Legal to play two opponents at same time?

[tombr]

“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.

If I let someone play that was wearing mismatched socks, I would be breaking my personal standards. However, I don’t believe this is an issue of personal standards. This is an issue of enforcing the rules as set forth by the governing body. Those rules don’t prohibit mismatched socks or playing only one game at a time.

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.

Why are you under the impression that the rules (regarding cheating, for example) are enforceable if I play a single game but are not enforced if I play 2 games at the same time?

If you let the person break the rules or not enforce the rules, where do you stop??? I would suggest informing the USCF that you are not willing to enforce the rules so that they can terminate your TD certiificate. It sounds like this is long overdue.

[Forsythe]

@tombr

If you let the person break the rules or not enforce the rules, where do you stop??? I would suggest informing the USCF that you are not willing to enforce the rules so that they can terminate your TD certiificate. It sounds like this is long overdue.

20D. Use of additional chessboard or computer prohibited. A player who analyzes a game in progress on another chessboard or consults a computer about the position is quilty of a serious violation of the rules. Through the director still has discretion, the usual penalty is loss of the game.

Tombr, if you have a second chessboard, even if you are going to play two ratable games at the same time. If you have two boards, how can you say there is no analyzes going on. It does not matter what move you are on, it can happen. Say you have white and black for both boards, could find yourself in the same opening. If you are not good with the opening, you could hold off till one of your opponents makes a move. Would not that be analyzes of the board? Would not that be soliciting advice?

If you want to have two ratable games on at the same time. Do not care, it would be your standard to let them play. If I did let them play, would know they are breaking a number of standard rules. If I let them break rule after rule, because they want to play in this form. What rule would I take a stand on?

It would be like a teacher that gives you the answers to the questions on the test. How can the teacher flunk you when the teacher let you cheat in the first place? If you go to work, your boss tells you to smash up the equipment. How can your boss firer you for smashing up the equipment? There have been people that have do stuff just like that. They want to set you up so they can get ride of you. It is not ethical to do that to a person. If I let you play with two ratable games at the same time, how would it be ethical to punnish someone?

If I let you play two ratable games at the same time. If on move 3, one of your opponents makes a claim you have copied the same move from your other opponent. When I question you, you said you had to look at the other board. The move is a sound opening, you did play the same move on the other board. How can I say you are cheating, as you have to look at two boards at the same time. Does the director have the right to declare the games as a loss, as you were looking at two boards? Would you feel you were being set up? Would not your two opponets be screaming, as you have used the move against them?

If it was unethical in the first place, to let two ratable games go on at the same time. How can any judgement during the game be ethical? This is the reason I would not let two ratable games go on at the same time. As any ruling from the director would be unethical for one or both parties. If I feel any ruling would be unethical, then the whole format would be unethical in the first place.

[jwiewel]

I can give a couple of examples of two games being played at the same time.

1. At one Illinois Open (I think the time control was 30/90, G/60, but it may have been somewhat different) there was a scheduling oversight and there was a G/20 side event at the same time as one of the rounds. There were two people who played in the side event simultaneously with the round in the Open. Because of the time controls, anyone even considering copying the moves from one game to the other would end up losing the G/20 on time.

2. I was not present for this one, but some years back (pre-sudden death) an Illinois tournament had an adjourned (drawish) game between a lower-rated master and a higher-rated master. The following round the lower-rated master was paired against another higher-rated master. The first higher-rated master finished his game for the following round and checked on the lower-rated master’s game to see how long it would be before he could attempt to finish the adjournment. The lower-rated master’s (drawish) game was going to be running for some time, but the lower-rated master decided that, in the interests of getting the adjournment over with without delaying the final round, he would play the adjournment at the same time. The positions were quite different, but clear enough that he was able to simultaneously hold both draws against the two higher-rated masters. If he had not played both games at once then the final round would have been delayed for over an hour for at least the top boards.

Some people may see a problem with the first example, but I do not. I’m sure there will be a very few people who may see a problem with the second example, but I do not.

One near example was a case in the eighties of two players (friends) in a middle school tournament being paired in the penultimate round on boards 1 and 2 against higher rated opponents. They gave brief consideration to the idea of each copying the moves of the other player’s opponent, resulting in the two higher-rated players essentially playing each other, but they quickly decided that it would be unethical and they dropped the idea.

[Forsythe]

20D. Use of additional chessboard or computer prohibited. A player who analyzes a game in progress on another chessboard or consults a computer about the position is quilty of a serious violation of the rules. Through the director still has discretion, the usual penalty is loss of the game.

Test case for the directors. If you let a player play two ratable games at the same time. The person with the two games have white and black. Both games start out with the same opening 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5. The game you have white, your opponent move 3. ed. You analyze the move, then you look at the other board and move 3. ed. Your opponent on that board stops the clock to get the director. Your opponent is making the claim you are analyzing the position on the other board.

Would it be ethical to forfeit both games, as both boards have the same position? Your opponent has made the claim, as you have made the same moves as the other moves. If the director does not forfeit both games, would not the director be unethical for not forfeiting? If the director does forfeit both games, would not the director set up the player. Would you feel you were set up if you are forfeited after move 3? If you were the opponent that made the claim, would you feel the director is unethical for not forfeiting the game?

What is the answer, forfeit the games or reject the claim.

[nolan]

I think this thread has gone on long enough.