Prohibiting unusual chess sets

Running Chess Tournaments
1

It’s like this:

 My son recently attended a non-rated scholastic tournament where everyone had to provide their own chess sets.  As it turned out, several students brought their glass chess sets.  

 After losing one game because he couldn't figure out what piece was which, the next time he was faced with it he demanded another set be substituted, and it was.

 But can't a TD at least announce that certain sets are prohibited, or that unusual sets (like a football set) not be used?  Or would it be possible, maybe through USCF, to have it stated that sets that don't meet certain criteria are not going to be used in tournaments?

 I know these glass sets are pretty, and I guess many parents buy them for their kids because I've seen more of those than I have regular sets on sale at the local store.  But I wish they'd understand that they aren't very good for tournament play.

Radishes

2

Radishes,

I guess you are not a TD… The USCF has already determined what is standard equipment. See Section 4 of the USCF Rule Book. If you do not have one, I strongly suggest you, and any other player, get one. Even in an unrated tournament, I would encourage a TD to apply the same rules.

3

40A. Material. Pieces should be made of plastic, wood, or posibly a material similar in appearance.

40B. Size. The king’s height should be 3 3/8 to 4 1/2 inches. The cross should occupy no more than 20 percent of the total height of the king. The diameter of the king’s base should be 40 - 50 percent of the height. The other pieces should be proportional in height and form. All pieces should be well balanced for stability and comfortable moving.

40D. Color. Pieces should be the colors of naturally light and dark wood or approximations of these colors, such as simple white and black.

39A3. Non-USCF play. For non-tournament or non-USCF-rated play against opponents not used to popular tournament sets or boards, equipment differing somewhat from these standards is likely to be acceptable.

Do understand there is a problem with non-rated scholastic tournaments with non-standard equipment. Even if it was a rated tournament, it is up to one of the players to make a claim of the set not being standard equipment. In most case it is white that makes the claim, as black has the right to use whatever standard set they want, if the organizer does not provide standard equipment.

The director has very little power under rule 40, and rule 41: if both players agree to the non-standard equipment. As your son did not make a claim that the glass set was non-standard equipment for the first game: the director has no empowerment to force both players to play with non-standard equipment. During the second game, your son used his rights to make a claim that the glass set was non-standard. Have looked and been around the type of ‘glass set’ you are talking about, it is clear it does not meet the standards under rule 40A, rule 40B and rule 40D. The director did remove the set from the board, and set up the standard equipment.

If for example, WGM Anna Zatonskih (person I have meet 3 times and talked with) and WIM Jennifer Shahade came to my tournament, during the tournament they are paired against each other. If they want to play with a non-standard equipment, there is nothing as a director I can do to stop them. The Official Rules of Chess give me no right to force the players to use standard equipment. There is a rule on page 223 - 224 of this once sentence; “The director is the final arbiter of whether the equipment in question is standard.” The word to look for is arbiter, as the director cannot make the claim and also be the arbiter at the same time. The director and the spectators, as parents are the spectators in any tournament, have no claim on what is or is not standard equipment.

If one of the players makes a claim, as only the players on the board can make a claim: then the director will have the right to make a judgement, and the final judgement on standard equipment will be the director. The director was not in error if players use non-standard equipment, as only the director can make a judgement if one of the players at the board makes a claim.

4

BTW, this being a non-rated event, the TD really has nothing to say!

Regards,
AJG

5

Even if it is non-rated or even if it is rated. It is up to the director, if the director wants to be pro-active. The director could provide a set and board to make it standard equipment. There is nothing in the rules to force two players on the same board too use standard equipment other then a chess clock; only if the director demands to use the directors own board and set on the players board.

If the black player has a non-standard chess set, and the white player has a standard chess set. If the white player does not object to the black players non-standard chess set, the director has nothing to force the black players right to set and board without the objection of the white player. The director cannot take the black players right to set and board, and force the white player too use the white players set and board, if and only if the white player not making a objection to the black players set and board. The director can take away the black players right too set and board, only if the director provides a standard set and board.

There is nothing in the rules to give as a penalty, for the players that wish to use non-standard equipment as in non-standard set and as non-standard board. The director can give a penalty, for not having standard chess clock at the board. But the clock is not the issue in this debate, the chess set is the issue of this debate.

6

The TD has EVERYTHING to say about how his tournament will be ran, be it a rated or unrated event.

