helmet and knee protection at least, it's a rough sport.
ssl-3 22 days ago [-]
I understand the necessity for the knee pads, as they clearly help with performing under-the-table negotiations.
But what function does the helmet serve?
pvaldes 21 days ago [-]
> What function does the helmet serve?
Protection from the biggest danger in chess, being hit by flying pieces.
deskr 22 days ago [-]
I seem to remember stories back in the day about threatening ashtrays and flipped chessboards. Helmets might not be a bad idea.
pmontra 22 days ago [-]
Ensure that no AI can beam moves to players brains. Tinfoil helmets, of course.
miceareacrutch 22 days ago [-]
Ballistic protection in particularly violent captures.
There's a narrative that Magnus doesn't care at all about FIDE as he is on good terms with the Saudis and their funding availability for events etc
steinvakt2 21 days ago [-]
Yep, this is it. Magnus played poorly, knew jeans were not allowed, made himself get kicked out so that he could spin this as FIDE being unreasonable. It's all about the saudi money. This has been a debate in Norway. Surprised to see so many pro-Magnus comments here on HN. It's all a play.
patrickany 20 days ago [-]
I’d surmise this was about promoting his new freestyle chess thing.
A loud silly issue where he can loudly tie back to what could be seen as “archaic” rules for the sake of rules and a federation that is not where the best players play.
Seems like it might be the beginning of a few issues for a handful of visible players :)
shevis 22 days ago [-]
The dress code is pretty outdated and doesn’t add anything of substance. Let the players be comfortable, we just want to see good chess!
julianeon 22 days ago [-]
Yeah, jeans should qualify as dressy enough for a chess championship in 2024. It's presentable and not insulting. We left the 50's a long time ago.
bmacho 22 days ago [-]
There is a random puzzle at the middle of the article as the illustration, and the solution at the bottom of the article.
fredoralive 22 days ago [-]
This appears to be a weekly chess column in the newspaper, and they all seem to have a chess puzzle in them[1]. I suspect in the paper it would be at the end of the column, with the answer on another page. It's perhaps a bit of an inelegant way to present it on the web version, but that's probably some sort of tradeoff with how the Guardian's website works, and if it's worth adding some sort of special case presentation for the chess column, which probably isn't exactly the most read bit of the site.
I think the dress code is stupid. But if he were against it, he should not have attended at all. To attend and make a scene is just about publicity. It touches the superficial thread of rebellion without being respectable or commendable.
viraptor 22 days ago [-]
Rules don't get changed due to people quietly saying "I don't like this rule" while staying at home. Public rebellion is what gets the job done. Protests that don't inconvenience anyone are irrelevant.
Aachen 22 days ago [-]
Would it have been quiet if the defending champion decides to stay at home and when someone asks him he says it's because of a disagreement about the event's rules? Wouldn't that have gone around and raised the issue/discussion?
I'm still undecided who's right here or who should have done what: I'm not for stupid dress codes, but it also seems silly to get hung up over if you can easily comply at no detriment to your performance or anything, so idk, just saying that it does seem like an option to stay home if you disagree when you're someone whose absence would be very conspicuous
cwillu 22 days ago [-]
We wouldn't be talking about it here, and I suggest that the same is true across many other forums that aren't specifically focused on chess.
vouaobrasil 21 days ago [-]
That is true, I won't argue there.
simplicio 21 days ago [-]
I mean...I feel like lots of rules are changed by people just saying they don't like the rule? Modern society would be pretty unworkable if the only way to change any rule was public rebellion.
(Plus, its not really clear to me that Carlson actually cares about the dress code rule? By his own admission, he broke it by accident, not like a concious act of rebellion, and his issue seems to have been with the way it was then enforced rather then the rule itself.)
janalsncm 20 days ago [-]
> he broke it by accident
Kind of goes to show how silly the rule is then, right? It’s not like he was wearing a swimsuit. Sport coat and jeans is pretty formal.
enkid 22 days ago [-]
Seems like publicity is the point. Getting headlines is a lot more likely to change something then just skipping the tournament.
cbg0 22 days ago [-]
On the other hand, this is the most impactful way to change antiquated rules.
vouaobrasil 21 days ago [-]
That is true.
21 days ago [-]
janalsncm 20 days ago [-]
He didn’t yell or cause a scene, he broke the rule, received a punishment and explained his reasoning in an interview afterwards. That is perfectly respectable in my opinion.
Part of what makes showing up in jeans way more valuable than not showing up is how normal it seems otherwise. Show, don’t tell, basically. If you didn’t know about the rule it wouldn’t have seemed out of place at all.
FrustratedMonky 21 days ago [-]
Everyone is arguing about 'jean's not being a big deal.
And, all dress codes are wrong.
So, can a female player wear a bikini? By the arguments here, then yes, that should be allowed. Would it interfere with game play? I think yes.
Can a man wear a bright orange Sarang with blinking lights?
How do you draw the line? Doesn't there need to be a line somewhere so there isn't chaos? It's just that todays generation now thinks 'jeans' are ok. 20 years ago they were not.
greatgib 21 days ago [-]
Something funny related to the topic of this news in my opinion:
in the picture selected by the newspaper, the sponsor of the event looks like to be the "Freedom Holding corp"...
Sooooo.. how about venues just be required to provide affordable black unisex chess mumuu's for players as needed? Problem solved?
pm2222 22 days ago [-]
Technically he withdrew and was not forced out.
Maxatar 22 days ago [-]
It looks like he was disqualified from one event and then withdrew for the other related event. He said he would change his pants for tomorrow but was told that he had to change before the start of the next game which was scheduled for today. When he indicated that he would not do so he was disqualified, ie. FIDE removed him from the schedule.
shkkmo 22 days ago [-]
Technically he was disqualified from the rapid event and withdrew from the blitz event.
searealist 22 days ago [-]
He was not. He was unmatched from round 10. He could continue to play after that if he corrected his attire.
geor9e 22 days ago [-]
So the only possible way for him to be disqualified is if he hung around for the rest of the tournament repeating the same thing over and over again? Sounds like newspeak logic.
8note 21 days ago [-]
that is the same thing as a DQ from the event
sambeau 21 days ago [-]
Here in the U.K., where so many of these stupid rules and customs originate, dress codes have always been a way to exclude the ‘wrong sort’. Which, is usually working class and poor people.
rurban 21 days ago [-]
Coincidence. The world best table tennis player, Fan Zen-Dong also just resigned, as well as two times world champion Chen Meng, from the sleazy organization called WTT. Which decides on WC and Olympics.
he chose to withdraw. he's not happy with fide anyway.
23B1 22 days ago [-]
I love watching institutions cling to silly little rules to the point where it actually hurts them. It's a perfect demonstration of the problems with groupthink.
roelschroeven 21 days ago [-]
I think it's not so much groupthink, but rather that those institutions feel the need to make themselves look important and essential to the sport, instead of being there to facilitate the sport.
23B1 21 days ago [-]
I would argue that groupthink is an umbrella term for what you describe; another might be 'bureaucracy' when used pejoratively, heh.
21 days ago [-]
spoonfeeder006 22 days ago [-]
I like watching chess videos of this guy doing online chess. I appreciate his being extremely down to earth and not arrogant by any means. Great vibes
mozzieman 21 days ago [-]
penalised by FIDE Council as follows: 5% of his/her prize
money shall be forfeited to the Organiser and a further 5%
to FIDE for each breach. In cases of serious misconduct,
the player may be disqualified from the event.
But the penalty he got was forfeit one game, i dont see that in the rules?
ergonaught 22 days ago [-]
I was pretty happy he didn’t cave in to this demand. He accepted the fine and agreed to change for the next game day.
