I was trying to write something up… is this a correct summary of the rules?
“If you do find yourself playing against an opponent that is either intentionally or unintentionally annoying you, simply stop the clock, summon the TD and privately tell them that the opponent’s actions are annoying you. (Keep in mind that if your complaint is unfounded, the TD may penalize your clock). The TD will make a ruling and if you disagree with that ruling and wish to pursue if further, then you should immediately state that you plan to appeal their decision. You can either continue playing the game or simply refuse to continue playing. Ideally three TD’s should make a judgment on your appeal or if that’s not possible, USCF can make a judgment. If that opponent demonstrates a pattern of annoying behavior (as reported by their opponents or observed by the TD) the TD can apply further penalties.”
Also I was trying to find out what is allowed, with regard to speaking during a tournament. Are you only allowed to say “I resign”, “I offer a draw”, “I adjust” (or similar phrases) to your opponent?
You can continue to play under protest. If you refuse to continue play you will forfeit the game and it will be rated. The annoying behaviour may be something that is being done without the player realizing they are doing it. Also, it may be something involuntary or uncontrollable. An example of the latter is many years ago someone complained about a noise the opponent was making. If he stopped making the noise he died, as it was his old pacemaker making the noise.
You are not totally banned from speaking to your opponent, but he can request that you not do so at certain times. Also, he can request that you stop if it is annoying him. This should be the first step regarding noise and/or annoying behavior. One player should ask the other to stop, and if that does not work appeal to the TD about the noise/behavior.
I think the most common complaint is the continual request for a draw. In other words one player keeps asking his/her opponent for a draw after every single move made. I’m sure that has been covered in some other thread/discussion.
Second sentence… the question would be more that the issue is truly frivolous or so trivial that no reasonable player would recognize it as annoying behavior. Even then, I’d invite replies here as to when a TD would penalize for a first complaint of annoying behavior against the complainant. Much more common for something truly trivial or frivolous for the TD to warn that the complaint is such on a first ‘offense.’ (Maybe were it a GM event???)
Third - as indicated, a player never has a basis to refuse to continue playing. The TD may pause the clock at the TDs discretion, but if the TD rules play on and your clock is started… better believe your clock will roll. (Most you can do is continue to play under protest or request clock pause while on appeal. But the TD makes that call AFAIK.)
Fourth - it is more common in my experience for the first penalty for annoying behavior to be a verbal admonition. “Don’t do that.” Only if the annoyance reaches a level in which a player would be significantly distracted (or suspicion the behavior is intentionally aimed as such) would I levy a penalty on first offense. (See 21G1.)
Fifth- the TDs judgment as to what is annoying behavior… Anyone know of an example where a floor TD’s judgment on an annoyance was overridden on appeal? Not saying it can’t be appealed, but if I’m Chief TD I’d be strongly inclined to accept the judgement of the floor staff.
Sixth - the first step in the appeal process is to the Chief TD. The Chief TD may reverse him-or-herself on appeal, if the Chief is a sole TD. But for any event where you have multiple floor staff… Chief TD.
Seventh - a Special Referee is the preferred mode to file an appeal to. A committee is formed only if there are enough TDs and a Special Referee cannot be reached. I believe it is at the Chief TD’s discretion which way to proceed. I’d be hard put to disturb Randy Hough’s weekend on an annoying behavior call. Tim Just, on the other hand…
Eighth - you’d be much better off to simply state, “If you disagree with the judgement of the TD, inform the TD at that time you’d like to appeal the decision. Consult the rulebook to understand the appeals process, or ask the TD what the process for the appeal will be at the time you protest the ruling.”
Your last question depends utterly on the setting. Speaking anything during the US Championship… not so much. But if I penalized every Kindergartner in a K-1 section who said something… the tournament would last indefinitely. Correction - reread the question: Yes, it is generally allowed to state you’re adjusting, offering or accepting a draw, resigning. Other level of conversation is dependent upon the setting, but generally leaning to ‘be as silent as possible.’ I tend to be rather draconian in wanting things to be quieter than a library during play, when directing (except for the above.) But again, impossible to do in a K-1 section - I can only keep telling players to be quiet.