You’ve just made it an issue. How is the clock any different from sets and boards as they relate to standard equipment/penalties, etc? Where, in the rulebook, does it say that a TD/organizer has to require clocks at all? Absent that, I see no penalty. The rulebook simply states that should clocks be required at a chess tournament, there are certain standards a player may request of the TD. Unless the TD/Organizer requires otherwise, the players could use hour-glass timers if they agreed to it!

7

Hmmm…

Actually, Doug hit on what I was talking about when he quoted Rule 39A3.

Since that rule says “equipment differing somewhat from these standards is acceptable.” it seems to me it allows the TD to accept whatever walks in the door, if the tournament is non-rated and non-USCF, as this was. That is, if he wants to. But it leaves a wide door open as to how different the sets have to be before they are rejected. Anyone could argue that these glass sets had easily distinguishable pieces, and that a player would be able to adjust to the difference.

And based on that, should a TD make such an announcement in his advertising beforehand about his policy of non-standard sets?

Luckily this wasn’t a big tournament, and enough players knew enough to bring their regular sets that substitutions could be made. But what would happen if this had been a large, scholastic tournament?

I should note that many who played in this tournament were most likely first-time players, although this waasn’t a beginner’s tournament, just an unrated scholastic one.

Radishes

8

Terry:

When talking about having the clock, or in that matter penalties there are huge sections of the “Official Rules of Chess” that deal with the chess clock. There are pentalties for the defective chess clock, that the director on the directors own free will has the right to change the clock.

Have noticed in the years of tournament play, that a director looking at the board and see the clock is not running. Would pick up the clock and wind the clock, then place it back onto the board. One time it was a G/30, the players started their clock at 5:00PM, the director picked up the clock and put 30 more minutes onto both clocks – so the flag would fall at 6:00PM. The players did not ask the director to do this, the directors did this on there own. The director was a witness to the defective clock, the director would fix the defective clock or even replace the clock if it cannot be fixed.

Been to a number of tournaments, like the site in Ann Arbor were the organizers do provide sets for the scholastic tournaments. Have noticed that one board has the club special, with a piece from a different design. If the players do not object to this different type of piece then what can the director do: nothing the director can do. We have looked at broken pieces, looked at very used and old sets. We have looked at stained and cut boards. As directors we can make our own claim that some broken sets and cut boards are no longer standard equipment, as they now defective sets and defective boards.

Is not fixing the error of the defective clock a penality to the owner of the defective clock; is not the removal of the defective clock from the board and replacement not a penality to the owner of the clock. Directors have been doing this for years, if they on there own noticed a error in the clock.

If the kings cross is broken from a King that would have been 3 3/8 if the Kings cross was on the king. As the King without the cross now is less then 3 3/8, that would be a set that is less then the standard size in kings height of 3 3/8 to 4 1/2 inches. Now this set is non-standard as the Kings height is less then the standard size. This set is now a defective set, but the director has no free way to replace the set.

The director can replace the clock if it is defective, and telling the owner of the clock that the batteries are dead and find a new clock. The only pentality is not having the owner of the clock use their clock. If the cross on the Kings are broken and make the Kings stand less then 3 3/8 inches, the director cannot tell the owner of the set they cannot use such set as now being non-standard. Unless the other player makes a claim not the director making a claim, the director cannot take the rights of the owner of the set and there being no pentality.

9

I haven’t seen a major point that hasn’t been brought up. This set may have been used because no other ones were available. I’m sure they would play with salt and pepper shakers if needed.

Sometimes you have to do the best with what you have. Yea it sucks to play on a Simpson’s Chess set, but it’s better than waiting until games are done for the 10 other kids to play on a standard set, which could delay the tournament, etc.

10

39A3. Non-USCF play. For non-tournament or non-USCF-rated play against opponents not used to popular tournament sets or boards, equipment differing somewhat from these standards is likely to be acceptable.

This is the reason for rule 39A3. Even that anything in the ‘Official Rules of Chess’ does not need to be used during a non-USCF tournament, it does give as a guide to the directors and the players that cross over from one type of tournament to the next.

Non-rated scholastic tournaments, most of the time the parents only have one type of board and set for their child. Having a child in the K-3 grade level, the 3 3/8 set is a little big for most of the players. Most of the problems with non-standard sets would be the size of the set not so much the design of the set. Except for the glass chess set, do not see that many novility chess sets under 3 3/8 inches.

