A few MonRoi Questions

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Maybe I can pull people away from the Issues Forum for a few minutes while we ponder how to deal situations unique to the object of earlier hot topics.

Okay, I broke down and bought one. :laughing: I’ve used it in a couple of tournaments. This is not a product review. I think Jerry Hanken covered that in his CL article. But I do have some questions from both a player and TD perspective.

Question #1: When I use a paper score sheet, I write down the elapsed time every 5 moves, or if a signicant amount of time was used I might note the elapsed time more frequently. My impression is this has not be treated as note taking.

If it’s a 2 control time limit such as 40/2 SD/60 I will circle 20, and underline 40 as reminder of the first control. Many players do this, and again my impression is this not considered note taking.

The MonRoi has no way of making time notations. Would it be considered note taking if I put the times down on a seperate piece of paper, scoresheet or otherwise?

Question #2: This comes from an actual situation I encountered in my 1st tournament using it. On the 18th move my opponent played …Nh5xf4. I accidently made the move Ng6xf4. We play about 4 moves more when I notice that my MonRoi position doesn’t match the board. On a paper scoresheet I probably wouldn’t even notice this mistake until I go to play the game out, or if there was a 3 fold claim. I would play the game out to its conclusion and no time would have been lost.

However given that the position I had on my MonRoi wasn’t the same one as the board I felt it would be hard to continue keeping score on the MonRoi. I noticed the error on my opponent’s time but waited to ask him for his scoresheet when it was my move. I backed up the position until I got to knight move in question. I then re-inputted all the moves that followed to reach the position that was on the chessboard. I guess between getting flustered over trying to figure out where I made the mistake, and not being able to read my opponent’s scoresheet it took me around 5 minutes to correct. 5 minutes is a lot of time to lose in g/25 delay 5, especially when one is already behind on time!

My question is this. Could I stop keeping score on the MonRoi, and continue on a paper scoresheet from move 23 which was the point where I noticed the position discrepancy? Would I have fill in the missing moves on the paper scoresheet or would the combination of the MonRoi and the remaining moves on the paper be sufficient to comply with score keeping regulations?

Even though the MonRoi was designed to help eliminate these types of scorekeeping it’s obvious from this example it’s only as good as the person operating it. :blush: So if a mildly dyslexic adult has this problem what can we expect from kids? How will the floor TDs at scholastic tournaments cope with this situation? One can bet that the opponent’s scoresheet will probably be even less legible then my adult opponent’s scoresheet. :stuck_out_tongue:

PS. Yes time became the deciding factor. I flagged on move 33 while trying to find a defense to 33…Nd3. Looking at the position it looks like I could have held though it would have been difficult.

I

2

Interesting questions, Polly.

I can envision an even more complicated one: Suppose that BOTH players are using a MonRoi. One of them makes an error on move 10. The other makes an error on move 15. By move 18 both players are in a situation where neither can record the latest move because it would be illegal on either unit.

Whose time should be used to correct the situation?

3

If it’s legal to write it down on one sheet of paper, then it’s legal to write it down spread across two pieces of paper. Or on a piece of paper and on a MonRoi.

There’s nothing in the rules that says you can’t have two copies of the scrore sheets. I’ve played in one tournament where the TD insisted that we used his “USCF standard” carbonless scoresheets and turn in one copy to him. Several people, like myself, had scorebooks we prefered to use. Most of us ended up keeping score “in duplicate” – once in our scorebook, and once on the “official” scoresheet.

People end up splitting their score across two separate pieces of paper all the time (whenever they exceed the number of moves that can be held on one scoresheet). So there’s no rule that you can’t stop writting the moves on one “scoresheet” and continue on another. The fact that one is a MonRoi shouldn’t matter.

4

It seems like a situation where the TD is going to have to intervene, and stop both clocks. That seems to be no different then the typical dispute that arises in scholastic tournaments where 1 player thinks a piece is on one square, and the other player thinks it’s on another. The TD looks at both scoresheets and tries to figure out where the disputed piece is located. “Tries” is the operative word since often both scoresheets are so garbled that it’s unclear. Then it take Solomon like wisdom to make a decision especially when the disputed piece is either a hanging queen or is about to deliver mate from the disputed square.

5

This is just one of those things that takes time to adjust to. You can actually use the score sheet screen to go back to a particular move and correct it. Then you would just go back to the final move and it would take you back to the game position but with the correct move inserted.

As for if you can keep score on paper after using the MonRoi. Yes, I have had people use the MonRoi but then use paper when it got down to a time scramble because they were more comfortable with that and they could write something totally illegible or make a mark to count the moves to an initial time control. Please note that on the score sheet screen on the MonRoi it also has the system where you can use check marks to check off moves as you reach the time control. Of course the key is that both players are meant to get their score sheets back up to date once they reach the time control, something that I see rarely done.