When playing, I use noise-canceling headphones with an MP3 player. Anything that can get through that, I may either request quiet myself or file a complaint. (And I’ve been shushed before, also.) But they work remarkably well for drowning out players who think it is OK to postgame analyze at the board when the director either allows it or isn’t in the room. (As a director, I will inform players who do so that they need to take it to the skittles room.)
There may be a different and well defined appeals process. At Supernationals V it was: floor TD; section chief; division floor chief; division chief; overall chief. Let the TD making the ruling know that you want to appeal and that TD should take it properly up the ladder.
A committee is okay providing it can be formed of TDs of at least the level of the TD being appealed. That proviso was added after cases such as one where an ANTD chief upheld an NTD floor chief and the three-TD committee had a Senior TD outvoted by a Local TD and Club TD to overturn it. Thus a LTD and CTD essentially overrode a combined SrTD, ANTD and NTD.
And let us be reminded it is hard to find a 3 player (person?) on-site committee that does not have a perceived self-interest in the results of a particular ruling. That is why those special referees are so important.
Pretty much the only times that you have to talk to a player during a game is to offer a draw or to indicate you are going to adjust a piece on your own time. Resignation can be silently done by turning the King over on its side and offering your hand to the other player. This is a universal sign of resignation. Saying “check” is unnecessary and might disturb the other players.
What is most annoying is when two players end a game and start talking loudly as if they are on the street. Since they are done, they are oblivious to the other players and don’t think they are doing anything wrong. This disturbance usually happens when a number of games are at a point when one or both players are in time trouble, a period of immense tension. Have some courtesy and remember where you are. Be quiet as a mouse and don’t disturb others by talking or noisily putting your pieces away.
Also, do not crowd around remaining games. Stay at least 8 feet away. Plopping yourself down next to the players, leaning on their chairs or on one of the player(!) shows no sense of tournament decorum. The players find this behavior more than distracting. I have seen spectators get smacked for such a breach of manners. It is not good when a quiet tournament game turns into a melee.
If you do find yourself playing against an opponent that is either intentionally or unintentionally annoying you, ask your opponent to refrain. If that doesn’t work simply stop the clock, summon the TD and privately tell them that the opponent’s actions are annoying you. (Keep in mind that if your complaint is unfounded, the TD may penalize your clock).
The TD will make a ruling and if you disagree with that ruling and wish to pursue if further, then you should immediately state that you plan to appeal their decision.
Only if the annoyance reaches a level in which a player would be significantly distracted (or suspicion the behavior is intentionally aimed as such) would a penalty typically be levied on the first offense. (See 21G1.)
If you disagree with the judgement of the TD, inform the TD at that time you’d like to appeal the decision. An appeal of a judgment on an annoyance is unlikely to be successful, but is possible. The TD should advise the appellant on the correct method of appeal. In the case of a club event a special referee should be appointed; ideally a secondary certified TD should be available at the time to serve as such and make a judgment.
Sorry. You can’t suggest that. It’s not Tuesday. Fizzbin comparisons may only be made on Tuesday or when there is at least one Vulcan and two chess enthusiasts viewing the thread and your favorite opening is the Ammonia and you bribe the Vulcan with chocolate chip cookies.
Wonder if anyone has made a tournament publicity announcement, “No appeals will be considered. Your only recourse is the $25 deposit to the office method.”
For my part, you’re welcome. You’re closer. The true problem may not be your description, but rather you’re trying to lay in a deterministic process in an area where TDs have a lot of flexibility in how to respond. My judgment and advice above may not be how all TDs would handle the situation.
I missed a question about your first paragraph… Will the TD allow the complainant to claim/make the case privately, or will the TD require you to state your objection boardside in the opponent’s presence? Take out “privately” and I don’t see anything wrong there.
But I think you missed what Special Referees are. Special Referees are very experienced Tournament Directors (typically NTDs) who are available by telephone for the TD to call and hear an appeal. There is a list of them on the TD/A login area on the website; the list currently lists 7 of them. I think they are the preferred method because as above, it can be very difficult to find enough TDs to form a committee. Locally, for example, I believe there are only two other Senior TDs in town. One of them is no longer in active directing as far as I know. (Though we have a bounty of NTDs within a 150 mile radius. ) I wouldn’t mind composing a committee with a Local TD or two - some of them are much longer experienced than I.
