rules recourse question

[brennanprice]

@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.

I don’t dispute any of this. I don’t care. It’s. Not. Legal.

EDIT: Unless, thanks to the Delegates’ wisdom, the TD decides it is. But don’t expect me to do so.

[dennisk]

@tmagchesspgh

…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?..

This is exactly why it is (and should be) illegal. It’s a form of note-taking. You’re using notes on the page to help you do the analysis that you’re supposed to do in your head. You no longer have to remember which candidate moves you have already analyzed, and whether or not you dismissed them, because it’s there on the paper in front of you. I strongly agree with the illegality of this common practice. It gives an unfair advantage to the person doing it. It’s even worse with a Monroi (or similar device), where you can also see the new position (and that’s why it was made illegal), but even without that, it still constitutes note-taking.

[DENTONCHESS]

@brennanprice

@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.

I don’t dispute any of this. I don’t care. It’s. Not. Legal.

EDIT: Unless, thanks to the Delegates’ wisdom, the TD decides it is. But don’t expect me to do so.

Do what you want at the events you direct–but I am with Tom here. Being a horses _____ and driving away players through what many of us would deem simply an abuse of TD authority is not
in the best interest of the club, tournament, or USCF (in our humble opinion, of course).

Rob Jones

[DENTONCHESS]

@dennisk

@tmagchesspgh

…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?..

This is exactly why it is (and should be) illegal. It’s a form of note-taking. You’re using notes on the page to help you do the analysis that you’re supposed to do in your head. You no longer have to remember which candidate moves you have already analyzed, and whether or not you dismissed them, because it’s there on the paper in front of you. I strongly agree with the illegality of this common practice. It gives an unfair advantage to the person doing it. It’s even worse with a Monroi (or similar device), where you can also see the new position (and that’s why it was made illegal), but even without that, it still constitutes note-taking.

You have the right to your opinion. I would suggest you play in events directed by TDs who share
your opinion.

Rob Jones

[tmagchesspgh]

I must add for those who do not want to understand the common practice of writing the move first, that I am not advocating writing all of your candidate moves on the scoresheet. That would be making notes. The writing of the move and then playing it is legal under USCF rules. You may not like it, but it is legal. If the TD comes over and disturbs my concentration to tell me to make the move first, I would consider that an unwarranted intrusion that steps over the line of TD discretion. No TD has ever, in my 43 years of tournament play, much of it on the master level, come over to mention the rule, not even the truly officious dunderheads. Nor has any player questioned the practice. In fact, many of my opponents write their move down first, too, the way they were taught or adopted after watching other players doing so. Unless there is an official complaint made by an opponent, in USCF rated tournaments the TD has no business initiating action with regard to the writing of the move first. He should be doing his important work rather than hovering like a vulture over the players.

[DENTONCHESS]

@tmagchesspgh

I must add for those who do not want to understand the common practice of writing the move first, that I am not advocating writing all of your candidate moves on the scoresheet. That would be making notes. The writing of the move and then playing it is legal under USCF rules. You may not like it, but it is legal. If the TD comes over and disturbs my concentration to tell me to make the move first, I would consider that an unwarranted intrusion that steps over the line of TD discretion. No TD has ever, in my 43 years of tournament play, much of it on the master level, come over to mention the rule, not even the truly officious dunderheads. Nor has any player questioned the practice. In fact, many of my opponents write their move down first, too, the way they were taught or adopted after watching other players doing so. Unless there is an official complaint made by an opponent, in USCF rated tournaments the TD has no business initiating action with regard to the writing of the move first. He should be doing his important work rather than hovering like a vulture over the players.

Another insightful work of prose.

Rob Jones

[dennisk]

@DENTONCHESS

@dennisk

@tmagchesspgh

…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?..

This is exactly why it is (and should be) illegal. It’s a form of note-taking. You’re using notes on the page to help you do the analysis that you’re supposed to do in your head. You no longer have to remember which candidate moves you have already analyzed, and whether or not you dismissed them, because it’s there on the paper in front of you. I strongly agree with the illegality of this common practice. It gives an unfair advantage to the person doing it. It’s even worse with a Monroi (or similar device), where you can also see the new position (and that’s why it was made illegal), but even without that, it still constitutes note-taking.

You have the right to your opinion. I would suggest you play in events directed by TDs who share
your opinion.

