I need some advice on how electronic scoresheets are supposed to be operated. I know the only USCF-approved devices are MonRoi and eNotate on a PDA. I know rules 15 and 43. But I don’t have any personal experience with the devices.
The question arises because one local junior has a practice of “fiddling” with his device repeatedly. The claim is that he makes moves on the device - and sometimes takes them back - before playing them on the board. The story is one TD who asked him about it was told there was a screensaver, and that he needed to keep touching the screen to bring it back up.
Now, I’m willing to watch if he plays in one of my tournaments, but what should I expect to see? Do these devices allow players to make provisional moves on the display and then take them back? Is the claim of a screensaver plausible? What are the best practices for using them - and what should be avoided?
Well in terms of eNotate (which I can speak to), if they have configured power management, the screen will dim or go off after a certain period of time such as 1 or 3 minutes.
But there shouldn’t be any fiddling… it’s a tap to bring the screen back alive or to simply press the power button (if it went to sleep). Nothing else.
If they are trying making moves and taking them back, that would be very evident as it’s more than just a tap.
Can they make moves and take them back? Sure, it’s the electronic method of scratching out a move on a paper scoresheet. But it’s silly obvious that they are abusing the electronic scoresheet.
The recording of a single move is only 2 taps (square it came from, square it’s going to). There are some exceptions such as when a check is recorded (that’s 3 taps, 2 more for the move, 1 for check), a draw offer is recorded (that’s 2 taps for the draw offer plus 2 more for recording the moves right before the offer), or a piece promotion (that’s 3 taps). There is the use case of them flipping between visual and written mode where they can see the actual notation also.
To un-do a single move, we’re talking about more than this.
Mind you I’m talking about them trying to ‘analyze’ by making and taking back moves. If they screwed up their notation (yes I’ve seen people do that), then legitimately they have to make a lot of taps but we’re talking that this is the exception and not the norm.
Check and see. I do this even for the kids and adults that use it in my tournament. I forfeited one for doing exactly what you said - analyzing by going back and forth. You can also remind them that the purpose of the electronic scoresheet is to record their moves. Some times they don’t realize you can’t do this and you educate them once and they won’t do it again. Other times you’ll find that they are doing what they should not be doing. They can’t be staring at the device. Record the move, put it aside.
Didn’t we have a situation two or three years ago where a young player was penalized for using the “scoresheet” as a second board to look at because he was more comfortable in two dimensions than three? Wasn’t the ultimate ruling that it is perfectly OK to look at your scoresheet?
15A (Variation I) says otherwise for paper. TDs who wish to enforce the 15A standard should be prepared to announce it and bring a flame-retardant jacket for the backlash.
I am not familiar with the situation described here. However, it’s not uncommon for players on top boards in CCA open events to sit and stare at their position on the MonRoi display. I have no problem with that, and I’d have no problem with a player staring at a diagram on his own electronic scoresheet.
I recommend reading Page 1 for the gist…then skip to Page 12 thru 14 to read the rationale on why looking at a MonRoi isn’t analyzing. It’s like a display board. No biggy.
Back when there were big demo boards at major tournaments, more than a few GMs were known to get up from their board and stare at the demo board instead, often pacing back and forth. This occasionally resulted in complaints from opponents, and even bigger complaints from the GMs if the demo board was not current or was incorrect.
The original question was posted about an event that involved me a couple of weeks ago. The question is not just about whether the player is staring at his screen but, after being warned not to be “testing” moves, he kept tapping the screen even when it wasn’t his turn.
My original complaint was cheating and was registered after watching him make and reverse three moves with two different pieces before he made his move in question (which was a fourth move made while I was tracking down the TD). Afterwards, it wasn’t looking at the screen that was a problem but all the tapping, particularly when it wasn’t his turn. In my opinion, there should be no reason for all the tapping to continue on someone else’s turn even if the screensaver is returning to obscure the electronic board. If the tapping action is disturbing the opponent, should it not be disallowed on the opponent’s time … there is a regular board to be viewing after all?
What should we instruct both players as a TD? Are there any pre-event announcements we can/should make of any Dell / Mon Roi users?
Finally, I don’t really see any reasoning that validates the action raised during your discussion that the use of the scoresheet of any kind as a second board is OK. It seems to me that rules 20A through 20D as a whole work as a sort of penumbra to prohibit the use of any material related to the game as an aid to better work out problems. Reformating the game be it by computer or otherwise would be an aid that benefits one player versus another. No? So, it should be prohibited, right? Please explain in some detail if you can if you disagree on this last issue.
Had I been the TD, the player would receive a warning for potential cheating (i.e. use the electronic scoresheet correctly). Further tapping would receive a warning of distracting the opponent, if the opponent says something about it (i.e. change the backlight settings on your PDA).
