Making It Simple and Straightforward

There has been a lot of discussion of late regarding our rules. On one hand we are looking at the ILC idea and whether it should be abolished or not. On another point the clocks themselves have been discussed, specifically whether we should still allow clocks with no delay/increment or just rule them out as well. Then we have the rules that FIDE has versus the USCF ones. Let’s face it, there is a lot of complexity in the rules of Chess and rated or tournament Chess.

There has been a good amount of discontent from people regarding the whole copyright thing and why the USCF cannot simply have the rules listed online. The main argument that I see is that the rulebook and its latest iterations are under contract with the publisher, McKay I believe, and we cannot put the rules online because of these laws and contract. It has been said that the rules themselves are not under thumb but the writings, which include the TD tips and other explanations that are in the text.

And the third situation that exists comes from one of the editors saying that this sixth edition of the rulebook is really a 5.1 or something rather than a 6.0 because they really only modified the 5th edition.

Taking these three things into account, I now wonder if it would be possible to do a complete re-write of the rules form scratch handling all three points above and others.

Starting from scratch we would be able to begin with the basic game and the rules of how the pieces move and so forth for the game play itself.

And right after that we would create the rules for rated play which would add the use of a timer and official overseeing the competition.

Now, the above would be all that’s needed for the rated game rules. In all honesty this is all a player would need to have, because it would be the only thing directly affecting his play in that rated game.

Perhaps in another volume, we would have a tournament directing and/or organizing rule set. This would include the pairing logics and other tournament running and set-up things. Sure, anyone could also have a copy of this set of rules, but really TDs and organizers would be the only ones that would need to have them.

Let’s take a moment and get back to the simplification of things. We could look at situations like the clocks and other equipment that do not provide what is needed for a rated game.

As a brief aside, if a rated game had neither delay nor increment as part of its time controls then analog and other non delay/increment clocks would be standard for that game.

But the whole point would be to make it simple and straightforward. I have a whole group of new students starting my Chess Club this coming Wednesday. I know that if I would show a bright child or even their highly intelligent parent the current rulebook, they would be taken aback at the denseness and complexity of it all.

If on the other hand I could show them the rules for play, they would be able to handle that better. Sure, how the pieces move is a part of it, but so is castling and en passant, not to mention other things like touch move.

I could then show them the next part, whether it is part of the same volume or not but at least a different section, and tell them that these are the rules added to the first ones for rated Chess, which includes the timers, game notation and the like.

And if I have some particularly sick child that wants to TD, just kidding, I would be able to show them the next volume or section with rules for organizing and/or running a rated game and tournament or other event.

In all three of the above I cannot stress how important it is to keep it simple and straightforward. All we need is the rules in each of them. The tips and such would better be in some other writing or writings, like a player’s handbook or director/organizer handbook.

We also should take the opportunity to simplify things like the ILC if we want it as a variation or what. Score keeping ways and devices should also be simplified in writing.

.

Complexity. Above you are focusing on complexity.

Control. Above you are talking about the fact that the USCF cannot even post its own chess rules on its own website, nor edit or iterate its own ebook or POD paperback of its own chess rules at its own whim, without having to pay McKay far more money than is desirable or even plausible.

Semantics, uninteresting to me.

Ideally you would have chimed in a year ago against continuing with McKay. Back then there were a lot of us on these forums saying - Stop with McKay!
[ http://www.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=18933&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=McKay ]

This is a pretty good idea Ron.
All aspects of the 6th edition that are relevant to the masses of USCF tournament players could be separated away from all the other content, and rewritten from scratch, and then fully controlled and published by only the USCF. The USCF would publicly disavow that portion of the 6th addition. For free Anyone could download the USCF’s .PDF of the USCF Chess Players’ Rulebook.

Ideally the USCF would also provide the same exact content, for $0 or $1, as a Kindle through Amazon.com.
For a POD paperback through Amazon.com, the customer would definitely have to pay. But only a fool would buy the paperback version of a rule set that changes every year, when a Kindle ebook or at least a .PDF is always available for free.

Meanwhile, Tournament Directors can continue paying McKay, and trying to match up accumulated errata and addenda between the USChess.org website and their paperbacks, as is the modern way now in 2014.

If we completely end our damaging relationship with McKay, then every day is a potential opportunity to revisit whatever the latest rule shortcoming is.
.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess

There are probably many other similar pages.