PDA

View Full Version : writing down moves



qpawn
02-04-2006, 03:34 PM
Yesterday I had to do something that I had never done before in a rated tournament: forcing the opponent to write his moves down.

I stopped the clock when it was my move and called the arbiter. After about 3 minutes of him copying my scoresheet we started the game again. This stoppage was to my disadvantage; my concentration was broken and, once the game restarted, I had to take a few minutes to regain my bearings in the position and make a move.

I told someone about this afterwards. He told me "oh him, he has trouble with his eyesight so he's never written his moves down in any game for ages". I can't say that I am filled with a lot of sympathy. Of course if he were totally blind then there are provisions for that. But his eyesight was good enough t o write down the moves once I got him to. It just won't wash with me; other people have obviously permitted this guy to get away with not writing down his moves in rated [ 75 min plus 30 sec inc] games but I will not.

He may not want to learn from his games. That's his problem. But I won't have a situation where rules are broken resulting in not only no way of resolving disputes, but also a time advantage for the player who is not writing down his moves [ even under the new rules of having to write down your moves after pressing the clock the other player often still moves while you are writing it down ]

Garvinator
02-04-2006, 03:58 PM
I stopped the clock when it was my move and called the arbiter. After about 3 minutes of him copying my scoresheet we started the game again. This stoppage was to my disadvantage; my concentration was broken and, once the game restarted, I had to take a few minutes to regain my bearings in the position and make a move.
In this situation, the player should have been catching up his/her scoresheet on their own time, not with the clock stopped. The player has been gaining time by not recording, hence why you have to catch up your scoresheet on your time.

Also with a 30 second increment, both players have to record for the whole game.

qpawn
02-04-2006, 04:40 PM
Thanks sincerely for telling me that; it is sad when I have to be a virtual expert on the rules of tournament chess to compensate for the silliness and ignorance of another player/ .

:confused:

qpawn
02-04-2006, 04:43 PM
Another thing that I forgot to mention. The game was meant to have a 30 second incre,ment. But he set the clock wrong [ by intention???? :eek: ] so it was in effect blitz without an increment.

Enough of this nonsense. The next time I play this guy he will not pull any more of these stunts.

Kevin Bonham
02-04-2006, 05:02 PM
An opponent who experiences trouble keeping score has the following recourses:

(i) Subject to the agreement of the arbiter he may provide an assistant to keep score.

(ii) Irrespective of (i), the arbiter shall adjust the non-scoring-player's clock "in an equitable way".

Your opponent should have approached the arbiter before the game and advised of the issue. If this is not done, the arbiter should assume no disability and proceed as normal.

For instance a player I know has a dyslexia-type condition that he claims causes him to play worse when required to score. We permit him to not keep score but he starts with 10 minutes off his clock for a G90.

I agree with Garvin's comments, and if you were short of time, you should have received time for the disruption.

qpawn
02-04-2006, 05:07 PM
This is all new to me.

At this rate I am going to know more about the rules of tournament chess than anyone else except for arbiters.

Garvinator
03-04-2006, 07:07 AM
This is all new to me.

At this rate I am going to know more about the rules of tournament chess than anyone else except for arbiters.
you might even learn more about the laws of chess than some arbiters;) :eek:

We have an arbiters thread on here for a reason, so chess players can learn the laws of chess and for fellow arbiters to debate different rules when they occur in tournaments.

Feel free to have a read through most of the threads, some are really technical and dont have a lot to do with day to day chess play, but may be still interesting :uhoh:

Feel free to also ask questions.

Kevin Bonham
03-04-2006, 11:28 AM
Some of the comments I made above are about normal practice rather than the Laws. However the Laws do contain the following:

8.1 [..] 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 in an equitable way.

Davidflude
05-04-2006, 07:01 PM
Once you notice that the increments are not being added then you should call the arbiter who will adjust the clocks. This is a common problem especially is people are playing blitz on tournament boards right up to the start of the tournament.

