PDA

View Full Version : When does the game start?



Vlad
31-07-2007, 08:18 AM
I have recently had the following experience. The draw for a round was announced. I grabbed my son to a different room to give him a few final hints before the game. We stayed there literally a few minutes. When my son was about to go, which was probably about 20 seconds after the game in the other room started; we got attacked by the parent of the opponent claiming that coaching during the game is not allowed. Can somebody clarify this situation? We have not entered the room yet so I thought the game for us has not started. Thanks in advance.

Spiny Norman
31-07-2007, 08:46 AM
Had a move been made on the board yet?

Vlad
31-07-2007, 09:03 AM
Ex post - yes, he did make the first move...
Ex ante - we did not know that; as I have said we have not entered the room.

WhiteElephant
31-07-2007, 10:50 AM
Interesting question. I have read openings books on the train while running late for a game which was already in progress. Surely it is is my time and I can do what I want with it. What if I arrive at the tournament venue and decide to do some last minute reading in another room before I sit down at my game (while my clock is running)?

Rincewind
31-07-2007, 11:02 AM
I would say the game starts when white's clock is started. After this has happened I would say that play has begun and therefore the rules which specify "during play" would apply.

The rule in this case is (I think) 12.2(a):

12.2 a. During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information, advice, or analyse on another chessboard.

If you accept these views then strictly speaking a player should not receive advice after the scheduled start time of a round unless it is known the round will be commencing late, or they know their game will be starting late due to perhaps a late finish in the previous round.

Also strictly speaking you should not be reading a chess book after the scheduled start time of the round.

Basil
31-07-2007, 12:09 PM
The game has started and the coaching was occurring during the game. Of that, there is no doubt. I'd suggest you and we should all ensure this doesn't occur again.
There was no ill-intent or untoward benefit gained.
The parent challenging you, if that's what they did, needs a quick nutting in the goolies for being a pointy-head.

CameronD
31-07-2007, 12:14 PM
Would be interested in what would occur if there was an official complaint made to the arbiter

Rincewind
31-07-2007, 12:23 PM
Would be interested in what would occur if there was an official complaint made to the arbiter

That would depend on the arbiter as there is no specified penalty for this rule. In the situation Drug describes I think a warning would be sufficient as there was no intention to seek an unfair advantage and the last minute coaching was as a result of the pairings being posted quite close to the next round start time. However that is just c'est l'echecs, the coaching should have been forgone in this instance.

Vlad
31-07-2007, 12:27 PM
12.2 a. During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information, advice, or analyse on another chessboard.


Does the fide handbook define when the play starts? I understand the above rule, but your conclusion is based on the presumption that the play starts when the clock is started. If the play starts when you actually start playing (which means you at least enter the room) then the above rule does not apply.

Something possibly related happened in the famous game #5 between Kramnik and Topalov which as we all remember Kramnik forfeited. He was in a separate room just a few meters away from the venue, and that was not considered as he started.

bergil
31-07-2007, 12:28 PM
Would be interested in what would occur if there was an official complaint made to the arbiterHe'd be told to sod off. ;)

Aaron Guthrie
31-07-2007, 12:32 PM
Also, is the child considered a "player" before he enters the playing area?

Capablanca-Fan
31-07-2007, 01:02 PM
I would say the game starts when white's clock is started. After this has happened I would say that play has begun and therefore the rules which specify "during play" would apply.

The rule in this case is (I think) 12.2(a):

12.2 a. During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information, advice, or analyse on another chessboard.

If you accept these views then strictly speaking a player should not receive advice after the scheduled start time of a round unless it is known the round will be commencing late, or they know their game will be starting late due to perhaps a late finish in the previous round.

Also strictly speaking you should not be reading a chess book after the scheduled start time of the round.

That sounds right. It would certainly apply once the player has reached the official venue, as opposed to still on the bus after the start time. But in this case, the pep talk commenced before the start time, and ended just 20 sec after it. So while there might have been a violation, it would warrant only a warning.

CameronD
31-07-2007, 01:51 PM
game should start once clock starts... otherwise...

player A makes unusual move (1. b4)
spectator notes unusual moves... leaves venue and informs Player B by phone
Player B reserches the opening in car/other location
Player B arrives to play his game

Garvinator
31-07-2007, 02:14 PM
we got attacked by the parent of the opponent claiming that coaching during the game is not allowed. Can somebody clarify this situation?
Others have started answering about when games begin etc, so I will answer this.

First of all, by the laws of chess, the parent is regarded as a spectator in the game and therefore can make no official appeals whatsoever. Of course it isnt unusual if a spectator sees something 'illegal' during a game and informs the arbiter and lets the arbiter take care of it.

The only people who can make official complaints are the two players. So the parent has no grounds to do what you claim has happened.

My response would be, speak to the arbiter.

Basil
31-07-2007, 02:32 PM
OK thread closed!

Next topic please ;)

Spiny Norman
31-07-2007, 02:57 PM
Listen here Gunner, I've told you once ... I'm not going to tell you again!

Basil
31-07-2007, 03:33 PM
What's this. Not the pulling the head in thing again?

Spiny Norman
31-07-2007, 03:42 PM
No point asking ... I've already said I won't tell you again ...:P

Spiny Norman
31-07-2007, 03:45 PM
In case you were wondering ... ;)

Capablanca-Fan
31-07-2007, 04:31 PM
game should start once clock starts... otherwise...

player A makes unusual move (1. b4)
spectator notes unusual moves... leaves venue and informs Player B by phone
Player B reserches the opening in car/other location
Player B arrives to play his game
IIRC the Laws once gave the White player the option to seal the opening move if the opponent is absent, to avoid this situation. Now this doesn't seem to be an option.

