Rule 13C5 (Making a time forfeit claim)

[kevingong]

Here’s the scenario (I didn’t witness this, but this is the gist of what happened):

With a TD watching, players A and B are playing. Player B runs out of time. Player A correctly says that player B ran out of time. Player B ignores him and keeps playing. Player A again says that player B ran out of time. TD says the game is over and records the result. Player B later claims that this was interference by the TD.

Question: is simply stating that your opponent ran out of time a valid claim? Rule 13C5 states “To claim a win by time forfeit, a player should stop both clocks…” It doesn’t say “must”, so I don’t know if that’s actually a requirement.

I suppose you could argue that the opponent did not accept the claim since he entirely ignored it, but the TD was right there.

What should the TD have done in this case?

[brennanprice]

@kevingong

Here’s the scenario (I didn’t witness this, but this is the gist of what happened):

With a TD watching, players A and B are playing. Player B runs out of time. Player A correctly says that player B ran out of time. Player B ignores him and keeps playing. Player A again says that player B ran out of time. TD says the game is over and records the result. Player B later claims that this was interference by the TD.

Question: is simply stating that your opponent ran out of time a valid claim? Rule 13C5 states “To claim a win by time forfeit, a player should stop both clocks…” It doesn’t say “must”, so I don’t know if that’s actually a requirement.

I suppose you could argue that the opponent did not accept the claim since he entirely ignored it, but the TD was right there.

What should the TD have done in this case?

The reason the claiming player “should” stop both clocks is to ensure that his flag (physical or virtual) remains up. With the TD as witness, this becomes unnecessary.

A has made a proper claim and wins. B’s suggestion of TD interference is not well taken.

[timjust]

@brennanprice

@kevingong

Here’s the scenario (I didn’t witness this, but this is the gist of what happened):

With a TD watching, players A and B are playing. Player B runs out of time. Player A correctly says that player B ran out of time. Player B ignores him and keeps playing. Player A again says that player B ran out of time. TD says the game is over and records the result. Player B later claims that this was interference by the TD.

Question: is simply stating that your opponent ran out of time a valid claim? Rule 13C5 states “To claim a win by time forfeit, a player should stop both clocks…” It doesn’t say “must”, so I don’t know if that’s actually a requirement.

I suppose you could argue that the opponent did not accept the claim since he entirely ignored it, but the TD was right there.

What should the TD have done in this case?

The reason the claiming player “should” stop both clocks is to ensure that his flag (physical or virtual) remains up. With the TD as witness, this becomes unnecessary.

A has made a proper claim and wins. B’s suggestion of TD interference is not well taken.

Perhaps B should file an appeal with USCF. Examples of frivolous complaints when USCF keeps the $25 good faith deposit are always welcome.

[Smythe_Dakota]

@kevingong

… Player B later claims that this was interference by the TD. …

Bullfeathers. This “interference” was requested by one of the players.

The advice for the claimant to stop both clocks is there to try to ensure that the claimant’s flag will not fall also.

@Tim Just

… Perhaps B should file an appeal with USCF. Examples of frivolous complaints when USCF keeps the $25 good faith deposit are always welcome.

Bill Smythe

[kevin_bachler]

@Smythe Dakota

Bullfeathers.

Careful! Bill is pulling out the harsh language now!