A post-mortem of the 2020 Candidates Tournament

Apart of context - kudos to lichess for publishing an excellent article like this. You completely destroyed FIDE for their actions, without ever being subjective.

Having an opinion is not politically biased. They are expressing their view, which they are entitled to do.

It seems that you more disagree with their opinion, rather than that you think they are politically biased. It is easy to accuse people of bias rather than make your own political views known, which would open you to criticism or disagreement.

Other than that, I think what they are doing here is fantastic. We need more chess journalism and more people shining a light on the world of chess. The more people looking at the chess world the better, and with sufficient oversight and scrutiny hopefully we can reform the chess world, so that it is more open and better for chess players, has less cronyism and corruption and more openness and transparency. In addition to this, if chess as a sport is more interestingly and dynamically run, with better tournaments, fairer qualification structures for things like the candidates and more embracing of technology and new ideas and ways to reach new audiences, that would be good too.

FIDE has had a bit of a reign of terror over the sport for a long time. Hopefully that can change in some way, either through a new governing body or a reform to the current one, along with other changes.

Someone worked long and hard to make this article nice and smooth. I very appreciate that.

@GrayTimes they incuded some politically biased facts to change the whole picture.
The most obvious example is the story with the Alliance of Doctors which is not really a proper workers union but a political antigovernmental organisation critizing the government policy doesn't matter what they do (I think they have about 100 people there), which is irrelevant, compared to the proper doctors unions such as przrf with more than 10'000 participants. Citing their opinion on the matter is far from the opinion of major political and healthcare structures is already very biased.
The article about the major contacting the russian president on dangers of the epidemy in Russia came already after the Candidates tournament on the 24 of March, they shouldn't cite it in this context, FIDE was organising everything much earlier.
Next we have the story of a coup in the Tournament - not a single source or insider information provided, again just some sort of speculation.
In the area where the tournament was they have now (a month later!) only about 50 confirmed cases, and this region is as big as Germany...

I mean i could go on and on, the point is not that we have different opinions, but that they stated only one part of the story, completely ignoring the other one.

I love lichess as a website from all perspectives and only because of that I am expressing some critism here.

@Spirit_Of_Light I can appreciate the criticism. Those points might be valid, but I do think they're minor. They don't change my opinion that better decisions could and should have been made.

This was a very interesting read, thanks for publishing it in a visible place! Let us learn from this!

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.