The last time being at a scholastic tournament: it was rated; someone did have a nice Drueke wood board and the set was a club special – the board and set did not match but were standard equipment. Scholastic players in general do bring in standard equipment, as the first rule of any chess coach is informing the parents and the students what is and is not standard equipment.

The chess coach needs to be pro-active to informing the parents and students of standard equipment. The parents need to be pro-active on teaching their child what is and is not standard equipment. The director needs to have a number of sets and boards, in the case the board in question does not have any standard equipment. As the director can remove the non-standard equipment if and only if the director can provide set and board, as the directors personal set and board as standard equipment. As the director cannot force the black player to give up rights to use set and board, and force the white player to use the white players own personal set and board.

As it was a non-rated scholastic tournament, we cannot blame the parents for not knowing what is and is not non-standard equipment. We cannot blame them for not even knowing the USCF is the official chess organization of the United States; so how can we blame the parents and scholastic players for not knowing the ‘Official Rules of Chess’. Most of these scholastic players learned the rules of chess, on that one sheet of paper when their parents bought them that non-standard set. They are not going to place any claim that there set and board is non-standard for tournament play.

The error was on the director more then the parents and the scholastic players, when it is over the issue of non-standard equipment. The director should have had some personal sets and boards in the case the board did have non-standard equipment. With the rule 39A3, it does give the director a way out of the problem. It would be asking the director to have a number of sets and boards in the case there are non-standard equipment. It would be like a judge finding you guilty of a speeding ticket and the judge would pay you’re fine.

Some of these non-rated scholastic tournaments are being directored by the ‘scholastic chess coach’ or a ‘official USCF scholastic chess coach’. If it was under a scholastic chess coach being the director, then the total error is in the camp of the scholastic chess coach being the director. A scholastic chess coach needs to be more pro-active to inform the students and the parents. Any director, and scholastic chess coach must understand what can happen at a tournament. If the scholastic chess coach cannot think of the problem of the non-standard equipment for one or any of the students when the students plays in any tournament. If the scholastic chess coach and the scholastic chess coach being the director, not knowing the player that is the owner of the non-standard equipment and being the student of the scholastic chess coach – then we know who caused the problem.When dealing with the case of the ‘glass chess set’ not knowing who the director was or in that fact if the director is a scholastic chess coach.

11

First we provide all the chess sets and boards at all of our tournaments (4-5 annual scholastic events). Everybody, including the un-rated sections, plays with the same equipment. We also sell these “club special” sets for $15 (Board, Bag, Pieces and Scorebook) at the event. Since we buy in bulk and aren’t making a profit we can offer these sets cheaper than they can be bought individually. Parents snatch them up and we usually sell 20-30 sets at each tourney. By putting standard sets in the hands of players at a reasonable price encourages their use. We strongly encourage keeping score in all sections higher that K-3. We provide scoresheets and pencils too!

We have also purchased 16 BHB clocks for use at our tournaments since there are a lot of players who don’t have them. We place clocks of boards that don’t have them, working from the top down.

Keith
President & TD
Winston-Salem Scholastic Chess Association, Inc.
wschess.org

12

President & TD of the Winston-Salem Scholastic Chess Association, Inc; very glad that you’re so pro-active with you’re scholastic tournaments.

13

In our club and in a local tournament, I have seen players bring out red and black chess sets. Call me a fussbudget, but as a player, I would object to having to red pieces as the light pieces because I would probably waste time during the game obsessing, “Why are these light pieces red?”. Rule 40D as Doug cited talks of naturally light colored wood. To me, red is not a light colored wooden color albeit my deck is stained a redwood color. The darker reds could be mistaken for the black pieces in bad light and the lighter reds have a distracting psychedelic alarm, like blood, fire trucks, and red stop lights.

14

My idea is this, if the USCF sell sets that are standard equipment other then the problem with color – with rule 40D of the rule book. Having mixed feelings of the USCF selling red chess sets, with it being red for the black pieces.

As the 5th edition does make it clear, red and white chess boards are now non-standard equipment. The USCF does not sell any red chess boards, as they are now non-standard: the federation has taken off the market the red chess board. There has been a rush to market the push for different types of chess sets, with the color for black being red.

The USCF has never made a statement in the USCF website or the USCF catalog, that the red sets are non-standard or standard equipment. If the red sets the USCF sells are standard equipment, without the warning the owner would feel the sets are standard equipment. As it is a little unclear how rule 40D would be used when the federation is selling what is non-standard or standard.

