PDA

View Full Version : Couple of questions



Phil Bourke
09-09-2008, 12:14 AM
My 2nd trip around as arbiter and I have two questions for your consideration.
In a game on the weekend, play was reduced to one player with lone king vs KNNB. Player with lone king was down to one minute approximately and hadn't been recording for some considerable time.

Player with material superiority was actually struggling to administer the mate, but got the job done. In the postmatch discussions, the subject of the 50 move rule came up and my question is this.

If the player had asked, am I allowed to use the opponent's scoresheet to count back the moves, or do I start the count from the point when I am asked. I offer that my thoughts were that I would be able to use the opponent's score sheet.

For interest only, I had discreetly counted the moves on the sheet that were visible and clear to me and established that there had been at least 32 moves! After the game, we established that mate was going to be delivered on move 46, the opponent resigned when it was mate in two coming.

In the usual time scramble that occurs in 60/10 weekenders, a player makes an illegal move and his opponent asks that 2 min be added to his clock. I had previously thought this was correct, but now doubt the veracity of this, as a closer reading suggests that each player would be allowed two such indiscretions, so long as they weren't deliberate for wasting time or creating confusion, before being penalised by the addition of time to his opponent's clock or the reduction of their own time.

Any clear ruling on this matter that can be applied to normal weekenders such as ours?

Bill Gletsos
09-09-2008, 12:40 AM
My 2nd trip around as arbiter and I have two questions for your consideration.
In a game on the weekend, play was reduced to one player with lone king vs KNNB. Player with lone king was down to one minute approximately and hadn't been recording for some considerable time.

Player with material superiority was actually struggling to administer the mate, but got the job done. In the postmatch discussions, the subject of the 50 move rule came up and my question is this.

If the player had asked, am I allowed to use the opponent's scoresheet to count back the moves, or do I start the count from the point when I am asked. I offer that my thoughts were that I would be able to use the opponent's score sheet.The arbiter can use either score sheet.

In the usual time scramble that occurs in 60/10 weekenders, a player makes an illegal move and his opponent asks that 2 min be added to his clock. I had previously thought this was correct,Correct.

but now doubt the veracity of this, as a closer reading suggests that each player would be allowed two such indiscretions, so long as they weren't deliberate for wasting time or creating confusion, before being penalised by the addition of time to his opponent's clock or the reduction of their own time.Incorrect.

Any clear ruling on this matter that can be applied to normal weekenders such as ours?Each illegal move results in the opponent receiving an extra 2 minutes. If a player makes a third illegal move then he loses the game.

Kevin Bonham
09-09-2008, 12:45 AM
If the player had asked, am I allowed to use the opponent's scoresheet to count back the moves, or do I start the count from the point when I am asked. I offer that my thoughts were that I would be able to use the opponent's score sheet.

You can use either scoresheet and any other evidence available to you to determine whether a claim of a draw is correct or not.

If the player just asks you how many moves have been made without actually claiming the draw, and they're not scoring, don't tell them. Wait for them to actually make a claim, and if the claim is made work out if it is right. If it is wrong the claimant can be penalised under article 9.5b.

CameronD
09-09-2008, 09:18 AM
My 2nd trip around as arbiter and I have two questions for your consideration.
In a game on the weekend, play was reduced to one player with lone king vs KNNB. Player with lone king was down to one minute approximately and hadn't been recording for some considerable time.

Player with material superiority was actually struggling to administer the mate, but got the job done. In the postmatch discussions, the subject of the 50 move rule came up and my question is this.

If the player had asked, am I allowed to use the opponent's scoresheet to count back the moves, or do I start the count from the point when I am asked. I offer that my thoughts were that I would be able to use the opponent's score sheet.

For interest only, I had discreetly counted the moves on the sheet that were visible and clear to me and established that there had been at least 32 moves! After the game, we established that mate was going to be delivered on move 46, the opponent resigned when it was mate in two coming.

