Watches

[MichaelBaron]

https://en.chessbase.com/post/adhiba...nal-teams-2020

GM lost because of wearing an analogue watch. Probably it is fair that they should be disallowed...however ... he was wearing same watch at a significantly larger event (Gibraltar) and nobody seemed to mind!

[Patrick Byrom]

https://en.chessbase.com/post/adhiba...nal-teams-2020 GM lost because of wearing an analogue watch. Probably it is fair that they should be disallowed...however ... he was wearing same watch at a significantly larger event (Gibraltar) and nobody seemed to mind!

Apparently it's a rule specific to that event. Several commentators have suggested a warning for a first offence would make sense, which I agree with - unless the watch has computational abilities or is capable of transmitting or receiving signals. If it did, then it would definitely be an electronic device under FIDE rules.

But this statement in the article is incorrect: "Logically if a watch had batteries in it, it would become an electronic one." My torch has batteries, but it's not an 'electronic' device.

[Garvinator]

I think the ban on analogue watches ie the type described in the article, is an over-reach under the rules.

I think it is important to remember what the mobile phone rule is designed to do:

1) To avoid any possibility that the player is receiving assistance ie either by using a smart watch phone to analyse the game (for instance), or
2) To distract the opponent by having the watch making noises during the game ie alarms, because as the rules state, it is the responsibility of the player to not distract their opponent in any manner.

I do not see how an analogue watch falls into either of these categories. Of course, if the players analogue watch starts beeping, or the alarm goes off, then that is when the arbiter should step in. I think something like, after the analogue watch has gone off, a fair decision is for the arbiter to say, 'thank you, I will keep possession of that watch until your game has ended' is sufficient.

[Kevin Bonham]

Some people out there have got a bit silly about the definition of "electronic", and this possibly reflects language issues with words like "electronic" and "electrical" and available translations in other languages.

Incidentally smartwatches are a growing problem. I've heard of a case of an Australian club level player being defaulted for wearing one, although there was no evidence of cheating. The rules are black and white - a player wearing a smartwatch that has not been specifically permitted by the arbiter loses the game unless the regulations of the event specify a different less severe penalty.

[BlairMandla]

Final round of NSW State Championships, Cameron Mcgowan claimed a win against Vlad Feldman as Mr Feldman was wearing a smart watch. The bigger issue is it was the last round and from what I am told the claim was made after Cameron had exhausted all other avenues of winning. Ths claim got Cameron =1st for the title.
Honestly the rules are just stupid nowdays, and its why I will not play tournaments anymore.

[Bill Gletsos]

Final round of NSW State Championships

You need to get your facts straight. It happened in the third round which isn’t even close to being the last round.

[BlairMandla]

Oh please bill. The game was postponed and played after the final round... Could of been 2nd last round

[MichaelBaron]

Final round of NSW State Championships, Cameron Mcgowan claimed a win against Vlad Feldman as Mr Feldman was wearing a smart watch. The bigger issue is it was the last round and from what I am told the claim was made after Cameron had exhausted all other avenues of winning. Ths claim got Cameron =1st for the title.
Honestly the rules are just stupid nowdays, and its why I will not play tournaments anymore.

Irrespective of the rules, very poor sportsmanship.

[Kevin Bonham]

Irrespective of the rules, very poor sportsmanship.

I'd be inclined to wait until I'd heard both sides of the story before drawing such conclusions.

[Bill Gletsos]

Oh please bill. The game was postponed and played after the final round... Could of been 2nd last round

That is totally untrue.

The game in question was played on the the 11th June 2019 the date of the third round.
The results were posted here on 12th June by the arbiter.
Feldman appealed on the 13th June.
He then withdrew from the competition prior to the fourth round.
That is why his remaining 5 games were listed as losses on forfeit (see crossable here).

Next time don't be so totally gormless and demonstrate your cluelessness for all to see.

[BlairMandla]

I apologies, I stand corrected on the detail of the dates.
As far as I know the details surrounding the claim are true, and the default of the game gave Cameron the likely additional half a point which he utilized to earn =1st.

[Ian Rout]

I'm not greatly familiar with smart watches, but as I understand it they are in effect simply smart phones attached to a watchband and with a clock face. This makes them worse than phones because they have the additional benefit that they can be hidden in plain sight.

I wouldn't want to claim a win just because an opponent was wearing one; they probably have no nefarious intention and probably no idea it's banned. But I would like to be able to ask the arbiter to ask the player to remove it and put it somewhere inaccessible, like a normal phone. Unfortunately I don't think it's possible to do that without the arbiter then having to default the player.

Is it normal practice now for abiters to specifically mention watches when doing the spiel about phones?

[Patrick Byrom]

I wouldn't want to claim a win just because an opponent was wearing one; they probably have no nefarious intention and probably no idea it's banned. But I would like to be able to ask the arbiter to ask the player to remove it and put it somewhere inaccessible, like a normal phone. Unfortunately I don't think it's possible to do that without the arbiter then having to default the player.

If you're confident that there is nothing sinister going on, why not just ask the player to remove it and put it in their pocket, and leave it in their bag in future? Then you could later ask the arbiter to keep an eye on the player in future rounds. That's what I would probably do.

Is it normal practice now for abiters to specifically mention watches when doing the spiel about phones?

At the Brisbane Club, the player only gets a warning for a first 'mobile phone' offence, so I wouldn't need to. But I did have to rule a while ago on some sort of heart rate monitor worn on the wrist, which I ruled wasn't a mobile phone - although it might now be considered an "electronic device".

[ER]

.

At the Brisbane Club, the player only gets a warning for a first 'mobile phone' offence,

Isn't that against the rules or after all the whole thing regarding mobile phones is at the arbiter's discretion?

[MichaelBaron]

If you're confident that there is nothing sinister going on, why not just ask the player to remove it and put it in their pocket, and leave it in their bag in future? Then you could later ask the arbiter to keep an eye on the player in future rounds. That's what I would probably do.

Exactly!
And based on the story provided by Blair..it is NOT that the arbiter spotted it but that the opponent complained to earn a point in this way in a position where he could not do so otherwise.
So it is clearly a case of very poor ethics.