Laws of Chess - changes

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri May 23, 2008 11:00 am

I believe we are approaching one of the periodic reviews of the laws of chess.

A recent rule change abolished the Kotov recommendation to record the move before playing it. However it left the paragraphs for claiming threefold repetition and 50 moves since a capture or pawn move as exceptions where the move is written down first.

It would seem logical that a player wishing to claim that his move would invoke a repetition or would be the 50th move should make the claim by playing the move, announcing the claim ,stopping the clock and summoning the arbiter. Equally it would seem logical that even in the event of a false claim, the opponent should be able to treat the claim as a draw offer and agree a draw, thereby terminating the game.

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4542
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Stewart Reuben » Sat May 24, 2008 1:34 am

I have proposed exactly those changes.
I wanted to 12 years ago. But the Laws at that time meant, if you made an incorrect claim, you lost 5 minutes on your clock. that could result in losing the game. I did not want to confuse anybody when they changed that to the rather ridiculous time penalty, which I can never remember.
Stewart Reuben

Neill Cooper
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Cumbria

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Neill Cooper » Sat May 24, 2008 8:10 am

Please could rule 12.2 2. ("If a player`s mobile phone rings in the playing venue during play, that player shall lose the game.") be changed to give the arbiter's flexibility, so as to be subject to rule 12.7 (" Infraction of any part of the Articles 12.1 to 12.6 shall lead to penalties in accordance with Article 13.4.") the same as other prohibitions (such as players being forbidden to make use of any notes). Each tournament can add its own rules (e.g. that a phone ringing means you lose the game). The present rule means that you do not automatically lose the game if a team mate tells you what to play, but if you mobile rings with a wrong number you do. Because it is a rule of chess it applies to all games from the World Championship to friendly games in a cafe.

There is a long discussion on mobile phones and lose of game on the SCCU open forum http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/letmobiles.htm My view is summarised by Geoff Marchant on 28.3.08 "I'm not saying that an automatic loss of the game on the ringing of a mobile phone should not happen - just that, in my opinion, it shouldn't be an explicit Article in the Laws of Chess."

ps If you want to check the rules of chess they are at http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/ ... w=category

E Michael White
Posts: 1420
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by E Michael White » Thu May 29, 2008 6:29 pm

Neill Cooper
I disagree with you and think the mobile phone rule should be left as it is. If arbiters have discretion, some will inconsistently apply a warning and others will default the player. In the case of a league match without arbiters the game may take weeks to settle.

This doesnt stop leagues, except for the 4NCL, making their own rules if they specify them in advance. For example to allow doctors on emergency callout to leave their phones on league rules could say "...FIDE rules apply except that for mobile phones ...etc".....,. However I think that for tournaments the rule should be applied consistently as it currently is.

Your analogy with advice is a weak one because your fellow team or club member may offer you advice against your wishes and outside of your control, or be a young or new player who does not know any better or be a malicious friend of your opponent. It would be unfair in those circumstances to be defaulted.

In the case of mobile phones left on you are the sole person responsible and the noise affects everyone. The decision should not even be up to your opponent as others are affected.

John Moore
Posts: 2226
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by John Moore » Thu May 29, 2008 7:19 pm

Michael

I agree with every word of your post.

John

User avatar
Greg Breed
Posts: 723
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:30 am
Location: Aylesbury, Bucks, UK

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Greg Breed » Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:33 pm

In any case, if a mobile phone must be left on for whatever reason, then how hard can it be to put it on silent and vibrate :?:
Then, if it does go off, you can deal with it by simply leaving the playing hall (subject to rules and regulations). If you have problems with this or queries, discuss it with the arbiter beforehand. Most of them are understanding.
Hatch End A Captain (Hillingdon League)
Controller (Hillingdon League)

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7179
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by John Upham » Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:37 pm

A quick question for any FIDE arbiters out there :

Are FIDE events still permitted to allow adjournments if the organisers choose to do so?

I was asked why World Championahip matches no longer included adjournments and I assumed that FIDE had chosen not to permit them from now on.

Maybe they are still permitted by the Laws of Chess but organisers choose not to allow them in their events?

