Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 37

Thread: Watches

  1. #16
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    14,435
    Quote Originally Posted by ER View Post
    Isn't that against the rules or after all the whole thing regarding mobile phones is at the arbiter's discretion?
    If its not Fide Rated...why not. When playing Allegro - we are allowed to have our phones on.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #17
    Premium Member ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    12,399
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    If its not Fide Rated...why not. When playing Allegro - we are allowed to have our phones on.
    makes sense, thanks!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

    In defense of Capitalism.
    Money is the cause of all evil!
    Wrong
    Lack of money is the cause of all evil!

  3. #18
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,889
    Quote Originally Posted by ER View Post
    Isn't that against the rules or after all the whole thing regarding mobile phones is at the arbiter's discretion?
    It is not necessarily against the rules even for FIDE-rated events:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11.3.2.1

    During a game, a player is forbidden to have any electronic device not specifically approved by the arbiter in the playing venue.

    However, the regulations of an event may allow such devices to be stored in a player’s bag, provided the device is completely switched off. This bag must be placed as agreed with the arbiter. Both players are forbidden to use this bag without permission of the arbiter.

    11.3.2.2

    If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The regulations of an event may specify a different, less severe, penalty.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (my emphasis)

    The discretion is not with the arbiter, it is with the regulations of the event.

    A warning is a penalty so what Pat is talking about is fine provided that it is part of the rules of the event.

    If no such rule has been specified in advance, and it is a FIDE-rated event, then the player must be defaulted. Otherwise, even if a player is not defaulted only once, it could result in the entire tournament not being rated.

    FIDE recommends that all competitive events, FIDE-rated or not, be played under the FIDE Laws. Of course, people may ignore that recommendation, but if people ran a tournament that very severely breached the Laws (for instance, players were openly consulting computers during the game and the arbiter didn't stop them) it's possible the ACF would also refuse to rate it.
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 12-02-2020 at 08:00 PM.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  4. #19
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    14,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    It is not necessarily against the rules even for FIDE-rated events:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11.3.2.1

    During a game, a player is forbidden to have any electronic device not specifically approved by the arbiter in the playing venue.

    However, the regulations of an event may allow such devices to be stored in a player’s bag, provided the device is completely switched off. This bag must be placed as agreed with the arbiter. Both players are forbidden to use this bag without permission of the arbiter.

    11.3.2.2

    If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The regulations of an event may specify a different, less severe, penalty.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (my emphasis)

    The discretion is not with the arbiter, it is with the regulations of the event.

    A warning is a penalty so what Pat is talking about is fine provided that it is part of the rules of the event.

    If no such rule has been specified in advance, and it is a FIDE-rated event, then the player must be defaulted. Otherwise, even if a player is not defaulted only once, it could result in the entire tournament not being rated.

    FIDE recommends that all competitive events, FIDE-rated or not, be played under the FIDE Laws. Of course, people may ignore that recommendation, but if people ran a tournament that very severely breached the Laws (for instance, players were openly consulting computers during the game and the arbiter didn't stop them) it's possible the ACF would also refuse to rate it.

    Does it mean that we can hold FIDE events without worrying about phones going off subject to tournament organisers accepting it?
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  5. #20
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,889
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Does it mean that we can hold FIDE events without worrying about phones going off subject to tournament organisers accepting it?
    No. Firstly the organisers have to specify some kind of penalty, and endless warnings wouldn't be a meaningful penalty.

    Secondly the Laws of Chess oblige arbiters to take action to:

    12.2.2

    act in the best interest of the competition,

    12.2.3

    ensure that a good playing environment is maintained,

    12.2.4

    ensure that the players are not disturbed

    ...so the arbiters must take action to effectively discourage mobile phone noise, cheating and suspicion of cheating during games.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  6. #21
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    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.
    There's a difference being confident as in completely sure and confident that in the majority of cases it would be nothing but you can't be certain.

    As a principle players should not be rushing into officiating their own games, except where specifically provided in the rules. It can lead to unpleasantness, especially if you appear to be in effect accusing the opponent of cheating, and gives them a certain level of justification for a belligerent response or a counter-claim that you are breaching the rules yourself by speaking to them. You really shouldn't have to put yourself in that position in a circumstance where you are completely in the right. It's standard practice for arbiters to instruct players to talk to them, not start fights and shouting matches.

    As I said, I would LIKE to be able to ask the arbiter to do something but not end the game. If it's an opponent I know well and if I'm certain it is a smart watch then I would probably be relaxed about mentioning it, more in their own interests for later rounds than because I was worried. If it's someone I don't know - well, I'll have to decide what to do when it happens.

  7. #22
    Premium Member ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    12,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    It is not necessarily against the rules even for FIDE-rated events:

    11.3.2.1
    (…)
    11.3.2.2
    (…)
    I read all of your interpretations of different possibilities and find them logical, correct and to some extent player friendly when no blatant violation of the rules occur.
    I also understand that it is important to have all these rules before the tournament begins presented in a written form and the arbiter to refer to them in a synoptic way before the start of each round.
    I also understand that sooner or later a uniform rule should be implemented in order to avoid player confusion when fronted with different rules tournament after tournament.
    Michael gave us an example before regarding MCC Allegros' relaxed way of dealing with mobile phones and that makes sense. (I also understand that those tournaments are rated neither by FIDE nor byACF) (*)
    On the other hand rated tournaments at MCC as well as the Chess Artists (I am a member in both and play as much as I can in their tournaments) the mobile phone as well as electronic devices rule
    is strictly applied to and announced by Aleksei in each and every round. (*) Wrong move IMHO by MCC, for both their rapid as well as their blitz tournaments not to be officially rated, but that's another story.
    Last edited by ER; 12-02-2020 at 09:36 PM.
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

    In defense of Capitalism.
    Money is the cause of all evil!
    Wrong
    Lack of money is the cause of all evil!

