I do vaguely recall that there is a USCF rule which states to the following effect:
A parent or coach should observe the game from behind the player so as not to arouse suspicion. (At many scholastic tournaments, the parents or coaches are not allowed to observe at all. However, this rule doesn’t apply to most adult tournaments.)
A parent or coach should not speak with the player during the game, especially if the parent or coach is higher rated than the player.
Can someone quote the USCF rulebook or scholastic regulations? I’ve been searching for a while and need to quote something to support an argument that I made. Thanks!
Also keep in mind that spectators have no RIGHTS in the Rules of Chess. You can simply require any spectator to leave the tournament room for any reason (or none). While I think that spectators should be treated with some consideration, a TD has pretty broad powers.
The spectator in this case is simultaneously a player, coach and relative. As a player, this person has, at minimum, a right to be in the tournament room.
I am very familiar with USCF Rule 20M. I’m looking for something more that might apply to coaches, either in scholastic or adult tournaments.
Michael: I’m not sure what you’re asking for, but at ALL tournaments, scholastic and adult, players are forbidden to have recourse from a third party. Adult tournaments are a bit more liberal in that they allow players to get up during a game and watch other games, but they aren’t allowed to speak to other players about a game in progress. Of course, adults do “speak” to other players during breaks from the game, but I think the adults are less likely to talk “about” the game than are their less mature younger collegues. I’m not aware of any guidelines in the rulebook as specific as those found for scholastic tournaments, as quoted by DrCheck.
I do not want to be very specific on the incident.
I will only say that both the accused player and the spectator were participants in the same tournament, but in different sections. However, they are relatives. The spectator is significantly stronger than the other player. The spectator asserts the right to both observe the other game and to speak with the accused player during the game. The spectator also asserts his long time as a respected member of the chess society as evidence that he would never cheat.
As the TD, if they want to talk, I want to listen. It just looks bad and raises suspician. The higher rated player/parent/coach is just looking for a problem to happen and may not even realize it.
There could be legitimate reasons - lunch arrangements, family message etc.
So, why don’t you find that scholastic rule to be sufficient?
If it says no one should talk privately with a player either at or away from the board, I would think that is sufficient. Also, with my rule book not handy at the moment, isn’t there also a rule that says the only thing a coach can say to a player is whether or not to accept an offered draw?
The idea being that the Coach should make a decision that affects the team’s outcome in the match being played.