G/5 quick-rated “blitz” tournament without delay:
Player A and player B clocks both showing 1 second. A’s clock drops to 0 as he makes his move and presses the clock. B immediately calls A’s clock, then his own clock drops to 0, which is pointed out by A. Multiple witnesses confirm that A’s time ran out first, causing both players to agree B is the winner. Is this correct or should the game be ruled a draw based on page 292 #6?
Please note that the text of chapter 11 of the Official Rules of Chess, 5th edition, has been replaced. You should consult the rulebook changes document available from the USCF web site. (The revised blitz rules are also available as a separate document.)
Rule 8c of the current blitz rules state that a game is drawn “[i]f the flag of one player falls after the flag of the other player has already fallen and a win has not been claimed, unless either side mates before noticing that both flags are down.” In the case given in the original question, B claimed a win after A’s flag fell but before B’s own flag fell, and there are witnesses to this. Therefore, the claim is valid, and B wins.
Please define claimed. It can certainly be argued that B did not make a valid claim.
Alex Relyea
“B immediately calls A’s clock.”
In a blitz game, especially with an opponent having one second remaining on the clock, I’d consider that a valid claim. I’d consider the words “flag” or “you’re down”, or perhaps even a finger clearly pointed and/or jabbed at the opponent’s clock, to be a clear intention of a claim of a win under rule 8c.
Perhaps I am too generous.
Thank you for the links. I suspect most players and many TDs who do not read these forums are unaware that these documents exist. With 8 years having passed since the 5th edition rulebook and 29 pages of changes since then, is it soon time for a 6th edition?
Wouldn’t rule 7c “A game is won by the player 7c.) Whose opponent’s flag falls first, at any time before the game is otherwise ended by stopping the clock prior to the player’s own clock’s flag fall and has mating material.” be the relevant rule in this case? The wording seems slightly confusing. If stopping the clock prior to the player’s own clock’s flag fall is unnecessary, perhaps it could be simplified to: “…Whose opponent’s flag falls first, provided that the player has mating material.”
I’m also curious why it was necessary to change the previous rule that the player claiming the win on time must first stop his/her own clock with time still remaining. It seems that requiring only a verbal “flag” could cause problems. What if the claim is not clearly heard? What if the witness(es) do not have a clear consensus on whose time ran out first?