They were being belligerent.
rurban 20 days ago [-]
And, he is allowed to play again. Wonder if the WTT bulges too
geor9e 22 days ago [-]
Not paired for round 9, meaning he was following the dress code for the earlier rounds. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Ok Magnus.
7e 22 days ago [-]
Probably having an off day and intentionally disqualified himself.
gerash 21 days ago [-]
Good on him. Stupid rule, stupid enforcement.
22 days ago [-]
codehotter 20 days ago [-]
Some context. The dress code and rules for enforcement are created by the players' representatives commission in FIDE, consisting of active and former competitive players [1] [2].
In a presentation shared with the players about the dress code before the event, jeans are listed on a slide titled "What's NOT allowed?" with "Not Approved" stamped in big red letters over a picture of jeans [3]. FIDE CEO says jeans have been banned in this event since 2018, and that players were asked for feedback on the dress code before the event, and none complained [4].
The same dress code presentation shared with players also has instructions for the Chief Arbiter:
The dress code is strictly enforced to maintain a consistent level of professionalism and respect for the event. The Chief Arbiter, in consultation with the FIDE Athletes Commission, will ensure that the dress code is upheld.
First Infringement
A financial penalty of 200 € for open events and 100 € for women's events. The player is allowed to play the current round.
Further Infringements
Exclusion from the pairings for the next round. Each round counts as one infringement.
Other top players were also asked to change their attire when found in violation. The hotel is a few minutes away [5]. Magnus Carlsen was notified of his violation after his second game on day 2 (round 7) and asked to change into approved attire before the third round of the day (round 8), played half an hour later [6]. Since he declined, he was excluded from playing in the last round of the day (round 9). This counts as a forfeit, and combined with Magnus' score until that point would make a podium finish unlikely, although he would still have been allowed to play in subsequent rounds [7].
In an interview, Magnus stated he was not having the best tournament, explained he had already lost his patience with FIDE due to an ongoing feud over the freestyle chess championship, and stated he declined to change into approved attire as a matter of principle and would withdraw from the rapid tournament and also the upcoming fide blitz tournament, apologizing to fans at home [8].
This is dumb. But so is golf attire in my opinion.
Admittedly I’m not into show for show’s sake.
molticrystal 22 days ago [-]
I think that is why some people enjoy John Daly in golfing. For those unfamiliar, look up him up on google images. He is known for usually wearing some sweat pants and smoking a cigar in tournament play.
fourseventy 21 days ago [-]
This site is cancer on mobile
moomin 21 days ago [-]
I remember in the late 80s there was a bar called “Lennon’s” in Liverpool. The dress code banned jeans. Pretty sure John Lennon would have despised the place.
NotYourLawyer 21 days ago [-]
> Honestly, I’m too old at this point to care too much. If this is what they want to do I” ll probably set off to somewhere where the weather is a bit nicer
Based.
llm_nerd 22 days ago [-]
"At the time of his default, Carlsen had scored 5/8 and was a point and a half behind the leaders, with little chance of retaining his title."
EDIT: I find it hilarious that this is downvoted. It's incredibly cogent to the point. If Magnus was leading the event I guarantee he wouldn't have pursued this distraction.
thatswrong0 22 days ago [-]
I’ve see Magnus come back from behind before. A lot.
He’s been fed up with FIDE for a while if you’ve been paying attention. There’s a lot more to this than just his pants.
llm_nerd 21 days ago [-]
It's an odds thing. He was unlikely to win. There are some very strong opponents. Could he have won? Sure. But note that he didn't protest the dress code at the beginning of the event.
And sure, he's "fed up" with FIDE (in the sense that everyone who thinks they are bigger than a league does). So why did he participate? If he had the purported principles, he should just withdraw from FIDE sanctioned events, no?
thatswrong0 20 days ago [-]
He was just like "I'll take the fine now and change pants tomorrow"
Changing organizations like FIDE doesn't happen by withdrawing.
kittikitti 21 days ago [-]
People take chess too seriously. The only thing being good at chess does is having more wins at chess, nothing else. It's not a sign of intelligence.
djaouen 21 days ago [-]
What is this, North Korea, where jeans are banned? Lol
alfiedotwtf 21 days ago [-]
Imagine chess tournaments just being about playing chess rather than pompous formalities that have zilch to do with chess.
Fnoord 21 days ago [-]
What's the point of this rule?
DonHopkins 21 days ago [-]
Imagine what a fuss they would have made if he wasn't wearing pants.
You just can't win...
syngrog66 21 days ago [-]
should not be on HN front page. shame on you folks
iambateman 22 days ago [-]
It’s a great day for the law-abiding contestants who would never stoop to such sloven. Justice! /s
FIDE is lost in the 80’s, and someone else is going to figure out how to make chess an entertainment sport and make a truly enormous amount of money.
hilux 22 days ago [-]
I was out for lunch with some friends. Came back, saw this, and thought "OK obviously some Onion copycat. Why is this being posted to Hacker News?".
Apparently it's true!??
pella 22 days ago [-]
> Apparently it's true!??
1.)
"Saturday, 28 Dec 2024 00:33 FIDE statement regarding Magnus Carlsen’s dress code breach" https://www.fide.com/news/3363
2.)
"Chess: Carlsen disqualified in New York after refusing to change out of jeans
The world No 1 was defaulted from the World Rapid Championship and has also chosen to withdraw from the World Blitz saying ‘it became a matter of principle’"
Had a friend who sold boats for a living. One day he was at a business meeting where the attire was listed as "business attire". When one of his buddies, another salesman, showed up wearing shorts, a t-shirt and sunglasses, my friend made a snarky remark about him not getting the memo about the attire. His buddy responds, "I don't know what business you're in, but I am in the boat business."
robotresearcher 22 days ago [-]
And here he is arriving at an event with a dress code.
Edit: removed extraneous arguments. Point here is that Pichai observes event-specific dress codes rather than assuming that Google’s code applies.
hilux 22 days ago [-]
What's your point? I'm not suggesting that Sundar ALWAYS wears jeans and NEVER wears suits.
I'm saying that it is ACCEPTABLE to wear jeans, even in a professional setting. Jeans are "smart business attire." (If the dress code were "formal," that would be something else. But it isn't.)
robotresearcher 22 days ago [-]
Jeans are not smart business attire. Google’s code is casual, not smart business.
kevinventullo 22 days ago [-]
I work at Google. I would not describe Google’s dress code as “smart business attire”.
searealist 22 days ago [-]
What's your point? If you find a photo of Larry Page in pajamas then you should be able to wear that to any Google event?
robotresearcher 22 days ago [-]
The point is that Pichai observes the dress code requested by the event host.
I wonder if people would care as much about chess if it didn't foster an image of sophistication and intellectualism? Imagine if most players just turned up in street clothes and looked more like software developers .. would sponsors and the public be just as interested? Would available prize money be as good?
reaperducer 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
John23832 21 days ago [-]
I don’t have a dog in this fight, but the mao suit was exactly inspired by western wear.
There are more traditional forms or eastern dress.
motorest 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
blagie 21 days ago [-]
Why? I'm neutral on Western. I'm fine with Western. I'm fine with non-Western. I'm not okay with discriminating against non-Western.
My personal preference is for places to use locally-appropriate clothing for the simple, pragmatic reason that e.g. Western suits in Sub-Saharan Africa get too hot. Most local clothing tends to have gotten what it is for a reason. Even Arab clothing -- much criticized in the West for covering too much skin in the heat -- does well in sandy environments and ones where sunburn is an issue, and tends to be loose enough to provide for adequate airflow.
mam2 21 days ago [-]
I'm the opposite of woke but he's not wrong that suits are a western thing and and enforcing it as if it's universal is a bit pushy
motorest 21 days ago [-]
> suits are a western thing
I think you're commenting out of ignorance. FIDE's dress code does accepts "national costumes", on par with suits and Bermuda shorts.