See above on instructions. The bothered opponent did right. The electronic scoresheet user needs to be careful or be forfeited. I don’t see any reason for announcements unless you have a glut of newbies who all dropped $100-$300 on electronic scoresheets. Players should know (or ask) the rules before they start tournament chess.
Please read the forums link I posted earlier before stating there hasn’t been any reason or validation provided. Static 2D boards such as display boards and electronic scoresheets are accepted. Let me say it a little bit more strongly: proper use of electronic scoresheets MonRoi and eNotate are accepted within the rules. Looking at the tiny 2D board (or giant display board) instead of the live board is OK; moving pieces on the tiny 2D board with the stylus is not. The link provided is a rich history of this discussion; raising the issue again doesn’t change the consensus answer. The next step is asking the Rules Committee for a declaration on the question; my money is on that proper use is treated like a display board.
OK, last clarifying question - I get that looking at a display board is OK and why but isn’t part of the reason that it is acceptable is that BOTH players can access that board? If only one player has access to a 2-dimensional aid, would that not be an advantage that one player has over the other? Isn’t that a relevant factor?
In this case, the device in question is simply a scoresheet. It is an electronic scoresheet, to be sure, but a scoresheet nonetheless. One could argue that a player with an electronic scoresheet has some advantages - but that player is simply following the rules pertaining to scorekeeping. The opponent has chosen not to pursue electronic scorekeeping. That doesn’t give him the right to stare over his opponent’s shoulder or demand to see the opponent’s scoresheet at his whim.
An electronic device that displays an updating diagram is not an electronic “scoresheet”, it is something beyond a scoresheet. The discussion gets misleading because we need yet lack a better noun/name for such electronic devices.
Any device should be prohibited if it can display a diagram containing a move that has not already been finalized on the live board.
A device that displays an updating diagram might be okay if someone can solve the take-back problem; although I doubt it can be solved.
A device that displays an updating diagram but that disallows take backs would be impractical, because accidental entry errors will occur.
.
.
A mere “Warning”? A player who uses any device in a manner that lets him see a diagram of moves that have not already been finalized on the live board is almost as serious as cheating can get.
Consequently, any device that shows an updated diagram is unacceptable in serious rated chess — because the device must enable take backs of accidentally wrong moves entered. But once the wrong move is entered it is seen, and thus the cheating has occurred before the take back action begins.
The whole situation almost guarantees that cheating will occur, intentional or accidental. Even if accidental, it is still somewhat intentional cheating because it is so obvious and predictable that accidents will happen.
An electronic scoresheet should record only Notation, and must not involve a diagram in any way.
If such a device is allowed, then a certain amount of cheating is implicitly being allowed, so complaints by the opponent would have to be taken with several grains of salt.
.
The problem with technology is that it takes time for players and directors to become familiar with them. It is easier to cheat when your opponent doesn’t know how to use the device, just like it is easier to cheat against a beginner. Since we don’t want our directors to act like beginners, we can’t reasonably expect a director to rule about a device that he has never used.
The problems with digital clocks have decreased over time. Experienced directors have seen the major brands of digital clocks often enough to know how they should work, even if they can’t set them. However, a devious player can still fool some people, e.g. different settings for delay, or “accidentally” turn off delay for second time control. Experienced players know to check the clock at the start of each time control.
On the other hand, the electronic scoresheets are still fairly new. In some areas of the country, they are rare or nonexistent (or perhaps one brand is rare or nonexistent). Is it fair for one player to use an approved electronic scoresheet that neither the opponents nor the director have seen before? How can the opponent be confident that the player is not cheating in a subtle way? How can the director verify that it is being used properly?
Michael Aigner
Aside: In the early days of 14H, I still remember twice getting rulings that I now know were flat out wrong. Just another example…
Allen - I believe that you are unable to understand why your opinion on this is mistaken. This is one of those instances in which it is crucial to be a player oneself. Writing down one’s move before making it is a training technique that is extremely helpful in certain ways, returning the player to the “here and now” after a period of having withdrawn into one’s own head to calculate and imagine.
I agree with Gene’s post about prohibiting access to manipulable diagrams during play, and his assessment of the situation described at the start of this thread.
PS - An unrelated reason why writing down the moves in proper chess notation should be required (unless the player is physically unable to do so) is that chess literacy is crucial to the perpetuation of the game. If we cannot speak chess notation, we cannot discuss chess, because it is the language of chess, and without language, intelligence is hard to develop very far.
And, of course, it goes without saying that, as an International Arbiter, you are aware that the FIDE Laws of Chess prohibit a player from writing a move on the scoresheet before making the move on the board unless the player is claiming a draw by triple occurrence of position or by the fifty move rule, or the player is sealing a move to adjourn a game. Correct?