Denis_Jessop
31-07-2007, 05:40 PM
IIRC the Laws once gave the White player the option to seal the opening move if the opponent is absent, to avoid this situation. Now this doesn't seem to be an option.

I don't remember this option being in the laws before but Geurt Gijssen, in his Arbiter's Notebook, has said that it is permissible under the present Laws so as to avoid the situation described by Cameron D.

DJ

pax
01-08-2007, 09:53 AM
If a complaint was made, a (very mild) warning would be more than sufficient unless there was evidence that the player had become aware of his opponent's move.

Capablanca-Fan
01-08-2007, 10:09 AM
I don't remember this option being in the laws before but Geurt Gijssen, in his Arbiter's Notebook, has said that it is permissible under the present Laws so as to avoid the situation described by Cameron D.
That's good, but how does he justify this from the laws?

Bill Gletsos
01-08-2007, 04:06 PM
Apparently from a comment in Reuben's first Organiser's Handbook (1997) it was the practice at Olympiads that if black is absent, white starts black's clock but without making a move. When black arrives he starts whites clock, white moves and the game proceeds normally.

Capablanca-Fan
01-08-2007, 04:21 PM
That seems like fair practice, but if an Australian player does so, and an arbiter disallows this on the grounds that White has failed to move, does this player have any recourse under the Laws as written?

Denis_Jessop
02-08-2007, 01:28 PM
That's good, but how does he justify this from the laws?

Good question. I wondered why at the time. I've tried to find the text but can't at present. I think I may even have sent Geurt a query. I seem to remember that he relied on the general preface to the Laws as it's clear that their letter doesn't allow it. I did come across a reference in his columns to the fact that the Royal Dutch Chess Federation has a special rule to that effect that applies in its teams events. If I come across Geurt's explanation, I'll let you know.

DJ

Capablanca-Fan
02-08-2007, 01:39 PM
Good question. I wondered why at the time. I've tried to find the text but can't at present. I think I may even have sent Geurt a query. I seem to remember that he relied on the general preface to the Laws as it's clear that their letter doesn't allow it. I did come across a reference in his columns to the fact that the Royal Dutch Chess Federation has a special rule to that effect that applies in its teams events. If I come across Geurt's explanation, I'll let you know.

Much obliged. Maybe ACF should consider a similar rule to the Dutch?

Basil
02-08-2007, 01:49 PM
Much obliged. Maybe ACF should consider a similar rule to the Dutch?
Would that be Rule 1...f.4?

Rincewind
02-08-2007, 02:19 PM
Would that be Rule 1...f.4?

Did a little Bird tell you that one? It is actually 1...f.5 ;)

Basil
02-08-2007, 02:25 PM
Doh! and a huge 30 HCDs for the birdie :clap: Best this month!

Kevin Bonham
04-08-2007, 01:40 PM
1.1 The player with the white pieces commences the game.

So once white makes move 1 the game has started whether black is there or not and black should not be receiving advice, whether black knows white has started or not.


6.5 At the time determined for the start of the game the clock of the player who has the white pieces is started.

I'm not sure this really means that start of clock necessarily = start of game.

Generally it's much simpler if it does, but what happens in the following situation: White is late and black starts white's clock. Upon arrival half an hour later White notices the board has been set up incorrectly and asks that the game be cancelled and a new game played including resetting of clock?

The situation mentioned by WE is interesting. I have sometimes wondered whether a player (especially white) could deliberately increase their chances in a weekender by staying outside and completing their preparation during the opening say ten minutes of their time - if they really need to book up on some lines against that specific opponent it could be a good investment. I've never actually done it myself though and I think it is dodgy practice.

Denis_Jessop
04-08-2007, 10:52 PM
So once white makes move 1 the game has started whether black is there or not and black should not be receiving advice, whether black knows white has started or not.



I'm not sure this really means that start of clock necessarily = start of game.

Generally it's much simpler if it does, but what happens in the following situation: White is late and black starts white's clock. Upon arrival half an hour later White notices the board has been set up incorrectly and asks that the game be cancelled and a new game played including resetting of clock?

The situation mentioned by WE is interesting. I have sometimes wondered whether a player (especially white) could deliberately increase their chances in a weekender by staying outside and completing their preparation during the opening say ten minutes of their time - if they really need to book up on some lines against that specific opponent it could be a good investment. I've never actually done it myself though and I think it is dodgy practice.

There are basically two ways of approaching this question.

I don't consider the third which is to ask White why he bothered to turn up at all if that's his attitude.

The first is to say that the relevant Article (7.1.a) must be read as referring to a game in which some moves have been made as the rest of Art. 7 so applies - a sort of purpose and object commonsense view. Also, if 7.1.a were to be interpreted as suggested how would 7.3 apply to Black if he displaced a piece before White arrived and the Arbiter observed the fact?

The second relies on the actual language used. Art. 7.1.a says "If during a game is is found that the initial position of the pieces was incorrect..." . If no moves have been made, The correct wording would be "is incorrect".

Moreover, Art, 1.1 says that "The game of chess is played between two opponents who move their pieces alternately...". If no moves have been made, it can then be argued that the is no game in progress as, for there to be a game, there must be at least one move.

Put more simply, references in the Laws to a game have to be read in context and interpreted sensibly, something that chess-playing bush lawyers, in my expreience do not understand.

In the case cited, I would take the same view if, for example, White made a move or two and then complained (though there I might also ping him for bringing the game into disrepute or the like were it clear that he knew about the error before making his first move) or where Black was the latecomer and made the same claim, White having made his first move.

I think that what I have said also fits in with Art. 6.5 ith its use of the words "at the time determined for the start of the game". That is Art. 6.5 establishes the time when the clocks are to be started but that is not necessarily the "start of the game".

DJ