Chris Bird

6

[quote="fantasychess

As for if you can keep score on paper after using the MonRoi. Yes, I have had people use the MonRoi but then use paper when it got down to a time scramble because they were more comfortable with that and they could write something totally illegible or make a mark to count the moves to an initial time control. Please note that on the score sheet screen on the MonRoi it also has the system where you can use check marks to check off moves as you reach the time control. Of course the key is that both players are meant to get their score sheets back up to date once they reach the time control, something that I see rarely done.

Chris Bird[/quote]

I have not used it in a 2 control tournament yet so I’m not sure how I’ll react during a time scramble to 1st control. I did find it fairly easy to keep recording even short on time in the sudden death though my opponent was still writing so that little pause helps, but even when he moved immediately I was keeping up.

It’s been so long since I’ve had a game where both players stopped keeping score on the first control, I don’t even remember what it’s like to catch up. :slight_smile:

I still want to clarify my question #1. Would it permissible for one to have a piece of paper with 5,10,15,20,25,30,35,40, etc written on it, and write down the time every 5 moves? It’s not a scoresheet so would it be considered outside material?

7

Sorry if I didn’t explain my position on your question.

My opinion is that its perfectly acceptable to split your “scoresheet” over more than one piece of paper. Likewise it’s perfectly acceptable to split your score between a MonRoi and a piece of paper. Since the amount of time used is something that you can write on a score sheet, you can write it on this “supplemental” score sheet.

There’s no rule against it. This is NOT note taking as an aid to memory, it’s scorekeeping.

8

It does force the director to have reconstruction of the scoresheets, even if the second time control is a sudden death time control. If the scoresheets are impossible to reconstruct, the accepted answer would be to make a clear diagram of the position that is reached. Number of directors accepted to waive the diagram of the position that is reached, as there are very few tournaments with more than two time controls.

Since the MonRoi must have a reconstruction, as the unit would not be able to conduct itself as a scorekeeper if the director use rule 15F3. Therefore, during the reconstruction the director should be present during the reconstruction of the scoresheet. With the reconstruction, the clock must be stopped during the time of the reconstruction of the scoresheet. Therefore, the duty of the director has to be at the board during the reconstruction period. Therefore, since there is a reconstruction, the clock has to be stopped during the reconstruction: that can delay the start of the next round because of the need to reconstruct the scoresheet.

Since it is the primary goal to get the rounds started on time, in my judgment, would still use rule 15F3. If the next time control is a sudden death time control, would rule reconstruction is unnecessary. Therefore, the owner of the MonRoi or both players with the MonRoi will be required to use a paper scoresheet during the next time control.

I’m not content with the idea a player must use two different modes to record the moves of a single game. As the rules are not addressed with the directors’ rights to change the recording mode during an active game, therefore, directors are back in untested waters. It is just that we are back into an era were the rules have become out-dated with the rule to accept a unit without understanding its impact at the board.

9

Hi Doug. I’ve seen posts of yours that basically claim the USCF is run by the “Old Guard” yet at the same time with posts like the above in my mind it puts you right there with the “Old Guard”

In other words how dare anything new and different be tried.

The Monroi device as it exists now affects very few tournaments.

True once prices fall to mass levels it could become more popular.

So have you become so anti Monroi that you are willing to completely disregard any positive aspects of it?

10

Wzim

In a nut shell, if you and your opponent have electronic scorekeepers and both in time trouble when both parties failed to record your moves, how are you and your opponent going to deal with the reconstruction? As the reconstruction has to be performed with the electronic scorekeepers, as the unit cannot be used to record the position with missing moves. If you and your opponent both accept it is impossible to make reconstruction, then the electronic scorekeepers are defective equipment. Tournaments with more than one time control are in balk tournaments with two time controls. One of the reasons why tournaments do not have more than two time controls, as it saves the director not needing to deal with reconstruction of the moves. Study rule 15F, as a tournament with two time controls the second time control is sudden death. Therefore, the players do not have to fill in any missing moves on the scoresheet, or, study rule 15F3, as it is impossible or unnecessary to reconstruct the moves.

At the present time, there are not any rules dealing with defective electronic scorekeepers. Since the Rules Committee or the delegates have not settled this issue, will consider the defective scorekeepers under rule 16O. True, it is to deal with defective clocks, since the Rules Committee has not settled how to deal with reconstruction of the moves with electronic scorekeepers. The directors have the liberty to settle the issue on there own free will.