Anyway, the issue really is once a person states they’ll appeal, it is in the TDs hands to follow a proper appeals process. (“Proper” used here not just meaning what’s in the rulebook, but also one that reflects an equitable and fair method in the spirit of good sportsmanship and due process, and also that which would be sustained if the player makes a complaint to USCF about said TD’s manner in which they formed the appeal.) Let’s say I call all seven Special Referees, try to reach all the NTDs in my area, I can’t seem to contact any other I’m the only TD present on site.
As a TD, I don’t mind if a player skips the step where he asks the opponent first, and comes directly to me. That way, I am aware of the situation and can step in if necessary. Also, if the complaint is valid, I can correct it immediately; if the complaint is not valid, I can advise of that immediately.
This is reasonable, but it’s also repeated in the last paragraph below, so it could be excised.
I don’t believe there is a Rule 21G1.
Special referees are experienced NTDs who are specifically designated by USCF. You can’t appoint a special referee on-site. You can get a second opinion from an on-site TD, but you’re still on the hook for your decision, whatever it may be.
seems like a lot of time and words for something that occurs very rarely in a club… but when it does occur it’s discussed with a lot of confusion and misinformation… for example intentionally adjusting after every move (when the pieces don’t need adjusted)… thanks again… you are right I completely missed the definition of special referee.
maybe i should include a caveat: This is my interpretation of the rules, use at your own risk…
If you do find yourself playing against an opponent that is either intentionally or unintentionally annoying you, ask your opponent to refrain. If that doesn’t work simply stop the clock, summon the TD and tell them that the opponent’s actions are annoying you. (Keep in mind that if your complaint is unfounded, the TD may penalize your clock).
The TD will make a ruling and if you disagree with that ruling and wish to pursue if further, then you should immediately state that you plan to appeal their decision. TD’s have a lot of flexibility to respond, including time modifications, game forfeiture and tournament / club expulsion (and other?).
Only if the annoyance reaches a level in which a player would be significantly distracted (or suspicion the behavior is intentionally aimed as such) would a penalty typically be levied on the first offense. (See 21G1.)
If you disagree with the judgement of the TD, inform the TD at that time you’d like to appeal the decision. It is in the TD’s hands to follow a proper appeals process. (“Proper” used here not just meaning what’s in the rule book, but also one that reflects an equitable and fair method in the spirit of good sportsmanship and due process, and also that which would be sustained if the player makes a complaint to USCF about said TD’s manner in which they formed the appeal). An appeal of a judgment on an annoyance is unlikely to be successful, but is possible. The TD should advise the appellant on the correct method of appeal. In the case of a club event a special referee should be appointed. Special Referees are very experienced Tournament Directors (typically NTDs) who are available by telephone for the TD to call and hear an appeal. There is a list of them on the TD/A login area on the website.
The vast majority of miscreants will stop annoying behavior when challenged by an opponent. Often their behavior is unintentional. Some are even completely oblivious to the fact that what they are doing is annoying. I have known players to tap fingers or pencils, rock back and forth in their chair, hum to themselves, heave sighs, whirl around to see who is behind them, eat crunchy potato chips in cellophane bags, slurp Double Gulps, tap dance while seated, etc. Most of it is unconsciously done; some of it is a little weird. The best thing to do is to inform the TD and let him watch what is going on. Once the TD is involved, the odd behaviors almost always end.
Occasionally, the annoying behavior will continue even after the TD has been informed. The onus is now on the TD to end it completely. The TD must do something, else he has an uprising or at least gets a bad reputation for running tournaments which leads to poorer turnouts. It is best for the TD to take the annoying player aside and inform him that penalties may be assessed from time taken off the clock to ejection from the event if the misbehavior continues. Only a real dunderhead will persist in annoying the other players.
