On the main display, it is obvious when one of these is in Record mode, as it should be.
Is there a symbol or anything on the main display of a Monroi that allows quick confirmation that Chess Rules is properly in the “No” mode? If so, please describe the indication, or better yet, link to a picture of the main display with it pointed out.
For your convenience, there is a picture of the main screen and all of the other screens at monroi.com/products_screens.html
Thanks,
Mike Swatek
Senior TD
No there is not. Best practice is to have the player show you that it is off before going into record mode. Once there, there is no going back to the main screen until the game is recorded with a score as complete. The latest OS update 2.303US, automatically has the chess rules function default set as OFF.
Thanks for the reply Terry.
It sounds like the only way to verify Chess Rules is Off during the game is to have the user demonstrate that they can record an illegal move. It is good to know this setting can not be changed during the game.
Monroi product development folks, if your reading: This is an important setting requirement for all rated tournaments. It would be much better to have confirmation of Rules Off visible at all times on the display for the convenience of the user, TD and opponent.
Cheers,
Mike Swatek
I agree that it would be useful to have this visible, although please remember that this is only a United States variation and everywhere else in the world then it is ok to have chess rules on.
One other thing I will mention, for those lucky enough to have the central monitoring device, is that when setting up the tournament in the central software, you can override the chess rules setting and have it set to “chess rules off” (and vice versa) irrespective of what setting the player puts on his device. The monitoring device will also highlight that an illegal move has been entered but will not inform the players.
Chris Bird
This is not quite true. All putting on Chess Rules does is ensure that a Bishop moves like a bishop, a knight like a knight etc. With chess rules on, one can still capture kings, leave kings in check, move into check.
So you if really want to know if chess rules are off, then you will have to see if you can move the knight like a bishop would move.
Thanks for that clarification.
It ought to be legal in the USA as well. What’s the harm in ensuring that moves are legal? The only restraint ought to be, that if only one player has such a device, he is required to point out immediately, to his opponent, any illegality by the opponent which the device discovers.
This is disturbing, to the point where I feel uncomfortable expressing the opinion I expressed above. I would hope that future versions of these devices could detect ANY illegal move.
Bill Smythe
.
I now think MonRoi, in tournament mode, should display nothing except:
[1] An empty chess board (no piece icons). You tap one square to move FROM (maybe an ‘F’ appears in the square), then tap another square to move TO, which completes the move notation.
-and-
[2] An alternative screen shows the game’s moves notated (in the owner’s choice of notation).
Unfortunately as it is, MonRoi is being a lot more than a notation scoresheet. 
It has led to several long forum threads about all the issues raised by this extra functionality, that it cannot be opted out of.
Generally I love the idea of capturing chess moves in digital form, during the game. But MonRoi is doing too much (allows players to view prior positions etc).
.
I think this would be a poor idea. If an illegal move were entered (different from the legal move actually played on the board), it could go undetected for a long time. Same would be true if the move entered were legal but different from the move played. In the latter case, if legal move checking is turned on, the move entered would be accepted, but later legal moves might be deemed illegal because the device is now playing a different game from the “real” game.
Bill Smythe
Hmm, kind of sounds like some of my paper scoresheets! 
The way the device works now with chess rules off any move is accepted, so it doesn’t seem to matter whether the position on the unit matches what’s going on during the actual game. It allows pieces to jump around, or move contary to its normal movement. Because it’s so sensative I have this problem every so often. It’s not a problem I’d have with a paper scoresheet because I’d never end out writing Rc3 indicating that a rook went from a1 to c3, however tapping the wrong destination square has caused this error.
All I can say is…all this makes me quite happy that no one is using Monroi yet at our local scholastic tournaments. I think I would miss writing my moves and trying to figure out my mistakes afterwards. Of course, I’m usually about three years behind on adopting new technology. I suppose I’ll have to learn Monroi and its TD ramifications sooner rather than later.
The changes to the scorekeeping rules also seem to be largely overlooked in our neck of the woods. If we can get kids to notate that’s a big deal.
Would I be breaking any rules as a TD by not allowing a MonRoi to be used at a tournament I was running?
Not if you announce it in the TLA in advance. If you don’t – unclear, hasn’t been adjudicated yet.
We just had someone drop out of the Chicago Open because he objected to having to use a delay clock if his opponent had one.
I’m on good terms with delay clocks! They have saved my game on many an occasion. Its funny how fast one can start thinking with 50 seconds on the clock.
But Bill you are dodging the issue; which is concern that MonRoi gives unprincipled advantages to the one player who has one. A player might be able to record his move notation slight faster with MonRoi, but that advantage is accepted. But being able to look at prior positions, or to have illegal move detection etc, these were not meant to be part of the deal.
Undetected? Yes, just as with the paper scoresheets used for two centuries. How is undetection necessarily more of a problem with digital capture than with paper-analog?
Required to share MonRoi info with your opponent? No way. That sounds like a mess, a breeding grounds for knotty problems.
It is not a poor idea to capture moves into digital format, in a way that causes as few principled differences from the paper-analog format.
MonRoi does cause principled differences.
The purpose of digital capture if for post-game ease, in uploading to the web or to Fritz.
Both TDs and players SHOULD be on good terms with delay clocks – players for the reason you mention, TDs because they avoid a lot of time-scramble hassles and unjust outcomes.
As a player, I have found that the delay works in my opponent’s favor more often than in mine. I move faster than most of my opponents, so I get into time trouble less often than they do.
Nevertheless, I’m a strong proponent of the delay, because it often results in an honorable outcome, where none would have been possible otherwise.
I’m glad you and CCA didn’t kowtow to this individual and somehow promise him he could play without the delay. If all organizers would do the same (and most of them probably do), sooner or later this type of Neanderthal attitude on the part of a handful of players will be eradicated.
Bill Smythe
I don’t mind if the Monroi gives advantage to the player who has one. The other player has the right to get one, too. Delay clocks also give advantage to their owners, because they can count on having the delay in every game. This advantage doesn’t stop them from being legal, or desirable.
Legal move detection falls into the same category, in my opinion. Besides, if you’re going to upload into Fritz or to the web, you should want some assurance that all the moves are legal.
Looking at prior positions during the game should certainly NOT be legal. I guess what the Monroi really needs is a mode which will detect ALL illegal moves (including moving into check) but will not allow viewing of previous positions, hypothetical future variations, etc. That would be the best middle ground between a simple notation aid and the possession of an unfair advantage.
Bill Smythe
You should have seen the letter he wrote, about how delay clocks are perfect instruments for cheating, because the clock can be set to add extra time for one side only, and not the other. Before digital clocks came around, I remember one player used to swear that his opponents had done the same thing to their analog clocks!
A while back (when time delay was just beginning to gain wide scale acceptability), I was making the standard announcements at the start of the first round of the NY State Championship in Saratoga Springs (the time conrols, how to set the clocks, round times, etc.). One individual (I don't [i]think[/i] it was the same guy from Chicago) waited until after I had finished (at least he was polite), and then stood up in the middle of the tournament room, as everyone was about to start the round, and announced in a booming voice, [b]"Time delay clocks are for [i]cheaters![/i]"[/b] Maybe it [i]was[/i] the same guy!
That was about eight or nine years ago, and today this latest one is probably one of a very few, but definitely [i]non-zero,[/i] number of comments I've gotten like that since then. I remember Kamram Shirazzi used to go ballistic when his opponent had a delay clock.