Time Ladies and Gentlemen Please!

[NickFaulks]

The author would appear to be unaware of the Open International de Saint-Quentin - Mémorial Aloyzas Kveinys - a nine round Swiss played over 7 days with a time control of 90 minutes for 40 moves, then 30 minutes extra, with 30 second increments. On the two days where 2 games are to be played the rules say the morning game can be adjourned following the procedure in the Laws of Chess, Guideline I

That is a very good spot. The tournament is of course fine for all purposes.

[Stewart Reuben]

Nick > Adjudications are not contemplated in the FIDE Laws. I don't believe that they ever have been.<

They were in the Laws until at least the 1980s, I think. I introduced quickplay finishes at Islington in 1973, but it took time for them to become widespread.
The cumulative mode is attributed to Fischer. The delay mode came from Bronstein. But, of course, you need suitable electronic clocks. I played with adjournments in the London League until 2019.My problem was they didn't have electronic clocks and I am too old for a sudden death finish. Almost invariably, one adjourned, set the position up on a computer and eventually agreed result.

[NickFaulks]

They [adjudications] were in the Laws until at least the 1980s, I think.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I wonder what they said.

What I probably had in my mind was that they have never been FIDE rated - I hope that, at least, is true.

[Stewart Reuben]

Nick >What I probably had in my mind was that they have never been FIDE rated - I hope that, at least, is true.<

That is a question I had never before considered. Games were definitely graded in England which were liable to the possibility of adjudication. The FIDE Rating System only started in 1970. I think (but don't know) that no events where adjudication was allowed were ever FIDE Rated. Probably not because of a regulation, ut they just weren't. The lowest rating was 2205 for some years.
I know that, in the US, games were USCF Rated that were liable to adjudication. I did some myself as part of a team in Las Vegas in 1964. I remember Bobby Fischer and GM Arthur Bisguier did adjudications in weekend Swisses in NY. I don't know what they did there when FIDE Ratings came in. It is likely that in the US they simply carried on doing hat they had done before.
Nick, what happened in Bermuda for the short tournament that used to be run alongside the very strong one?

[NickFaulks]

Games were definitely graded in England which were liable to the possibility of adjudication.

They still are!

It is likely that in the US they simply carried on doing hat they had done before.

You can bet on that. My introduction to FIDE came when I won a game in Las Vegas under FIDE Laws but was informed that I had lost it under USCF Laws. It was FIDE rated as a loss. I went to the next set of FIDE Congress meetings to complain about that and to try to get it changed.

Nick, what happened in Bermuda for the short tournament that used to be run alongside the very strong one?

I do not believe that any games in Bermuda were FIDE rated before I arrived in 1991, and adjudication was long gone by then.

[Roger de Coverly]

My introduction to FIDE came when I won a game in Las Vegas under FIDE Laws but was informed that I had lost it under USCF Laws. It was FIDE rated as a loss. I went to the next set of FIDE Congress meetings to complain about that and to try to get it changed.

Would that have been their USCF rule that you could only claim a win on time in normal play with a mostly complete score sheet? UK and International practice had always been to reconstruct the game, Particularly with adjudications and adjournments many players took their time management to the wire, evem at 40 moves in two and a half. If both players did it, scrambles without recording and subsequent reconstructions were relatively routine. For that matter, you had players who would miss out moves, making false claims as a consequence.

That didn't always work as Karpov once claimed 41 moves or more had been played and the opponebt 39. It was a case of counting repetitions. This was before the days of sensory boards, so relied on an arbiter paying close attention or taking the word of any spectators,

[NickFaulks]

Would that have been their USCF rule that you could only claim a win on time in normal play with a mostly complete score sheet?

Yes. Numerous visiting GMs got caught and made a fuss at the time but then, unlike me, let it drop.

If both players did it, scrambles without recording and subsequent reconstructions were relatively routine.

I once had the privilege of sitting next to a Dave Rumens game in a weekend congress where the time control was at 48 moves and both players had abandoned scoresheets around move 15. The reconstruction was worth the entry fee.

[David Sedgwick]

They [adjudications] were in the Laws until at least the 1980s, I think.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I wonder what they said.

From the 1985 Laws:

"8.1 If, during a game, it is found that an illegal move was made, the position shall be reinstated to what it was before the illegal move was node. the game shall than continue by applying the rules of Article 7 to the move replacing the illegal move. If the position cannot be reinstated, the game shall be annulled and a new game played.

This applies to all sessions of play and also to a game awaiting a decision by adjudication."

Previously wording akin to the last sentence was included in the Official Interpretations rather than in the Laws themselves.

The sentence was retained in the 1989 Laws and in the 1993 Laws, but did not appear in the 1997 Laws.

[E Michael White]

Nearer to home for Nick, the current FIDE title regulations mention adjudication but only to say that games so decided cannot be used for title applications ! (Regulation 1.42c). This statement was in the regulations both before and after 2009. I pointed this out to some of the adjudication hunters back then.

Some might suggest that this shows FIDE recognise continuing use of adjudication is a possibility.

[NickFaulks]

Nearer to home for Nick, the current FIDE title regulations mention adjudication but only to say that games so decided cannot be used for title applications ! (Regulation 1.42c). This statement was in the regulations both before and after 2009. I pointed this out to some of the adjudication hunters back then.

Some might suggest that this shows FIDE recognise continuing use of adjudication is a possibility.

That has been mentioned during revisions and the feeling has been that it does no harm, so there is no reason to remove it.

[Stewart Reuben]

For games to be FIDE rated, they must be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess. It would be strange to allow unrated games to count towards title norms! Rating and title regulations are not part of the Laws.
It is possible to conceive of a situation where games are adjudicated. After three hours play some of the games are finished in the last round. Then a calamity happens which prevents play continuing, even the following day and people are going home, indeed some have already done so. The games were all broadcast so that the positions when play stopped are available.
Now the decision could be made that the best thing to do is adjudicate the remaining games. The results of those games cannot be used for title applications. But they could be used for awarding prizes, or qualification to a later event.
Highly unlikely - yes. Illogical - no.

[Matt Mackenzie]

There was the odd instance of games being adjudicated in the final round of FIDE-rated tournaments when - for various reasons - it was decided that it would not be possible to play them to a finish. One (in)famous example came at the conclusion of the 1985 USSR Championship.