We have a disabled player who plays in many local events. I have been the TD or assistant TD or an aide at a number of the events.
He requested that I allow the use of a voice recorder app on his cell phone. I initially wanted to deny the request; I consulted a Senior TD. We Knew that he was not cheating,
but we were concerned about the appearance of cheating.
I pointed out the 3 approved apps and a tape recorder. He said it was an issue with his hands. He requested: Would it
suffice if opponent agreed? I said no and repeated my objections.
I always bent the rules as much as I could to deal with disabled players. We had a player who was wheelchair bound, could not speak and had to use a head stick to move pieces around on a small magnetic board. His motor control was limited and he was often heavily tranquilized.
I never ran across an opponent who wasn’t willing to accept the accommodations we made for this player, including moving the game to a different part of the room, a different room, and sometimes even an different floor.
He wasn’t a very strong player, and I don’t think he ever lost a game on time, and he couldn’t take notation so he never had to make a claim on time against an opponent.
Hmmm…as far as I know there are no approved apps. There are approved independent devices, but no apps. I would allow whatever he wants especially if the opponent agrees. Or, just let him use a 2nd to write the moves.
I would bend over backwards to allow this person to play and accommodate his needs. He has enough problems in his life without us adding to them. My preferred solution would be to have an assistant TD, or a tournament aide be assigned to take notation for this player. That way it is someone who will clearly be neutral.
If no such person is available, then my next best solution would be to let this player name a friend or acquaintance of his to take the notation. If all that person is doing is taking notation the appearance of impropriety should not be an issue.
If that is also not possible, then I would make whatever accommodations seem necessary. By rule a disabled player may use a voice recorder to keep score. As long as the app on this player’s cell phone is record only, with no analysis function I would allow that.
If it turns out that the app does have an analysis function, then my final fallback position would be to allow this player to compete without keeping score, possibly subtracting some time from his clock, or adding some to the opponent’s to compensate for the time he will not be using to record moves. In no case would I turn this player away.
I would do my best to accommodate the disabled player. If his opponent doesn’t object, I see no reason to disallow his phone as a recording device for a local event.
35A can cover a lot for such players (“the tournament directly enjoys considerable discretionary authority to institute special rules”).
It seems like you are reading 35F6 and thinking a dedicated device for scorekeeping is needed (“any other specially designed device”) but I’d be fine allowing a specially designed app (essentially a tape recorder).
Personally in this case I’d be more concerned about a denial violating the ADA than an accommodation resulting in a protest to US Chess.
I’d go out of my way to explain to the opponent and any nearby parents. I think that would go a long way to avoiding the slight possible amount of strife.
Have dealt with several situations with disabled players. In most of the cases, they brought an assistant to record moves, make moves, and/or take care of their natural needs. Accommodations were made that were appropriate to the disability. I do not recall any opponent objecting. One of the roles of the TD is to make sure that all of the players are treated well. As the TD, I do not think you would have any problems or appeals if you permitted the use of a recorder, a phone app, or other device as long as all parties are informed of how they work. Any objection to the use of these devices would have to come before the game.
In some cases accommodations have to place the disabled player in another area of the playing room or in a special room. This may be because of any sounds that can distract others or because the player may require frequent trips to the bathroom. The assistant, if there is one, should be reminded to be as inobtrusive as possible. This is one of the occasions where it is nice to have one or more TD assistants or volunteers available to help out as needed.
What if someone does object? Note the objection. Explain to the opponent the accommodations being made, the rules and legal basis for making the accommodations, and that he may engage an assistant of his own. If he continues to object, stand by your ruling. Explain the appeals process and the fees. In all cases, do it as calmly and professionally as possible. Tournament players can be very emotional and stressed out when they believe they are not being dealt with properly. You have no worries as far as appeals. I am sure you can find enough witnesses to support you, if you feel you need them.
In my view, one would be–and should be–more likely to get in trouble with a US Chess disciplinary committee if one did not accommodate the disabled player.
The appropriate accommodation is going to vary as a function of the disability and the resources available. It is very much a “you had to be there” type of call. But I would not rule out permitting the use of a cell phone voice recorder as a scorekeeping device if the disability and resources were such that this was the accommodation necessary to facilitate scorekeeping.
Best practices are best practices for a reason, but among the highest of best practices is accommodation of disabilities. Sometimes one has to set aside lesser best practices to achieve higher best practices.
It is avery much a situation that depends on resources available.
Had a competent volunteer assistant been available to serve as scorekeeping deputy using the standard event scoresheet, I would probably be inclined to instruct the player to use the assistant. That’s pretty much my first choice of accommodation for a variety of reasons. But that presumes resources that may not have been there, and I am awfully . . . intense? . . . on scoresheets in general.
I can say from personal experience that very few directors or players will complain about accommodations for a disabled player. Most directors and even many opponents will go out of their way to ask what they need to do. Kids tend to be even more accommodating than adults (somewhat paradoxical). The only problem that I can remember over nearly 25 years involved a local player who was frustrated with his bleak lifetime score against me.
about a protest to USCF