It's an arbitrary list of clothing items that is supposedly put together to "promote a good and positive image of chess", regardless of where you come from.
blagie 21 days ago [-]
"Business casual (European standards), which means long trousers or pants, shirt, jacket, with or without tie (no t-shirts, no polo, no jeans, no sports shoes or sneakers or slippers, no hats or caps (except for religious reasons) and the equivalent style of dress for women players.
National costumes and team uniforms are allowed."
It quite literally says "European standards."
National costumes -- I don't know the context here -- usually means vetted traditional clothing (such as, for India, a sari, but not the much more common selwar suit). It also -- by definition -- excludes minority groups (for example, Inner Mongolia or Tibet in China, or the Kurds in Turkey). There's also the very practical matter that "minority groups" include neurodiversity too.
The whole point is to judge people on their chess and not on their looks. It's the exact same issue as professional hairstyles or, before that, professional skin colors. A 1930-era US or German management consulting firm would obviously look worse to clients with a non-white consultant. There was an objective reason to discriminate in positions. That didn't make it right.
In either case, if the goal of FIDE was to make money, discriminating would make complete business sense, regardless of ethical value.
If the goal is to promote chess, people should be able to see themselves in the game, and participate regardless of how they choose to look. Back to the management consulting example, in 1930, a qualified black management consultant would serve the additional benefit of being an ambassador to and role model for their community.
lowbloodsugar 21 days ago [-]
So a USA player can wear blue jeans?
fnordpiglet 21 days ago [-]
FWIW blue jeans are about as western (literally!) as you get.
tedunangst 21 days ago [-]
Who said anything about requiring suits?
UniverseHacker 21 days ago [-]
> I'm the opposite of woke
English already has a word for that- asleep
Arch485 21 days ago [-]
No, "asleep" is the opposite of "awake". Woke is a different construct.
Maybe an antonym to "woke" could be "slept"?
7bit 21 days ago [-]
It couldn't, because that has a negative connotation in that context.
I find people who use it in a derogatory don’t do much actual thinking to start with.
The literal origin of its use in social justice realms was to put an emphasis and value on critical thinking.
By pondering the nature of society one can be “awoken” to the deeper sociological forces which shape individual lives.
I’ll freely admit the term has been perverted by a range of actors with motivations I disagree with.
But the original meaning and intent is valuable: all of us live in a world of hidden boundaries and power structures, but seeing that requires thought.
Many people don’t want to think for themselves, and they hate those that do.
codr7 21 days ago [-]
That's far from the whole story though.
Part of being woke is usually seeing others as asleep and not as enlightened, which means it's ok to lecture them to hell and back. There's a difference between thinking critically and looking for problems to feel superior.
griomnib 21 days ago [-]
I agree to an extent, I think the term lost the original meaning.
My main complaint with the state of politics is too little thoughts and reflection. I think cable news, talk radio, and social media are the root cause.
Reading a daily newspaper or viewing the nightly news gives you a full day to think things over. We are more driven by emotion as a result of never having time to digest and reflect.
codr7 21 days ago [-]
They tend to.
Agreed, and not just politics, too little thought and reflection period.
Fear will override almost anything, which is why we're being pounded with it from every angle. Time away maybe, disconnected.
seattle_spring 16 days ago [-]
Probably worth noting that the people who throw around “woke” as a pejorative also tend to be the ones calling people they disagree with “NPCs.”
krapp 21 days ago [-]
You aren't wrong, but to be entirely fair, the original meaning of "woke" came from the black activist community and referred to the hidden boundaries and power structures of systemic white supremacy, ignorance of which could directly threaten their lives.
I think it's important to remember that specific context when talking about where "woke" as a concept comes from, its general acceptance within the leftist community has, unfortunately (and maybe inevitably,) come with a bit of whitewashing.
griomnib 21 days ago [-]
Totally agree.
ripped_britches 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
Dilettante_ 21 days ago [-]
Sometimes, when a HN user and a news article love each other very much[...]
xenity7 22 days ago [-]
It didn’t violate the dress code…
nitinreddy88 22 days ago [-]
Why it shouldn't be? Is there any rule book which defines.
gverrilla 21 days ago [-]
[flagged]
BenjiWiebe 21 days ago [-]
Do they really? I have some black slacks that are 10 year old hand-me-downs from a relative and they look fine. My dress shirt for multiple years was a $5 second hand purchase - and I got more compliments on that shirt than on the ones that I got new.
UniverseHacker 21 days ago [-]
Most such things are more about insider cultural knowledge than actual money. Most “upper class” activities and styles can be done cheap or free, but you need to know how.
gverrilla 21 days ago [-]
Anectodal.
chirau 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
threatofrain 22 days ago [-]
There are exemptions to all legal systems in the world, and you're using words like "official petition" and "civil disobedience" for a game.
foobarian 22 days ago [-]
[flagged]
cool_dude85 22 days ago [-]
He's one of a few extremely high profile players to publicly support (and maybe financially back / have a stake in?) Freestyle Chess, which may or may not be a venture capital-backed attempt to force a schism in the FIDE World Chess Championship.
RandomThoughts3 21 days ago [-]
He is shareholders of chess.com since they bought out Play Magnus. He is not losing it. He has competing economic interests to FIDE and very little interest into being cooperative with them more than is strictly necessary.
JadeNB 22 days ago [-]
> I wonder if this guy is slowly going off the deep end like a number of other past chess masters. He's been such a great example for aspiring players for a while now but I can't help but worry.
I don't know much else about him, but nothing in this story reads to me like someone going off the deep end. It sounds like someone who picked a perhaps-unfortunate hill to die on, though if you aren't willing to take risks to argue against silly rules when you're at the top of your game then when will you, but not someone losing his faculties.
jhghikvhu 22 days ago [-]
Well there are other circumstances too. He didn't defend his classical chess champion title. He likes his alcohol.
He hasn't gone off the deep end (past tense). But is it a process currently in progress? Only possible to say in hindsight but does certainly seem possible.
devit 22 days ago [-]
Probably just burned out from chess, especially training the whole day for competitions.
We are animals and eventually the brain will rebel against extreme repetitive mental effort that is perceived to be at least partially useless (and given he's already been the world champion, it's easy for part of him to think there's no point in training).
iambateman 22 days ago [-]
He’s fine.
CarlitosHighway 20 days ago [-]
I like this as a European person. And because Americans are screeching about it.
There have been tensions between the FIDE organization and top players like Carlsen since the latter have been promoting an alternative chess organization around Freestyle chess (aka Chesss960), which has slightly different rules.
I.e. this is less about "dress code enforcement" and it is more about "Carlsen is fed up with the FIDE organization in general".
He wasn't trying to protest the dress code or make a scene, it wasn't on his mind at all. He had been out for an appearance with a sponsor during a break, then came back to the venue for the next round, and didn't notice that he was wearing jeans and it didn't cross his mind that that would be a violation.
Then he was told to change, and there wasn't enough time for him to go do that before the upcoming round. He thought he was told he could do it either after that round or for the next day, but then was told he would be excluded from that round, and at that point he said f--- it and withdrew entirely.
The controversy was about exactly how the penalty is imposed. The rule is a fine for the first violation and disqualification for multiple. It wasn't clear if his appearance for the day would count as one violation (so he could just incur the fine and wear correct clothing tomorrow), or if each round would be a separate violation. It also wasn't clear if he could play while in violation or would be excluded from each round until he changed. Precedent from other events wasn't clear for either of these.