Rob Jones

My “opinion” is supported by the rule book, and I am a TD as well as a player. In actual practice, I do not enforce this rule as a TD unless a player complains about it. As a player, I don’t really care if my opponent writes his move first, as long as he always makes that move (and preferably, does so immediately). If he writes the move down and then sits there thinking about it for a minute or two before making it, I will be uneasy but still OK with it – as long as he makes that move. But the first time he erases or crosses out the move he has written down and writes another one, and then ends up making a different move than the one he originally wrote down, you can bet I will complain. That is note-taking, and it’s illegal. This is not “my opinion” – it’s the rule.

[relyea]

@tmagchesspgh

I must add for those who do not want to understand the common practice of writing the move first, that I am not advocating writing all of your candidate moves on the scoresheet. That would be making notes. The writing of the move and then playing it is legal under USCF rules. You may not like it, but it is legal. If the TD comes over and disturbs my concentration to tell me to make the move first, I would consider that an unwarranted intrusion that steps over the line of TD discretion. No TD has ever, in my 43 years of tournament play, much of it on the master level, come over to mention the rule, not even the truly officious dunderheads. Nor has any player questioned the practice. In fact, many of my opponents write their move down first, too, the way they were taught or adopted after watching other players doing so. Unless there is an official complaint made by an opponent, in USCF rated tournaments the TD has no business initiating action with regard to the writing of the move first. He should be doing his important work rather than hovering like a vulture over the players.

I hope that Mr. Magar and others who feel the same way don’t plan on playing FIDE-rated events very soon. In those events, the arbiter is required to intervene when a player violates the LoC. In the only tournament I have done so far under the LoC we had a player doing the write then move thing, and an assistant arbiter (quite properly) went over and corrected him.

Alex Relyea

[jwiewel]

@relyea

…
I hope that … and others who feel the same way don’t plan on playing FIDE-rated events very soon. In those events, the arbiter is required to intervene when a player violates the LoC. In the only tournament I have done so far under the LoC we had a player doing the write then move thing, and an assistant arbiter (quite properly) went over and corrected him.

Alex Relyea

Some people would say that just because FIDE requires something doesn’t mean it has to really be done by the TD. Such people need to be told that if there are irregularities in FIDE-rated events then those irregularities can either be taken care of by the national federation or they can be ignored by the national federation and have FIDE take care of not only those irregularities but also essentially put the national federation on probation (possibly resulting in the denial of norms earned in totally unrelated events after they are submitted by the national federation).

With that said, I’d anticipate the USCF’s FIDE committee (which I am not on) to come down HARD on TDs of FIDE-rated events that opt to only enforce the FIDE rules they want to enforce.

[tmagchesspgh]

At this future FIDE rated event that I may play in, I should hope to see the dozens and dozens of well paid arbiters who will be enforcing the rules and watching the clocks per the tournament requirements established by FIDE. The chief organizer and/or chief TD should be in compliance with these requirements. Otherwise, the events should not be eligible for rating, or where applicable for recognition of norms.

In all of the previous FIDE rated events I have played in, the TD(s) were an unobtrusive presence who allowed the players to quietly play chess unmolested. If FIDE makes any rules which the players feel too onerous and invasive, then it would be appropriate to vote with their dollars and play in other venues.

[relyea]

@tmagchesspgh

In all of the previous FIDE rated events I have played in, the TD(s) were an unobtrusive presence who allowed the players to quietly play chess unmolested. If FIDE makes any rules which the players feel too onerous and invasive, then it would be appropriate to vote with their dollars and play in other venues.

In all previous FIDE-rated events that you have played in, FIDE did not require USCF events to follow the LoC. That changed on 1 July.

I agree with your last sentence, and would further expand it to say that if USCF makes any rules . . . I suppose we can even extend it to scholastic players in Oregon and Washington and NWSRS rules.

Alex Relyea

[tmagchesspgh]

I will comply with all FIDE rules when they pay me an appearance fee. USCF rules are good enough for me as a TD to apply, with appropriate discretion and respect for the players and the independent culture of this and other nations.

[DENTONCHESS]

@relyea

@tmagchesspgh

In all of the previous FIDE rated events I have played in, the TD(s) were an unobtrusive presence who allowed the players to quietly play chess unmolested. If FIDE makes any rules which the players feel too onerous and invasive, then it would be appropriate to vote with their dollars and play in other venues.

