rules recourse question

[dmn10]

Hi,

Hoping someone can help me here.

I ran into an unfortunate situation yesterday, and I’m pretty sure I have no recourse now, but I would like to know what happens if I run into this again in the future.

Last round game of a tournament with a decent amount of prize money at stake, as well as pride, rating points and a personal goal and other things that we play chess for.

Playing a kid, who is using his scoresheet as an analysis board. Routinely writing moves, erasing them, in some cases writing 3 candidate moves down or more.

At the 4th erasure in, i go to the section td, who is mid game, and ask the section TD to let the kid know it’s illegal. His response is, “I think it’s ok, I have to go check”. He comes back 4 minutes later and tells me it’s legal and I’m in the wrong.

At this point I go on massive tilt, because I have read these forums and know about rule 15a and 20c and how they work in conjunction.

I, to my own discredit, am not playing my best, and clearly bothered. I start looking at his score sheet (if he’s going to write down his moves before playing them why not!), and effectively blunder when the move he writes down is not the move he plays because i was blitzing moves based on his writing.

I know i dont have recourse for the paragraph i just wrote, but what about above? If the TD tells me I’m wrong, when I know the rule is in my favor, what can i do? I don’t want to start a scene as there are dozens of other games going on all with similar stakes.

Anyway, what could I do differently next time? Ex post facto the head TD (a GREAT guy, and a very strong player) admitted he didn’t know the rule.

I realize emotionally I have to handle it better and not start playing like crap, and that’s going to be a personal challenge for me to overcome, but from a rules standpoint what should I have done differently?

(Edited to clarify which td I went to).

[relyea]

First: I hope you stopped the clock when you went to the TD.

Second: Yes, you can appeal all the way up to the delegates if you want, and the section chief should have informed you of that. Ideally, you would have appealed to the tournament chief, and if he had ruled against you, asked to appeal to a special referee. An appeals committee is also possible, but given the circumstances you’ve described, probably not the correct choice. If the special referee also ruled against you, your next step is to take it to the office, who would probably take a $25 deposit and then hand it over to the rules committee. Note, however, if the special referee ruled against you, you’re probably wrong. Also, note that if you were to move after this, you are giving up your right to appeal, at least until your opponent made use of his notes again.

Third: Yes, it is too late now.

Alex Relyea

[wzim]

In the future if you could show the TD where in the rulebook you believe your view is supported it might help some. Of course in the heat of the moment that isn’t always possible. But you do see some TDs in the forum using that as their method, by saying you show me where it says that in the rule book etc.

[dmn10]

Thank you both for the advice

I was on mega-tilt and didn’t stop the clock or do anything correctly. I didn’t realize i’d have to appeal all the way up before making my next move and didnt want to make a scene or be that guy, but maybe I should have been that guy.

I guess there’s also the perception if you do that, even (or especially) if you’re proven right, you’re the problematic player that isn’t welcomed with open arms, but I’ve now been cheated twice in my career, once by a clever old guy who moved a rook as a knight in a lost position while I was grabbing water and I missed it until after I put the game into Fritz.

This one though feels worse and might bother me for weeks, because it was happening, I knew it was happening, and wasn’t able to stop it because I didn’t know the exact steps to take. It’s probably the first time I wasn’t graceful in defeat, simply tipping my king over, picking up my stuff quietly (forgetting my scoresheets from that day which I instantly regretted), and just exiting the premises in a silent rage.

I don’t know if they had a rulebook on them, but I might have to start bringing one with the pdf update to tournaments.

It was a completely depressing way to end a weekend for sure, and I’m more mad at myself for knowing the rules but not knowing the right protocol, and then completely compounding my error, by letting it bother me and playing worse than I would normally play.

[relyea]

At my last tournament in a money game, one player insisted that his opponent remove his headphones. I ruled that he was right to so insist, but the opponent was very rattled by this, as it was the first time it had come up in his career. I informed him of his right to appeal to a special referee (I was chief TD), but that he would lose. I spent about half an hour convincing the opponent to play the game and not give the player a forfeit win. It is all part of the job.

Rarely have I had a tournament in which someone doesn’t come to me for a ruling. A former member of the EB has said that “SwissSys is the TD.” I think you’ll find that most TDs take their jobs more seriously than that.

Alex Relyea

[brennanprice]

Rule of thumb: always appeal during the game.

I am not certain your appeal would have been successful. The rulebook contains this variation to Rule 15A, which need not be announced in advance, and states only that TDs “may” penalize the behavior you describe:

15A. (Variation I) Paper scoresheet variation.

The player using a paper scoresheet may first make the move, and then write it on the
scoresheet, or vice versa. This variation does not need to be advertised in advance. The
scoresheet shall be visible to the arbiter (tournament directors) and the opponent throughout
the game.

TD TIP: TDs may penalize a player that is in violation of 20C. “Use of notes prohibited” if the
player is first writing the move and repeatedly altering that move on their scoresheet before
completing a move on the board.

“May” is legalese for “doesn’t have to.”