The headline of "disqualified" is wrong and did not happen - he chose to withdraw.
• He chose not to contest it, for which there is a clear protocol, and simply withdrew.
• Based on two previous well-publicized incidents, it DID cross his mind that it would be a violation.
"The principle is simple: it is still required to follow the official dress-code, but elegant minor deviations (that may, in particular, include appropriate jeans matching the jacket) are allowed."
"They were saying that jeans were generally not allowed. If it's generally not allowed, that must mean that there must be exceptions. And if I, with a decent attempt at an outfit apart from that, didn't meet that exception, I don't see what would, frankly."
I'm not saying I agree with the rule or the specific way it was applied... But Magnus definitely knows the rules.
Edit: for people downvoting... Can you please explain how the world's best chess player of all times wouldn't be familiar with FIDE rules? How is that even plausible? All of the players who compete at these events know the rules.
Magnus pants were fine. He is absolutely correct that they were singling him out and you can look back to many recent tournaments to see the clear double standard.
Refusing to match him with a competitor because of this, effectively preventing him to compete, was disproportionate regardless.
Edit: I see you added a section that specifically disallows jeans after I posted my comment. We could have saved some time.
It's entirely possible to read 4.10.1.1, conclude that blue jeans are fine, and then skim over 4.10.1.3.
However the Carlsens read it, after reading it, years will have passed. Carlsen didn't dress like he did after a studious read of the rules. He just put on some nice clothes that were no different from what he usually wears at tournaments.
Except he forgot a belt. A proper organiser would have offered to lend him one.
He's not a regular participant, Magnus is almost an institution of his own.
Either way, it's literally his job to follow the FIDE rules (which is unusual but true), and he's the best in the world at his job.
---
> "It's entirely possible to read 4.10.1.1, conclude that blue jeans are fine, and then skim over 4.10.1.3."
In all fairness I originally did the same, so I hear ya. But I'm not a pro at this.
He is also very much no in agreement with FIDE (a tradition for chess champions - see Fischer, Kasparov). And to be honest FIDE is on FIFA level when it comes to being dodgy as an organisation so it’s hardly surprising.
This is some combination of
- "I'm above the law"
- teenage rebellion
- protest against the system
Meanwhile Arkady Dvorkovich, President of FIDE : https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1hntyjb/arkady_dvork...
Dvorkovich is putins puppet, covering for Medvedev when putin was pretending to take a break.
4. 10. 1. 2. Dress code for women.
Classic shoes.
Trouser or skirt suit or dress, preferably unicoloured, but not mandatory
So, the logical conclusion is perhaps, no surprise, that FIDE don't really want to enforce a strict dress code, but rather want to promote the sport, and that translates differently into dress codes (or lack of them) for men vs women...
FIDE is an agency that exists to promote and develop chess.
Magnus Carlsen is the biggest draw in the chess world by far.
A minor dress code violation should have been dealt with a fine as the rules very much allow for the benefit of the game.
Also, I don’t think there’s a single player who would complain about that (well, other than Kramnik, but Kramnik complains that spectators breathe too loud and that’s cheating).
And then FIDE should have stepped back and thought about the recent growth in the popularity of chess, since the pandemic and thanks to the work of the likes of Magnus and Gothamchess and should have reconsidered the strict dress code rules in the first place.
It makes me wonder if he's been enabled by tournament organizers being lax about enforcement of the rules for top players, when it should be the opposite - those with the most experience should be held to the highest standards because they should know better.
Women athletes who are forced to wear what amounts to underwear when the men aren't - they have a valid complaint about uniform standards. This sounds like a bunch of whiny silver-spooned brats.
For what it's worth that was the same organization - FIDE - that has made those terrible choices in the past as well.
Everyone is saying it's literally their job to know the rules, but for players like Hikaru and Magnus, this is not their job in any meaningful sense, it's a hobby.
Also, Magnus isn't lookirg for sympathy, he's just saying why he can't be bothered complying with these regulations, there's not that much in it for him.
for the most part theyre paying a lot for non-playimg middlemen to be in the way
It's not his occupation in some ways. He makes a lot more money from every other venture, so there is not a major economic incentive for him. Likewise, he works with creators and platforms that pull in big numbers of engaged viewers.
What
I don’t read the license agreement of every bit of software or the privacy policy of every website, after all.
You need to care about the bits around the actual chess playing, but regulations for these things are overwhelmingly made of "play nice, be reasonable, don't be a dick" rules. If you try to play by those high-level rules, apologise if you break the nitty gritty of the low-level rules and fix things at the earliest opportunity, it shouldn't be a big issue. Also, things like dress code can easily be a "not an actual rule, just convention" sort of affair.
Likewise, I use GPL software daily, for a living - doesn’t mean I’ve ever read the license.
They’re professionals because they understand the game and are in the top 1% of people who play it. Not because they are the best at memorising rules. The latter group are people Who become umpires/referees instead.
This one is hard to tell because not all of them have been alive at the same time. Morphy was really, really good, but in the 1850s.
Currently there's Ivanchuk, who is good enough to beat anyone but has no stamina so can't win tournaments reliably enough to be world champion.
Both parties could have handled this much better.
It's pretty black and white.
Reference: https://www.fide.com/docs/regulations/wrbc_regulations_2024_...Wish I had found that section earlier, but I'm less familiar with the chess regulations so it took me a bit to assemble all of the essential parts.
When you're the third party and they trusted your quoting skills, that criticism is pretty weak.
Well, you are the one who posted the quote, which I used as the basis for my comment. I thought I had read it twice over, and saw no reference to jeans, hence my question. Not statement, question. I did not make anything up.
Did you by any chance add the relevant section of the rules to your comment after I asked a question? The proper thing to do would have been to quote the relevant portion of the rules, instead of adding that later.
So, no. Apologies not accepted. Sorry.
You can gather them from anywhere they exist. There might be places where it is easier to gather facts than Reddit.
But wherever you get purported facts, it's hard to know whether they are merely claims, or actual facts. Most of us do indeed short-circuit our evaluation of claims when we trust the source, and although this sometimes causes us to wrongly believe false claims are facts, I think it's probably a good optimization on balance.
Nevertheless, "who should we believe?" remains one of the most fundamental questions of human existence. The tremendous energy required to confirm the factuality of even a trivial claim makes me agree with what I think is your premise — the quoted poster was making a highly dubious assertion of "facts".
But I think s/facts/claims/ would suffice to fix it.
on edit: note I do not say anything about verification, as that is a different thing as to whether or not a thing is a fact. Verification is about how sure the knowledge we have is a fact, but whether a fact is verified or not it remains a fact even if we do not know it is a fact.
Source?
How do you define reliable?
Why is the authors identity important?
Facts don't change because you know the authors name, or trust the source, or like the person telling lies.
The idea that anonymous sources, or "untrusted" sources (for someones definition of trusted) cannot be the source of facts is gaining ground right now, and it needs to be pushed back on wherever it is seen.
It's a lazy Ad hominem, and it's down right dangerous.
I don't care if it's elected officials claiming Russian malinformation or a random chess thread, this is the hill I choose to die on.
Unknown sources on the internet are usually not reliable. Anonymous sources should not be trusted, even when there are more than one saying the same thing. Bots and deliberate misinformation abound.
This is not a hill you should die on as it’s a hill that can greatly harm democratic society.
Quite often this is simply not possible.
Next time I read "according to our anonymous sources in the FBI", I'll make sure I reach out to them for verification.