If the Rules Committee forces the directors to make every effort to make reconstruction, there will be times both parties are unsure how the position did get to the current position on the board. If the electronic scorekeepers are going to become the accepted standard for recording the moves. The Rules Committee must deal with how reconstruction must be conducted. Even with that in mind, there will be times reconstruction is impossible. How to deal with a defective scorekeeper is also an issue, as there are not any set rules with this question.

There is one way the organizer can make the issue of reconstruction a moot point. It will be a moot point how the rules committee comes up with the rules with more than one time control. It will be a moot point how the players have to deal with reconstruction, or, how the director has to deal with reconstruction. That would be having tournaments with only one time control. If the electronic scorekeepers become the standard to record the game, organizers would be more pressed into making the tournaments only with one time control.

If everyone has an electronic scorekeeper, than everyone wants to use the electronic scorekeeper for the whole game. Even with the best rules from the Rules Committee can come up with reconstruction with the electronic scorekeeper, there will be times it will be impossible to reconstruct. Organizers are going to have to accept major tournaments with one time control. There are going to be a number of members upset about the idea of one time control, it is just that electronic scorekeepers are going to force the organizers into one time control some time down the road.

As you have pointed out I have made a number of anti-MonRoi statements. In fact I have in the past. I’m just pointing out that the unit is not going to make people happy. There are a number of members unhappy with the change in rule 15A; they are also going to be unhappy that tournaments are in a nut shell going to be forced into one time too. Some will find that to be positive, others will find that it is a negative.

11

I’m still waiting for someone to develop a portable DGT type board that could be easily transported to tournaments. That way all moves in a severe time scramble could be recorded, and reconstruction would not be necessary.

The issue you raise regarding 2 players using a Mon Roi with both in time pressure is a valid concern. The rules don’t say anything about switching from one notation medium to another. I don’t see it being a big deal to go from electronic medium to written. Even though I was the one who asked the question to begin with, given the answrs I seen I don’t think it’s a problem.

The MonRoi will have the last position recorded, and the players would pick up from move 41 (or what ever next move in the control would be) on paper. Perhaps afterwards they can reconstruct what occurred from the last position on the Mon Roi to the position on the board at the point that time control was reached.

If the issue of switching from one medium to another becomes important perhaps future versions of the Mon Roi firmware will include a feature where one could diagram the board position such as one can do in Fritz or Chess Base, and then be able to continue inputting on the device from the diagrammed position.

I’d be interested in hearing from any arbiters that have used encountered this situation, and how they’ve handled it.

In the meantime I’m not going to sweat reconstruction since I think of the 300+ regular tournament games I’ve played this year I think only 20 have been 2 control limits. (I did accelerated schedules on 3 longer events I played in this year.) Of those 20 games I did not stop keeping score as I approached the 1st time control.

12

That is basically my point, The Monroi device is not a fixed enity. It will continue to evolve. (Just like the first digital chess clocks didn’t have time delay features but now do.) Maybe the Monroi team will see this and set an option to set the position up according to the current board position and then keep the score from that point. Sort of like what happens on paper at times when the score gets way out of wack, you just start keeping score from that point onward.

I’m not really even trying to defend the Monroi, what I’m defending is the right for chess players to try new things. We don’t have to do something necessarily because that is the way it was always done. Naturally some things will be tried that don’t quite work but everynow and then one experiment will work out brilliantly.

You’ve questioned the fairness, the workability, the introduction of something new. In the process you seem to have painted yourself in a corner and or now unable to let it go.

13

From what I’ve seen, the MonRoi makes PLAYERS fairly happy.

Several of the side events at the Olympiad in Turin used the MonRoi. I talked to a number of the players in those events, they liked using the MonRoi once they got familar with it. (That reminded me of what happened when digital clocks first came out.)

MonRoi brought a number of units to the US Open in August, to rent them out to players, who could subsequently purchase them. They sold out.

14

That is a clear problem with the electronic scorekeepers, there is not any rule dealing with the problems with reconstruction. Directors hate to get into the reconstruction of the position; therefore, there are very few tournaments with more than two time controls. In fact, there could be more conflicts with reconstruction with one player with an electronic scorekeeper and the other with paper. As the players could be in agreement that both players have fulfilled the required number of moves, the players can be in disagreement with the number of moves made to get to the current position.

If there is disagreement, how can the moves are recorded in the electronic scorekeeper? If there is disagreement, it looks as the electronic scorekeeper would have to be declared defective equipment. Since there not any rules, this is a paradox how directors should handle the conflict. I’m not sure if the directors have the right to change the mode of scorekeeping during the game.