Clarification would be welcome! :D
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:58 pm

http://www.fide.com/info/handbook?id=125&view=article contains the rules for adjournments.

In theory adjournments were possible after 6 hours play for the 1993 Kasparov-Short match for which the move rate was 40/2, 20/1 repeating, although every single game finished in the first six hours.


The default international move rate changed to 40/2 20/1 G/30 (or G/60) at about the same time and single session chess became the norm.

The 4NCL started in 1993 - I don't think that 2pm/11am start times could have worked without a quickplay finish to force the completion of games within the weekend.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by JustinHorton » Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:34 pm

God no. Particularly if you had to get the 7pm coach back to London on the Sunday evening.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4542
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Stewart Reuben » Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:32 am

A cursory look at the FIDE Laws would reveal that adjournments are still possible. They were given up on because they are less efficient than a quickplay finish. People did not like the growing influence of computers on adjournments. Also, it was hard to concentrate on anything else, for example a 2 hour stop for dinner.
For the 4NCL there is no need whatsoever for a quickplay finish, which is much inferior to an increment. The reason for this is that there can be problematic finishes with a finite amount of time.
Try 40/110, 20/55, all in 20, add on 10 seconds per move from the start and that is removed. There would be no danger of anybody missing his train.
Face up to the fact that games with a 30 seconds increment result in a more efficient use of the time available and that then games have to be recorded throughout, then you might come up with.
40/100, all in 50 add on 30 seconds cumulatively from the first. 120 moves is then 7 hours.
Stewart Reuben

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by JustinHorton » Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:41 am

Stewart Reuben wrote:There would be no danger of anybody missing his train.
Not sure about that.

I played a game on Saturday, began at 4.30. Ninety minutes per player with a thrity-second increment. I finished round about 8. The last few games were still going on and all but one finished soon.

The last one, however, involved an old player, who had a bare rook, against a junior, who had a knight and pawn.

First, the old guy spent time trying to win the pawn, but didn't quite go about it the right way: he then offered a draw. The junior declined it, given that he still had a pawn and might promote it. He also had about twelve minutes on his clock, while his opponent had next to none.

The older player then failed to realise - he may have been the only person in the room who did not - that he could draw any time he wanted simply by taking the pawn with his rook. So they played on, and on. Every so often the pawn would move, depriving us of any chance of a 50-move rule finish. It got to nine o-clock, the pawn reached the fifth rank and still there was no prospect of an end to the torture.

However, the junior misplayed it and finally there was a chance for the older player to win the pawn - or maybe even the knight, if his opponent (who'd now used up most of those twelve minutes) made the wrong choice.

So he thought about it...

...and thought about it....

....and lost on time....
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by JustinHorton » Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:43 am

(Had he won the pawn, of course, then given that he would quite rightly have refused any further draw offers, but would not have known how to try and win it, we'd quite likely have been there until ten.)
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4542
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Stewart Reuben » Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:54 am

A bit silly that, especially for the 4NCL.
A bare knight can win against a bare rook if the player with the rook oversteps the time limit. He still has mating material.
There are good arbiters at the 4NCL. I like to think that one would step in and declare the game drawn, for the honourable reason that he wanted to go home. Once at the British a player was forfeited. Drunk in charge of a chess board was the verdict.
Stewart

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:06 pm

re Length of games

A check on my TWIC 2007 and TWIC 2008 collections suggests that about 0.1% (about 100 in 100,000) of recent games go beyond the 120 move mark, in some cases well beyond. We don't see much of this in the UK because QP finishes from move 60 at the latest force either an earlier result or the true game length not being recorded.

The late night Pert v Peek game from Hastings was a mere 147 moves. That's about the longest British game I've got from the last 8 years. Runner-up at 144 was Rudd-Roberson from Swansea in 2006. That one would have been 40/2 20/1 G/30 but it's unlikely to have lasted more than 5 hours.

E Michael White
Posts: 1420
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm

Re: Laws of Chess - changes

Post by E Michael White » Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:56 pm

In relation to arbiters, Stewart Reuben wrote:... I like to think that one would step in and declare the game drawn,...
Stewart

Just for completeness, under which rule would an arbiter declare the game drawn if neither player can claim a draw. Rule 10.2 doesnt apply under increment mode so what else is there ?