Yes, both players will be short one increment.
Bill Smythe
Well, some TDS consider it a serious problem that both players are short one increment with certain clocks. Why is that an issue then while in this situation we are ok with it even though it is one player causing the situation?
“We” are not particularly OK with it – that’s why I prefer, if my opponent neglects to press his clock, to make my move, then press his clock, then press my clock.
Anybody who is OK with just going ahead and moving, without a clock press by either player, should keep in mind that both players are losing one increment period.
Bill Smythe
I’m well aware of that, and I’m still OK with it. I have explained why in a previous post. As for the other situation alluded to (whether or not the increment is in effect before the first move), I also regard that as a tempest in a teapot. In any time control long enough to be worth playing, 30 seconds more or less for the entire game is not going to make a significant difference.
Well, it’s OK to be OK with it (going ahead and moving without a clock press by either player), but it might not always be in your best interest.
Suppose you had 7 seconds left when you made your previous move. You then had (and still have) 37 seconds left after you pressed your clock. Your opponent is forgetting to press his clock, but he still has 10 minutes left.
Wouldn’t you rather somebody (him or you) pressed his clock, so that you would now have 67 seconds left, instead of the 37 you would have by simply moving?
Bill Smythe
The logic changes in time trouble situations. However, for me this is the most hypothetical of hypotheticals. The last time I experienced time trouble was in the 2013 US Open blitz tournament – which was the last time I played blitz, and the last time I ever will. These days, I never play anything shorter than G/90, and I play quickly enough that time trouble simply never happens to me. I don’t like it, and I avoid it like the plague.
Your hypothetical scenario also points out one of the reasons why I really don’t like increment at all (I greatly prefer delay). The very concept of being able to gain time by hitting the clock is distasteful to me, especially in time trouble situations. It’s too much of an easy out, and gives people less incentive to simply avoid time trouble via better time management. Procrastinating perfectionist time trouble addicts are among my pet peeves, and increment just encourages them. If someone is inefficient enough to get into time trouble, let him pay the price. No easy outs.
Some tournaments require the available standard amount of time (for a 60-move game) to be at least a certain number for each player. Failing to hit the clock does not change that standard time available, it only changes the amount of time the players have opted to have available. Vaguely analogous to players arriving late and facing a time reduction.
This is among the reasons why, almost invariably, I allow the clock to run when faced with this situation.
That said, after any measurable amount of time greater than zero, it is reasonable to presume there will not be a claim, and in the unlikely event the presumption is incorrect, it can be remedied by an intervention that is no more invasive than the correction of a clock or move counter.
You’re the one I very highly respect, by the way . . .
Also a reasonable approach.
I am not OK with it in any context.
Correct timekeeping in chess requires the clock to be operated properly. Ideally the players will be the ones to operate their individual clocks properly. When that doesn’t happen, it is ideal if the opponent or arbiter makes the correction.
This is a red herring for several reasons. To make the above hypothetical more concrete, let’s assume that the “you” above is playing Black, there is an extra 30 minutes added at move 40, and that White has just determined but not completed his 35th move. If it makes us happy, we can assume White determined his move 120 seconds ago.
In the first place, Black has as long as he likes to analyze his 35th move. He loses none of that 37 seconds until White notices or decides to press his clock. Yes, ten minutes is a ridiculously long time in such situations, but if Black needs enough time, he may win on time. There is no chance, in any event, that Black will have less than 37 seconds to make his 36th move.
In the second place, regardless of the above, there is the principle that the player always has the right to press his clock after he determines his move. The only time this is untrue is if the arbiter/TD ends the game first or just decides to restart the clock on his own. This is true regardless of what shenanigans go on between determination and completion. For example, White determines his 35th move and appears to lose interest in completing it. Black analyzes the position for either fifteen seconds or five minutes (the former if you wish to argue that he should have at least 52 seconds for move 36) and then pre-moves, that is he determines his 35th move even though White has not completed his 35th. Note that Black is physically incapable of completing his 35th move at this time because he can not stop his clock and start White’s because White’s is already running. Now let’s further suppose that White is incurious as to why Black either didn’t ineffectively press his clock or why nothing happened when he did. Instead White thinks for 90 seconds about how to respond to Black’s 35th “move”. At the end of the 90 seconds, White determines his 36th move and we’ll assume he presses his clock, but we can add as many iterations as necessary. White has just completed his 35th move. Now Black is free to complete his 35th move by immediately pressing the clock. White may be confused as to what happened, and if Black can’t explain very quietly and briefly then it will be best to summon the arbiter/TD so that White can understand what has happened. At this point, of course, White is free to complete his 36th move after which Black will consider how to determine his 36th and we can let them let back to their game with the correct amount of increment time added and any move counter being correct.
It’s problematic because any action taken between White’s determination and completion of a move could, and likely should, be considered annoying behavior. Making sure Black has White’s attention and then gesturing towards the clock, oral cues about pressing the clock, even reaching his hand into the space above the board, picking up one or more men, and replacing them on different squares are almost certainly a distraction, though I would not penalize Black for any of them. The first two are actions against interest with clearly no purpose other than to benefit White, and the third could easily be done out of ignorance that he was not on move.
I will say that any claim that “my opponent completed my move for me”, even if not in those words, will be considered extremely favorably by me, and any claim that “White was taking too long to complete his move so I had to reach over and press his clock” should be punished.
Alex Relyea
I would be very hesitant about pressing my opponents clock in this situation.
Has anyone ever witnessed a situation where a player tried to remind their opponent to press their clock several times (visually and/or verbally) but the opponent still didn’t press their clock? I’ve never seen it happen as a player or TD and I think it would be extremely rare. I think it’s better to have a general policy that you should not press your opponents clock for them and instead either 1) simply remind them to press their clock either visually, verbally, or both (if they aren’t present at the board when you notice they have forgotten to press their clock, wait until they return to the board to remind them to press their clock) or 2) simply wait for the opponent to remember to press their clock.
I currently like the following for the TD Tip:
TD Tip: If a player forgets to press their clock, the opponent may remind the player to press their clock visually or verbally but are not obligated to do so and can simply wait for the opponent to remember to press their clock. Flagging after forgetting to press the clock is a legitimate loss on time. A player should not press the opponents side of the clock for them in this situation.
How is this a TD tip?
Alex Relyea
As has been stated many times before, there are “TD Tips” in the rulebook that aren’t strictly TD Tips. Maybe using the word “Tip” would be better than “TD Tip” but who cares. However, this is a good tip for TD’s in how to respond when asked about what happens if a player forgets to press their clock.
Covered in 1B1. Notification and/or 1B2. Major variations.
How is this covered in 1B1 or 1B2? I don’t see it as a variation on the rules.
Still curious how this would be a variation on the rules.