In the usual time scramble that occurs in 60/10 weekenders, a player makes an illegal move and his opponent asks that 2 min be added to his clock. I had previously thought this was correct, but now doubt the veracity of this, as a closer reading suggests that each player would be allowed two such indiscretions, so long as they weren't deliberate for wasting time or creating confusion, before being penalised by the addition of time to his opponent's clock or the reduction of their own time.

Any clear ruling on this matter that can be applied to normal weekenders such as ours?

At the surfers paradise major, the arbiter stated that if a player wanted a 50 move draw without any evidence available, he needs to be contacted and he would stand their and start the count from the next move.

george
09-09-2008, 01:28 PM
Hi All,
Many years ago (sounds like fairytale) I found myself playing in the Tasmanian Championship or city of Hobart - something like that. I think it was about 20 years ago and was some type of knockout tourney.

The games were played in the mall and were 1/2 hour each I think.

Anyway I was equal first with 2 rounds to go and playing the Tasmanian Champ at the time who was a better player than me - anyway i had him on toast and was moving my king around as I was well ahead on time.

The Tasmanian Arbiter was keenly watching because if it was a draw then it was decided by a lightning game. My opponent asked me for a draw - I said nothing and played on - he had 1 minute left I had 10 minutes.

My opponent was scrambling and had 20 seconds left when the Arbiter stepped in stopped the clock and said it was a draw because of repetition.
There was no recording of the games and i very much doubted the same position had been reached 3 times.

Anyway i shook hands with my opponent played the lightning which I lost as my anger at the arbiter had destabilised me somewhat (whats new right).

I thanked my opponent but when the Arbiter wanted to give me some money for coming in a placing i think I politely told him where to shove it and mumbled something about 'local rules".

Was I in the right or in the wrong as immediately prior to the Arbiters action my opponent had not claimed the draw but was concentrating on making quick moves.

Kindest Regards

Capablanca-Fan
09-09-2008, 01:46 PM
George

The arbiter should be shot. Article 9 is crystal clear that a draw by threefold appearance (or by 50 move rule, or draw must be claimed "by the player having the move". Furthermore, "If the player makes a move without having claimed the draw he loses the right to claim."

Even under quickplay finishes, it is up to a player to make a claim under 10.2 that "the opponent is making no effort to win the game by normal means".

"Local rules" is crap, as the FIDE laws state (http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article):

A member federation is free to introduce more detailed rules provided they:
a. do not conflict in any way with the official FIDE Laws of Chess

road runner
09-09-2008, 01:50 PM
If the player just asks you how many moves have been made without actually claiming the draw, and they're not scoring, don't tell them.Why not?

Capablanca-Fan
09-09-2008, 02:03 PM
Why not?

Article 13.6 (http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article) The arbiter must not intervene in a game except in cases described by the Laws of Chess. He shall not indicate the number of moves made, except in applying Article 8.5 when at least one flag has fallen. The arbiter shall refrain from informing a player that his opponent has completed a move or that the player has not pressed his clock.

eclectic
09-09-2008, 02:17 PM
if a player tries to claim a draw by repetition or by 50 moves by writing the intended move along with an = sign stopping the clock then summoning the arbiter and the claim gets rejected can their opponent then make a complaint that notetaking has occurred?

:P

road runner
09-09-2008, 02:27 PM
Article 13.6 (http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article) The arbiter must not intervene in a game except in cases described by the Laws of Chess. He shall not indicate the number of moves made, except in applying Article 8.5 when at least one flag has fallen. The arbiter shall refrain from informing a player that his opponent has completed a move or that the player has not pressed his clock.OK thanks.

Kevin Bonham
09-09-2008, 08:35 PM
Hi All,
Many years ago (sounds like fairytale) I found myself playing in the Tasmanian Championship or city of Hobart - something like that. I think it was about 20 years ago and was some type of knockout tourney.

The games were played in the mall and were 1/2 hour each I think.

Certainly neither the Tasmanian Championship nor the City of Hobart ever used such a fast time control, nor were either ever played in the Mall.

This sounds like one of the old Fiesta (later Festival) quickplays. These were first held in 1981 in Franklin Square and the last two (which I played in) were in 1988 and 1989 on the lawns at Salamanca. They weren't held every year (in some years there were simuls instead) and records of the results of several of them appear to have been lost for good.

