26-08-2014, 11:12 AM
The more I think about it the less I like guideline 2 (although of course I understand what it is trying to achieve). Two issues have sprung to mind
1. I can refuse to play a disabled player if I wish. I could simply resign on move 1, just the same as I could against any able bodied player. The rules of chess cannot compel me to play if I simply don't want to.
2. What does correctly paired mean? Lets say we are in a FIDE rated tournament and the arbiters make an incorrect pairing but do not discover their error until after the draw is published. If I refuse to play because the draw is incorrect and the arbiters say they cannot change the draw because it is a FIDE rule what happens then? So as bizarre as it may seem maybe the rule should be about (disabled) players against whom you are paired, because it doesn't (necessarily) matter if the pairing is correct or not.
1. I can refuse to play a disabled player if I wish. I could simply resign on move 1, just the same as I could against any able bodied player. The rules of chess cannot compel me to play if I simply don't want to.
2. What does correctly paired mean? Lets say we are in a FIDE rated tournament and the arbiters make an incorrect pairing but do not discover their error until after the draw is published. If I refuse to play because the draw is incorrect and the arbiters say they cannot change the draw because it is a FIDE rule what happens then? So as bizarre as it may seem maybe the rule should be about (disabled) players against whom you are paired, because it doesn't (necessarily) matter if the pairing is correct or not.