As a player, I have frequently had spectators analyzing my game next to my board with an engine on their phone. I find this very distracting and frankly disrespectful, and would like to see it stopped. As a TD, is it correct to ban any and all use of engines on phones inside the playing hall under 20F “Analysis in the playing room prohibited. No analysis is permitted in the playing room during play or during adjourned sessions.” It seems pretty clear cut to me.
Hey,
In a club environment where a separate room is not immediately available for use, I can see where two players might spend a few minutes with their opponent looking at the game. as a TD of some of these events, I have allowed them to continue for 5 or 10 minutes if they were not distributing any ongoing game. In non-club events I try to always have a room for skittles or an area where players can review games.
I not case would I allow a spectator to evaluate a live game where the players even have a CHANCE at seeing or hearing the analyst.
Did you bring this to the TD’s attention and receive a response?
Thanks…
Yes such a ban is appropriate, just as any other analysis should be banned. And the device should not have been out or in use in the room period - even as a phone.
Such a spectator would at a minimum get a stern talking to if I were in charge of the event.
Not only should the spectator get a talking to, but it should be pointed out that analysis in the playing room is banned [or at least discouraged in a small club environment] so as not to disturb the players. This, also applies to having any phones go off in the playing room. I would warn the spectator that a second office will get the spectator banned from the tournament room as well.
Larry S. Cohen
Senior level TD
Thanks for all the insights. I haven’t ever taken this to a TD when it has happened. The two most prominent times it happened I was in time trouble and was trying to remain focused on the game. I also had to look in the rulebook to find a specific rule violation. I couldn’t think of one at the time.
As a TD, how would I explain banning the use of such engine analysis? I realize I don’t need to justify it other than with a citation of the rule, but I think a clear rationale would help. The normal reason for prohibiting analysis because it is distracting or may be overhead by the player doesn’t seem as clearly applicable here. As a player, I find it distracting on a psychological level. It is difficult to explain why.
Any analysis in the playing hall of an active game being played is automatically suspect for cheating. This spectator could be signaling the opponent. that is reason enough.
IT is distracting. By and large - though not entirely - distraction is in the eye of the beholder. Within limits it is only important whether you think it is distracting, not whether the person doing it thinks it should not be distracting to you.
And finally spectators have no rights at all. They don’t even have to be allowed in the room. So you aren’t taking away any rights - the spectator doesn’t have them to begin with.
“You’re a spectator. By rule, spectators have no rights to the tournament hall. Your use of an engine is a severe breach of the playing conditions my players reasonably expect when they pay their entry fees. Get out of my tournament hall. Now.”
A few observations.
- There is no rule saying that you must cite a rule when making a decision.
- The rationale is that you are required to uphold USCF rules - including Rule 20F.
- Spectators have no rights. At all. They’re allowed as a courtesy only.
If he understands why engine analysis is not allowed in the playing room, then he is deliberately violating the rules. If he does not understand why engine analysis is not allowed in the playing room, then he may consider this a hard lesson learned. In either case, if it is up to me, that spectator is out for the rest of the event.
Ok, say in a regular tournament, dad is watching the game. He takes pictures of the game in progress with his cell phone.
Neither player is notating. Johnny, playing White, goes to the rest room accompanied by dad, not at all uncommon.
When they come back to the board, according to Johnny and his dad, and the cell phone picture, Billy, playing black has
added a queen and knight to his army. Billy, naturally denies.
Johnny’s dad tells you, the TD–we have proof Billy cheated–it is the picture I took of the board before Johnny went to the rest
room. What is your course of action??
Rob Jones
This is quite different than the situation related by Mr. Copeland in the OP. That said, since I explicitly ban all mobile device use (cell phones, tablets, PDAs) in my playing halls after the first 5 minutes (even as cameras), I don’t have this problem.
If this is anything other than a beginner section of a scholastic tournament, that should never happen.
Dad, kid, and smartphone with current position all in a bathroom at once? Nothing could possibly be wrong with this, right? 
Of course, this is just one reason why mobile devices should not be allowed for any use in a tournament hall at all.
If the picture is clearly of the game in progress - with the only difference between the picture and the current position being, say, a couple of extra black pieces - Billy loses the game, and is thrown out of the tournament immediately.
