Overruling a Proper Ruling

Running Chess Tournaments
1

I’ll be as concise as possible as this is detailed.

Chief TD is an NTD, Asst. Chief TD is an NTD, floor TD is a Senior TD
Black is the claimant, White is just there.

This is not an episode of Fantasy Island, Looney Tunes, or The Twilight Zone of Chess but could be.

I’m called over by Black. I get to the board and notice that the chess clock, board, and pieces have all been put away and both players are getting ready to leave to post their scores.

I ask Black his concern. Black states it was unfair of him to have had to accept an incorrect draw offer. I ask white to please stay. I clarify Black’s statement by asking “you are saying you unfairly had to accept an incorrect draw offer?” Black says yes. White also says yes to the drawn agreement. I give him Rule 14B. Black becomes a little testy now and says he took White’s bishop with his rook, had a clear won endgame, and it was unfair to have had to accept the incorrect draw offer. (Rule 14B again). Black now is agitated and adds to his complaint that he is not disputing the draw but that he had not yet pressed his clock when White stuck out his hand and said draw, therefore it is an incorrect draw offer. I give him Rule 14B2. Black now raises the ante and states he never really heard the word draw but something unintelligible and he “thought” White said resign and Black shook White’s hand. I tell Black that he has multiple times now said yes he accepted the incorrectly offered draw and now he is changing the story completely. I tell him the ruling stands as a drawn game. Black protests my ruling and wants to appeal. I tell him that’s his right and we will all go and see the Chief TD.
The Chief TD asks me what the appeal is for. I tell him Black accepted a draw offer by White, they shook hands, put away the game and were on their way to record the draw on the pairing sheet when I was called over. I begin to explain the circumstances but the Chief TD tells me that’s enough. I tell him he needs to hear all the facts first to make a proper judicial ruling. The Chief TD tells me that we are not here to be judicial but as TD’s to simply direct the tournament (huh?). I’m not allowed to explain further? A spectator speaks up and says he witnessed the incident. The Chief TD asks him to tell what he saw. The witness states he saw White and Black shake hands (nothing more is being said). I ask the witness “and?”. He states he thought White looked like he was resigning when both were shaking hands but didn’t hear anything that was said between them. I tell the Chief TD this is an unreliable witness since he did not hear anything and he thought White looked like he was resigning.
The Chief TD asks for the score sheets and tells us to wait for his decision.
The Chief TD states “my decision is the TD’s ruling is overruled”. I begin to ask on what evidence. The Chief TD just tells me I’ve made my decision and you are overruled(really?) The Chief TD says that the score sheets appear to agree. He looks directly at White and states " you never really wanted your opponent to accept a draw" (really?). He looks directly at Black and states “you never really wanted to accept the draw”(really??). He looks at me and says the TD will take the players back to the playing hall, reconstruct the game, set the correct times on the clocks, and then the game will continue from there (double really??).

The score sheets actually did not agree and I had to get both players to agree on every move not correctly notated until a position was set up to allow Black to take White’s bishop. The clock times were just as bad to get White and Black to agree to. Black later calls me back to the game claiming an illegal move by White but his score sheet was already missing 6 moves after the reconstructed position from move 44 of the original claim. I told Black his score sheet is incorrect and there is no illegal move by White as it is Black’s turn to move. Black seems confused at this point then simply offers White a draw, White accepts, game is over.
Black apologizes for all the trouble that has been caused, tells me he has been a chess teacher for 25 years and has no idea of what just happened tonight and that the original draw he protested was probably correct. He was genuinely apologetic.

I go back to the Chief TD and Asst. Chief TD and explain what happened. I was told by both that I was still completely wrong about my decision of a drawn game. The Asst. Chief TD told me that he would personally overrule me every time I rule a game is drawn in the future with these same circumstances. The Asst. Chief TD was never even at the appeal to begin with. The Chief TD gave me Tim Just’s book “Just Law” with the section on draw by handshake to read. I just threw up my proverbial hands and walked out. I felt I was “in the land of bad things”.

Fortunately Black and White received the proper 1/2 point each.

2

You should have informed White of the right to appeal. This is the biggest advantage of a rated tournament; that wrongheaded TD decisions are not final. It is clearly too late now, especially as White has achieved the correct result.

I’d seriously have to consider whether I would work under those TDs in the future.

Alex Relyea

3

OK - I don’t mean this as a criticism - but it will be/would be interesting to hear if the Chief had the same perception of the conversations as the TD here. Perhaps something was lost in communication?

4

The Chief TD in this case was not interested in hearing any retorts from anyone. He simply stated what he wanted to each player and myself then enforced it by his status as Chief TD.
Even though I tried to protest on behalf of the players, myself, and the rules he simply was not interested in hearing the evidence.
Therefore how could a proper decision be made when the attitude of the Chief TD was in my view unprofessional at best.
I do what I do for the players and to promote chess. Fortunately none of the other many disputes settled were appealed.

5

With all due respect, I’m not entirely clear what arguing the case in this forum will accomplish other than the cathartic release of venting. I would suggest that if you really believe your argument has merit, you should consider filing a complaint through US Chess that will probably be directed to the Tournament Director Certification Committee (TDCC).