Which mythical reliable sources? Humans are known to make errors regardless where they work.
The facts are he violated the dress code rule and then withdrew when it was enforced. He then mentioned his FIDE alternative in the ensuing press coverage.
Edit: also, on paper, him attending a sponsor event and then violating a rule at the competition because he "didn't have time to change" speaks volumes about his priorities.
I find it weird to witness all the drama, pomp, and circumstance around the professional chess scene. It is a board game. I couldn't care less if they decided to play pool-side with swimming trunks and flip-flops.
Magnus' priorities are clearly that he's won everything up for grabs and plays for fun. He doesn't need to worry about money nor rules set by a sport federation stuck about half a century in the past. If only the rest of us were so free!
What I was saying is that I think Magnus was protesting, and doing it as a publicity stunt. He didn't forget anything. He didn't expect to be given a pass.
And FIDE also weren't being dicks by enforcing the current rules.
Attending corporate sponsorship events sounds soul crushing for someone so free, not fun. His priority is keeping his sponsors happy as he tries to fire up his new thing.
The arbiter didn’t clarify what was going on first saying it’s a 200$ fine which was meaningless to him, then latter saying you need to change or skip the next round.
That’s the “objective” according to https://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS_2013/FIDE/Proposal_....
Clean jeans are normal for “smart casual” now. And the dress code shouldn’t be so prescriptive. If you can pass as “smart casual” somewhere else, should be legal.
There are people who think that it can be reformed and there are people who don't think that FIDE can improve, but certainly no one argues that its past proves its commitment to professionalism.
I'd say you'd be hard-pressed to find a worse performing global sport federation.
This is nothing more than a dumb outdated rule. He wore jeans. Not a fluorescent jump suit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0OhiPwBff0
I think Magnus is under a lot of slow-burn pressure. He's the best, but chess is a grindy game, it only takes one mistake to lose, everyone is watching him, there's nowhere to go but down, and he wants to have fun instead of practice his ass off.
A few tantrums might be a way of getting out of the competitive scene on his own terms.
Clothes has nothing to do to with chess.
I am not sure knowing the rule but really have jean ... it is crazy rule in any case.
During Kasparov's era sentiment was similar and ultimately an entirely new players' association with their own world championship cycle was created. In the end they reunified with FIDE, but we're back on the trajectory for something like that to happen again.
I would wager alot that chess.com is strategizing behind the scenes about ways to become that replacement.
I think there'd be material there for an investigative journalist (if such a thing still exists to get out the old whiteboard and start figuring out connections and trying to piece together what might be going on behind the scenes. In any case, there's a lot of money involved.
For the 99% people who don't know what it is, I figured than "slightly different rules" was a reasonable summary.
> Freestyle and FIDE organization are not in competition.
You may want to ask yourself why FIDE is acting like they are indeed in competition. Perhaps they see something that you don't? Several top players getting behind Freestyle chess probably has something to do with it.
(Freestyle chess, Chess 960 and Fischer Random are names for the same game)
is there a game thats closer to fisher random than chess? checkers? pokemon the card game?
fisher random has the same pieces that move the same way, and at least half the pieces have same starting position as chess (the pawns)
if you compare to say, duck chess, only the opening of fisher random is different, and i imagine sometimes its the same? in duck chess, the openings, midgames, endgames and tactics are all different, whereas in fisher random, the midgames, endgames, and tactics are the same as in chess. fisher random is a superset of chess, and not by much.
engine chess is still considered chess, and similar to fisher random, the pieces and pawns start in different places than they do in chess
That is because the only rules that are updated are the position of the pieces in the back row, and castling.
It's a bit like painting with oils or acrylics.
To me it seems like mostly the same game, just without the ability to study and memorize openings (the most tedious part of chess)
They're competing for the time and attention of the players. If there are two competitions on the same day, players will have to choose which competition to play in. That in itself will determine where the sponsorship money goes unless they can agree not to put events on at the same time. They won't do that because it isn't in either group's interest.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE_World_Fischer_Random_Ches...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Play_Magnus_Group
Still, it seems like a step in the right direction.
We will see how other players react today. Will they wear jeans in protest?
I agree that rules against jeans make limited sense. It makes more sense to forbid worn down or shabby looking attire. But one should abide by the rules one signs up to.
If it's the only competition in town, and the rules are unjust, and the organisation in question considers you #1 chess player in the world… I can hardly imagine better circumstances for civil disobedience.
Or is it a comparative grey matter evaluation in time and pressure constraints?
you provide an example, but the luck is in guessing what the opponent would check or not check.
a clearer example is trying to play out of your opponent's prep. you dont know what lines theyve prepared, and youre taking a gamble with each move on whether theyve prepped it or not. they cant prep every possible line in the available time, regardless of how long (ding wasnt prepared for most of gukesh's attacks, with months to prepare)
theres also luck in that your opponent may not have slept well the night before because a car alarm went off at 2AM, so their comparative grey matter evaluation in time was lower than usual, or they just played a tiring long game where they lost, right before this game.
One of the biggest examples of this was in his title defense against Caruana. Every game of that match had been drawn, and in the final game Magnus had a very promising position where he could squeeze with basically no risk.
Instead he offered a draw which was immediately accepted. That sent the game to rapid tie breaks where he casually butchered Caruana 3-0.
And no great player is bad at any time control - they're just 'less good'. Except Magnus - since he's #1 at everything he's just more or less dominant.
https://ratings.fide.com/top_lists.phtml
Hikaru mentioned there had been drama between FIDE and himself about having cameras at the same tournament — and he felt FIDE refused to give him airtime on their streams. Hikaru also had drama with FIDE about the Freestyle league.
I think both happening at the same tournament, which they had threatened to boycott if FIDE didn’t permit them to also play Freestyle league, indicates this is political.
But if you are going to bother signing up, is 'jeans' really the hill to die on?
If the beef is with the organization, just boycott altogether.
Otherwise, just put on some pants.
EDIT:
Perhaps the downvotes are because of disagreement with methods of protest?
What brings greater attention to your cause?
1. A boycott, you just don't go to the event? And make a press statement about it, that probably doesn't get any headlines.
or
2. Sign up, go, then angrily get disqualified, based on some stupid rule, which gets a lot of headlines, and attention focused on silly rules of the organization?
Guess, if the goal was to effect change, then maybe this was the correct move. But if it was just being pissi, then why bother signing up, you know the rules, so just don't go.
Discretion should be a thing.
This being a thing at all certainly proves Magnus’ point. Its not 1970.
I agree. This isn't high school rebellion. Is the real world.
Adults dress appropriately for different places and different times. You can be denied admission to a restaurant, a business, an office meeting, or even a concert for not dressing appropriately. This is no different.
Grow up and put on some pants. Be sloppy in your own home.
It's also about showing respect to the host, you dress nicely. Would you wear jeans to church or to a wedding?
Where I'm from, this is normal. There are even theological cases to be made against dress codes in church, beyond "don't show up naked" and similar basics.
If your "host" has unreasonable expectations, then it is on some level unreasonable to follow them.
Japes abounded and some of the more conservative family members were giving severe side-eye, but at no point was it suggested that he be sent home. He showed up in jeans (offense), we gave him a lot of ribbing that he took in good stride (punishment).
The appropriate response to offenses like this doesn't have to be banishment.
Everyone is arguing about 'jean's not being a big deal. And, all dress codes are wrong. So, can a female player wear a bikini? By the arguments here, then yes, that should be allowed. Would it interfere with game play? I think yes.
Can someone wear a bright orange Sarang with blinking lights?
How do you draw the line? Doesn't there need to be a line somewhere so there isn't chaos? It's just that todays generation now thinks 'jeans' are ok. 20 years ago they were not.
