Is it legal to play two opponents at same time?
The ‘Official Rules of Chess’ says nothing about two opponents at the same time. Making a stand on the issue, it should not be legal to play two opponents at the same time. The player with the two boards, could get help from his own opponents. If you are white in one game and black in the next, your opponents would in fact play against each other not against you. How many movies had the novice play against two Grand Masters at the same time. The novice just made the same move as the Grand Masters made, it was cute as a movie unethical in real life. That could happen if you play two opponents at the same time, its’ unethical. If its’ unethical in one case, it should be unethical to play two opponents at the same time
Not only legal, but actually fairly common. Perhaps once in twenty or thirty tournaments you’ll have a player playing dual boards, or in two sections at the same time.
As to Mr. Forsythe’s contention that you could do that to cheat, I suppose that it is possible, but cheating is covered elsewhere.
Alex Relyea
There’s a chess short story about a grandmaster who gets hoodwinked into playing against himself, white on one board, black on the other. To find out how he got out of the dilemma, read the story. 
I think it’s in Irving Chernev’s book, “The Chess Companion”. (My copy of that book seems to have disappeared, it’s got a number of entertaining chess stories in it.)
Players entering more than one section used to be fairly common around here, but I think it’s fallen out of favor lately. (I remember one tournament where a player entered THREE sections that all ran at the same time, and he won tropies in at least two of them.)
I have occasionally allowed a player entering late to play two games simultaneously in round 2, rather than taking a half-point bye in round 1. (These were plus-score tournaments, and the player wanted to remain eligible for the 4-0 prize rather than the 3.5 prize.)
In one case, the player was fairly strong, so I told him he would be paired in both games as though he had won in round 1 (to do otherwise would be unfair to at least one of his opponents). According to his rating, he would have been players 3 and 4 in the 1-point score group in round 2. Counting both of him, there would have been 5 players in that score group. Thus, he had to play players 1 and 2 simultaneously (player 5 was dropped to a lower score group). That was justice, I felt, for a player arriving late. (I think he ended up winning one and losing one.)
Bill Smythe
I recently heard a story like this, and it didn’t even involve two simultaneous games by one player. It seems that TWO players, both paired against grandmasters, decided to play the two GMs against each other. Each cheater would wait for the GM on the other board to play his move, then copy that move on his own board.
The GMs quickly realized what was happening, and simply slowed down their games, playing at a snail’s pace until a minute or so before the time control. Since the cheaters had to wait for the GMs to move, all four players ran short of time. At that point, the GMs started playing blitz, and the cheaters found it physically impossible to continue their strategy. Both GMs won.
Bill Smythe
The problem I have with two boards with the same person, or two games at the same time. Are the rules 20B (Use of recorded matter prohibited), rule 20C (Use of notes prohibited), rule 20D (Use of additional chessboard or computer prohibited), rule 20E (Soliciting or using advice prohibited).
If you play two games, the games could be alike. So the scoresheet can be recored matter from game B to be used in game A. The scoresheet can be used as notes or as recored matter from one game to the next. The chessboard can have the same position, so one board can help with the analyzes of one game for the other. If the player has the same position on the board (having white and black), can hold off from making the move till his opponent makes the move, then copy the move on the other game. This would be soliciting and using advice, and use of additional chessboard.
Nope nope nope, having two ratable games going on at the same time is not going to happen at my events. Can go on and find other rules it breaks the faith, but found 3 rules and need no more to say its’ not going to happen.
Douglas, you simply do not understand the rulebook.
Nolan:
If I can play two opponents, I can copy the position from one game to the next. If my two opponents are two masters, the change to win against one master is very slim. If I copy the position on the boards, my chance to get one draw is better, the chance to get a win is better.
If the one master makes a move, I am going to use that advice to make my next move on the other board. It was the opinon of the master when the move was made, to make the same move on the other board. The master was very helpful with the advice he gave me. Its’ soliciting advice, as I’m just a class C player, as the master with the move on the other board just gave me the advice what to do.
Before I make the move, I would have to write it down on my scoresheet. The note on the scoresheet, will help me if I need to borrow my own scoresheet. Some times I do forget to write down my moves, glad the other game scoresheet has the notes. The notes on the scoresheet, was a big aid to my memory. The notes on the other scoresheet was a better aid then my memory.
Some times I get up from the board, one of the masters made a move on the board. Just look over and analyze the board, the analyze of the board did show me my next move. Then make the move on the other board. The analyze of the other board did help me out.
Glad the director over looked all the cheating. Nolan whens your next tournament? I want to play on two boards at the same time. Thank you for all my cheating.
Having two ratable games at the same time, would be calling that cheating. Sure, the director should forfeit someone that did play two ratable games in the above statement. Then again, the director having the player play two ratable games at the same. Did allow the player to cheat in the first place. If the act of the director lets the player cheat, then the action is unethical. Sure, 1 time out of 10,000 two ratable games at the same game would end up in cheating. Then again, 1 time out of 10,000, handing a loaded handgun to a child would end in the death of the child. If it is unethical to give a child a loaded handgun, why would two ratable games be different. If there is a chance the actions of the director leading to unethical behavior of one player, then the action itself is unethical.