I once had an instance where a player who annoyed another player came up to me with a question. He asked why his opponent took off his watch and ring and put them in his pocket. I told him that it was a sign that if he continued to annoy the guy, he should prepare to run or take a beating. Made it a point to stand to the side to watch the game to make sure nothing happened. Both players were angels for the rest of the game. The annoying player never did his little table bumping tap dance for the rest of the tournament.
You’re right, it is a lot of words for a small topic. Part of the confusion can be that very flexibility that we directors have. And yes, it would be your interpretation of the rules… For example, when I mistakenly referenced rule 21G1 (and I meant 20G1): 20G1 actually has to do with Inadvertent Annoying Behavior. Here’s the actual rules 20G and 20G1 from the rulebook:
In short, the TD gets to decide if the behavior is annoying at all, and if so what the appropriate penalty is from a warning to the standard penalty, up to a game or tournament forfeiture. The TD can, theoretically, upon a first offense and a complaint tell the other player, “You forfeit and are gone… here’s your entry fee and now get off my playing site.” I can’t conceive of the circumstance in which any sane TD would do that. The TD would most likely thus buy an office complaint that would probably be righteous. But the power is there.
It is far more common for the TD, if the TD agrees the behavior is indeed annoying or distracting, to simply warn the other player to not do whatever it was. Maybe on a second offense the director applies a penalty, or gives another warning, or gives a ‘final warning.’
In any event, if you’re going to be restating what the rulebook says (and possibly interpreting it in the process,) what you’re effectively doing is creating a house rule. You could argue - rightly - that so long as your interpretation is strictly what the rulebook says you’re not establishing a new set of rules. But were I in your shoes and doing this, I’d prefer the freedom that claiming a house rule set would allow you.
By that, I mean that rules 1B1, 1B2, and 26A and 26B permit you to establish rules variations, so long as they are properly published/announced. (You should read those rules, the gist is that if a rule variation is significantly major enough to deter players from entering a tournament you should have pre-publicity of the variation(s) so players can make an informed decision if they want to play and that minor variations only need be announced and/or posted onsite.)
In other words, every variation you’ve tried so far is something you could use. If you want you can have a variation saying, “The TD will decide annoying behavior claims and there is no appeal from that decision.” You can use that and so it shall be for your tournament(s.) You really cannot stop someone from filing an appeal with the USCF office after a tournament. But I’ve never heard of anyone who’s properly handled a variation before a tournament getting in trouble because of the very existence of the rules above. If you want, “In the event of a complaint of annoying or distracting behavior, the TD shall instruct all players to pause their clocks and a vote of all players shall be immediately taken as to whether a penalty will be applied,” you could do it - it would be dumb, but you could do that.
I keep on intending to write a set of house rule variations for our local club tournaments. But in reality, the players by and large trust me that I know the rules well enough to be directing. For example: I’ve never had a serious complaint that I rule while a ringing cell phone draws the prescribed penalty a phone on vibrate does not. (Keeping in mind the previous is strictly in the context of weekly club events and not in any larger event or context.)
The last bit I’d suggest… I’d do my best to get familiar with the rulebook before writing up changes to it or interpretations of it. Now, like chess itself, this is a never-ending endeavor. But you may want to make sure that any variations or interpretations you make don’t have any unintended ramifications, or contradict other published rules. However, the rules themselves are written in a deficit mode. That is, the rules of play are mostly only called upon when someone is in violation of them… if you’re playing ‘appropriately,’ however you unpack that, there are never any complaints and thus they are not invoked. What I’m saying is, if whatever you interpret or change does not cause anyone a problem, be bold and go for it.
I, unfortunately, can easily imagine “annoying behavior” that would cause the TD to immediately forfeit the player and kick him out of the tournament. I cannot, however, imagine such a circumstance in which the organizer would refund the entry fee.
Have you ever noticed that those who immediately start making noise after their game ends frequently are those who complain most about noise while their game is in progress!
) I wouldn’t mind composing a committee with a Local TD or two - some of them are much longer experienced than I.
Part of the confusion can be that very flexibility that we directors have. And yes, it would be your interpretation of the rules… For example, when I mistakenly referenced rule 21G1 (and I meant 20G1): 20G1 actually has to do with Inadvertent Annoying Behavior. Here’s the actual rules 20G and 20G1 from the rulebook: