I am from a place that does not have too many chess tournaments. However, last year, I went to San Francisco, where the idea of time delay was first introduced to me. At first, I objected to its use, simply because I did not understand the real nature of this idea, but later on I played with it regularly while in California, becoming accustomed to its use.
Later, when I returned home, I noticed that none of the tournaments near me had time delay. When I asked why, they said that no one understood how time delay worked, and also did not like it in the first place. I argued that it was not my fault that the players who participated in the local tournaments did not own a rulebook (hence, not understanding the rules specifically) and argued under rule 42D that it should not be denied by any TD. The rule itself (that I feel is relevant) reads as follows:
A properly set clock with time delay capability is preferable to any other clock with any sudden death time control. Therefore, if white has such a clock available, and black does not, white’s clock should be used…
The State Championship is coming up (time control usually is g/120), and I wish to play my games with time delay, yet after consulting with the local TD’s, they have made it plain that they do not want time delay in their tournaments.
My question is this: do I have the right to time delay in my games, and if so, how can I make sure that my right to time delay is respected by the local TD’s and players?
If you supply and set the clock, and if you are present before the start of the round, and if the TD has not announced any rules variation, you have the right to usee time-delay.
If you don’t bring a time-delay clock, the TD (or your opponent) is not obligated to supply you with one.
If you are not present at the start of the round and your opponent is, he gets the choice of equipment, time-delay or not.
If the organizer has announced a rule variation, the preference for time-delay may not apply. A few organizers do this in the TLA, in which case there is no question that the variation trumps the rule. If it’s only announced at the door – well, it’s not so clear, but I haven’t heard of anyone doing this lately.
If the TD simply ignores the rule and doesn’t have a good explanation, you can file a complaint with the TDCC. This isn’t going to get your games replayed with time-delay, but it might get the TD reprimanded or decertified.
Thank you for your quick and prompt reply, rfeditor!
I’ll respond to these one by one:
Concerns being on time and setting up the clock correctly (subtract 5 minutes from each side and set the delay for 5 seconds). Assuming I am on time, this should not apply.
I own a delay clock, so if I bring it, this should not apply.
Again, concerns being on time. If I am on time, it should not apply.
This was the one I was really concerned with. I’ve heard of these happening before elsewhere, but never before has the TD’s where I live announced any restrictions before registration or before the start of Round 1. We have had our discussions about time delay weeks before the tournament, but this knowledge was never sent out to anyone outside of our city to those who live out of town that may wish to play. No advertisements saying that time delay was not permitted. Nothing.
This is important for two reasons:
a. There are few TD’s where I live. Therefore, getting them decertified would not do, since there are other players who also wish to play. It doesn’t make sense to kill the establishment over a rule. Then again, I want my rights as a chess player to be respected. It’s a dilemma that has held my hand back before.
b. Having a place where I can file a complaint is useful, but would it not be possible to invoke the right to appeal the TD’s decision on the spot?
Assuming that my answers to 1)-4) hold true (being on time, supplying a functioning clock, no announcements on the advertisement for the tourney, no mention of any rule changes before registration) would I be permitted to have time delay under these circumstances, and if not, then what options would I have, besides submitting a complaint to the TDCC?
Theoretically yes, but if the TD refuses to allow time-delay, the USCF is not going to send in a flying squad to enforce the rules. I suppose you could make a case for appealing the TDs ruling (though there is some question as to whether you can appeal solely on a point of law), but no TD is going to delay the start of the round to assemble an appeals committee. At best, you would have to play under protest, and even if the ruling went in your favor, the game is not going to be replayed. I’m afraid the only real recourse you have is not to play in tournaments directed by that TD, and perhaps to file a complaint with the TDCC.
While I doubt that the USCF would send the hounds to where I live (it’d be a long trip) it is frustrating because there are only two TD’s who are active, and they’re both against time-delay. So, to not play would be to not participate in the local and state chess scenes. I think it’s wrong of them to not grant my right to time-delay, but to avoid playing chess with these two TD’s would mean to not play chess in my state. That’s also not right.
I guess I’ll just be under protest until the situation changes (or more people in my town buy rulebooks)…
What happened to the use of special referees (rule 21J on page 93 in the 5th edition)? I know it was used at one time. One challenge is that I have not seen this list published on paper or the website in some time now. I used to maintain that list but I just assumed someone else took over that job when I was no longer contacted about it. Not having the list published might explain why those TDs on the list have not received any phone calls in some time now. Those special referees could be used in place of an appeals committee.