Personally I think that blitz should not be permitted on tournament boards within 10 minutes of the scheduled tournament start. I like to sit down at my board and get organised a few minutes before play starts.

pax
06-04-2006, 05:08 PM
Personally, I feel that blitz should not be allowed on tournament clocks FULL STOP (unless they are analog). Otherwise there will inevitably be problems which are only noticed half way through the game, when you are in a hell of a pickle.

Garvinator
07-04-2006, 02:21 PM
Question for 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.

Most of this law would be known to regular readers of this section :eek:

Was thinking of a scenario that could be likely to occur (hasnt actually happened as far as I am aware).

Player A writes move down on scoresheet, then changes it and writes down a different move. Player B stops the clock and informs the arbiter of what has happened as asks for a ruling.

What ruling should be made in this case? The part I was thinking most about is whether the arbiter can enforce that Player A makes the move first written down (if it is legal).

Of course writing down the move first before playing it on the board is illegal under the current laws.

The_Wise_Man
11-04-2006, 08:17 PM
We have a player at St George that has trouble holding the pieces, let alone being able to write... He sometimes knocks other pieces over and somtimes points to the piece and then to the square that he intends moving it... People are most obliging to help him out... Thus he never keeps score... he is rated around 1000 for all the time that he has been at the club.... But he comes and has fun... Its just a good news story coming out of St George.

Wise

Ian Rout
12-04-2006, 10:28 AM
Player A writes move down on scoresheet, then changes it and writes down a different move. Player B stops the clock and informs the arbiter of what has happened as asks for a ruling.

What ruling should be made in this case? The part I was thinking most about is whether the arbiter can enforce that Player A makes the move first written down (if it is legal).
I don't believe so. The effect of the new rule is to prohibit writing moves before playing them, not to intoduce a "write-move" rule analogous to touch-move. As FIDE has never stated that this (write-move) was the intent of the rule an arbiter doesn't have any grounds to exceed the literal interpretation.

Kevin Bonham
12-04-2006, 11:29 AM
I agree with Ian; there is no "write-move" implication.

arosar
12-04-2006, 11:50 AM
Except, I'm sure, where player A is claiming a draw. If he first writes down a move, option 1, which leads to a forced draw then notices another move, option 2, which leads to mate, he must make option 1. I think we discussed this somewhere.

AR

Vlad
12-04-2006, 01:38 PM
Except, I'm sure, where player A is claiming a draw. If he first writes down a move, option 1, which leads to a forced draw then notices another move, option 2, which leads to mate, he must make option 1. I think we discussed this somewhere.

AR

Only after the player claims the draw you can say that it is a draw. Otherwise, the same argument as Ian described it applies.

If you do follow what you have suggested you may find yourselve in a big trouble. Say the player has a terrible handwriting; he writes a move which is something in between Ra5 and Rd5. The first one is the third repeatition, the second one is the mate. Who is going to identify which move was written?

Garvinator
12-04-2006, 02:01 PM
I don't believe so. The effect of the new rule is to prohibit writing moves before playing them, not to intoduce a "write-move" rule analogous to touch-move. As FIDE has never stated that this (write-move) was the intent of the rule an arbiter doesn't have any grounds to exceed the literal interpretation.
I got a reply:eek: :clap:

arosar
12-04-2006, 02:02 PM
Only after the player claims the draw you can say that it is a draw.

That's what I said man: "where player A is claiming a draw".


If you do follow what you have suggested you may find yourselve in a big trouble. Say the player has a terrible handwriting; he writes a move which is something in between Ra5 and Rd5. The first one is the third repeatition, the second one is the mate. Who is going to identify which move was written?

I don't think it is a real problem since during the draw claim, at least in most circumstances I have witnessed, the written move is accompanied with a verbal indication anyway. So having to decipher the handwriting wouldn't be necessary.

AR