6

I’m not cathartically venting. I have no use for that. I simply stated an event that happened. I let the chess world decide for itself what it thinks in any given situation.

Thank you,

Scott C. Hunt

7

I won’t speak for the chess world, but I tend to agree with Ken that if it is important enough you should file a complaint. That choice of yours determines whether the chess world should decide it cares about it. The facts as you describe them are disconcerting.

8

I think it is very unprofessional and unwise for a TD to try and litigate a dispute between himself and the Chief TD in the USCF Forums.

9

Perhaps I do not know what the word “litigate” means.

Alex Relyea

10

I wasn’t there, but it seems highly likely that the handshake did not represent a meeting of the minds. X might have been offering a draw, while Y might have assumed X was resigning. This happens a lot.

In making a ruling, the TD should first determine what each player assumed the handshake meant. If, in fact, one player says it was a draw offer and the other says it was a resignation, then there was, indeed, no meeting of the minds. In that case the only correct ruling would be that the game never ended, and therefore must continue.

At the same time the TD rules that the game must continue, he might also want to warn X (the player who offered the draw by extending his hand) that the proper way to offer a draw is to make his move, state that he is offering a draw, and press the clock, in that order, and without hesitation between the move and the offer, or between the offer and the clock press. Extending one’s hand should never be done as part of a draw offer. The opponent is the one that should extend his hand, if he is accepting the draw offer.

I think some coaches may be to blame for this extend-your-hand behavior. It may seem to the coach that he is fostering good sportsmanship by teaching this practice, but in reality he is causing confusion.

In addition, some players like to game the system by extending their hand in a dead lost position, in order to make their opponents think they are resigning. Then afterwards they claim they were offering a draw and that their opponent accepted. Tsk tsk.

BTW, when offering your hand in resignation, you should also resign explicitly, either by tipping your king or saying you resign. This, too, will help avoid misunderstandings.

And, if your opponent extends his hand in apparent resignation, but says nothing and does not tip his king, you might want to ask him if he is resigning.

As I said, I wasn’t there, but from this distance it seems highly likely that the chief TDs were correct in reversing the original ruling.

Bill Smythe

11

If that’s accurate, it sounds like a draw agreement to me.

12

Concur.

Absent this, this would arguably be a handshake. A handshake, without more, is neither an agreed draw nor a resignation.

13

What we have here is one side of the story. Without hearing the other side any conclusions that might be drawn are meaningless. I concur that simply venting in this forum accomplishes nothing positive.

14

It is, however, a friendly gesture.

Alex Relyea

15

We TDs get trained on the job, sometimes by making mistakes and having our rulings reversed on appeal. Usually there’s a dialogue between the junior TD who ruled and the higher-ranking, more-experienced TD who is handling the appeal. Often this dialogue takes place out of earshot of the players after the appeal TD has gathered info. The ruling and relevant rules get discussed, and the junior TD hears exactly why his ruling was or was not the best one. The junior TD may be chagrined at missing a key point, but he also comes away feeling more knowledgeable.

That’s the ideal, and it did not happen in this instance. It is impossible for us to know how that learning process broke down this time, and it’s not for us to speculate about whose “fault” that was. The takeaway here is to remember what should happen in these instances, whether you’re the junior TD or the appeal TD in the scenario.

16

If the OP is actually looking for advice on how he might better have handled it, it’s important to get immediately to the facts (only). I don’t care what White or Black thinks the rule is. It’s the TD’s job to apply the rules to facts of what happened. It’s possible that Black shook hands thinking White was resigning and then White convinced him that by shaking hands he was agreeing to a draw and that colored his description. OTOH, he might have actually understood that it was a draw offer and now had second thoughts. What you need to ask (to each player) is what is the recollection of what each did.

17

Improper draw offer is more accurate than incorrect draw offer. Note that an improper draw offer may still be accepted.

The real question is whether or not it was accepted, and when it was accepted if it was (“accepting” after the opponent says you already automatically accepted is not necessarily true acceptance).

18

I find it interesting that Black claims to have been a chess teacher for 25 years. As such I would think he would teach his students that if you think your opponent is resigning, then request that the opponent tips over the King. There is nothing confusing or ambiguous about tipping over the King. That is what I would do as a player.

Larry S. Cohen

19

I used to resign simply by stopping the clock and offering my hand (always in clearly resignable positions). I felt that by stopping the clock first it obviously wasn’t a draw offer (one would not have the right to stop the clock). Two or three times my opponents did as recommended and confirmed that I was indeed resigning. That never bothered me. In my opinion no one should be offended by their opponent doing that; only one who really was attempting to pull a fast one might be annoyed.

Eventually, however, I did decide to eliminate all confusion by tipping the king before offering my hand.

20

Yes once black admitted he had accepted the improperly or incorrectly(his word) offered draw. I immediately reinforced his admission by asking him “YOU are saying YOU think it’s unfair that YOU had to ACCEPT an incorrect draw offer?” Black’s reply “yes”. I quoted him the 14B rule. This should have ended there but black simply became more agitated as he realized he was stuck with the draw. The handshake was never even a consideration since by his own admission he had accepted the draw offer.
It is absolutely paramount to establish all facts as I did do but sometimes it turns out badly with a player who simply does not want to listen.