Whatever type of rule change is needed to deal with electronic scorekeepers with rule 15F, there will times when the position cannot be reconstructed. The rules are silent, as electronic scorekeepers have never been address with reconstruction. It is a given, there have to be standards to address when the electronic scorekeeper becomes defective. It is a given, there have to be standards to replace the electronic scorekeeper with some other mode of recording if the moves cannot be reconstructed onto the electronic scorekeeper.

Just to make the problem of reconstruction as a moot issue, is to organize the tournament with only one time control. As it would be unacceptable with the owner of the electronic scorekeeper to be forced into some other mode of recording the moves other then the electronic scorekeeper. If electronic scorekeepers do become the norm, it is going to force organizers to organize tournaments with only one time control.

15

Sorry Douglas, but your argument doesn’t make sense.

If a player can’t continue keeping score on a MonRoi for some reason, it’s STILL his responsibilty to keep score. IF he can’t do it on a MonRoi, he would have to do it some other way. We don’t need special rules to let the TD force the player to switch to a different scorekeeping method – that’s just plain silly. It’s the PLAYER’S responsiblity to keep score – the rules don’t absolve him of that responsibility just because he can’t fix the score on his MonRoi.

You’re like a broken record on this subject. Why don’t you quit wasting your time and work on something productive? The USCF has bigger issues than electronic scorekeeping. You should choose your battles carefully, and you’ve already LOST this battle. The rule change for electronic scorekeeping passed by a wide margin.

16

It’s not the question with the MonRoi; it’s the other electronic scorekeepers. With the change to the rules to accepted other electronic scorekeepers, [DM06-11 (ADM 06-36)] “An electronic scoresheet not so certified is not considered standard and may only be used at the discretion of the tournament director.” Have been thinking since electronic scorekeepers are going to be accepted, why not just accept other modes of electronic scorekeepers as well.

Thinking about accepting Palm Pilots, as I know more players use electronic scorekeeping with Palm Pilots then the MonRoi. Have been to a tournament were a player has used his laptop computer with Fritz set to the two player mode. If I was going to accept MonRoi, then I should be willing to accept the Palm Pilots and laptop computers with the Fritz set at the two player mode. I have been thinking the state of Michigan should accept these other modes.

17

Michigan is free to do whatever it wants, as long as any deviations from USCF rules are announced in advance, as required, and as long as those deviations don’t affect the ratability of the event.

I’m not sure letting a player use his Fritz for ‘recording moves’ would meet the latter test. There’s no way I’d play in an event which permitted that.

18

Tanstaafl:

Did I say the player does not have a responsibility not to record the moves when the electronic scorekeeper is defective? All that I have pointed out, there are not any rules how to deal with a defective electronic scorekeeper. There are not any rules dealing with the change of mode from a defective electronic scorekeeper to other modes of recording. The player is still required to record the moves; it does not state the transfer from electronic scorekeeping to a different mode of recording.

19

Are there any rules to deal with a pencil that breaks, a pen that goes dry, or a scoresheet that gets wet when a player spills his coffee?

The USCF rulebook CANNOT COVER every possible situation, I think the USCF has already gone too far trying to do that.

At some point common sense has to take over.

20

Exactly my point. I think somewhere down the road Mon Roi, or who ever develops the next generation of electronic scoring devices will make it possible to put in a position, and continue from that point. I love to to see that done, or at least be able to diagram the final position on the unit. Often when I stop notating during a sudden death sistuation when the game ends I diagram the final position. Sometimes depending on the number of moves played since my last written move and the final position I can reconstruct the missing moves. Even if I can’t I just like to have a record of the final position. I always draw a diagram with the final position.

Once I ever figure out how to get the drivers working, and get my computer to recognize the device I will download the games into Chessbase, and also include the final diagram that I drew.

The point of my post was not to start another raging Mon Roi debate. I believe electronic score keeping is here to stay, and what the units can do will evolve. My point is just like with any new piece of equipment situations will arise, and though there doesn’t need to be a new rule for each situation TDs and players need have a certain amount of discretion and leeway to handle situations as they arise.

My hope is that other Mon Roi owners and TDs that have them in their tournaments can provide examples and solutions to some of the bumps in the road that we will encounter along the way.

I consider myself an ideal “crash test dummy” when it comes to putting this thing through its paces.

  1. I’m an active player who is prone to not clarifying ambigius moves such as which knight moved to a square.
  2. Time pressure is my middle name.
  3. I teach and coach in an affluent area where I suspect a number of parents decide this is a must have item for thir child…Mabe once I figure it all out I can offer private tutorials on getting most out of your Mon Roi. :smiling_imp:
  4. I will start to see more of these in tournaments I direct.
  5. I’m computer literate, though for the time being I can’t get my computer to recognize it. IMHO the documentation is rather underwhelming.