@pawngrid said in #28:
> idk, I've never played competitive chess, but. can't you just train yourself to tolerate distractions better? or maybe wear earplugs?
probably. i suppose one could also train themselves to just git good at chess, have you considered that?
hi.
If the opponent cant play chess he will try some tricks... just like uhmm that, MAYBE!
@Durarbayli said in #30:
> In my opinion, it's essential that arbiters take a more proactive approach to address distractions during chess games. I believe that training arbiters to identify and address distractions early on in the game would be a significant step forward. Currently, I have observed that arbiters often do not fulfill this role effectively.
Indeed I gave up asking arbiters for help. I have started to use transparant custom earplugs. To fabricate such earplugs they inject a liquid in your ears and let it cool down so it has exactly the shape of the ear. It removes all noises. You don't even hear anymore draw offers from your opponent.
Nobody objected yet against those transparant custom earplugs. I also only use them if I am disturbed by noise. As they are transparant it is clear that it is just some sort of plastic without inside a device for signals. It is not cheap however but worth the investment.
you are just salty he was playing better than you. Coughing can be distracting but if the opponent is sick and normally doesn't cough, it is just an exception for that tournament. You should not have the right to tell him to stop. It's not intentional distraction.
I've played someone that would always try to make movements to distract the opponent, that was different and intentional.
Women with cleavage might be 50/50, it is difficult to know if it is intentional, but it is very distracting ;)
Moreover, he asked you to postpone the final because he was sick and you said no.....
Then you cannot complain about coughing in that situation anymore.
Maybe we should think of chess more like Walmart. A percentage of the time there is shoplifting, and a percentage of time people will use stuff then return it, as well as other unethical/illegal behavior.
If I go to a tournament, I will just expect something bad to happen to me 10% of the time, i.e. be paired against a cheater, get sneezed on every move, hear coughing, etc.
Understanding statistics, it can happen to anyone, so it's all fair, and it just creates a little variance with the rating point gains.
Maybe I can reduce this number to 9% by being extra nice to my opponents. And maybe I can minimize damage by bringing an emergency kit with face shield and ear plugs.
Walmart spends millions per year to deter shoplifting because it saves them money (they can't stop it).
Criminals have motive - money or goods. Chess players will cheat just for fun.
It's probably best to prepare for the worsening of ethical behavior in chess by taking peace in mind that the abnormalities will be rare. Relax a little. The threat is stronger than the execution.
@jeffreyashton said in #47:
>
So this is about working on pre-event self-priming. include some adversity proportion. Not far from the insurance point of view. or should i say actuarial. Still, the moral or adversity could be shaved off to let only the avoidable distractions being minimized.
This is not (just) about intended adversity. but just environment being conducive to best thinking for all. I have no clue about what is the average experience.. been reading here only.
I guess there are many ways to improve the quality of thinking environment, or how the same stimuli might affect the cogitive (and affective intertwined) efficiency of individual players. More than one aspect being raised by the blog.
Chess should be integrative. We have a new member in our chess club. He is heavily crippled, in a wheel chair, using a speech computer, medical assistance always at his side. Respiratory difficulties make him cough extensively. Can we manage to integrate him in one of our chess teams for championships? We'll try, because he has so much fun playing OTB.
