According to an official release from FIDE GM Vassily Ivanchuk will not be penalized for missing his drug test at the Dresden Olympiad. The official report is given in full:

Wijk aan Zee (NED), January 21, 2009

Drug testing is still relatively rare in chess. However, it does occur in various official events and was carried out during the course of the Dresden Olympiad. Unfortunately, a high proportion of the tests were scheduled during the last round and there was a lack of personnel, which lead to a procedural error: there was not a designated Doping Control Officer present at this match (USA v Ukraine).

After losing a crucial game for his country, Mr Ivanchuk was distraught. The Hearing Panel concludes that although the arbiter attempted to inform Mr Ivanchuk in English that he should accompany him for a doping test, Mr Ivanchuk apparently failed to understand the instructions, especially since English is not Mr Ivanchuk’s first language. If there had been a Doping Control Officer present, he would have immediately gone to Mr Ivanchuk’s board and there would have been communication between him and Mr Ivanchuk. In that case the outcome might have been different. Because there was no notification by the Doping Control officer, there was no refusal in the sense of the regulations.

The Conclusion:
The procedural error allied with Mr Ivanchuk’s state of mind led him unintentionally to miss the test. The Hearing Panel therefore concludes unanimously that there should be no penalty.

Further Reading:
The FIDE Press Release

Okay, so maybe like usual Susan has tried to avoid talking about Ivanchuk and instead emphasized the use of drugs to enhance chess skill. It seems that Susan discovered an experiment with beta- blockers and she even throws in her comments on caffeine.

I can't honestly take this to be Susan's opinion as she's in Hungary and probably the article was posted by an admin but even if it is her true opinion its not a contrary one to my own. Actually, there isn't much opinion in the article at all ... strictly facts and research. You should take a look at the article and form your own opinion accordingly.

EJH from the Streatham & Brixton Chess Club Blog has put his two cents worth out in the media weighing in on the Ivanchuk contraversy surrounding drug testing in chess. I agree with many of his subtle points involving drug testing in general but I have to disagree with his primary point.

That point is essentially that the rules of a sporting events should be blindly accepted and followed. To quote:

However, I'm also a strong supporter of the principle that sporting events should take place according to the rules and that no competitor is above them. None. Not Garry Kasparov, not Bobby Fischer, not Rio Ferdinand. None. They are obliged to play according to the rules under which they have agreed to play. They may disagree with them and say so. They may even on occasion choose to defy them openly, on a point of principle, and take the consequences. But they are not above them. They may not ignore them. They may not say, either overtly or in effect, "these rules do not apply to me, because of who I am".

First of all, it is not the accepted rules of the game that drug testing be done afterwards. Everyone with a brain and a reasonable intelligence knows that no drug will help you play chess and those who have used are more than likely hurting their chances of winning. (EJH even goes so far as to say this in his article).

Secondly, the greatest periods in history are those times when brave men saw the stupidity of the rules and had the chutzpa to say that the rule was ridiculous and either ignore the ruler or fight to change said rule. If history teaches us anything it is that prosperity follows such times. I personally see a better time in the future for chess as more stupid FIDE rules are passed at least every four months and professional players see the potential for abuse and rage against it (as Magnus Carlsen has done threatening to drop from the grand prix cycle).

The question to me becomes ... do you like FIDE more or Ivanchuk? Without hesitation I choose the player above the organization. Ivanchuk has been described as being very selfish and moody but it's nothing compared to the greed and moodiness of FIDE. If a self-centered individual is the instrument for the destruction of FIDE I'm totally for that.

It may sound very cold hearted to some degree and I'm sure there are those who will think of me as the chess version of a warmonger but I love the players! When is the last time you saw the FIDE president sit at a chessboard and actually play chess rather than babble on about pointless expectations placed on players (such as his stirring words during the Nalchik Women's Championship when several of the best players refused to attend).

If only the PCA had found more support from FIDE member countries.

Well, the plot thickens and Ivanchuk has now stated that:

"This all seems like pure madness!! But such spectacles sometimes happen in our world. I simply left, being upset after losing a game, and did not listen to a man who I was seeing for the first time in my life, and whose identity I don't know until now. You see what a comedy it was"

So his position is that he wasn't refusing to test he simply ignored a stranger. I can't independently verify the truth or falsity of this statement but it seems plausible (of course my opinion has not changed ... it doesn't matter if he was as high as a kite).

As a side note Arthur Kogan has been circulating a facebook petition that if FIDE bans Ivanchuk we will ban FIDE. Personally, I'd like to do that either way so I joined the group immediately. Yay for Arthur Kogan!

FIDE rules have always been stupid to cater to money makers. I was reading Shirov's recent press release regarding FIDE's decision to try and drug test Ivanchuk after a game he lost against Gata Kamsky (it seems obvious to all involved that Ivanchuk's refusal to test means guilt but who knows). Why do we have these drug testing rules and policies? The Current FIDE president has been nursing the idea that chess should be an Olympic sport. Shirov is quick to point out the success of mindsports in Beijing. I firmly agree with that ... Chess doesn't need to be an Olympic recognized sport.

As for Chess and Drug use ... who cares? If Ivanchuk needs to reflect on a loss through a cloud of smoke what difference does it make to the game, his opponents, or even himself? There aren't any drugs that are proven to enhance chess performance. The Olympic rules are stupid and FIDE is as Shirov put it "licking their posterior".

I don't foresee the Olympic folks accepting chess as an Olympic sport ... if they had that intention they would have already made it one. Why are we so concerned about it now after constant rejection from the Olympic Committees?