An Un-jean-ial dispute
An ongoing dispute over who wears the pants in world chess.
The World Rapid Championship was a great event, and Volodar Murzin, the surprise winner of the tournament, deserves massive kudos from the chess world for his outstanding play, his good nerves, and his resilience. Unfortunately, an idiotic sideshow is receiving most of the attention, so let’s get that out of the way, try to forget it, and then I’ll write a second post focusing on the event’s last two days, omitting further discussion of the controversy and its participants.
So: FIDE has a dress code for the event. Might it be stupid? We can have that argument, both about whether there should be a dress code (it seems obvious to me that it should, and the player at the heart of the controversy doesn’t dispute this) and whether the dress code as stated gets everything right (there’s definitely room for argument here). There can also be reasonable arguments about what sorts of penalties are appropriate and how lenient the arbiters should be.
Let’s get to the details. What does the dress code say? The first problem is that it isn’t particularly clear. In a way, that’s good; in a way, that’s bad. (The advantage of absolute clarity is that everyone knows what to expect, but it could lead to terrible policies at the margins, especially if those charged with enforcement have a draconian streak. On the other hand, vagueness may be appropriate when the subject matter has fuzzy boundaries, but there’s the danger that someone might deliberately take advantage of the lack of clarity.) You can find a link to FIDE’s PDF on the subject here; this is what it says:
The dress code for the playing venue is Smart Business Attire, aiming for a balance between professionalism and comfort. This allows for individual expression while maintaining a consistent level of elegance.
Men:
Suits, trousers, long-sleeve or short-sleeve shirts, polo-shirts, shoes, loafers, jackets, vests, sweaters, or national traditional dress (with prior approval from the FIDE Technical Delegate).
There follow pictures, first of what is approved, and then of what is not. Four categories are offered in the “not allowed” category:
Sneakers “all styles” - Avoid athletic footwear and opt for more formal shoe options.
Jeans - Jeans are generally not considered business attire.
T-Shirts - For men, choose collared shirts or polo shirts. For women, consider blouses, dresses, or more formal T-shirts.
Torn Clothing - Ensure that all clothing is in good condition and clean.
These rules/guidelines have been in effect for a number of years and apparently were produced by a players’ committee rather than non-playing bureaucrats. The general idea is a good one: players should look like professionals, because they are, and should present themselves in a way that makes the game more attractive (or at least in a way that doesn’t detract from the game). At the same time, chess is a sport (or at least something close to a sport), and clothing shouldn’t get in the way of their performing at their best. (Wearing jackets and ties would not be helpful, to put it mildly, especially in a time scramble. And I don’t really get the point of the no-sneakers rule. They’re more comfortable, they’re better for your feet, and they’re less likely to make a distracting “clack” on an uncarpeted floor. Besides, there are also dressy-looking sneakers.)
All that is by way of background. During round 7, I think, Magnus Carlsen was told by the/an arbiter that since he (Carlsen) was wearing jeans (he had rushed from another event and inadvertently kept his jeans on), he was in violation of the dress code. As you can see on page 7 of the FIDE Dress Code PDF, the first infringement is a 200 Euro fine; the second is exclusion from the pairings for the following round. Carlsen received (and apparently paid) the fine and was asked to change for the next round. Carlsen asked if he could finish the day in jeans and then play in approved pants the next day, to which the arbiter said no. Carlsen had time to change for the next round - his hotel was only three minutes or so away - but decided not. He played in jeans again, and the arbiter carried out the threat of not pairing Carlsen for round 9. Carlsen then withdrew from the event and initially said he was going to leave town and skip out on the blitz event as well.
I mentioned above the issue of vagueness, and as Carlsen himself has pointed out, it’s not clear that he actually violated the rule. As you can see above, it says of jeans that they “are generally not considered business attire” (emphasis added). That implies that they are sometimes considered as business attire, but doesn’t go so far as to say that they are “smart” business attire (again, see above). The rule is vague, and it’s possible that Carlsen’s jeans were classy enough to pass muster in a business environment.
There’s a further subtext to all of this. Carlsen is trying to organize some sort of “Freestyle” (i.e. Chess 960/Fischerrandom) chess world championship, but FIDE maintains that it alone has the right to officially designate a Chess960 competition as the world championship. (I don’t know the details, but there were at least rumors that Carlsen considered not playing in the World Rapid & Blitz because of this issue. I might be completely wrong on this particular point, so if you can confirm or contradict this, please do so.) There was some thought that he might have been singled out on this account, or alternatively that he was needlessly inflexible out of his own anti-FIDE animus.
Anyway, it seems to me that the arbiter could have been more flexible, but he was in a bind. If he backed down with Carlsen, he would have received endless grief from other players and his bosses, particularly as there were others (notably Ian Nepomniachtchi for a sweater he was wearing) who were also fined and warned. But it’s not at all obvious to me that Carlsen shouldn’t have just backed down, changed, and then worked with FIDE to change or clarify the rule. Just because one can act like a 400-pound gorilla doesn’t mean one should. A last point, irrelevant to the principle of the matter but relevant when it comes to deciding whether the “opponent” is really an adversary or just someone to disagree with, is that FIDE has shown some flexibility with Carlsen in the past. They recognize that he’s a golden goose, and even if they haven’t given him everything he wants, when he wants, my impression is that he gets consideration that no other chess player has received since Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov were champions.
Okay, readers, comment away. But realize that my enthusiasm for this topic, and in general (with exceptions) for what chess players do off the chess board, is around the same level as it is for the Giuoco Piano with 4.d3 or 5.d3 and for college football teams other than the University of Notre Dame’s.