IMHO: As the chair of the TDCC I would guess that the committee, after a complaint is processed, would warn the TDs about your current situation. The TDs would also be advised to advertise their delay clock ban in their TLAs and/or make an announcement at the site. Once they adhere to those conditions you sort of have to decide to either play under the delay ban or not play.
It’s not obvious that using a “special referee” would save much time over having an appeals committee, and the delay in starting the round was my basic objection to trying to appeal this. I have some serious reservations about the “special referee” business in the first place, but that’s really a subject for a separate thread.
Hmmm…I would think that picking up a phone and calling one special referee for an instant decision is a lot faster than forming a committee of at least three willing people who have to discuss and debate the issue, but I could be wrong.
I don’t know who’s keeping the list of special referees up to date if Tim hasn’t been doing it, I can ask Joan about this on Monday, I assume she has the most recent version of it somewhere.
I wasn’t able to find that list on the current website, I can add that to the list of pages that someone (other than me) needs to get put up.
This was how I was instructed to set up my clock while in San Francisco. The idea was that after 60 moves, the 5 seconds of delay would add up to 5 minutes for each player, and if the game went beyond that, you would have more time than what would be normal under a sudden death time control.
The reasons why time-delay is disliked and distrusted by the players and TD’s where I live are as follows:
The players have no idea what it is. This goes on in two ways:
a. They fear that the stronger player will have an advantage as the game progresses
b. They question about having delay extending the games for a longer period of time than normal (but under the above system, it almost never goes on for too much longer than normal)
The TD’s have had bad experiences with time-delay when playing in bigger tournaments out of town. Thus, they prefer the status-quo over innovation.
I personally think that these reasons are bogus. Most players where I live do not own a rulebook and hence, do not understand how time-delay works. Is it my fault, as a player, that other players do not understand how the rules work? Even after explaining, there was general distrust in the idea. This perhaps comes from the fear that I may be trying to take advantage of the rules to secure better footing over the other players.
The reasons why I want to play with delay (aside from being used to playing with it) are as follows:
It voids rule 14H (insufficient losing chances)
It can save a player if he gets into time trouble
It could prepare players where I live of how to use it if they choose to play at events elsewhere.
Given that most big tournaments permit time-delay (in one form or another) I don’t understand why time-delay would be refuted so quickly. Shouldn’t time-delay be universally accepted? In the next edition of the rulebook, could we amend the rules such that time-delay is forced whenever is it possible to use it?
That’s unfortunate that your local TDs don’t want to deal with time delay. I’ve never heard of anyone refusing to allow time delay. Do most players in your tournaments still use analog clocks? I played the Alaska Denker representative in a quad at the US Open. He had no problem with the delay clock.
How do they deal with 14h in close positions where placing a time delay clock is the appropriate course of action?
In theory, yes, but in practice, an ignorant or stubborn TD who refused your original right to the delay is likely also to refuse your right to an appeal.
I hope you can start running a few tournaments in your area yourself. That would also serve to educate the players in your area. Then there would be more pressure on the other TDs to do it right.
It sounds like most of the players in your area don’t have delay capable clocks and so the TD is working to their favor.
As a TD I love the delay because I never have to rule on an insuffient losing chances.
As a player The time factor is taken out of the equation and the game is solved over the board. Realize one can still lose on time.
I had a player a few months back that even though he had a delay clock, did not insist on using it. As a result he lost with King and pawn vs King that was easily won. (The lone king was not in positon to stop the pawn from Queening.)
The reference to special referees is buried in the old site, linked from the TD/Affiliate support area. The current link is http://www.uschess.org/tds/specialreferee.php (please note that the link can change at any time as the team updates and improves the site). Here is the text on that page:
Special Referees - updated Sept. 2007
A special referee is a director with substantial experience who is available to provide advice or make a ruling by phone. See rule21J, “The Special Referee” (pages 93-94) in the 5th Edition of the U.S. Chess Federation’s Official Rules of Chess. If you are interested in volunteering, contact the Rules Committee, c/o USCF Office, PO Box 3967, Crossville, TN 38557. This list also appears in the bi-monthly rating supplements.
Carol Jarecki NY (212)912-0972
Randy Hough S.CA (626)282-7412
Harold Stenzel NY (631)218-4440
Bill Snead TX (806)372-4387
Tim Just IL (847)244-7954
Alan Losoff NV (702)510-8882
Bill Goichberg NY (845)496-9658
Andrew Thall TX (956)723-8067
Just a cotton-pickin’ minute. If he was easily winning, then he must have been the one with the pawn. So how was it possible for him to lose, if his opponent had only a lone king? A time forfeit in that situation would be a draw.