  8. #23
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    There's a difference being confident as in completely sure and confident that in the majority of cases it would be nothing but you can't be certain. As a principle players should not be rushing into officiating their own games, except where specifically provided in the rules. It can lead to unpleasantness, especially if you appear to be in effect accusing the opponent of cheating, and gives them a certain level of justification for a belligerent response or a counter-claim that you are breaching the rules yourself by speaking to them. You really shouldn't have to put yourself in that position in a circumstance where you are completely in the right. It's standard practice for arbiters to instruct players to talk to them, not start fights and shouting matches.

    As I said, I would LIKE to be able to ask the arbiter to do something but not end the game. If it's an opponent I know well and if I'm certain it is a smart watch then I would probably be relaxed about mentioning it, more in their own interests for later rounds than because I was worried. If it's someone I don't know - well, I'll have to decide what to do when it happens.
    I wasn't suggesting that a player should make any accusations. You could just point out to them that their watch may be in breach of the rules, in the same way that a player could point out to their opponent that they haven't pressed their clock. You would be trying to help them avoid a penalty. If they ignore you, or tell you to mind your own business, then you don't need to do anything else - it's now entirely their problem.

  9. #24
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,080
    Quote Originally Posted by ER View Post
    I read all of your interpretations of different possibilities and find them logical, correct and to some extent player friendly when no blatant violation of the rules occur.
    I also understand that it is important to have all these rules before the tournament begins presented in a written form and the arbiter to refer to them in a synoptic way before the start of each round.
    I also understand that sooner or later a uniform rule should be implemented in order to avoid player confusion when fronted with different rules tournament after tournament.
    Michael gave us an example before regarding MCC Allegros' relaxed way of dealing with mobile phones and that makes sense. (I also understand that those tournaments are rated neither by FIDE nor byACF) (*)
    On the other hand rated tournaments at MCC as well as the Chess Artists (I am a member in both and play as much as I can in their tournaments) the mobile phone as well as electronic devices rule is strictly applied to and announced by Aleksei in each and every round. (*) Wrong move IMHO by MCC, for both their rapid as well as their blitz tournaments not to be officially rated, but that's another story.
    Local variations in the application of rules can certainly be a problem. But as long as players are notified, I don't think it's a major problem. In the initial example on this thread, apparently the rule was applied much more strictly than usual - but players were warned in advance.

  10. #25
    Premium Member ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    12,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    (…) But as long as players are notified, I don't think it's a major problem (…)
    yes Ι understand that's why I noted :

    I also understand that it is important to have all these rules before the tournament begins presented in a written form and the arbiter to refer to them in a synoptic way before the start of each round.

    In the initial example on this thread, apparently the rule was applied much more strictly than usual - but players were warned in advance.
    Yes, I noticed and indeed it's an extreme case! I believe that the arbiter (not sure who she/he was) handled the situation correctly.
    However, it would be useful i to have their point of view of the situation as well!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

    In defense of Capitalism.
    Money is the cause of all evil!
    Wrong
    Lack of money is the cause of all evil!

  11. #26
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    20,521
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    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.
    My watch is electronic and digital, but not smart, so certainly can't receive chess signals or analyze a game. It is a time piece. There is no way I could cheat with it even if I wanted to. It would be moronic to forfeit me for wearing it. The tournament rules have become absurd and paranoid, punishing lots of innocent people to try to stop a few guilty ones.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  12. #27
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    13,242
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    My watch is electronic and digital, but not smart, so certainly can't receive chess signals or analyze a game. It is a time piece. There is no way I could cheat with it even if I wanted to. It would be moronic to forfeit me for wearing it. The tournament rules have become absurd and paranoid, punishing lots of innocent people to try to stop a few guilty ones.
    I have some empathy for arbiters in this regard. It may well be that your watch doesn't have those features, but others do and it may not be so easy for arbiters to tell one type from the other in all cases.

    In general smart watches extend the capabilities of a smart phone. So while the watch can't make calls on it's own, it conects to the phone that does, Eg over bluetooth, and lets you read messages etc. So if it's accepted that phones should be banned, those watches probably should be too.
    So what's your excuse? To run like the devil's chasing you.

    See you in another life, brotha.

  13. #28
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Desmond View Post
    I have some empathy for arbiters in this regard. It may well be that your watch doesn't have those features, but others do and it may not be so easy for arbiters to tell one type from the other in all cases.
    In the general case I agree with you - the arbiter can't win whatever he does. However in this case, the watch was definitely analog, so unless it belonged to James Bond it probably doesn't present a threat.

  14. #29
    CC Grandmaster Adamski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Penrith, NSW
    Posts
    8,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    Is it normal practice now for abiters to specifically mention watches when doing the spiel about phones?
    At Rooty Hill for rated games we collect mobiles and smart watches before the games start. Players have 2 choices: don't bring them to the playing venue or hand them in. The same applies for late arrivers.
    God exists. Short and to the point.

    Secretary of, and regularly arbiter at, Rooty Hill RSL Chess Club. See www.rootyhillchessclub.org.

    Psephological insight. "Controversial will only lose you votes. Courageous will lose you the election." Sir Humphrey Appleby on Yes Minister.

    Favorite movie line: Girl friend Cathy to Jack Ryan in "Sum of all Fears". "What kind of emergency does an historian have?".

  15. #30
    Premium Member ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    12,399
    See off topic thread for a rather indirectly related comment on this!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

    In defense of Capitalism.
    Money is the cause of all evil!
    Wrong
    Lack of money is the cause of all evil!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Does the electronic devices rule include watches?
    By ChessGuru in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 29-10-2013, 04:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •