I just noticed ADM 14-47 as I browsed the Delegates Call. It would allow TDs to call flag-fall in games that are USCF-rated—even if they are not FIDE-rated.
Not sure I like this. What do y’all think?
While I am generally not a wagering type, I would bet good money that most snowballs have a better chance in Hades than this ADM has of passing – especially as a 2/3 margin is required for rules changes.
Well, if we want to talk about it on it’s merit rather than the fact that it likely won’t pass, I’ll make some comments.
I really don’t understand why we don’t let TDs call flags. The main argument that I’ve heard is that it wouldn’t be fair since the TD cannot monitor all the games and thus people would be playing under different conditions. To use the current World Cup as an analogy, this would be like saying the ref can’t call fouls because he can’t see all of the fouls that happen during a game. Can you think of another sport where the ref/umpire is not allowed to intervene when they see a violation of a rule (using too much time)?
The other argument I’ve heard is that TDs could be biased and only call flags when they want to affect a certain game. My point here is that if we have a biased TD we have a much bigger problem. If you don’t trust the TD, don’t let them direct.
I think that if you run out of time, you lose.
Mike Regan
This will be an issue as the disconnect between the FIDE Laws of Chess and USCF rules becomes apparent to players who compete under both rules sets.
I think FIDE has it right, in its rules for events in which the arbiter/TD to boards ratio is less then 1/3. i.e. if one TD needs to cover more than three boards, then the Competition Rules do not apply, and the revised rules are similar to USCF’s.
From Appendix A of the FIDE LOC:
[i]The Competition Rules shall apply if
one arbiter supervises at most three games and
each game is recorded by the arbiter or his assistant and, if possible, by electronic means.
Otherwise the following apply:
…To claim a win on time, the claimant must stop the chessclock and notify the arbiter. For the claim to be successful, the claimant must have time remaining on his own clock after the chessclock has been stopped. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the claimant cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
[/i]
The issue: As far as I can see, the alternate rules (non-Competition Rules) apply only in Rapid or Blitz. There is no provision for arbiters to ‘not’ call flags in Standard games, no matter how many boards they must cover.
Think of a large U.S. Swiss here…and it’s clear that at some point it will happen that a TD calls flag-fall on one board, while a flag-fall on another board goes unnoticed by both TD and players. Yes, the latter is not likely, with delay, and much less likely with increment, but I have seen it happen in rated play. (with 5-second delay)
To me that’s not fair. I can accept TDs calling illegal moves on some boards but not others, for instance, or stepping in to re-set clocks, or whatever else is required under the more pro-active FIDE Competition Rules. But calling a flag-fall on one board but not another? Don’t like it.
Just extend to Regular-rated games FIDE’s idea that in events where there are not enough TDs to cover all boards, (three boards per TD, maximum) the “alternate” rules apply. Amend ADM 14-47 so that it only applies to events with adequate TD coverage, and it might make sense.
Of course, those events are already FIDE-rated and use FIDE rules, so this whole discussion is moot.
IMHO, by amending the motion, ala above, and/or making it a variation, it has a better chance at passage.
Did I mis-read or does the flag-calling also require the arbiter (or assistant) to be keeping score for the boards? (another FIDE rule states that players cannot be assistants in norm events, though I’m not sure about non-norm events). A score-keeping arbiter is more likely to notice a flag fall than an arbiter who is merely monitoring games (especially with multiple times controls and clock set without a move counter).
Score keeping is not a requirement for an arbiter to call a flag fall.
The rule you’re probably referring to is that an arbiter cannot be a player in a norm event, not even as a filler.
Why should it make any difference whether the clock has a move counter or not? The move counter has no standing in a claim (or arbiter ruling) of a loss on time.
The move counter has no standing, but without one there are more calculations needed to decide whether or not somebody has actually overstepped if the clocks show times with only one player having gone into the second time control.
It’s easier to see the true time differential at a quick glance with a move counter.
One should be careful here. There are three sets of rules in the FIDE Laws of Chess. The “Competition Rules” (Articles 6 through 12) apply to “standard” chess (roughly equivalent to USCF “regular rated”). There is a second set of rules in Appendix A for “rapidplay” (roughly, USCF “quick rated”, but more specifically, G/11 through G/60). There is a third set of rules in Appendix B for blitz. (The definition of rapidplay is actually more involved. I have simplified the description by ignoring the effect of increment.)
The question of needing adequate supervision for arbiters to call fallen flags only arises in rapidplay and blitz.
Article A.2 stipulates that the players do not need to record the moves, which is one of the competition rules. If there is adequate supervision in rapidplay, that is the only difference between “rapidplay” and “standard.”
Similarly:
For non-blitz and non-rapidplay, there is no requirement on the number of arbiters in order for the “Competition Rules” to apply (and for arbiters to be obligated to call fallen flags).
Only if the move counter is accurate. And since the move counter has no official standing, using it AT ALL is probably not best TD practice.
Just a random comment: I find the FIDE standard of no more than three boards per TD to be very conservative. Back in the 1980s, I was a TD at a tournament of about 200 players which used FIDE time forfeit procedure. Chief TD was IA and NTD Bill Lukowiak, one of the true pioneers. We had about one TD for every 50 boards and never even remotely came close to a situation in which a TD might have had to divide his attention between two time pressure situations.
– Hal Terrie
Note that Mr. Ballou indicated that the 1/3 standard is only for rapidplay. It is, as he indicated, 1/1 for Blitz, and no limit for regular. Note also that the limits are only in effect when the players are not required to keep score.
Alex Relyea
If the “move counter” is active then at a glance you see the correct time differential between the players regardless of how accurate the move number is that the counter references. If it added the second time control early then both players have been given the same amount of time and the current difference between them is the actual difference (and both are too high by the amount of the next time control - which can cause other issues). If the “move counter” is not active then sometimes you have to mentally add the amount of a time control (maybe two in extremely rare circumstances) to one side to properly calculate the time difference between the two players.
Thus it does slightly alleviate the calculations that a TD has to do.
What it does to the players, and the amount of confusion it causes as to which move the game is really at, are entirely different issues and are the reason that many TDs prefer the “move counter” to be off.
Maybe the rule(s) have since 2010. But when I took the FIDE TD course in Toronto I was told that the Arbiter could not be a player in an event/section they were playing in. This was told me by the teacher of the course, who I was told was head of all arbiters for Europe at the time. But as I said maybe the rules have changed.
Larry S. Cohen
As a tournament director, I don’t think that the TD should interfere in a game except to level the playing field. If the clocks are set wrong, board or pieces set up wrong, or dealing with an issue based on player request, you are doing something to improve the game for both players. But to call a flag is a different matter. We are irate when a spectator calls a flag. That is deemed an interference and the situation is a mess. The TD in a time pressure situation should stand aside and be a mere spectator and let the players decide the game through their play and their own watching of the clock. That has been previous tradition and practice. Even in the FIDE rated events I have played in, the TD has been absent or stood aside and let the players call their own flag.
As a player, with a crowd watching a game, if I hear a flag called by anyone, I am going to be angry at interference by a spectator. If it is a TD calling the flag, I will still be ticked off. The game is for the players to decide. It will make me not want to play in that TDs events.
I know that there has been a major effort to make USCF and FIDE rules congruent. This is one aspect where they should stay apart. I am curious about one thing. Has there been a major game in a championship, world class tournament, or world championship match where the arbiter stepped in and called a flag of one of the players? How often has this occurred? Have not even FIDE arbiters been reticent about calling flags?
In “standard” play, and in both “rapidplay” and “blitz” with adequate supervision, under the FIDE Laws of Chess, an arbiter who observes a fallen flag is required to call it. This is not optional.
Yes it happens in the Olympiad even at the highest team tables.
It has happened in the Grand Prix as well.
At one US Championships a player refused to catch up on his scoresheet after having not taken score even though a 30-sec increment was available and the arbiter did not allow the player to continue until he caught up his scoresheet. He refused to and so the arbiter waited until the players flag fell, called it, and game was over.
In general though, games at the highest levels haven’t required the arbiter to call the flag as the players are cognizant of it. At the amateur level and youth chess level I don’t find players are as cognizant of the flag. And yes at the World Youth and World Junior the arbiters have also called the flag.
This will change. As of 1 July, 2014 FIDE-rated events are required to follow FIDE rules.
Alex Relyea
Mike, you are overlooking something.
If a clock is not counting moves, it cannot add the secondary time at move 40 (or whatever the control is). Instead, it must add the secondary time when the primary time expires.
Most clocks, if they are not counting moves, will add the secondary time to each player’s clock when that player’s primary time expires.
So, if white runs out of primary time at move 43, but black does not do so until move 57, then for 14 moves white sees the extra time on his clock and black does not.
And, in that case, the arbiter may have to perform some (minor) mental gymnastics to figure out which player actually has more time. This is especially true if the clock’s method of indicating a second control (a different hyphen location, for example) is unfamiliar to the arbiter.
A move counter – even an inaccurate one – solves this problem, at least partially.
Bill Smythe