The practice you describe used to be widely taught in scholastic circles, and may still be (I don’t run in those circles). An effort to conform to the (in this case, well reasoned) FIDE rule (move, punch, then and only then write, unless you’re making a claim that requires writing first) was rebuffed by the tail that wags the dog; thus this variation that need not be announced.

Now, in my events, the standard Rule 15A is universally applied, and I have instructed players to move before writing. Because this practice is so widespread, I have never penalized beyond corrective instruction, but that’s only because I’ve never had to give corrective instruction to the same player n+1 times, where n is some integer greater than 1 and less than infinity, which I won’t know until I reach it, which I hope never to do.

But I don’t run everything, and that’s a good thing.

[Bob_McAdams]

@dmn10

I don’t know if they had a rulebook on them, but I might have to start bringing one with the pdf update to tournaments.

You, as a player, have the right to expect that the TD will have the USCF rulebook on the premises and available for consultation (see chapter 5 of the rulebook, right #3).

Bob

[DENTONCHESS]

I advise my students who are not using electronic notation devices to go through a priority check,
then write their moves, and then go through the priority check again before they move. This is legal.
They are not using the scoresheet in this incidence as a tool to analyze. Now, if they have candidate
A, B, and C, well this is another story.

Rob Jones

[nolan]

They are not using the scoresheet in this incidence as a tool to analyze.

If there is any significant delay between when they write the move and when they make it on the board, their opponents might disagree with your conclusion, as might a TD who observes that delay repeatedly. (I’m not saying I agree with the way the rule is written, but that is how I might have to interpret it.)

[brennanprice]

@DENTONCHESS

I advise my students who are not using electronic notation devices to go through a priority check,
then write their moves, and then go through the priority check again before they move. This is legal.

Using the standard, non-variation Rule 15A, no, it most assuredly isn’t. But since the variation is allowed without any advance publicity, it’s legal by virtue of people quietly making it legal.

[timjust]

You should file a complaint. 15A has a variation for paper scoresheets only, not electronic ones. All other scoresheets have to abide by the rule of making the move first.

[relyea]

@Tim Just

You should file a complaint. 15A has a variation for paper scoresheets only, not electronic ones. All other scoresheets have to abide by the rule of making the move first.

Also, that variation is not allowed in FIDE-rated sections.

Alex Relyea

[BobMessenger]

@dmn10

Playing a kid, who is using his scoresheet as an analysis board. Routinely writing moves, erasing them, in some cases writing 3 candidate moves down or more [emphasis added].

If your opponent had three or more candidate moves visible at the same time this would be considered making use of notes, which is a violation of rule 20C. “This is a much less serious offense than 20B [Use of recorded matter prohibited]; a warning or minor time penalty is common, with more serious punishment if the offense is repeated.”

[DENTONCHESS]

@nolan

They are not using the scoresheet in this incidence as a tool to analyze.

If there is any significant delay between when they write the move and when they make it on the board, their opponents might disagree with your conclusion, as might a TD who observes that delay repeatedly. (I’m not saying I agree with the way the rule is written, but that is how I might have to interpret it.)

I think it would be difficult to argue with such an interpretation, not that I would rule it this
way myself.

Rob Jones

[Allen]

@DENTONCHESS

I advise my students who are not using electronic notation devices to go through a priority check,
then write their moves, and then go through the priority check again before they move. This is legal.
They are not using the scoresheet in this incidence as a tool to analyze. Now, if they have candidate
A, B, and C, well this is another story.

Rob Jones

Indeed it is not legal and is a violation of 15A. 15A is not even ambiguous.

[brennanprice]

@BobMessenger

@dmn10

Playing a kid, who is using his scoresheet as an analysis board. Routinely writing moves, erasing them, in some cases writing 3 candidate moves down or more [emphasis added].

If your opponent had three or more candidate moves visible at the same time this would be considered making use of notes, which is a violation of rule 20C. “This is a much less serious offense than 20B [Use of recorded matter prohibited]; a warning or minor time penalty is common, with more serious punishment if the offense is repeated.”

I’m reading Mr. Naylor’s description of the conduct as a write-erase-[repeat 1 to n times]-move cycle on a paper scoresheet, not the writing of multiple candidate moves at once. I tust he will correct me if I am wrong.

The latter is unequivocally notetaking. The former is notetaking if the standard 15A is elected. But if the variation of 15A is elected–and such election need not be announced in advance–a write-erase-repeat-move cycle “may” be construed as notetaking. The word “may” is permissive; it mandates nothing.

Best practice, in my view, is to implement the standard 15A, and this story shows why. But if my understanding of the conduct is correct, and the TD says, “I elected to use the variation to 15A, and I deemed the write-erase-repeat-move cycles not to be penalizable as notetaking,” that ends the inquiry, in my view. The outcome, however unjust, is permitted by the plain language of the Delegates’ decision.

[timjust]

First, the TD Tip to the rule 15A variation:

TD TIP: TDs may penalize a player that is in violation of 20C, Use of notes prohibited if the player is first writing the move and repeatedly altering that move on their scoresheet before completing a move on the board.