Before I will accept the picture, though, Johnny’s dad must agree to let me examine his cell phone. If I happen to find evidence that the position in the picture has recently been run through an analysis engine, or other assistance has been provided via the phone, Johnny will also suffer Billy’s fate (the game will be marked as a double-loss for ratings purposes). If no such evidence is found, Johnny’s dad will be advised that any additional banned cell activity in the playing hall will result in him being barred from spectating for the rest of the event.
It it had been a queen OR a knight (as opposed to a queen AND a knight) then Billy could have added the piece after the picture was taken and still not have cheated (in which case the piece would still be on Johnny’s back rank after the pawn promotion if the claim was made immediately upon Johnny’s return to the board).
Various issues are:
- The shot could have been faked. Is there enough of the background there to show it was really that particular board, or is it just a shot of the pieces that could have been on some similar looking board that might have been set up in the skittles room?
- There may be a lot of suspicion cast on whether or not the father was analyzing the game with the son while away from the board.
- Billy may have added the pieces. In one tournament I did it was the player that went to the bathroom that also stopped by the team room to pick up a knight and rook and place them on the board when the opponent’s head was turned (that was the last game the player played in that tournament - if the coach hadn’t been the type to immediately withdraw him then the chief TD would probably have ejected him).
- Are spectators allowed into the playing area? I know I do a lot of scholastics where there are no spectators permitted in (many experienced coaches and parents prefer that because then they don’t have to worry about having people mistakenly accuse them, or accuse some other parent on their team, of signaling their players).
- Are players allowed to use the public bathrooms? Some events have bathrooms connected to the playing area and limited to only players, thus avoiding the concerns that a player may get help from a coach if both are in the bathroom at the same time.
Just an amusing aside…
My youngest daughter (my fifth child), REALLY wanted to play in a tournament like her older siblings. She was only in Kindergarten. When it got time to actually PLAY, she was so scared she wouldn’t go in unless I was with her. The TD was OK with my sitting next to her with my back to the board – after all, this was my FIFTH child in his tournaments. Some of the other parents complained to the TD that I might be helping her, but he reassured them that I would not do that.
When she lost ALL of her games, they were convinced!
[quote=“narceleb”]
Just an amusing aside…
My youngest daughter (my fifth child), REALLY wanted to play in a tournament like her older siblings. She was only in Kindergarten. When it got time to actually PLAY, she was so scared she wouldn’t go in unless I was with her. The TD was OK with my sitting next to her with my back to the board – after all, this was my FIFTH child in his tournaments. Some of the other parents complained to the TD that I might be helping her, but he reassured them that I would not do that.
When she lost ALL of her games, they were convinced![/quote
I have coached chess for about a decade now. During this time, tutoring in various settings, there are a very small number of students I would call naturally gifted prodigies. One such lad as a kindergartner and first grader, simply was not adjusted enough
emotionally to play without his mother in sight. So, we simply made mother a results table checker, an essential position at
most larger scholastic events.
Rob Jones
I didn’t know that could be done, probably because I’ve never had a situation in which I thought that both players deserved to lose the same rated game. If it did, I more likely would have submitted it as 0F-0F. How would a TD go about submitting a rated double forfeit?
A double loss would be recorded using the split result feature in WinTd - not sure how to do it in other programs
For the past decade I have only used SwissSys. I know that I could manually go into the wall chart, turn off the “automatically update opponent” feature and put in losses for both players. The issue is if it will be accepted when I submit it to the USCF online or that I will get an error message. As I’ve never tried, I don’t know.
You can report a game as either a double-loss or a double-win for ratings purposes. In SwissSys, I would do it manually in the wall chart without auto-update of opponent’s result (I don’t think it can be done any other way), and probably send the national office an explanatory email after submitting in TD/A.
In the rating report crosstable, instead of “L”, use the code “S” for each player for a rated loss (“S” as in “loSs”). I believe the codes to use for rated results where the total points don’t add up to one are “N” (for “wiN”), “R” (for “dRaw”), and “S” (for “loSs”).
You’ll probably have to edit the rating report after uploading it to do this.
The options are listed on the td
information page on the TD/Affiliate Site, under Frequently Asked Questions.
Result Result Code
Win N (as in wiN)
Draw R (as in dRaw
Loss S (as in losS)
So you would on the TD submittal page, on-line, enter a S for both players.
Rob Jones