Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43

Thread: Article 8.1

  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310

    Article 8.1

    The article reads:

    Article 8: The recording of the moves

    8.1 In the course of play each player is required to record his own moves and those of his opponent in the correct manner, move after move, as clearly and legibly as possible, in the algebraic notation (Appendix E), on the `scoresheet` prescribed for the competition. It is forbidden to write the moves in advance, unless the player is claiming a draw according to Article 9.2 or 9.3.

    A player may reply to his opponent`s move before recording it, if he so wishes. He must record his previous move before making another. Both players must record the offer of a draw on the scoresheet. (Appendix E.12)
    If a player is unable to keep score, an assistant, who is acceptable to the arbiter, may be provided by the player to write the moves. His clock shall be adjusted by the arbiter in an equitable way.

    13.4 The arbiter can apply one or more of the following penalties:

    1. warning,
    2. increasing the remaining time of the opponent,
    3. reducing the remaining time of the offending player,
    4. declaring the game to be lost,
    5. reducing the points scored in a game by the offending party,
    6. increasing the points scored in a game by the opponent to the maximum available for that game,
    7. expulsion from the event.

    Ok, at our club, we had a situation and I was arbiter. Player A record a move before playing it and I warned Player A and briefly explained why. Player A accepted the explaination and the game continued. A few moves later, Player A again records move first before playing it and was warned a second time and informed that a third offence would result in loss of game.

    About ten moves later, Player A recorded move before playing it on the board and I informed him that he loses the game.

    Now i have a question after some conversations at the end of the night from our club. Would other arbiters regard my actions as correct? Would this be the course of action other arbiters would take? etc etc from there.

    I dont think there is any other course of actions as it is a third penalty situation.

  2. #2
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,424
    If there is some reason to believe that the player is deliberately trying it on then it may be reasonable to nip it in the bud. If it's just an ingrained pattern of many years that hasn't been unlearned in three weeks then I think it's somewhat harsh on both the player and on other players who see a rival getting a free point, and a somewhat unsatifying way for of winning for the opponent.

    If you are concerned about multiple strikes than I think the first one or two instances could be dealt with by an informal reminder rather than an official warning. Some sort of intervening stage of a time penalty between a warning and a default also seems sensible.
    Last edited by Ian Rout; 22-07-2005 at 01:32 PM.

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    I dont think there is any other course of actions as it is a third penalty situation.
    This statement is a misinterpretation of the rules gray. Unless you want to have a bad reputation as the George Bush of Australian chess, then you should learn to give people some leeway. (See Rout's post).

    I mean, we're talking about an entire generation of chess players who probably read Kotov and learned to record before moving.

    Rule 13.4 does not say, "3 strikes and you lose". The rule merely makes available to you, the arbiter, a menu of penalties. Giving away free points and making people feel bad should be the last of your choices.

    AR

  4. #4
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,360
    As the rule has only recently been changed I think it is important for arbiters to be lenient on players while players take time to get used to the new situation. I'm not penalising players for this one at all at the moment, simply trying to spread the word and then warning repeat offenders. Even if a penalty was to be applied I think a small time penalty would be best, say two minutes off clock. I would only forfeit a player for it if it was obvious they were doing it deliberately knowing it was illegal. We should be aware that many players are needing to break the tournament habits of a lifetime in getting used to this rule change. Disclaimer: I'm one of them, although I'm doing pretty well with it so far and only slipping up about once a game.

    I think your action was way too harsh and arosar is right - there is no reason the arbiter has to act after three strikes. But it is very commendable that you started a thread on it and gave others a chance to comment on your actions.
    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

  5. #5
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    As the rule has only recently been changed I think it is important for arbiters to be lenient on players while players take time to get used to the new situation. I'm not penalising players for this one at all at the moment, simply trying to spread the word and then warning repeat offenders.
    So when then do you start penalising?

    Even if a penalty was to be applied I think a small time penalty would be best, say two minutes off clock. I would only forfeit a player for it if it was obvious they were doing it deliberately knowing it was illegal. We should be aware that many players are needing to break the tournament habits of a lifetime in getting used to this rule change. Disclaimer: I'm one of them, although I'm doing pretty well with it so far and only slipping up about once a game.

    I think your action was way too harsh and arosar is right - there is no reason the arbiter has to act after three strikes. But it is very commendable that you started a thread on it and gave others a chance to comment on your actions.
    I am not going to agree with arosar on principle, you know that

    In fact at the club, in the discussions afterwards, most of the players didnt have a problem with my decision. The player had been warned twice with no penalty and only after the THIRD infraction, was the loss of game penalty applied. The player was warned after the second time that a third infraction would be loss of game.

    Some said that perhaps just keep applying time penalties would be appropriate, but where does that end. How do you apply them, keep adding two minutes, half time remaining etc. How many warnings and penalties need to be applied in one game?

    As was discussed in the sydney grade matches thread, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations, which are discussed in the Laws.

    The only analogous situation that comes to mind in 'normal' chess is the illegal move rule. Interestingly, that is loss of game after three infractions.

    For the record- I didnt want to apply the loss of game penalty- but thought it was the ONLY penalty that could be applied after two previous infractions.

    I actually thought I was being generous by not applying a time penalty for the second infraction.

    Now for the rules people at fide- STIPULATE A PENALTY THAT SHOULD BE APPLIED FOR THIS. DONT LEAVE IT TO THE ARBITERS, or penalties will be different at each tournament.

    Maybe clarification of this rule and penalties should be sent to Geurt.

  6. #6
    CC International Master Kerry Stead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    So when then do you start penalising?