> It's just that todays generation now thinks 'jeans' are ok.
'jeans' literally are 'pants' though. If a dress code specifies pants, jeans are fine, unless they specifically exclude jeans as a type of pants.
This is completely not True.
Either
1. You know it is not true, and are just trolling.
or
2. You do believe this, and have just redefined these words to fit a particular world view. Which I guess can happen. If this generation has re-defined the words 'jeans' and 'pants', then guess, I can't argue against how people re-define words. Just goes to how the world is being divided by re-defining entire vocabularies.
A companies dress code will generally exclude jeans if they are not acceptable.
I haven't redefined anything.
You are correct. Looked it up, and Jeans are sub-category of Pants. Though, I live in the US and have never had someone refer to jeans as pants. It seems a technical definition that I've never seen used that way. I know arguing with HR they did not see it that way.
Perhaps HR really meant 'slacks'. as in Dressy Pants.
Really, I had to look it up. I had always thought of 'pants' as 'dress pants'. So to have such a broad category of 'pants' seemed like an older technical definition I've never seen used commonly.
But, if you saw in other posts. For the Chess rules. There was another section of the rules that specified 'no jeans'. So for the current controversy, it didn't specifically hinge on this definition of 'pants'.
I concur except about the bureaucratic administrators. I think they do this because the upper class will replace them if they don't do the work of asserting the upper class's power.
The billionaire they were working for wore stuff that was expensive, old and hence comfortable. He didn't have to play to anyone.
He did dress up to meet the president though, he had to play a part.
The president has to dress well all the time, he is always playing a part, in front of the whole world.
Wear your part. Or don't, if you don't want any part in all of this (which seems to be Magnus's motivation, or lack of it).
The upper class doesn’t need dress code. They know they are the upper class. Dress codes are for petit bourgeois and the upper middle class who try to pretend but everyone knows they are actually middle class.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200925160442id_/https://www.fi...
But I wonder if another player complained to the administrators.
3.a. The following is acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation. -- Suits, ties, dressy pants, trousers, jeans...
3.b. The following is NOT acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation. -- Beach-wear slips, profanity and nude or semi-nude pictures printed on shirts, torn pants or jeans...
> The following is acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation. Suits, ties, dressy pants, trousers, *jeans*.
And then later:
> The following is NOT acceptable for men players, captains, head of delegation. Beach-wear slips, profanity and nude or semi-nude pictures printed on shirts, torn pants or jeans.
Magnus did not wear torn jeans [2], I can’t see any justification for this enforcement choice.
Don’t even get me started on the sex differences in these rules.
[1]: https://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS_2013/FIDE/Proposal_... [2]: https://x.com/MagnusCarlsen/status/1872819038554148882
[1]: https://doc.fide.com/docs/2024_WRBC/wrbc2024_dress_code.pdf
That Carlsen will be able to point at this clause could embarrass them greatly, perhaps even legally?
I think if anybody's to be commended for their principle it's probably the organisers? They have their dress code, he violated it, was warned, continued to violate it, and they enforced the rule despite his name.
The reason is (according to Carlsen) of course that FIDE is driven by a strict adherence of «rules» which are defined by a small set of people in power. Whenever something happens they always say «oh, but these are the rules», but the process for changing the rules is very one-sided and power driven. This was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Yet another example of a silly unnecessary rule.
[1]: In an earlier WC he got stuck in traffic and arrived in ski clothing, but changed after the first round.
This every government or organization that has ever existed. Every human group from beginning of time. Left or Right, up or down.
You can't call a rule new, which is nagging them for nearly a decade now:
https://www.chess.com/news/view/dress-code-incident-at-world...
This is sport event after all, and he is an athlete!
It is like asking female athletes to wear corset and long dress, because that was traditional dress in Victorian England!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-29/chess-player-fined-ov...
I think they come off better, personally. I'm not saying that should be the dress code, he shouldn't be allowed to wear jeans or whatever, or even that it's bad of him to decide not to play rather than to play in jeans. I just don't think 'it became a matter of principle' is a great argument for him, because it just makes me think better of the organisers for similarly standing by theirs.
another player was not fined or punished at all for wearing basically the same thing
I can’t even figure out what the principle was.
I'm not a chess dress code rules lawyer, but I think the principle here is that the judge was power tripping and hit him twice for a single dress code violation.
Yes, we have. That ship has sailed long ago.
But, in this context, specifically, the GP might have meant 'censured' instead of 'censored' and it was autocorrect or mental confusion.
Magnus is a tremendous chess player. He's also, by all evidence, a massive asshole, and continuously shows boorish behaviour and terrible sportsmanship.
And yes, he is a massive asshole, at least in regards to chess. He is an incredibly sore loser, constantly makes it about himself (at the cost of every other competitor, such as in this case: they can't have beaten him, but instead he had to do this spectacle to give himself an excuse to exit and to asterisk their win). He has done this sort of thing again and again.
He has loads and loads of fanboys who will always excuse this behaviour. Who'll say that he has earned the right to be like this. They'll adulate poor sportsmanship like showing up terribly late "like a boss", as if this isn't contemptible behaviour. Eh.
And he can. He might be the greatest chess player ever. Doesn't change that he's obnoxious and boorish.
The masses are the ones who elevate him and assume that because he plays a game so well then the spotlight must be on him. Magnus did not seize the spotlight of our attention and he never owned it.
And yes, people do drop out. It happens. Magnus is famously a very sore loser, however, so when he suddenly is a Dress Code Liberty Fighter to drop out, it should be called out for the ridiculous ruse it is. That people are actually celebrating it and talking about his principles...how profoundly gullible can people be?
The guy has an insane number of fanboys, however. It's absolutely bizarre.
Why would smart people care about denim vs. trousers?
Let competitors wear pajamas- it makes no difference.
Mostly it's about the sponsors. It's much more difficult to get sponsors for an event if the participants are dressed like they slept in their clothes. That's why organizers try to impose minimal standards on dresscodes.
Jeans and sneakers are maybe debatable, but players showed up with cargo pants, shorts or tank tops on other events.
In the FIDE regulation for that event jeans were explicitly mentioned as not allowed. FIDE would have made a fool out of themselves when allowing Magnus to wear the jeans.
FIDE needs to embrace the younger generation that think the game is cool. Ancient dress codes are a distraction.
Textbook slippery slope fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
Anyone who considers jeans to look like "clothes someone would sleep in" is immediately dubious in my book. Jeans are so extraordinarily uncomfortable to sleep in that I don't think I've ever intentionally done that in my life.
This looks to me like a case where FIDE got greedy and forgot to balance the talents interests with the sponsors.
Would be interesting if they can get mattress companies or apparel companies that have good comfy clothes as sponsors. Why not play chess on a firm mattress?
Also, he looked very sharp in his outfit with the jeans. Frankly it was a better ensemble than I’d look in one of my suits.
Prescriptive contest rules suck, but I don’t like the attitude endemic to nerds that truly smart people don’t care about personal aesthetic. There’s no more honor in not caring how you look than there is in not caring about food or fine art. I have friends that are smart, capable professionals that look like they only get new clothes when their mom notices their shirts exceed the totinos pizza roll stain threshold and drags them to Bob’s— whether it’s at home, work, wedding, date night, court, the gym, the club, a con, etc. You’d expect them to reject people’s tendency to judge people on their looks, but ironically, they deem anyone that puts any effort into their appearance (a.k.a. doesn’t solely dress for comfort) shallow, unintelligent, and boring. Predictably, gender expectations play a huge part.
