Scenario:
During the course of a game a player is away from his board and, while he is away from his board, his opponent makes a move and then takes it back. A player on the next board observes this and reports it to the TD. As the TD, what would you do?
Would your response be any different if you were notified of this immediately after the player who took back his move (the cheater) had just recorded that he had won the game?
Well, at my winter Open this did happen except no one reported to a TD and a TD in the room did not observe it. Later it was reported as a rumor on a discussion board that the incident occured. The player that made the move (?) and took it back ended up losing, so that may account for the lack of a report to the TD at the site.
In the situation you describe the TD has several options:
Forfeit the player for cheating.
Warn the offending player, add time to the opponent’s clock, force him to make the move he took back.
If he reports a win then forfeit him and throw him out of the tournament.
If he reports a win see (2).
It is the TD’s choice!
Tim
So if I see John K Hillery or Thunderchicken make a move when their opponent is away from the board. Than I can go up to Tim Just, report a claim, than see them go bye bye. Tim Just that is so sweet.
In many cases option 3 will have to be used as there will not be enough time left in the tournament round for the players to go back to an earlier position after the “game” has already been completed.
I think Tim would take into account the credibility of the source of the report.
What sounds good in theory, does not work in practice.
Very true, sometimes. That’s why the TD needs to exercise some discretion and common sense. The same solution may not work the same way in every situation.
Assuming the interval between the completion of the “game” and the discovery of the problem is short, there shouldn’t be a time problem, since the game would be resumed using the same clock times that were showing when the “game” was originally completed.
Bill Smythe
If this situation happened with experienced adult players, I’d forfeit the player and eject him from the tournament. I just don’t see any other penalty appropriate for intentionally cheating like this.
For young, inexperienced players (which is who I’d expect to have the problem), I’d try to explain the issue to them – that this was cheating (the offending player may not really have realized this if he were very inexperienced). I’d consider a lesser penalty only for the most inexperienced players.
Doug,
Common sense says the TD first has to investigate the claim. I assumed that all the readers on this forum had common sense. Your statement here indicates that at least one reader did not make that assumption. My bad.
Tim
Tim, assume that the third party’s report cannot be authenticated or turns out to be false.
What are the choices for sanctioning someone who made a false claim about a game OTHER than his own?
I’m not sure why you keep using me as examples of cheating or having a soul like hell, but if that makes you feel better, that’s fine with me.
I did see your website doug, and I am choosing to ignore everything you say from this point forward. If you’re going to try to pick stupid fights by saying this stuff, it’s really not going to work.
This statement pretty much sums it up.
Tim may have a different answer, but IMHO any spectator (including a player) that INTENTIONALLY tries to interfere in another’s game should be ejected from the tournament. This is quite different than the case where a spectator unintentionally interferes (whispering a comment that’s overheard, for example). I’d also consider a complaint to the ethics committee. Of course this pre-supposes that the claim is FALSE rather than just “not authenticated”.
It is hard to prove the claim, when the person that makes the claim would win a greater prize – if the person was forfeited. When the claim has money on the line, and its not clear if the statement is true or false. What works in theory never works in practice when you have money on the line.
Often, when confronted by a 3rd party, the guilty person will end up admitting that they had done something wrong.
Are we at the point where security cameras will be needed in the playing rooms?
With the advent of super high class prizes I submit that it might be necessary.
Hey, that would at least give the parents at Nationals a way to see their kids games! 
If the claim is true, before forfeiting the player: would talk to the opponent before forfeiting. Not all players want to win a forfeited game. In this case, the opponent would have some idea on the appropriate penalty. Not all players, even if they understand their opponent could or should get a penalty, want their opponent to get a penalty.
The rules seem clear to me on this one. Once the player’s hand has released the piece the move is complete. This isn’t a touch-move issue. The cheating player has changed the position on the board and tried to fool his opponent into thinking that it’s the correct position.
I don’t care what his opponent says, I won’t allow a person like that to continue to play in one of my tournaments. If I were holding regular events, I’d even consider a ban for X months.
To a large exent we have to rely on the honor system and on players being self-policing. Compare this to golf, for example, and you’ll see my penalty isn’t really harsh at all. In Golf (even more self policing than chess – players are expected and required to call their own penalties on themselves) a player that ACCIDENTALLY signs a scorecard with an incorrect score is out of the tournament.
What if his opponent was at the board, and the director was a witness to this cheating. If the opponent touched a piece, put the move back and move some other piece. If his opponent does not object, would not this be cheating also. As both players are not following the rules.
What is the difference if the opponent wants to wave off the cheating, at the board or away from the board? There should not be any difference, as his opponent touched a piece than move some other piece.
Now, if the director was a witness to a touch-move, and the opponent does not make a claim. Would not both players not be following the rules? Just looking into why the opponents wish to wave off a claim is more important being at the board than away from the board.
I’d like to slightly correct your wording. Normally the move isn’t actually complete until the clock is hit (moves like checkmate and stalemate that immediately end the game are complete when the piece is released). If the move was changed before the clock was hit then it is a touch move issue, while if it is changed after the clock is hit then it is the cheating issue that is under discussion.
I am guessing that this thread is about a move changed after the clock was hit and thus this isn’t really about touch move.
By the way, if the change was to correct an illegal move (unlikely in this particular case) I would be disinclined to declare the game lost, though other actions may be appropriate.