PDA

View Full Version : Rules lectures before play (sf support our chess admins)



antichrist
05-05-2006, 11:08 PM
But do any have a sense of humour?

We have that old complaint against KB giving a rules lecture before it begins - that rules him out.

Kevin Bonham
06-05-2006, 02:54 PM
We have that old complaint against KB giving a rules lecture before it begins

Firstly there has never been any formal or other public complaint against me over anything like that. It is just some rumour being spread from time to time by you.

Some time ago you claimed that some player had told you that I had arbited a Tasmanian tournament and that he had decided not to play anymore because of me supposedly raving on about the rules too long before play started.

You couldn't name the player nor tell me where it occurred. Your memory that he said it was me could be wrong, his memory that it was me could be wrong, he could dislike me for some irrelevant reason and be beating up nonsense about me, and so on. It is hearsay, it is not reliable.

What I usually do by way of rules briefings before events start is read out 10.2 so players are absolutely sure about it, since it comes up so much and many players ask me to refresh their memories of it, and sometimes remind players of recent important changes they may not have got used to yet.

So as far as I am concerned your story is not valid and unless you are willing to back it with evidence I ask that you not repeat it ever again either in public or in private. Ta. :lol:

Basil
06-05-2006, 07:24 PM
This thread is devoted to positive feedback ...


But do any have a sense of humour? We have that old complaint against KB giving a rules lecture before it begins - that rules him out.

AC

I think this prevents you from future claims of 'thread pollution' against others

antichrist
07-05-2006, 04:27 PM
KB, without me inferring anything, readers, by your reply, can make up their own minds up - I know nothing!

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 04:58 PM
KB, without me inferring anything, readers, by your reply, can make up their own minds up - I know nothing!

If any reader takes AC's story seriously on the basis of the "evidence" he has provided so far, I am happy to pay for a full state funeral for their brain. :rolleyes:

I need details here, AC:

* When were you told this story?
* When did the person telling you say it happened?
* Where did the person telling you say it happened?
* How long did he allege that I spoke for?
* Give me a rough physical description - not enough for me to ID the suspect, but enough for me to check if there is anyone who dropped out in that timeframe who even might fit the description.
* Why do you say it "rules me out" (not that I care if I am mentioned in this thread or not) when you cannot possibly know if the story is true?

:lol:

Lucena
07-05-2006, 05:05 PM
If any reader takes AC's story seriously on the basis of the "evidence" he has provided so far, I am happy to pay for a full state funeral for their brain. :rolleyes:

I need details here, AC:

* When were you told this story?
* When did the person telling you say it happened?
* Where did the person telling you say it happened?
* How long did he allege that I spoke for?
* Give me a rough physical description - not enough for me to ID the suspect, but enough for me to check if there is anyone who dropped out in that timeframe who even might fit the description.
* Why do you say it "rules me out" (not that I care if I am mentioned in this thread or not) when you cannot possibly know if the story is true?

:lol:

Kevin those :lol:s are scaring me.

antichrist
07-05-2006, 05:13 PM
KB, well now it seems it can be discussed publicly and privately with immunity.

I told you about 6 months ago, and you like a faithful dog went searching for that 3-4 year-old bone.

Back in the old ACF BB days someone claimed that before tourneys you DOPed that you would give a speech on the rules (just as you have admitted), and that the speech put him off (or he may have been reporting it second-hand).

And that was how I found out that you were a chess organiser.

At last count you could not find that bone on the old BB, maybe it was deleted, who knows?

And judging by your second last post I will let readers make up their own mind and infer nothing!

But as you are well aware posters have said lot worse things about myself, look what advice Greg gave me, so don't take it too seriously. It is a Sunday arvo - I did not realise the fish were biting that well.

WhiteElephant
07-05-2006, 05:36 PM
We have that old complaint against KB giving a rules lecture before it begins - that rules him out.

Nothing could be more boring and moronic than Roland Eime's 'Readings from the book of FIDE' before the start of a tournament. That has to be one of the sorriest spectacles I have ever seen. Roland is one walking advertisement ahainst playing chess.

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 05:38 PM
Back in the old ACF BB days someone claimed that before tourneys you DOPed that you would give a speech on the rules (just as you have admitted), and that the speech put him off (or he may have been reporting it second-hand).

Great, you don't even remember if it was a first-hand claim or a second-hand claim. Now, are you referring to the 2003 ACF YaBB BB (the one immediately prior to this) or to the fall-over type from 2002 or possibly earlier?


But as you are well aware posters have said lot worse things about myself, look what advice Greg gave me, so don't take it too seriously.

I don't care who has said worse about what, I just want to know what the truth behind this claim, if any, is, and set the record straight in the event that there are errors in these claims.

