So loss in American Champs

[JMcNicoll]

The story is here, <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.chessbase.com/post/us-champ-r9-forfeit">http://en.chessbase.com/post/us-champ-r9-forfeit</a><!-- m --> .
So, overzealous arbiters spoiling the game for everyone or silly player ignoring warnings and claiming ignorance of the Laws?

[JRedpath]

Would have said arbiters spoiling the game if it had not been for the fact he had already been warned several times not to do it according to reports, therefore has no-one to blame but himself!

[Andy Howie]

The story is here, <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.chessbase.com/post/us-champ-r9-forfeit">http://en.chessbase.com/post/us-champ-r9-forfeit</a><!-- m --> .
So, overzealous arbiters spoiling the game for everyone or silly player ignoring warnings and claiming ignorance of the Laws?

Latter, he was warned twice. Bit surprised they jumped to forfeit though. Would have thought a time penalty first

[Alex McFarlane]

So is a player with a bit of a history.
He could well be Autistic and need everything spelled out to him. This is not however the arbiter's job.

The arbiter told him not to make notes on his scoresheet or he would forfeit the game. This. as Andy says, seems a bit extreme going from warning to loss of game without any of the punishments in between for what is after all not the most serious way of using notes. It could certainly be distracting to an opponent and as such had to be stopped.

The arbiter says he told So he would lose the game if he wrote messages on his scoresheet again. So took this literally and wrote them on a piece of paper instead.

If this was an ordinary player with severe autism I would have some sympathy for his situation. However, it is difficult to accept that someone could get to his level of play without knowing the Laws adequately regarding using notes.

So appealed requesting only that the game should not count for rating. He did not appeal the Arbiter's decision. The Appeals Committee did not agree. Even if it had it is uncertain that FIDE would have agreed not to rate the game.

[hamish olson]

it might well be for the best anyways - much better for So to lose a game in a US champs that he can't win anyways than in a match with Carlsen for the world championships or something like that.

[Phil Thomas]

So is a player with a bit of a history.
He could well be Autistic and need everything spelled out to him. This is not however the arbiter's job.

The arbiter told him not to make notes on his scoresheet or he would forfeit the game. This. as Andy says, seems a bit extreme going from warning to loss of game without any of the punishments in between for what is after all not the most serious way of using notes. It could certainly be distracting to an opponent and as such had to be stopped.

The arbiter says he told So he would lose the game if he wrote messages on his scoresheet again. So took this literally and wrote them on a piece of paper instead.

If this was an ordinary player with severe autism I would have some sympathy for his situation. However, it is difficult to accept that someone could get to his level of play without knowing the Laws adequately regarding using notes.

So appealed requesting only that the game should not count for rating. He did not appeal the Arbiter's decision. The Appeals Committee did not agree. Even if it had it is uncertain that FIDE would have agreed not to rate the game.

Have to agree with the Appeals Comittee to have the game rated.
Otherwise each time I find myself losing - - -rather than resign I could write some notes to encourage myself to get disqualified from that game and not lose any grading points.

[Geoff Chandler]

Cannot understand any of this.

Wesley So was warned twice.

On the third time Wes should have claimed a draw by three fold rep.