ModernPhilidor · @ModernPhilidor
8th May 2023 from TwitLonger
My response to GM Hess' post about hybrid events
I am going to respond to GM Hess' tweet from a player's perspective. I do not know GM Hess personally but his tweet made me upset because what is written in that tweet is far from the truth. I will try to refrain from any personal attacks and strictly stick to the subject.
If you know anything about me and my chess, my years of chess pursuit and hundreds of facebook posts, thousands of hours spent grinding chessable courses, if you watched me play in person, you know me as a person of impeccable integrity. I am very passionate about the game of chess. I made a National Master at the age of 33 after being stuck at the 2100 USCF level for 11 years. It took me another 10 years to get to 2200 FIDE and a FIDE CM title. If you know me, you know I would not participate in anything shady or rigged when it comes to chess events. My whole life I stood strongly against cheating in chess of any kind.
Hybrid events were great tournaments, in my humble opinion, they were the best-run events in the USA. You get pairings ahead of time and can prepare, you can play a variety of strong players and get the games FIDE-rated. There are multiple levels of anti-cheating detection which is important to me.
I have played 17 of these events in Los Angeles, Seattle, San Jose, and Las Vegas, mostly with a time control of 90+30 and some with a time control of 60+30. I have scored 36 wins, 22 draws, and 29 losses. All my games are available in the database for anyone who is interested to study them. I had only one draw that went shorter than 20 moves. I have played hundreds of hours of competitive chess in these hybrid events. Most of the games are very interesting and deep: I have taken lessons with the GMs where we would spend an hour per game digging deep to go over what happened, fascinating stuff! It is my intent to make a video collection of my games played in these events when my time permits.
I have never bought a game from anyone and always played fair. To the best of my knowledge, and I have a big chess network and a lot of connections, and I am not aware of a single instance of any US player "paying" for a rating in these events.
As a chess player, I have benefited greatly from participating in these events. My journey began in November 2021 when I played my first hybrid tournament, losing all 3 games. At the time, my FIDE rating was only 2011. However, I persevered and continued to participate in hybrids, resulting in significant growth. Currently, my FIDE rating is 2203, with a peak of 2268 in September 2022. While hybrids were my primary focus for the past two years, I also competed in multiple IM RRs across Charlotte, Chicago, New York, and California, as well as a few open events. In most of these tournaments, I performed at a FIDE level between 2150 to 2230, which is comparable to my current FIDE rating. Furthermore, I have also achieved notable results, such as tying for 1st in the National Open 2022 U2300 section with 4 others in a field of 110 players and tying for or winning 1st place in 3 other events in 2022.
But enough about me. Let's talk about the reality of how hybrid events were run. If you were to observe any of the hybrid events or study the actual games or talk to the players and organizers, you would find hybrid events have many safeguards against cheating, including players being on camera, their computers being on camera, screen sharing taking place, zoom calls being recorded, arbiters observing the players, and last but not least chesscom's anti-cheating detection being involved.
The reality of the hybrid events is that young players between ages 12-18, who have low FIDE ratings due to the pandemic and not enough FIDE-rated events in the USA, who all have GM coaches, are playing against older people who are 45-70 years old and often somewhat overrated. The result will be in favor of the kids and their ratings will grow a lot (especially due to K=40) whether the games are played OTB or online. It saves time and money for the kids' parents to not have to travel, as many of these parents work demanding jobs in the very best companies in Silicon Valley and Seattle etc; it allows Europeans to make a side income by getting appearance fees (to perform at their best effort and not to throw games!), keeps coaches employed, and gives tournament directors work and income.
In general, hybrid matches are highly competitive and the majority of matches end with the US team only winning around 55-45% points in the matches at most. Despite the competitiveness, US players tend to see an increase in their rating as a result of participating in these matches.
The fact that young kids are gaining while playing with adults is normal. This would have happened in the USA over-the-board events as well, but the problem is many adults in the USA have 2200-2400 FIDE ratings but haven't played any rated chess in the last 5-15 years for various reasons. If such players were incentivized to play over the board vs young kids, they would lose a lot of points. In fact, almost every adult chess friend that I personally know has lost a lot of FIDE points lately. The results of kids prevailing vs such adults are to be expected.
Hybrids allow for a great equalizer. For example, if someone in Europe who is 71 years old and hasn't played in 30 years has a rating of 2220 FIDE but a strength of 2000 and chooses to compete in the year 2023, well, maybe they shouldn't be rated 2220 FIDE? I find this to be a fair system. Finally, kids are gaining quickly because of K=40. As an adult, I am not a fan of this. Had I had a K of 40, I would already be a FIDE master and more. The rating system is designed to support the kid's rating growth.
Even if some of these kids are somewhat overrated, in my opinion, it is great for the overall chess ecosystem. It will introduce rating points into the US player pool and allows organizers to construct better IM and GM norm events. It is not a secret how difficult it is to obtain an IM or a GM title in the USA: many norm seekers travel to Europe and play in Hungary, Serbia, Croatia etc precisely for these reasons. Hybrids indirectly allow us to fix this issue: maybe our next youngest GM won't have to spend months playings in Europe and could do that in the USA instead?
Regarding Robert Hess' comments on US players' performance in OTB events, it really varies from person to person. Sure, some crashed and burned after great hybrid results but there were also some players who have shown remarkable results recently, such as Shawnak Sivakumar, who has been doing exceptionally well in OTB tournaments. Bryan Xie also achieved a positive score in a GM norm tournament just last month, while Zoey Tang became the Oregon state champion. Tommy Wen, who tied for 1st in the California High School championship, also scored 6.5/10 in the IM norm event in April 2023. These are just a few examples, and I could list more.
For me personally, who is 43 years old and has a full-time job, playing hybrids allows me to get FIDE-rated games under my belt on a weekend, compete vs strong players without having to travel, and play chess while sustaining my full-time employment. It was truly a blessing. I hope FIDE reconsiders its decision to terminate hybrids.
Whether we like it or not, more and more of our lives are spent online. It's my personal belief that over-the-board chess will gradually and slowly fade away. Hybrid events are a correct step towards the future where we live in a more connected world, where a rated game against someone who is thousands of miles away is a reality. Instead of banning such events, we need to have a constructive and open discussion on how to make these events better. Constructive criticism, attention to detail, open minds - if the game of chess taught us anything, we need to apply these traits and think about how to expand on the idea and make it work.
Last but not least, I would like to thank all of the organizers, tournament directors and players for the great experience of hybrid events. Thank you all so much!