The TDCC needs to take this issue up on how a director should rule with the red chess sets. As the USCF sales department withdrawn and stop markerting red chess boards: as the 5th edition did make it clear they are non-standard equipment. The TDCC and the USCF sales department need to work out a final claim on the issue of red chess sets. The red chess sets should not be a case by case issue with each and every director. That leadership is in the hands of the TDCC, at this time there is a void on this one issue.

15

Doug,

Um…The TDCC deals with certification. The Rules Committee deals with rules. The red set issue is a rules issue.

To get the Rules Committee to comment on this you might try e-mailing the chair.

Tim Just
TDCC Chair

16

I stand corrected!

17

Now here’s another one for you.

At another non-rated scholastic tournament, where the TD was a USCF local TD, one student had regulation pieces but a non-regulation sized board. The pieces didn’t have the proper amount of spacing around their base (probably no more than 1/8th inch) and the board itself was smaller by about 1/2 inch to an inch all away around. Otherwise all colors were standard on pieces and the board.

My student complained because the board looked too crowded to him. The TD said it was regulation and he could play on it. When I questioned it, I was told they bought it from USCF. I replied that it looked like the board came from the analysis set USCF sells. Didn’t make any difference, the TD would not change it.

The student went ahead and played on it and lost that game. Played on it a second time and won. But it still bothered me the TD didn’t seem to recognize the board was smaller than any of the other boards that were being used in the tournament.

Radishes

18

This is a test too see if the set and board are standard to each other. Take 4 pawns and place them on the same square, have the pawns meet each other at two a breast with two ranks – the pawns should meet at the corner of the square. If the pawns cover up the corner of the square, then the set is too large for the board; if the pawns do not even meet at the corner of the square, then the board is too large for the set. If the pawns do meet at the corner of the square, and does not over lap much or show little of the corner of the square – then the set and board are standard too each other.

This would be the only test as a director, or only test as a person wishing to purchase a set and board, for seeing if the board and set are standard too each other. Other factors too reject a set and board as a person wishing to be a purchaser, or as a director asked to make a judgement call – would have too study the other factors.

For the case that Radishes pointer out, the director should have not looked at the board and set and say they are standard to each other. It is the directors rights to make any judgement call they feel is just. Will not say the director was in error or just on the judgement call.

19

This is a good idea, but it doesn’t address the issue of a player who goes to a tournament where the players are asked to bring their own sets because the organizers don’t have them. Then you get players who bring their own sets that may or may not follow the guidelines of USCF.

Since I first posted this question, I checked the USCF rulebook, and noted that I could have had the TD toss out the glass sets, based on the rule that says boards have to be made of an opaque material. That alone should have been enough to have them tossed, and that’s what I wanted.

Radishes

20

It is up too the players, one of the players must object too the use of the ‘glass set’. In the tournament that you’re son was in, it would have been you’re son, not a parent or spectator having any rights to the equipment being used.

20M5. Spectators cannot make claims. Spectators, including parents and coaches, may point out irregularities to the director in a manner neither heard nor noticed by the players, but have no right to make claims of any kind on behalf of players. If a problem arises during play, a player of any age should understand that he or she should promptly stop both clocks and see a director. A spectator who makes a claim may be ejected. Official Rules of Chess, 5th edition, page 86

You could point out the problem of the ‘glass set’ too the director. It would be up too the director to have a set and board with standard equipment, if the director does have standard equipment to replace non-standard equipment – that is the directors personal equipment. As you’re son did not make the claim, the director cannot force you’re son to use personal equipment as the standard equipment on that board, then rejecting the other players rights too their non-standard equipment. If the director does not have standard equipment, too replace non-standard equipment – the non-standard equipment would be used.

If the director informs you’re son without having standard equipment, the director would be in error: the director would be informing of a rule without a player making a claim. The director cannot interven in a game that has started, when it is about non-standard equipment. If the players have started the game, the director cannot interven into the game about the non-standard equipment without a claim of one of the players. If the players have not started the game, the director before the first move can replace the non-standard equipment with standard equipment that the director has ownership of the equipement. If the director informs the players that the equipment is non-standard before the start of the game, without having standard equipment too be used on the board – the director would be intervening without any rights. As the player would know that the other players equipment is non-standard, then could make a claim.