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 05:44 PM
By the way, I tried to track down my previous discussion of this with AC but could not find it.

antichrist
07-05-2006, 05:49 PM
KB
By the way, I tried to track down my previous discussion of this with AC but could not find it.

A/C
Which could also mean that the original post I refer to on old BB would more so be untraceable.



I am proud that I can't remember :

what type of claim it was (first or second hand);

what BB it was on;

what year;

who poster was;

was it truthful;

on whose feast day;

under what star sign;

was it a Holiday Day of Obligation (Easter or Good Friday - so is relevant)?

I like to enjoy myself with crazy,funny things in my mind not be a walking infopaeadia.

Sorry you new thread has come to a road block.

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 06:05 PM
KB
By the way, I tried to track down my previous discussion of this with AC but could not find it.

A/C
Which could also mean that the original post I refer to on old BB would more so be untraceable.

Well, not necessarily. Firstly if I was on the board at the time I would certainly have remembered it, which I don't. Secondly our previous discussion may have been via PM in which case I would not be able to find it by searching.


Sorry you new thread has come to a road block.

Well, it was actually you who started the line of discussion, it was fairly off-topic at the time.

I'm assuming the incident you refer to, if remembered correctly by you, is either a massive overreaction or fiction by the person who mentioned it. You might even be remembering someone trolling me based on something I had said about rules lectures.

However others might want to discuss the issues of rules lectures in general - are they necessary, do they work, does anyone ever listen (Reuben says no, but it is nice to be able to tell people they were told something.)

ElevatorEscapee
07-05-2006, 06:16 PM
However others might want to discuss the issues of rules lectures in general - are they necessary, do they work, does anyone ever listen (Reuben says no, but it is nice to be able to tell people they were told something.)

I would like to discuss the issues of rules lectures given to players prior to tournaments, is there anything I should know, or rules I should follow before embarking on such an enterprise? ;)

Garvinator
07-05-2006, 06:35 PM
I would like to discuss the issues of rules lectures given to players prior to tournaments, is there anything I should know, or rules I should follow before embarking on such an enterprise? ;)
understand the rule that you are going to read out before reading it out;) because you will be asked about it and maybe even a couple of players will stop the clocks during the game to pick up on whatever rule you read out:eek:

I remember from one of the rounds of the 2005 Australian Juniors, rule 9 about draw offers was read out. Then when inputting the games I noticed that most of the players had written down the equals sign for a draw offer, which they previously hadnt been doing:cool:

I usually do about one or two rule readings at each tournament. One usually covers the changes to the recording of moves and some other rule that I have noticed come up in one or more of the games.

WhiteElephant
07-05-2006, 06:44 PM
I usually do about one or two rule readings at each tournament. One usually covers the changes to the recording of moves and some other rule that I have noticed come up in one or more of the games.

During my game last week, I noticed that my opponent was occasionally writing down a move before playing it. It didn't bother me in the least so I did not say anything. My opponent, however, complained to the arbiter about me listening to my ipod because apparently it might have been receiving transmissions from my Fritz at home hehe :)

antichrist
07-05-2006, 06:49 PM
I can remember Ron Kite hating it when CZ read out rules before a comp.

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 07:59 PM
By the way if anyone else from the old BBs remembers this post AC refers to I would be interested in hearing from them.

antichrist
07-05-2006, 08:11 PM
Your posts remind me of the Inquisition currently on SBS.

God Almighty, who of current posters were around 4 years ago. Who would remember such a small unimportant point. (I recently asked an active official a question about a matter well in current issues. He denied knowing anything about it even though it is in black and white in front of him. So don't rely on people's memories - only I just happened to remember it. Just as I remember my brother defeating the Aussie ping pong champ even though my brother forgets. I even can almost remember the score.)

The lack of design in that board, that is a free-for-all of one thread only, it was easy to miss posts unless one went checking up the list.

If I was to put up a poll giving that previously mentioned reply of yours as an example, and asked would it be likely that this poster got adverse reactions for rule lectures before tournaments, I reakon the vote would be in the positive.

I am not going checking old posts. But on the balance of probabilities, just like the witches, you would be found guilty.

And I am still waiting for your answer to my objection of last night re kingfishers, do you concede defeat there also?

I am not starting a new thread over it.

from Shoutbox

06-05-2006 08:00 PM Kevin Bonham
as for the request that i play hippy, the trip away was fairly routine apart from the holdup at the end. however i did record a kingfisher that is seldom seen in tasmania (quite irrelevant to my work as i was looking for invertebrates)

A/C
[Edit | Delete] No it isn't, those kingfisher eat your invertebrates don't they?