In all previous FIDE-rated events that you have played in, FIDE did not require USCF events to follow the LoC. That changed on 1 July.

I agree with your last sentence, and would further expand it to say that if USCF makes any rules . . . I suppose we can even extend it to scholastic players in Oregon and Washington and NWSRS rules.

Alex Relyea

Seems fairly simple. If one does not agree with the rules of a local event, then simply do not participate. To go and expect change to suite one’s whims is usually unrealistic.

Rob Jones

[jwiewel]

@tmagchesspgh

I will comply with all FIDE rules when they pay me an appearance fee. USCF rules are good enough for me as a TD to apply, with appropriate discretion and respect for the players and the independent culture of this and other nations.

And as long as you neither direct nor play in a FIDE-rated event that attitude is fine.

[DENTONCHESS]

@jwiewel

@tmagchesspgh

I will comply with all FIDE rules when they pay me an appearance fee. USCF rules are good enough for me as a TD to apply, with appropriate discretion and respect for the players and the independent culture of this and other nations.

And as long as you neither direct nor play in a FIDE-rated event that attitude is fine.

i do expect a gradual demise in FIDE events with their current stance. it is clear for FIDE it is their
way or the highway. I do believe most will find the highway just fine.

Rob Jones

[narceleb]

@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.

While the variation does not require advance publicity, it should still be announced prior to the start of play because it IS a variation.

[tmagchesspgh]

So, which one of you TD arbiters is going to snitch or be and informant to FIDE if one of the other arbiters in a USCF/FIDE event ignores players writing their move down first before playing a move?

Little by little, FIDE is writing rules that are different or are against our federation’s traditions and practices. We allow the TDs a wide degree of discretion, but with certain exceptions. FIDE rules will soon give wide powers to arbiters with narrowing of discretion as the rules become increasingly intricate and difficult for the players to understand. Like the thread on the calling of flags, our federation’s directors tend to view their roles differently. FIDE favors a more intrusive role. With that in mind, there will be a necessity to have more TDs on hand to implement rules, interpret them, and enforce what are often draconian policies, like their rule on forfeiting late players. As new rules appear and new powers granted, there will also be an expectation raised that the TD/arbiters be a major presence to patrol the tournament hall. Players may feel uncomfortable with this. Some may even like it and expect the TDs, especially their pals, to play a role to “discover” infractions by the opponent. TD/arbiters who do not follow in lock step with FIDE are ripe to be punished for not being more intrusive. Of course, that will happen after TD/arbiters are required to pay a yearly fee just to be an arbiter so that they can work in chess, just like chess trainers and others are being charged. Just imagine losing the right to TD events because of a snitch who saw that you did not enforce a rule like the one on writing moves.

As a TD, I prefer to leave the players alone to play their game. If they have a problem, they can ask for a ruling. I do not want to patrol to see if they are not writing down moves. Nor do I want to call a flag or stand with a stopwatch to see if someone is late to sit down at a board to begin a game. I spend my time keeping the atmosphere of the tournament hall quiet and without distractions for the players, as well as carrying out other TD duties to make sure the rounds are paired and posted on time. The tournament is ultimately all about the players, not the TDs. When nobody notices the TDs it is a good tournament.

[DENTONCHESS]

@narceleb

@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.

While the variation does not require advance publicity, it should still be announced prior to the start of play because it IS a variation.

Agreed. And it is.

Rob Jones

[eastside]

@tmagchesspgh

So, which one of you TD arbiters is going to snitch or be and informant to FIDE if one of the other arbiters in a USCF/FIDE event ignores players writing their move down first before playing a move?

Players in any FIDE rated section of any event I run should expect full enforcement of all FIDE rules. Whether I agree with a rule has nothing to do with my obligation as an arbiter. I sincerely hope I never have to work with any arbiter who feels differently.

[relyea]

@eastside

Players in any FIDE rated section of any event I run should expect full enforcement of all FIDE rules. Whether I agree with a rule has nothing to do with my obligation as an arbiter. I sincerely hope I never have to work with any arbiter who feels differently.

I couldn’t agree more. All players in the section deserve that. Can you imagine how upset some would be if the tournament wasn’t rated because it didn’t follow the LoC?

Alex Relyea