Applying the 2005 Laws of Chess to a rapidplay game played sometime in the 1980s (and not necessarily under FIDE laws) in order to rule on the arbiter's decision isn't an exercise I see as in any way fruitful so I shan't bother with that. But at present and for as long as I can remember, at all time limits, a player seeking a draw by repetition has had to claim it.

Kevin Bonham
09-09-2008, 08:41 PM
if a player tries to claim a draw by repetition or by 50 moves by writing the intended move along with an = sign stopping the clock then summoning the arbiter and the claim gets rejected can their opponent then make a complaint that notetaking has occurred?

No, because under 9.1c. A claim of a draw under 9.2, 9.3 or 10.2 shall be considered an offer of a draw and under 9.1b. The offer of a draw shall be noted by each player on his scoresheet with a symbol (See Appendix E13)

On this basis it is clearly legitimate to record an "=" after a draw claim rejected by both opponent and arbiter, and arguably obligatory! :P :P

george
10-09-2008, 12:04 AM
hi Kevin,

You may well be right about time and name of tourney. I dug up an old photo and in background of the layout in the mall is something starting with F.

My oldest son was about 3-4 then and born in late 1980 so i would say it was 1983 - 4 and played after Xmas and maybe just after 1st January.

Whilst the name of the tourney is hazy what happened was not and left an indelible image. Surprising isnt it what sticks in your mind.

I hope to come to Tassie in about 16 months time for my 13th visit - I can drive around Hobart now and find most things from general directions - probably not surprising but I do love the place.

Im sure Arbiter techniques are fantastic now and I look forward to playing in a tourney in Hobart again sometime - its only been (on this reckoning) 24 years.

Kindest Regards

Denis_Jessop
11-09-2008, 04:18 PM
I'm not sure that, in all of this, anyone has answered Phil's question about when to start the 50 move count. Arts 5.2.e and 9.3.2 of the FIDE laws say


The game may be drawn if each player has made at least the last 50 consecutive moves without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. (See Article 9.3)

9.3

The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by the player having the move, if

1. he writes his move on his scoresheet, and declares to the arbiter his intention to make this move which shall result in the last 50 moves having been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture, or
2.the last 50 consecutive moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture.

so that it is clear that the count starts from the time of the last pawn move or capture, not from the time of the claim though it would appear from 5.2.e that you may start the count from the point of the claim and go backwards which is the more sensible thing to do. The count couldn't start from the time of the claim and then go forwards as the claim is the at least 50 moves have been already played.

DJ

Kevin Bonham
11-09-2008, 11:05 PM
Yes. The count starts from when the last piece was taken or the last pawn moved, irrespective of how many moves have elapsed since, what claims have been made in the meantime, who has or hasn't stopped scoring, etc.

In unrated interschool qualifiers (time limit G15 flat, no scoring), when I see weak juniors mucking around in endings they don't know how to win and with a danger of the game being decided on the clock, I will get the players to do their own move count. But rather than start it from my own arrival at the board, I ask the players how many moves that material balance has existed (if the pawns are all gone) and get them to start from an agreed figure; if the estimates diverge I take the lower one.

Capablanca-Fan
13-09-2008, 12:25 PM
Applying the 2005 Laws of Chess to a rapidplay game played sometime in the 1980s (and not necessarily under FIDE laws) in order to rule on the arbiter's decision isn't an exercise I see as in any way fruitful so I shan't bother with that. But at present and for as long as I can remember, at all time limits, a player seeking a draw by repetition has had to claim it.
I can remember from national championships and Olympiads 20 years ago, and even back then it was up to the players to make a claim, not the arbiter.

Denis_Jessop
14-09-2008, 08:42 PM
I can remember from national championships and Olympiads 20 years ago, and even back then it was up to the players to make a claim, not the arbiter.

I have a copy of the FIDE Laws as at 1978 and under Art 12 of those laws a draw by repetition had to be claimed by one of the players.

DJ