His outfit is sharp as hell Fwiw
Then IMO you should be on Magnus' side here. He is a truly smart person and IMO he looked clean, groomed, and ready for business in those jeans. He wears a mindfully put together outfit of good quality. This is good character, is it not?
More generally, appearances are important because they are clear signs of attention and care. Something worth our respect is worth dressing up for, and a collective dressing up reinforces the importance and elevation of a given event or moment over other events or moments of lesser import.
Attention and care for appearances, not for the job to be done.
One could interpret it that the sharp looks are there as a cover for ... less than stellar competence.
You cannot win with statements like that.
its kinda cruel that you think homeless people who have maybe less than jeans should be given no respect, because they dont have a suit
Take a sport like rowing. Technically there's no reason why all the rowers in a boat needs to be dressed identically, but it looks more professional.
Rather for people with a really good memory. Which, to me, makes the game extremely boring and bland.
Chess to me is boring because the better player should win/draw unless they blunder. And we (generally) know who the better player is because of ratings.
I’ve always much preferred games that in the short run have a luck component that can create massive swings (poker, backgammon, Scrabble) and inequality.
I'd play some Go but I have almost no one to play with casually. And since I play for fun, online isn't so good.
learn your tactics and end games instead.
And that attitude led us to these honestly inane events.
Chess is for everyone, my 5 year old plays chess. Being world class is another thing.
They happen to be rules that people decided are fun, or interesting, or something. If the dress code isn't fun they should change it.
And for that matter... this tournament is a blitz game, itself a change of rules. Perhaps it would be well suited to a change in dress code. Formal clothes for classic chess. Show up in your PJs for a game that takes as long as brushing your teeth.
Ah yes the wonderful "everything is equally valid" postmodernism. Why don't the organisers subscribe to that? They must be dumb-dumbs.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I'm usually not one to stand on formality but that does feel kinda gross.
Reportedly he was not sure he'd even bother to show up to this event[2].
[1]: https://www.chess.com/blog/Eternal-Pawn/chess-at-the-crossro...
[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErKi4NcLlOc
FIDE conceded — and then punished Magnus for his jeans and refused to allow Hikaru to have cameras. It’s hard not to see it as political, given the context and fact FIDE went after multiple top level players.
Magnus Carlsen Got KICKED OUT Of World Championship (5 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNTD_R8Scbk
"Earlier in the day, another participant, Mr. Ian Nepomniachtchi, was also fined for breaching the dress code by wearing sports shoes. However, Mr. Nepomniachtchi complied, changed into approved attire, and continued to play in the tournament," the statement added."
A: To see administrators administrate.
B: To see chess players play chess.
Someone somewhere has lost sight of a most basic fundamental that everything else they may care about rests on.
hikaru was trying to get camera feed of his games to stream, and fide said no
https://x.com/MagnusCarlsen/status/1872819038554148882
FYI 'OOTD' == 'outfit of the day'
Carslen: "But you can't disqualify me! This is outrageous! I've been planning for this tournament for months, and now you're telling me I can't play because of my pants?"
FIDE: "I'm afraid the rules are quite clear, dear fellow. Proper dress code is required, and jeans simply won't do. You should have read the fine print."
Carslen: "Fine print? What fine print? This is a travesty! A complete and utter waste of my time. Do you have any idea how much effort I've put into preparing for this tournament?"
FIDE: "I understand your frustration, but rules are rules. Now, if you'll just step aside, we have a schedule to keep. The tournament must go on without you."
Carslen: "Without me? But I'm the best player here! You can't just kick me out like this. It's not fair!"
FIDE: "Life's not fair, my friend. Now, if you'll excuse us, we have some important work to do. Good day to you."
Carslen: "But wait! You can't just leave me here. What am I supposed to do now?"
FIDE: "That's not my problem. Perhaps you could try your hand at some other hobby. Knitting, perhaps? Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a tournament to run."
Carslen: "You know what? Forget it. I'm withdrawing from this tournament. And you know what else? I'm going to take my jeans and start my own chess tournament. With blackjack. And hookers. Actually, forget the chess tournament. I'm just going to start a jeans-only nightclub. That'll show you!"
FIDE: "What? You can't do that! You've already been disqualified for the dress code violation."
Carslen: "Oh, I can do it. And I'm going to do it. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some plans to make. Toodle-oo!"
At least the Daily Fail has pictures - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12908497/Chess-kaza...
Also - those shoes are ugly. Yet, I would not think twice about appropriateness. Would seem fine to wear to work, a funeral, or a state function.
Maybe not everyone is impressed by money?
The word "to" is commonly interpreted to mean "for the purpose of" in this context. That is, the contestant should put effort into making their appearance impressive. Which, I also find offensive, but to a lesser degree.
I'd propose that they certainly aren't "sport" sneakers, which is what she got dinged for. Unless you're a multi-millionaire playing tennis in a country club, I guess -- but the only reason a person would wear those particular shoes in sport would be to impress their peers.
And if you're not personally impressed by money, how would you interpret the "dress to impress" guideline? Would you find any shoes to be impressive? Perhaps no shoes at all? I'd lean towards 6" platforms, myself, as some people find tallness impressive.
See also: Tennis. Schools. Restaurants. Courtrooms. Offices. Stores. Even public sidewalks.
Welcome to society.
The rules aren't even universal, tennis clubs, schools, and even countries have different rules altogether, which highlights the absurdity of it all.
If you're going to enforce arbitrary rules, they must at least be objectively defined. Otherwise it just becomes a power trip for whomever decides.
But what function does the helmet serve?
Protection from the biggest danger in chess, being hit by flying pieces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2DaDziImgY
(Submitted URL was https://www.timesnownews.com/sports/magnus-carlsen-disqualif....)
A loud silly issue where he can loudly tie back to what could be seen as “archaic” rules for the sake of rules and a federation that is not where the best players play.
Seems like it might be the beginning of a few issues for a handful of visible players :)
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/sport/series/leonard-barden-ches...
I'm still undecided who's right here or who should have done what: I'm not for stupid dress codes, but it also seems silly to get hung up over if you can easily comply at no detriment to your performance or anything, so idk, just saying that it does seem like an option to stay home if you disagree when you're someone whose absence would be very conspicuous
(Plus, its not really clear to me that Carlson actually cares about the dress code rule? By his own admission, he broke it by accident, not like a concious act of rebellion, and his issue seems to have been with the way it was then enforced rather then the rule itself.)
Kind of goes to show how silly the rule is then, right? It’s not like he was wearing a swimsuit. Sport coat and jeans is pretty formal.
Part of what makes showing up in jeans way more valuable than not showing up is how normal it seems otherwise. Show, don’t tell, basically. If you didn’t know about the rule it wouldn’t have seemed out of place at all.
So, can a female player wear a bikini? By the arguments here, then yes, that should be allowed. Would it interfere with game play? I think yes.
Can a man wear a bright orange Sarang with blinking lights?
How do you draw the line? Doesn't there need to be a line somewhere so there isn't chaos? It's just that todays generation now thinks 'jeans' are ok. 20 years ago they were not.
he chose to withdraw. he's not happy with fide anyway.
But the penalty he got was forfeit one game, i dont see that in the rules?
They were being belligerent.
In a presentation shared with the players about the dress code before the event, jeans are listed on a slide titled "What's NOT allowed?" with "Not Approved" stamped in big red letters over a picture of jeans [3]. FIDE CEO says jeans have been banned in this event since 2018, and that players were asked for feedback on the dress code before the event, and none complained [4].
