Anish Giri and the "39 Steps" to the Candidates

What are you all's feelings about Anish Giri withdrawing from the Isle of Man Swiss to preserve his rating advantage?   

A couple of points:

The rules of the Swiss https://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/Rules_for_the_FIDE_Grand_Swiss_2019.pdf

"4. 5. Players who fail to provide a satisfactory reason for withdrawal, after they have signed the contract, could be sanctioned by the
decision of the FIDE Presidential Board."

"Could be" could be an empty threat.  Or an invitation to grease the palms of the presidential board.

What is their process to determine, and how open is it to the public, if the offender should be/could be sanctioned? What would that sanction entail?  

Why even put this in the contracts if there isn't even a looky-loo?  

Who would this affect?  The most direct person it affects, that Giri has withdrawn from the Swiss, is MVL.    Maxime Vachier-Lagrave must be tired of being on the outside of important tournaments through questionable technicalities in FIDE Sanctioned tournaments.

Maxime is 3rd in the line up for qualifying by rating.  Giri is first, followed by Mamedyarov, then Vachier-Lagrave.   Mamedyarov has a good chance to qualify via the Grand Prix.  (Yes there are questions about his loss to Radjabov in the World Cup... however enjoyable it was to see Radjabov get some of that old magic back... it is still stained by how he and his compatriot have gamed draws in the past).  

If Maxime had known he was able to enter and withdraw from the tournament.  Perhaps he would have.  He stated so much in a tweet.  https://twitter.com/vachier_lagrave?lang=en

So... what is Anish's justification for his withdrawl?  COWARDICE?   He is afraid of losing his spot by rating.  He has not secured a ticket to the Candidates because he has to maintain his lead through the Dec. 2019 FIDE rating list.   

Let's say Anish makes it throught the Candidates and into the World Championship match.  

Would you be willing to endorse a player who achieved such a height through cowardice? 

Would you root for someone who you know would turn away from a legal contract and a chance to psychologically imbue fear into opponents through an open tournament win?  This person isn't playing to win.  They are playing the odds for a good paycheck.   Anish Giri will never win an extended match with Magnus Carlsen.   He doesn't have the guts or nerves to do so and he is proving it through his actions.

Giri should play the tournament he signed up for under the rules he put his signature and oath as a person.  

Is Anish Giri's word no good?  Is he teaching his child (and all of the other children learning chess and looking up to him) that they shouldn't do what they say they would?

FIDE and Chess.com who are sponsoring the event need to make clear their actions towards his behavior.  Prove that his sponsors believe in a player who can win and stay true to their word.

Or what do we believe about his sponsors?  Are we to look at these companies and their products or services through veiled eyes?  

I have no horse in the race except as a spectator.  A patzer at best playing the game.  But I am a fan.

I've been a fan of the game since the early 2000's and watched it morph from watching game relays on chess.net (wtf happened to them?) while listening to chess.fm for commentary to what it has blossomed into with chess.com on twitch and chess24.   I usually have both running in the background when I work.

I've considered sponsoring events on the sites to advertise my small art production company.

But why should I even consider $1000 to sponsor a casual tournament when rules to a contract are either not enforced or are not impartial?   

I have to admit that IM Levy Rozman has me riled up a bit.  But good for him to address this topic.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/490710446

Watching tournaments at the highest level is a luxury for me.  One that more often than not leaves me on an emotional down swing after it is over.  The thrill of finding moves in the vein similar to GM's is quite satisfying and endorphins bloom in my brain.  I never studied chess as a kid and it always seemed outside of my socio-economic background.    Growing up it was a sign of intelligence and wealth that one could afford a coach.  With what websites like chess.com et al  provide, the opportunities for kids to learn the game at an early age and succeed in playing at a high level is unprecedented.   Everyone wants to know what the game can teach kids.  Why should we put it in our schoolsj?  Why should I buy this program or book?  

While I'm not a strong chess player, I didn't even pick up the game outside of learning the rules till I was 20, it has taught me to be prepared.  Life has a probabilistic curve to it and if you make yourself ready you can take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves.  Now having children of my own... will I show them the tactics off the board?  And whose?  What morals do we present?  Is it about the result or how we play the game? 

