@ChessExplained@GMSokolovIvan@romain_edouard@FIDE_chess Exactly. It’s not rocket science here. And if a player chooses not to, they can bear the responsibility. Mouse slips in games at these time controls are the most spurious of argument. I love 3D pieces too, but come on.
@comedycubes @tatasteelchess I thought so too, but I can now see how that could be exactly what happened: they could have offered a choice (which they didn't need to based on the rules) and Alireza then angrily responded they could play the tiebreaks on any of the other tables.
@Great__Red_spot @tatasteelchess The truth is they should have just ordered them to move since that was allowed under the rules the players agreed to. Making an offer of any kind was the real problem.
Maybe Alireza wasn't done dirty after all. This is what the rules were when he entered the tournament (highlight mine)! So what if Alireza was in the wrong here? #TataSteelChess https://t.co/yHIQUtujHW
@Bennyficial1@chesscoachandra Conflates time controls and otb. Chess with a generous time control is the real thing, regardless if one is manipulating a mouse or 3D pieces. The rest is preference and aesthetics...and deserving of a generous spirit, not gatekeeping.
@IexistentiaI @GelarPradipta @GMHikaru The 2nd part is true, but there’s nothing dubious about the SB tiebreak system...it goes way back and Alireza knew the system when he started.