It’s impossible to completely eliminate ALL forms of cheating, but trying to cheat by playing two games at once would be TRIVIALLY easy to detect – just check the scoresheets. Would anyone be silly enough to try?
Compare this to player conversations in hallways, telephone calls, trips to the bathroom – much harder to be SURE none of these led to cheating. But nobody’s going to have tournaments where trips to the bathroom or conversations between players are illegal!
The question should not be what the player did, it is what the director let the player do. Granting the player to play two ratable games at the same time, gave the player the choice to cheat. If the director lets one player play two ratable games at the same time, the player has a choice to be ethical or unethical during the games. If the director lets one player play two ratable games at the same time, the director grants the player a great deal of power. That power, can be abused by the player. It was not the player that had the right to play two ratable games. The director granted the player the right to abuse the power. If the player abuse the power to cheat, the director also abused the power of the directorship.
If I granted someone to play two ratable games at the same time. If the player abused the power I granted him to cheat, then I am not an ethical director. It would be unethical to say to one player you cannot play two ratable games, then some other player the right to play two ratable games. If I reject the right for one person, then I should be bound to reject the right for all the people. Some people would abuse the right, other people would not abuse the right.
Douglas, if you want to prohibit simuls at your events, that’s fine with all of us. You are taking the high road, and that’s admirable.
If another organizer permits such simuls, that’s fine too. It, too, is the high road, and is admirable.
I doubt whether anyone would stay away from any organizer’s tournaments simply because he does or does not permit players to play 2 games at once.
As a TD, however, I try to make sure neither of the two opponents objects, before I make such a pairing. A few opponents say they would find it distracting, although I suspect their real fear is that they might lose to the simul-giver and never live it down.
Bill Smythe
Simuls are different then two ratable games in a single tournament. First off, when was the last time anyone ever went to a simul to be rated? Can simuls be rated in the first place?
Its your tournaments, there is nothing that says you can or cannot have the pairings. Glad you ask the players before you make the pairings.
There’s nothing specifically prohibiting the rating of a simul in the rulebook, though coming up with a time control that wouldn’t cause problems might be a bit of a challenge.
There are a few events in the ratings database with the word ‘simul’ in the event name, some of them may have been rated simuls
One time one of my opponents was playing two games simultaneously (one against me and another against someone else in a separate tournament being held in the same building.) I beat him. That was the highest-rated player I’ve ever beaten (23-something!) (I don’t know how he did in his other game.) 
If there’s a big concern that a multi-game player is going to play one opponent off of the other one, just give him the same color on both boards.
Hogwash is about the mildest word I can come up with. You can apply that same logic (for lack of a better word) to pairing an experienced tournament player to a newcomer who’s still struggling with the rules. There’s ample opportunity for the experienced player to “modify” the rules and get away with it. If he/she does, it’s cheating. Don’t be putting the blame on the TD because a player decides to cheat. Every player you ever paired had that option.
Not so, if I did let someone play two ratable games I would be breaking my personal standards. It is true anyone can cheat during the game. There are rules dealing with cheating, when its’ a standard game between two players. Since there are no rules dealing with cheating with one player and two games at the same time. How can the director enforce the rules when there are no rules with one player and two games. Can anyone show me any rules with two ratable games at the same time?
If I let the person play two ratable games at the same time. Then a number of the rules could not be enforced. Since some rules cannot be enforced, then the player could be cheating with some of the rules not enforced. The director would be breaking the rules just to have the games rated. If I let the person break the rules or not enforce the rules, were do I stop.
In this case, of course, I was using the word “simul” to mean one player playing two rated games at the same time. I did not mean “simul” in the usual sense of a grandmaster playing 30 games simultaneously.
Bill Smythe
Doug, there is a rule in the book that you can enforce. The book says that cases that are not explicitly covered by the book are to be dealt with in ways analogous to the rules in the book (and the spirit of the rules). This is one of the most important of all rules in the book. There are several rules that give the TD enough discretion to deal with cheaters in this and many other situations.
Thats true, could use rule 1A. Having one player play two ratable games at the same time would have to use rule 1A. Explicitly statement for or against one player to play two ratable games at the same time, would have to use rule 1A. Just to cover cheating would have to use rule 1A, as there is no explicitly statement on how to deal with the cheating (check past cheating statement).
If the director can only use rule 1A, the player should appeal. As the enforcement of rule 1A is the personal bias of the director. The rule 1A is so opened ended, the director can use the rule at will. If I was on a appeals committee, would like to have a much stronger rule then rule 1A. Look the director can use rule 1A because you did not take a shower for a few days. The appeals committee should not need to sniff the player, or deliberate if the player needs a shower. The director can use 1A on any judgement he/she feels needs to be taken care of. The director needs a much stronger rule then rule 1A. If the director can only use rule 1A then it is a very weak case.