And rule 20C:

20C. Use of notes prohibited.
The use of notes made during the game as an aid to memory is forbidden, aside from the actual recording of the moves, draw offers, and clock times, and the header information normally found on a scoresheet. This is a much less serious offense than 20B; a warning or minor time penalty is common, with more severe punishment if the offense is repeated. See also 1C2, Director discretion; 15, The Recording of Games; and 21K, Use of director’s power.

[GeneM]

. .

@brennanprice

The practice you describe used to be widely taught in scholastic circles, and may still be (I don’t run in those circles). An effort to conform to the (in this case, well reasoned) FIDE rule (move, punch, then and only then write, unless you’re making a claim that requires writing first) was rebuffed by the tail that wags the dog; thus this variation that need not be announced.

Now, in my events, the standard Rule 15A is universally applied, and I have instructed players to move before writing.

Good explanation.

@BrennanPrice

Because this practice is so widespread, I have never penalized beyond corrective instruction,

(Or maybe the other way around?..)

Because I have never penalized beyond corrective instruction, this practice is so widespread.
. .

[tmagchesspgh]

I have asked elderly players whose heyday was the 1930’s and even back to the early 1920’s what was the method used with regard to the recording of moves. The response was that moves were recorded first on the scoresheet, the move made, and then the pressing of the clock. That is how they saw the masters of their time conduct the game. In Russian texts (see N. Krogius’, “Chess Psychology”), there was the Blumenfeld rule, which encouraged writing down the move first, doing a basic blunder check, and then making the move on the board. There is a long history for this practice of writing the move down first before playing it.

Scholastic coaches often encourage their impulsive young players to write the move down first to slow them down and make them think a little before they move. When they move first and press the clock, it is common for them to forget to write down their move. The opponent moves, they move, and so on leading to an empty scoresheet as the kids blitz out moves. By making them write down the move first, there is a better chance that at least some semblance of a score will be taken down.

My own preference is to write down the move, make it, and then press the clock. Then I sit back and observe my opponent’s behavior and body language. That gives me clues to his mood, what he thinks about his position, and whether he is nervous. If I write my move down after pressing the clock button, my head will be down and I may miss important visual information about my opponent’s demeanor. Chess, after all, is a game with psychological elements that are useful in decision making. The application of Rule 15 A is damaging to a player’s sporting efforts to win the game and an unnecessary intrusion by the TD into the game.

Is it common to write down a move, erase it, and select another? Of course. The first move that pops into your head may look good, you may believe in it, and then after writing it down you may give the move more thought and take one last look around. Drat! What a dumb move, it loses a rook! Back to the drawing board. What else can I play? When a player is not in form, he may dither over several moves before a final decision. It is his time to spend or waste. A messy scoresheet shows indecisiveness, nerves, and sloppy thinking. I want to see that my opponent is scratching out move after move. That is a useful tidbit to know. If I am doing it, it is a clear indication that I don’t have it today and have to do more work on my game. I am giving clues or tells to my opponent. These tells are a part of the game, too.

[DENTONCHESS]

@tmagchesspgh

I have asked elderly players whose heyday was the 1930’s and even back to the early 1920’s what was the method used with regard to the recording of moves. The response was that moves were recorded first on the scoresheet, the move made, and then the pressing of the clock. That is how they saw the masters of their time conduct the game. In Russian texts (see N. Krogius’, “Chess Psychology”), there was the Blumenfeld rule, which encouraged writing down the move first, doing a basic blunder check, and then making the move on the board. There is a long history for this practice of writing the move down first before playing it.

Scholastic coaches often encourage their impulsive young players to write the move down first to slow them down and make them think a little before they move. When they move first and press the clock, it is common for them to forget to write down their move. The opponent moves, they move, and so on leading to an empty scoresheet as the kids blitz out moves. By making them write down the move first, there is a better chance that at least some semblance of a score will be taken down.

My own preference is to write down the move, make it, and then press the clock. Then I sit back and observe my opponent’s behavior and body language. That gives me clues to his mood, what he thinks about his position, and whether he is nervous. If I write my move down after pressing the clock button, my head will be down and I may miss important visual information about my opponent’s demeanor. Chess, after all, is a game with psychological elements that are useful in decision making. The application of Rule 15 A is damaging to a player’s sporting efforts to win the game and an unnecessary intrusion by the TD into the game.

Is it common to write down a move, erase it, and select another? Of course. The first move that pops into your head may look good, you may believe in it, and then after writing it down you may give the move more thought and take one last look around. Drat! What a dumb move, it loses a rook! Back to the drawing board. What else can I play? When a player is not in form, he may dither over several moves before a final decision. It is his time to spend or waste. A messy scoresheet shows indecisiveness, nerves, and sloppy thinking. I want to see that my opponent is scratching out move after move. That is a useful tidbit to know. If I am doing it, it is a clear indication that I don’t have it today and have to do more work on my game. I am giving clues or tells to my opponent. These tells are a part of the game, too.

Very insightful, thank you.

Rob Jones