Back to the point:  Does Giri want to be stained en-route to the candidates?  There is a good chance he will not win the Swiss but maintain his ratings lead.  Is he that afraid of Vachier-Lagraves rating?

Are we the vierwers cheated out of Maxime and Anish playing in the tourney?  The drama their rating battle could provide?  Should Maxime be allowed to take Anish's place? (He was awarded an invitation by his rating after all!)  Should Giri be forced to play or eliminated form chances in the Candidates?  Should Giri be forced to play and Maxime's invitation re-instated?  How did this affect the players in the tourney?  Have some wasted prep?

I feel like I could go on but seriously.  What do you all think?

apologies for typos

You call it cowardice. Others call it pragmatic.

I'd call it pragmatic if it wasn't strongly discouraged, if not prohibited, in the rules.

It is a call on his character.  Look at what Ding did.  He could have coasted on his rating.  But he put it on the line with his World Cup Play.   He took a chance to expose his weaknesses by pushing his opponents to prove themselves.  While I'm no fan of the Giri draw jokes... he has proven his play beyond that stale meme... he has not yet proven himself in tough spots in super tournaments outside of earlier this year when he finally placed first in the Shenzen masters.  

I guess what constitutes a satisfactory reason is rather subjective - it could be argued that qualifying for a tournament that's basically a satellite championship to playing for the world champs is a satisfactory reason, and as you point out it only says "could" be sanctioned.

I'm not bothered either way, I don't particularly like watching chess, I suspect all it does is make MVL a more likely recipient of the wildcard as that will then be seen as the "right thing to do".

I agree that this will be the most likely result.  And maybe I should just cancel my online memberships to play and view games... and play live games in town.  A bit more of a hassle to get a game but I won't have to be paranoid about cyborgs.  Focus on the local live competition instead of watching twitch or something else.  Might be on to something there...

"Would you be willing to endorse a player who achieved such a height through cowardice?"

"Anish Giri will never win an extended match with Magnus Carlsen.   He doesn't have the guts or nerves to do so"

"Is he teaching his child (and all of the other children learning chess and looking up to him) that they shouldn't do what they say they would?"

"Does Giri want to be stained en-route to the candidates?  There is a good chance he will not win the Swiss but maintain his ratings lead.  Is he that afraid of Vachier-Lagraves rating?"

"Should Giri be forced to play or eliminated form chances in the Candidates?  Should Giri be forced to play"

This is all exaggerated. Quite understandable that he withdraws given the circumstances. It's just that it's Giri that makes people more angry than when others did similar things. In the Grand Prix series 2012-13 Grischuk finished 13 places ahead of Svidler. The latter decided to withdraw from the last event so he could play the Russian Superfinal that started the day after the Grand Prix finished. Svidler preferred to prepare for the Russian Superfinal, that he won, and was partly because of this given the wild card to the Candidates instead of Grischuk, who was higher rated and had done considerably better in the qualifications. The sponsor being Russian made it quite certain that a Russian player would get the wild card, and Svidler getting it this way caused little or no discussion since he is much more popular than Giri. In spite of Svidler's withdrawal being against the rules, and considerably weakening the last Grand Prix event, which may well have affected the outcome.

This is perhaps a good point to bring up.  That this has happened before in some sense.  I don't remember it being pointed out back then by another player it directly affected.   Perhaps the wildcard selection needs to be more transparent in the process.  The main point is to exaggerate it a bit to spotlight that sponsors may have more pull in determining certain outcomes than others.  And that FIDE/chess.com need to be fair and open about their contracts. 

While Giri's decision is his own how to conduct himself it isn't winning any fans in this instance.  In general I've been a fan of his banter and trolling as it adds some dimension/drama to the game.  

Peter may have also been selected by having won the Russian championship 7 times by then, placed second in the 2005 WCC and third in the 2007WCC and enjoying his peak rating around that time.  Grischuk for sure had his merits but the sponsor could have ostensibly gone with either being that they are both Russian.   I don't know the specifics of it but it seems to have a little different flavor to the situation.

Either Way It wasn't a direct withdrawal from a qualifying tournament to protect his rating.  He didn't sit around to shield his chances he played the Russian Superfinal. And Won.