Rule differences between OTB US Chess regular and blitz

I created a document explaining the rule differences between OTB US Chess regular and blitz, pdxchess.org/wp-content/uploads/ … -rules.pdf. Did I get everything correct? One thing i didn’t include was the blitz rule “If the king and queen are set up incorrectly, it is legal to castle short on the queenside and long on the kingside.” since there are differing opinions as to whether this rule exists in regular chess.

I wonder if the rule that states all rounds in a blitz tournament must use the same time control should be eliminated. If an organizer wants to have different rounds at different blitz time controls and players want to play in them, why not let them? Most blitz tournaments are just for fun.

I wonder if the blitz rule that states the standard blitz time control is G/5;d0 should be adjusted since it makes it seem like no increment or delay is recommended in blitz but two seconds of increment or delay is recommended in blitz. Perhaps it would be better to say that the standard for blitz is to have a “total playing time” of five minutes.

I wonder if the blitz rule that states an analog clock is preferred over a digital clock that can’t be set to continue to run when one player runs out of time should be eliminated since the inaccuracies of analog clocks are an issue a lot more often.

I wonder if the blitz rules should state scorekeeping is not required.

I’m not sure what the point is of having the regular and blitz rules differ on what constitutes sufficient mating material in order to be able to win on time.

If it’s a round robin, that rule kind-of-sort-of makes a certain amount of sense, since in general you won’t have “easy” pairings in the early rounds and “hard” pairings in later rounds the way you would in a Swiss.

But it should be a “round robin rule” rather than a blitz rule. That way, it would apply to all-round-robins-regardless-of-time-control rather than to all-blitz-events-regardless-of-tournament-type.

It should also be permissible to have different controls in a Holland tournament. The qualifying round-robins could be played at a faster control, and the final round-robin(s) slower.

It certainly should. In fact, it’s long overdue. G/3 inc/2 has long since been the international standard. USA organizers should be prodded to follow suit.

Absolutely. Many blitz events are already run at G/3 inc/2 using organizer-supplied DGT North American clocks, which always halt-at-end in increment mode. At the very least “if possible” should be added to the requirement that clocks be set not to halt-at-end.

(Actually, the best idea IMHO is to have the clock continue to run, but to display which player flagged first. This would be compatible with either a rule set that says first-flag-loses, or with a rule set that says both-flags-draws.)

This is a problem with quick rules too. It seems that somewhere between the 5th and 7th editions this quick rule was dropped inadvertently, and replaced with just a TD Tip to that effect.

The definition of “mating material” is a thorny buffalo to begin with. I like the idea of declaring a dead position an automatic draw (of course), and allowing arbiter discretion in awarding draws in “almost dead” positions.

Bill Smythe

This is what the Xflyee clock always does and I mentioned this is my review of it, chess.com/forum/view/chess- … hess-clock.

So did I get all of the differences between OTB regular and blitz correct? US Chess should feel free to post my document on its website as a resource for players and TD’s.

Some people prefer G/3;inc2 and some people prefer G/5;d0. This is why I proposed saying that the “standard” for blitz is to have a “total playing time” of five minutes per player.

For G/3;inc2, a digital clock with increment (or delay) capability would be preferred over an analog clock due to the digital clocks ability to be set for the actual time control (or being able to substitute delay for increment). The intent of this rule is that for blitz time controls with no increment or delay, an analog clock would be preferred over a digital clock that can’t be set to continue to run when one player runs out of time. However, I think this should be eliminated since the inaccuracies of analog clocks are an issue a lot more often.

True, but what’s the point in having a difference in what constitutes sufficient mating material to win on time in regular and blitz?

I think my document on the differences between OTB US Chess regular and blitz rules would be a nice resource for players and TD’s. How can we get it posted on the US Chess site so people who don’t visit the forums can see it?

Hi Micah,

If it is something you feel the TD community would benefit from then please email the information to tdcert-group@uschess.org. As a US Chess staff member, I don’t get to visit these forums. As a US Chess member, I get to visit once every blue moon in my free time.

Thanks, I will do that!

Chris, thanks a lot for helping to get my document posted on the US Chess website, new.uschess.org/tournament-directors.

Under US Chess over-the-board rules, regular and blitz have a difference as to what constitutes sufficient mating material to win on time.

Therefore, for online platforms that are following US Chess rules, should online regular be the same as OTB regular and online blitz be the same as OTB blitz play as to what constitutes sufficient mating material to win on time?

Which on-line platforms follow US Chess or FIDE rules for mating material?

I know that Chess.com does not follow either (it checks to see if the unflagged player’s material is enough to checkmate a lone king and that is it - sacrificing to get a forced mate in two with only a K+N left to you means the opponent simply lets the flag fall before that second move and gets a draw).

Checking to see if there is a forced mate (US Chess for K+N or K+B) or a possible helpmate (FIDE) is not done by them. For that matter it also doesn’t check for blocked positions with checkmate impossible (such as White Ke1, Pa4, Pc4, Pf4, Ph4 and Black Ke8, Pa5, Pc5, Pf5, Ph5) and they can still be won on time at Chess.com.

Nah, just get rid of the differences to begin with.

Bill Smythe

True, although I brought this up years ago but no delegate has submitted an ADM on it, viewtopic.php?f=5&t=23475&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=King+rwo+knights

Under US Chess over-the-board rules, regular and blitz have a difference as to what constitutes sufficient mating material to win on time.

I guess it’s not different (and thus I have deleted this from my document) due to the following:

The blitz rules state that a game is won by a player “7c.) Who correctly points out that the opponent’s flag has fallen first, at any time before the game is otherwise ended, provided the player has mating material. Mating Material consists of (at a minimum) two minor pieces, a pawn, a rook, or a queen provided it isn’t a position where one could claim a draw under rule 8.”

I guess the statement “provided it isn’t a position where one could claim a draw under rule 8” would mean that the K+N+N provision from rule 14E3 would apply and be considered insufficient mating material in blitz. This seems like a very clunky way to try and explain all of this.

I’ve also updated my document to add that scorekeeping is now required for every move if there is a delay of 30+ in regular and I also clarified a few other things.