The same dress code presentation shared with players also has instructions for the Chief Arbiter:
Other top players were also asked to change their attire when found in violation. The hotel is a few minutes away [5]. Magnus Carlsen was notified of his violation after his second game on day 2 (round 7) and asked to change into approved attire before the third round of the day (round 8), played half an hour later [6]. Since he declined, he was excluded from playing in the last round of the day (round 9). This counts as a forfeit, and combined with Magnus' score until that point would make a podium finish unlikely, although he would still have been allowed to play in subsequent rounds [7].In an interview, Magnus stated he was not having the best tournament, explained he had already lost his patience with FIDE due to an ongoing feud over the freestyle chess championship, and stated he declined to change into approved attire as a matter of principle and would withdraw from the rapid tournament and also the upcoming fide blitz tournament, apologizing to fans at home [8].
[1] https://doc.fide.com/docs/90%20Congress%20Agenda%20and%20Ann...
[2] https://www.fide.com/directory/commissions (GM Ahmed Adly, GM Eugenio Torre, IM Dinara Saduakassova, WIM Jesse Nikki February, GM Irina Krush, GM Wei Yi, IM Alina Kashlinskaya, IM Oluwafemi Daniel Balogun, IM Noaman Omar, GM Ioan-Cristian Chirila, IM Irine Kharisma Sukandar, GM Ivan Cheparinov, GM Evgeny Tomashevsky, WGM Aleksandra Dimitrijevic)
[3] https://doc.fide.com/docs/2024_WRBC/wrbc2024_dress_code.pdf
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWi5CIKhuSs [ Magnus Carlsen Jeans Scandal | Full Story ] from 15m00s
[5] https://www.fide.com/news/3363
[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrK88j-fyaw [ FIDE World Rapid Championship 2024 | Rds 6-9 ], Magnus' round 7 game finishes around 2h24m30s, round 8 2h59m50s
[7] https://www.facebook.com/chess/videos/-magnus-carlsen-is-unp...
[8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWi5CIKhuSs [ Magnus Carlsen Jeans Scandal | Full Story ] from 3m28s
Admittedly I’m not into show for show’s sake.
Based.
EDIT: I find it hilarious that this is downvoted. It's incredibly cogent to the point. If Magnus was leading the event I guarantee he wouldn't have pursued this distraction.
He’s been fed up with FIDE for a while if you’ve been paying attention. There’s a lot more to this than just his pants.
And sure, he's "fed up" with FIDE (in the sense that everyone who thinks they are bigger than a league does). So why did he participate? If he had the purported principles, he should just withdraw from FIDE sanctioned events, no?
Changing organizations like FIDE doesn't happen by withdrawing.
You just can't win...
FIDE is lost in the 80’s, and someone else is going to figure out how to make chess an entertainment sport and make a truly enormous amount of money.
Apparently it's true!??
1.) "Saturday, 28 Dec 2024 00:33 FIDE statement regarding Magnus Carlsen’s dress code breach" https://www.fide.com/news/3363
2.) "Chess: Carlsen disqualified in New York after refusing to change out of jeans The world No 1 was defaulted from the World Rapid Championship and has also chosen to withdraw from the World Blitz saying ‘it became a matter of principle’"
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/dec/27/chess-carlsen-...
The title sponsor is Google, a well-known tech company.
Here's Google CEO Sundar Pichai in GQ: https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/lifestyle/article/sundar-picha...
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/05/04/multimedia/04even...
Another event, another dress code.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQfQwah...
Edit: removed extraneous arguments. Point here is that Pichai observes event-specific dress codes rather than assuming that Google’s code applies.
I'm saying that it is ACCEPTABLE to wear jeans, even in a professional setting. Jeans are "smart business attire." (If the dress code were "formal," that would be something else. But it isn't.)
Did I make it so obscurely?
EDIT: Actually, the poster above was not accurate. The dress code is found here- https://www.fide.com/docs/regulations/wrbc_regulations_2024_...
And it was much more precise than "smart business attire.".
Though I’m sure the old guard would say some dress is too distracting.
Traditional Norwegian dress for women and men.
https://thespurtrail.com/the-bunad-norways-traditional-folk-...
what would you call the ones in the Middle East?
There are more traditional forms or eastern dress.
My personal preference is for places to use locally-appropriate clothing for the simple, pragmatic reason that e.g. Western suits in Sub-Saharan Africa get too hot. Most local clothing tends to have gotten what it is for a reason. Even Arab clothing -- much criticized in the West for covering too much skin in the heat -- does well in sandy environments and ones where sunburn is an issue, and tends to be loose enough to provide for adequate airflow.
I think you're commenting out of ignorance. FIDE's dress code does accepts "national costumes", on par with suits and Bermuda shorts.
https://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS_2013/FIDE/Proposal_...
It's an arbitrary list of clothing items that is supposedly put together to "promote a good and positive image of chess", regardless of where you come from.
National costumes and team uniforms are allowed."
It quite literally says "European standards."
National costumes -- I don't know the context here -- usually means vetted traditional clothing (such as, for India, a sari, but not the much more common selwar suit). It also -- by definition -- excludes minority groups (for example, Inner Mongolia or Tibet in China, or the Kurds in Turkey). There's also the very practical matter that "minority groups" include neurodiversity too.
The whole point is to judge people on their chess and not on their looks. It's the exact same issue as professional hairstyles or, before that, professional skin colors. A 1930-era US or German management consulting firm would obviously look worse to clients with a non-white consultant. There was an objective reason to discriminate in positions. That didn't make it right.
In either case, if the goal of FIDE was to make money, discriminating would make complete business sense, regardless of ethical value.
If the goal is to promote chess, people should be able to see themselves in the game, and participate regardless of how they choose to look. Back to the management consulting example, in 1930, a qualified black management consultant would serve the additional benefit of being an ambassador to and role model for their community.
English already has a word for that- asleep
Maybe an antonym to "woke" could be "slept"?
For clarity, my suggestion was also sarcastic.
It’s best to learn nuances of word usage before “correcting” others.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
What exactly do you think that word means?
The literal origin of its use in social justice realms was to put an emphasis and value on critical thinking.
By pondering the nature of society one can be “awoken” to the deeper sociological forces which shape individual lives.
I’ll freely admit the term has been perverted by a range of actors with motivations I disagree with.
But the original meaning and intent is valuable: all of us live in a world of hidden boundaries and power structures, but seeing that requires thought.
Many people don’t want to think for themselves, and they hate those that do.
Part of being woke is usually seeing others as asleep and not as enlightened, which means it's ok to lecture them to hell and back. There's a difference between thinking critically and looking for problems to feel superior.
My main complaint with the state of politics is too little thoughts and reflection. I think cable news, talk radio, and social media are the root cause.
Reading a daily newspaper or viewing the nightly news gives you a full day to think things over. We are more driven by emotion as a result of never having time to digest and reflect.
Agreed, and not just politics, too little thought and reflection period.
Fear will override almost anything, which is why we're being pounded with it from every angle. Time away maybe, disconnected.
I think it's important to remember that specific context when talking about where "woke" as a concept comes from, its general acceptance within the leftist community has, unfortunately (and maybe inevitably,) come with a bit of whitewashing.
I don't know much else about him, but nothing in this story reads to me like someone going off the deep end. It sounds like someone who picked a perhaps-unfortunate hill to die on, though if you aren't willing to take risks to argue against silly rules when you're at the top of your game then when will you, but not someone losing his faculties.
He hasn't gone off the deep end (past tense). But is it a process currently in progress? Only possible to say in hindsight but does certainly seem possible.
We are animals and eventually the brain will rebel against extreme repetitive mental effort that is perceived to be at least partially useless (and given he's already been the world champion, it's easy for part of him to think there's no point in training).