PDA

View Full Version : Spectator counting moves for time control etc.



pappubahry
21-11-2008, 08:30 PM
I'm reading The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal at the moment, and this is one of the anecdotes:


We concluded the game in a terrible time-scramble, in which my opponent gave up recording the game round about move 25, and I some five moves later.

In the course of this rapid play I could have forced a draw, but I overlooked this, and instead left a piece en prise. Adamski made his move, and I saw that it was time to resign. All the same I made one more move, and my opponent's flag fell, but there was a controller standing by, and he said nothing, so I assumed that the 40 moves must have been made. Holding out my hand in a sign of resignation, I suddenly heard the voice of my wife, speaking in Latvian: 'Have you made up some new rules or something? After all, he's lost on time!' I replied in Russian that there was a controller for that, but she held up the fingers of both hands: that was how my wife had been counting the moves.

We reconstructed the score, and it turned out that Black had indeed not managed to make his 40th move. My opponent took my scoresheet, rewrote it, and showed that he had made ... 42 moves. It turned out that Adamski had simply added a repetition of moves, which was quite ridiculous: the controller confirmed that there had been no repetition.

Then a decision was made by a commission of appeal, which, on the basis of the 'eye-witness evidence' of a whole series of participants, confirmed the loss on time.

I guess I'm happy that the correct decision was reached, but it seems a bit dodgy that a spectator should step in like that. What should happen in that situation?

Kevin Bonham
21-11-2008, 10:42 PM
I guess I'm happy that the correct decision was reached, but it seems a bit dodgy that a spectator should step in like that. What should happen in that situation?

I think this sort of thing used to be a bit less policed than it is these days.

The current Laws state:


Spectators and players in other games are not to speak about or otherwise interfere in a game. If necessary, the arbiter may expel offenders from the playing venue.

If the tournament was being played under the current Laws the correct course of action in my view should be to expel Tal's wife from the playing area and anywhere else within earshot of the players for, say, the rest of the tournament. However, since the evidence of the eyewitnesses shows that Tal's opponent did indeed overstep, it is hard for the arbiter to avoid giving Tal a win should Tal claim one.

Without knowing what rules were in force for the tournament Tal played in I cannot comment on whether the decisions made in that case was correct.

eclectic
21-11-2008, 10:52 PM
perhaps the most infamous example of an unauthorised person "altering" the score of a game was the usa v soviet union basketball gold medal game at the 1972 munich olympics

CameronD
21-11-2008, 10:57 PM
Reminds me of the recent us womens championship with armeggedon. A players clock expired and thought it was a draw till a spectator with a camera got involved to change the result.

Kevin Bonham
21-11-2008, 11:20 PM
Reminds me of the recent us womens championship with armeggedon. A players clock expired and thought it was a draw till a spectator with a camera got involved to change the result.

As Bill notes this is incorrect.

You may be thinking of the other recent armageddon incident, the FIDE Womens World Championships situation involving Socko and Foisor where Socko won on time with KN vs KN. That was initially ruled a draw and the draw was reversed on appeal, but I'm pretty sure spectator intervention had nothing to do with it, although the appeals committee may well have watched the video. Indeed if you watch the video you can see Socko demonstrating why it is a win immediately after it is wrongly ruled a draw. Clearly she would have appealed without the video.

Furthermore once a game has finished and a result been declared it can be argued that a spectator who wishes to comment on the declared result is no longer interfering with the game, as the game is over. Certainly I would not take any action against a spectator who wished to comment on the declared result of a finished game (without annoying players still playing in the process), although it is up to a player to appeal an incorrect result and a spectator has no standing to do so.

CameronD
22-11-2008, 12:02 AM
I actually saw video of the incident, both players saw it as a draw until 15 seconds later when a spectator moved the pieces to show the win and stating the rule, the player then demanded a win from the arbiter. If the spectator never got involved, then the sheets would have been signed drawn by the players.



As Bill notes this is incorrect.

You may be thinking of the other recent armageddon incident, the FIDE Womens World Championships situation involving Socko and Foisor where Socko won on time with KN vs KN. That was initially ruled a draw and the draw was reversed on appeal, but I'm pretty sure spectator intervention had nothing to do with it, although the appeals committee may well have watched the video. Indeed if you watch the video you can see Socko demonstrating why it is a win immediately after it is wrongly ruled a draw. Clearly she would have appealed without the video.

Furthermore once a game has finished and a result been declared it can be argued that a spectator who wishes to comment on the declared result is no longer interfering with the game, as the game is over. Certainly I would not take any action against a spectator who wished to comment on the declared result of a finished game (without annoying players still playing in the process), although it is up to a player to appeal an incorrect result and a spectator has no standing to do so.

Bill Gletsos
22-11-2008, 12:21 AM
I actually saw video of the incident, both players saw it as a draw until 15 seconds later when a spectator moved the pieces to show the win and stating the rule, the player then demanded a win from the arbiter. If the spectator never got involved, then the sheets would have been signed drawn by the players.You saw no video of this happening as it never occurred as part of the US Womens Championship Armageddon play-off.

Kevin Bonham
22-11-2008, 12:23 AM
I actually saw video of the incident, both players saw it as a draw until 15 seconds later when a spectator moved the pieces to show the win and stating the rule, the player then demanded a win from the arbiter. If the spectator never got involved, then the sheets would have been signed drawn by the players.

If you mean the Socko case the video is here (http://nalchik2008.fide.com/video/?lang=rus).

The pieces are clearly moved by Socko to demonstrate the win, not a spectator.

Garvinator
22-11-2008, 12:25 AM
CameronD,

Please show this video by giving a link?

Bill Gletsos
22-11-2008, 12:31 AM
I actually saw video of the incident, both players saw it as a draw until 15 seconds later when a spectator moved the pieces to show the win and stating the rule, the player then demanded a win from the arbiter. If the spectator never got involved, then the sheets would have been signed drawn by the players.If you mean the Womens championship incident them you can see in the youtube video that Socko quite clearly demonstrates the mating position around 2.11.

jr86xZcJAaM

ER
22-11-2008, 01:48 AM
Reminds me of the recent us womens championship with armeggedon. A players clock expired and thought it was a draw till a spectator with a camera got involved to change the result.

You are wrong (again) in both your text as well as in your signature! In case you 've forgotten CHESS IS A SPORT!!! :P

Adamski
22-11-2008, 03:06 PM
I'm reading The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal at the moment, and this is one of the anecdotes:...(Adamski loses on time in a won position.)It seems every time I hear about my Polish IM "friend"'s career, it's an unusual incident. His career seems to have had more than his fair share of such incidents. Maybe this is why he never made it to GM.