The match between Polish grandmaster Jan-Krzysztof Duda and Russian grandmaster Denis Khismatullin at the World Rapid Chess Championship in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, opened with a heated moment. Duda did not greet his opponent with the traditional handshake, a choice that sparked intense discussion within the sports community. A well-known Czech hockey veteran, Dominik Hasek, who once played for Moscow Spartak, weighed in with a firm anti Russian stance and supported the Polish player.
“That was the right gesture. Yet, let’s be honest, it does not solve everything”, Hasek commented on social media.
In response, Sergei Karyakin, a former world championship contender, Russian grandmaster, and head of the Moscow Region Chess Federation, criticized Duda. He noted years of collaboration with Khismatullin and the successes they enjoyed together, while urging FIDE to address the incident with clear sanctions.
“What happened between Denis Khismatullin and Jan Krzysztof Duda is completely unprovoked”, Karyakin stated. “It should be considered normal for athletes to exchange handshakes regardless of political views, and those who choose not to should face consequences such as a warning or a loss in the game.” These remarks appeared on Match TV.
Khismatullin had intended to extend the customary pregame greeting, a tradition observed before most matches, but he declined. The situation raised questions about whether personal beliefs should override sportsmanship and whether authorities should intervene when a handshake is skipped. Khismatullin, speaking through the same channel, emphasized that he wanted the gesture to reflect professional respect rather than politics. A broader concern was raised about the role of FIDE in setting standards for such moments and whether guidelines or penalties are needed to deter similar behavior in the future.
The chess community was reminded that sports can unite players beyond political differences, and the incident prompted discussions about the responsibilities of coaches and players alike. Khismatullin’s supporters highlighted the long partnership and shared values with Karyakin, noting that both individuals have contributed to humanitarian efforts outside the board. They argued that personal convictions should not undermine mutual respect among competitors, and that conscience should remain clear in the heat of competition. The sentiment was that the best path forward is for athletes to juggle ethical standards with professional duties while keeping sportsmanship intact.
Meanwhile, Sergei Smagin, vice president of the Russian Federation, offered his view that Duda acted in response to Khismullin’s associations with Karyakin, who publicly backed Russia’s actions in Ukraine. He recalled that regulations had existed earlier regarding handshakes and the need to inform referees in advance when a player refused to shake hands with an opponent.
Smagin described the episode as a regrettable misunderstanding and suggested that Duda’s stance differed in motive from that of Ukrainian athletes involved in similar circumstances. He argued that many athletes strive to separate politics from competition, and that individuals ought to be allowed to make personal choices without facing character judgments from the broader chess community. The general takeaway, he added, is that professional rules should guide this area more clearly to prevent ongoing disputes and to maintain the integrity of the sport.
Smagin proposed a practical approach: implement fine-based penalties for actions that undermine the competition’s spirit. He asserted that monetary consequences would quickly resolve questions, and if a player disagreed with the framework, they could opt to participate in another event. Such measures, he argued, would restore order more effectively than moral sermons.
The Duda-Khismatullin game concluded in a draw, and Khismatullin did not appeal to FIDE over the handshake moment. The match drew to a close with ongoing reflections on how to balance personal beliefs with professional duties in high-stakes chess.
At the core of the discussion is the belief that sports should transcend politics while upholding a standard of respect that strengthens the sport. The episode remains a point of debate among players, coaches, and officials about the appropriate way to handle gestures of courtesy and the responsibilities of leadership bodies in guiding conduct on and off the board. The broader consensus centers on preserving fair play, protecting the dignity of competitors, and ensuring that rules keep pace with evolving expectations in international chess.
Note: the events described reflect the reactions and opinions expressed by various figures within the chess community and related media coverage. The aim is to report what occurred and what discussions followed, without definitive statements on intent beyond what was publicly stated by those involved. This account preserves the sequence of events and the continuing dialogue about etiquette and governance in chess.