Denis_Jessop
07-05-2006, 09:58 PM
Without reflecting on anybody's practice in running events, my own experience is akin to Stewart Reuben's. He says


It is useless to read out a number of regulations prior to start of play. No player ever listens, instead they will become irritable. (The Chess Organiser's Handbook, 3rd ed., p41)

DJ

WhiteElephant
07-05-2006, 10:29 PM
Without reflecting on anybody's practice in running events, my own experience is akin to Stewart Reuben's. He says
It is useless to read out a number of regulations prior to start of play. No player ever listens, instead they will become irritable. (The Chess Organiser's Handbook, 3rd ed., p41)
DJ

:clap: Nicely put.

An arbiter who reads out rules before the start of a tournament is stroking his own ego. The best arbiters make sure a tournament runs smoothly by being invisible.

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 10:32 PM
God Almighty, who of current posters were around 4 years ago. Who would remember such a small unimportant point.

Several current posters were around back then.


The lack of design in that board, that is a free-for-all of one thread only, it was easy to miss posts unless one went checking up the list.

OK it was 2002 or earlier then, if it happened. Posts from those BBs were so often lost that if there was such a post it would be difficult to find. However I was online on the 2002 BB and I certainly recall no such post and would definitely recall it had I seen it.


If I was to put up a poll giving that previously mentioned reply of yours as an example, and asked would it be likely that this poster got adverse reactions for rule lectures before tournaments, I reakon the vote would be in the positive.

I am not going checking old posts. But on the balance of probabilities, just like the witches, you would be found guilty.

Now who's engaged in an inquisition? Such a poll would prove nothing and in a court assesing balance of probabilities the judges would instruct that your evidence be thrown out and the case dismissed - hearsay is inadmissable. :owned:

I will deal with the kingfisher thing in the shoutbox if I can be bothered.

Kevin Bonham
07-05-2006, 10:34 PM
An arbiter who reads out rules before the start of a tournament is stroking his own ego.

I think this is true for an arbiter who reads a huge list of rules. However I have found that in more than half the events I arbeit someone will actually ask me to clarify something, usually 10.2, at the briefing before the start. Maybe this is because Tasmania has a lot of infrequent players whose awareness of the rules can easily get rusty.

antichrist
07-05-2006, 10:38 PM
Well KB, the poll is about 5 against you at the moment. They would hate it mate, so yes it is probably that someone years ago was put off by your reading of the rules that you have admitted to - by the Authority of Pope Innocent 1 your tongue is to be cut out - and may the kingfisher gobble up it's invertibrate remains!

WhiteElephant
07-05-2006, 11:08 PM
I think this is true for an arbiter who reads a huge list of rules. However I have found that in more than half the events I arbeit someone will actually ask me to clarify something, usually 10.2, at the briefing before the start. Maybe this is because Tasmania has a lot of infrequent players whose awareness of the rules can easily get rusty.

That's fair enough, I guess, for club tournaments with a fairly small field and where players have requested it. When I saw it happen at the Aus Juniors at Mt Buller, you should have heard some of the comments from the players...not fit for decent ears, I can tell you.

antichrist
07-05-2006, 11:30 PM
Well that makes it about 100 against KB - off with his head.

Admit it KB, you have lost this one and can't WORM your way out - the kingfishers are hoohooo haaaahaaaaahhooooing and saliving at Sunday lunch coming up (they have been waiting).

Garvinator
08-05-2006, 01:04 AM
That's fair enough, I guess, for club tournaments with a fairly small field and where players have requested it. When I saw it happen at the Aus Juniors at Mt Buller, you should have heard some of the comments from the players...not fit for decent ears, I can tell you.
How else are players going to learn the laws of chess if they are not read out at tournaments? Players on the whole dont sit down and read the laws of chess and they wont attend rules seminars? But then when an arbiter pulls them up and penalises them for a rule infraction, they claim ignorance??

Axiom
08-05-2006, 02:59 AM
How else are players going to learn the laws of chess if they are not read out at tournaments? Players on the whole dont sit down and read the laws of chess and they wont attend rules seminars? But then when an arbiter pulls them up and penalises them for a rule infraction, they claim ignorance??
i agree, maybe give ppl the option to stay and listen to rules ,then no excuse to whine when ppl get pulled up for mob phones or scoring incorrectly etc

Garvinator
08-05-2006, 10:03 AM
i agree, maybe give ppl the option to stay and listen to rules ,then no excuse to whine when ppl get pulled up for mob phones or scoring incorrectly etc
As I said earlier, I only read out about one or two rules during the tournament, say one rule at the start of a round and then another rule at the start of a different round, usually after some incident or after being asked a couple of similiar questions.

At the start of the tournament I make the usual announcements and inform players of the change to the recording of moves rule and remind everyone to turn mobiles off.

WhiteElephant
08-05-2006, 10:04 AM
How else are players going to learn the laws of chess if they are not read out at tournaments? Players on the whole dont sit down and read the laws of chess and they wont attend rules seminars? But then when an arbiter pulls them up and penalises them for a rule infraction, they claim ignorance??