    I am not going to agree with arosar on principle, you know that

    In fact at the club, in the discussions afterwards, most of the players didnt have a problem with my decision. The player had been warned twice with no penalty and only after the THIRD infraction, was the loss of game penalty applied. The player was warned after the second time that a third infraction would be loss of game.

    Some said that perhaps just keep applying time penalties would be appropriate, but where does that end. How do you apply them, keep adding two minutes, half time remaining etc. How many warnings and penalties need to be applied in one game?

    As was discussed in the sydney grade matches thread, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations, which are discussed in the Laws.

    The only analogous situation that comes to mind in 'normal' chess is the illegal move rule. Interestingly, that is loss of game after three infractions.

    For the record- I didnt want to apply the loss of game penalty- but thought it was the ONLY penalty that could be applied after two previous infractions.

    I actually thought I was being generous by not applying a time penalty for the second infraction.

    Now for the rules people at fide- STIPULATE A PENALTY THAT SHOULD BE APPLIED FOR THIS. DONT LEAVE IT TO THE ARBITERS, or penalties will be different at each tournament.

    Maybe clarification of this rule and penalties should be sent to Geurt.
    Garvin, I'd run with Kevin on this one.
    Comparing it to the rule about illegal moves is not quite correct - after all, its NEVER been OK to make illegal moves in a game of chess ... for years, it has been accepted as OK to write a move down first and then make it. The changes have only been brought in recently, so as Kevin said, you must allow some leeway for adjustment.
    Personally I would have run with two warnings as you did, and on the third breach, award a time penalty of some description. Awarding a game should be one of the final options that is considered, and to my mind would require some sort of deliberate breaking of the rules to come into play.
    If you don't want to apply a particular penalty, then don't!

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Now for the rules people at fide- STIPULATE A PENALTY THAT SHOULD BE APPLIED FOR THIS. DONT LEAVE IT TO THE ARBITERS, or penalties will be different at each tournament.

    Maybe clarification of this rule and penalties should be sent to Geurt.
    Read the Preface.

    AR

  8. #8
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,424
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    The only analogous situation that comes to mind in 'normal' chess is the illegal move rule. Interestingly, that is loss of game after three infractions.
    I think that where this analogy breaks down is that making an illegal move (on the board) does potentially cause distraction and interference to the opponent and can give a significant benefit to the perpetrator in engineering a break. On the other hand writing and playing moves in the wrong order, even three times, is merely a procedural breach - and moreover one that didn't exist last month. Also making legal moves is a fundamental part of the game.

    To find an analogy, try looking at offences in other sports that incur disqualification. We are then in such territory as punching below the belt (boxing), signing an incorrect card (golf), interference (running, cycling, motor sports), taking a headstart (running, swimming), proven use of performance enhancing drugs.

    Incorrect note-taking just doesn't seem to fit, except by comparison with signing a golf card, and there it's not the same thing because a golfer can change their score whereas recording the move first doesn't give you an extra pawn.

    The thing to remember is that chess is meant to won by checkmate, not administrative instrument. There has to be a significant breach to justify changing that priority.

  9. #9
    CC International Master Kerry Stead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout
    The thing to remember is that chess is meant to won by checkmate, not administrative instrument. There has to be a significant breach to justify changing that priority.
    Excellent observation Ian!
    Applicable to many situations ...

  10. #10
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    430
    Over here at the Amsterdam Open, the rule is simply not being enforced. Players who have always written down their moves before playing them are continuing to do so without fear. I think most arbiters here assume that the new rule is a piece of lunacy by FIDE/ Guert which will (hopefully) soon be reversed.
    Ian

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_Rogers
    I think most arbiters here assume that the new rule is a piece of lunacy by FIDE/ Guert which will (hopefully) soon be reversed.
    Ian
    Do you know this for a fact? If so, then what other rules are the arbiters going to ignore just because they dont agree with them. Where does it stop.

  12. #12
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    If so, then what other rules are the arbiters going to ignore just because they dont agree with them. Where does it stop.
    It will stop when players and arbiters have no reason to question the rules.

    The rule is stupid, so say the community of chess players and sane arbiters. Are you going to be a sane arbiter?

    AR

  13. #13
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310
    Quote Originally Posted by arosar
    It will stop when players and arbiters have no reason to question the rules.

    The rule is stupid, so say the community of chess players and sane arbiters. Are you going to be a sane arbiter?

    AR
    I run chess tournaments to what the rule book says, no more, no less.

  14. #14
    CC Grandmaster Alan Shore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Crane, Poole & Schmidt
    Posts
    3,871
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    I run chess tournaments to what the rule book says, no more, no less.
    Oh well, that's one approach. There are some rules however I cannot in good conscience accept and prefer the methodology of common-sense.
    "I can't go back to yesterday because I was a different person then."
    - White Queen, Alice through the Looking-Glass

  15. #15
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840

    if the notation fits ... PLAY IT!

    if there are those here who say rule 8.1 is so stupid and that you should be allowed to write your move before you play it then i'd be prepared to agree so long as when my opponent writes down a move which is a blunder i can summon the arbiter and have that arbiter compel my opponent to play it.

    eclectic
    .

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. New Laws of Chess as of 1st July 2005
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 02-11-2005, 09:45 PM
  2. Bobby and me article from the Guardian
    By News Bot in forum Chess Australia
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-04-2005, 05:23 PM
  3. article 9.5
    By Garvinator in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 30-08-2004, 05:53 AM
  4. Article on Junior win
    By News Bot in forum Chess Australia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15-07-2004, 02:01 PM
  5. Rogers article in SUnday Herald about Zonals
    By chesslover in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 21-04-2004, 12:54 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
  •