I don't think any player can be expected to read the entire FIDE Handbook of their own accord. Neither can the arbiter ever read the entire Handbook, even at 100 sittings prior to tournaments. I look at it a bit like when your car breaks down. You take the time to find out about that particular problem so you know what to do about it next time. You find out about the intricacies of rules through your experience as a tournament player.

Therefore, most players in a tournament will already be familiar with all the rules because they have learned them at some time in the past through tournament play.

Garvin, imagine being a player, coming to a tournament and being mentally prepared and excited about your first game. Now imagine some boring stiff reading out in the most dull phraseology imaginable, SOMETHING WHICH YOU ALREADY KNOW. This will aggravate you, might make you lose your enthusiasm for the game and, most importantly, might make you lose all respect gor the arbiter, which is exactly what happened to me in the case of Roland Eime.

It would be much more effective for the arbioter to briefly give an intro to the tournament, make any announcements required, even crack a joke. Players want to get excited about the tournamnt, not be treated like fools.

WhiteElephant
08-05-2006, 10:07 AM
As I said earlier, I only read out about one or two rules during the tournament, say one rule at the start of a round and then another rule at the start of a different round, usually after some incident or after being asked a couple of similiar questions.

At the start of the tournament I make the usual announcements and inform players of the change to the recording of moves rule and remind everyone to turn mobiles off.

That's cool, but what rule do you choose? Whichever one you choose, most players will already know it. Why bore the living crap out of everyone in the tournamnet for the sake of one or two?

Brian_Jones
08-05-2006, 10:10 AM
:An arbiter who reads out rules before the start of a tournament is stroking his own ego. The best arbiters make sure a tournament runs smoothly by being invisible.

Yes, I agree. Everyone just wants to play not listen to the Dopes.

EGOR
13-05-2006, 08:47 PM
Yes, I agree. Everyone just wants to play not listen to the Dopes.
Funny, I'm sure that I've heard you read out rules before the start of a tournament.:)

arosar
14-05-2006, 12:02 PM
I don't mind a quick reminder of particularly the most contentious rules. 10.2 springs to mind immediately. And when in blitz, a clarification on "king capture" would be helpful.

You'll find that spending a few moments before the start of play on some of these rules will likely avoid prolonged arguments during play.

AR

jase
14-05-2006, 12:18 PM
And when in blitz, a clarification on "king capture" would be helpful.

You'll find that spending a few moments before the start of play on some of these rules will likely avoid prolonged arguments during play.

I'll certainly be clarifying that piece of jurisdiction befroe play commences today.

antichrist
15-05-2006, 12:50 PM
Brian Jones:
Yes, I agree. Everyone just wants to play not listen to the Dopes.


Funny, I'm sure that I've heard you read out rules before the start of a tournament.:)

Brian, I think that the audience demands a reply? Otherwise you will have AR after you.

Basil
15-05-2006, 11:47 PM
Quick! Get Solomon and his W/I/S/D/O/M

He'll tell you what to think. And you'll love him for it. [Even if he does start sentences with a preposition]

ElevatorEscapee
16-05-2006, 07:40 PM
:doh:

The wisdom of "Solomon", very clever! :clap:

I get it now... derrr :oops:

I wonder if his dad had a CB radio! ;) :lol:

antichrist
16-05-2006, 07:58 PM
I am told that he had a very sharp sword

ElevatorEscapee
18-05-2006, 09:16 PM
To be Frank, his sword is much sharper than Jim's when his son comes to pay a visit. ;)

antichrist
23-07-2011, 04:22 PM
why not start saturday off with a laugh - I prefer at my gravesite to be known as a laughing larikin than a wet onkarpinga

Kevin Bonham
23-07-2011, 08:47 PM
why not start saturday off with a laugh

Superb idea. Everyone who sees this stupid thread should laugh at you, then laugh at you again for your silly decision to bump it.

antichrist
23-07-2011, 10:37 PM
Superb idea. Everyone who sees this stupid thread should laugh at you, then laugh at you again for your silly decision to bump it.

well if you had read the thread there was a poll along with this thread that agreed with me overwhelmingly and against you - so I deserve a healthy blow on that triumphalism bugle - would you like the Last Post dedicated to yourself

Kevin Bonham
23-07-2011, 11:13 PM
well if you had read the thread there was a poll along with this thread that agreed with me overwhelmingly and against you

False. Here is your poll thread:

http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=4186

While you claimed it was 5 votes against me the facts are:

* The poll allowed multiple voting and you attempted to stack it by voting for all your anti-me options.
* Either four or five posters voted. It is unclear how many because a vote for one option has been edited in by an admin rather than cast using the normal system.
* At best the vote was 2-2; if not that it was 3-2 against you.
* The sample size was rubbish anyway.

You should know better than to regard your own past reporting of a poll as accurate. So what you now have to do with your triumphalism bugle is eat it.