TDs call flag-fall?

[Matt_Phelps]

@relyea

@Matt Phelps

That is a valid point.

However, one could argue that if such a player has enough time to do that, he or she should have been keeping score anyway, so your scenario would benefit a player who was not keeping score properly. Allowing a TD to call the flag would, in this case, let the game to continue to the next time control; so that it would be (probably) decided over the board. Surely, that is a better result than determining which player violated the rules more? Also, in your scenario, if there’s no TD present, the player who’s flag has fallen can (and should) call his or her flag so the game can continue! THAT scenario has always struck me as absurd; technically fully correct, but absurd.

Of course, all of this is avoided if the event uses a 30 second increment, thus forcing all players to keep score at all times. I hope more events in the US move in that direction to avoid issues like this one entirely.

Again, I just don’t see why we don’t allow a trained referee (TD) to call violations of the rules when witnessed, instead of relying on the players, most of whom aren’t aware of the proper procedures.

-Matt

This is not technically true because of the 1988 rule near the top of the Issues forum.

Regarding the last paragraph, what do you do when one player clearly wants a draw, but can’t use three-fold repetition correctly?

Alex Relyea

Yes, I know it’s not technically true since a player could not be keeping score legally for a number of reasons. I did say “one could argue.”

I leave it to my esteemed colleagues on the Rules Committee to work out the devil in the details.

I don’t understand your last question. If a player makes an improper three fold claim? There are rules to handle such a thing. Or are you asking if I’m in favor of your “5 repetitions or 75 moves with no capture or pawn move the TD declares a draw” proposed rule change, than yes I am.

-Matt

(BTW, Alex is sitting next to me, but we can’t talk because we’re arbiting (sp?) the US Girls Junior Closed right now… using FIDE rules I might add.)

-Matt

(EDITED to remove an annoying number of " "s)

[fantasychess]

@Hal Terrie

It’s one thing to propose that TDs be allowed selectively to use FIDE time forfeit procedure, under which they would step in and declare a forfeit, because (having personally counted the moves) they are certain one has occurred. That’s at least debatable. However, allowing a TD to initiate USCF time forfeit procedure is a very different thing.

What if a player knows his opponent’s flag is down but is delaying the claim for a few seconds in order to fill in some needed move pairs on his scoresheet? If a TD jumps in and starts the process, the player is forbidden to fill in any more moves. This could have the effect of preventing a valid claim from being made, which seems doesn’t seem right.

I’m going to oppose this motion.

– Hal Terrie

Of course, the player whose flag is down has the right to call his own flag to stop his opponent from doing this, at least under USCF rules.

When overseeing FIDE events, the arbiter’s job is to interfere when a flag has fallen and they should not care on what move the player is on. However, once the player has proved they have made the requisite number of moves, if that is the stage of the game the flag fall is relevant to, then the game should continue.

[jwiewel]

@fantasychess

@Hal Terrie

It’s one thing to propose that TDs be allowed selectively to use FIDE time forfeit procedure, under which they would step in and declare a forfeit, because (having personally counted the moves) they are certain one has occurred. That’s at least debatable. However, allowing a TD to initiate USCF time forfeit procedure is a very different thing.

What if a player knows his opponent’s flag is down but is delaying the claim for a few seconds in order to fill in some needed move pairs on his scoresheet? If a TD jumps in and starts the process, the player is forbidden to fill in any more moves. This could have the effect of preventing a valid claim from being made, which seems doesn’t seem right.

I’m going to oppose this motion.

– Hal Terrie

Of course, the player whose flag is down has the right to call his own flag to stop his opponent from doing this, at least under USCF rules.

When overseeing FIDE events, the arbiter’s job is to interfere when a flag has fallen and they should not care on what move the player is on. However, once the player has proved they have made the requisite number of moves, if that is the stage of the game the flag fall is relevant to, then the game should continue.

Just to clarify, is it true that if FIDE rules are followed and both players are in time pressure and have missed recording a half-dozen moves, then defensively calling your own flag doesn’t make you any less liable for reaching the time control than if your opponent actually had been keeping score?

If only one player is in time trouble then is the other player obligated to continue keeping score until that player is also in time trouble?

[Sevan_Muradian]

@jwiewel

Of course, the player whose flag is down has the right to call his own flag to stop his opponent from doing this, at least under USCF rules.

When overseeing FIDE events, the arbiter’s job is to interfere when a flag has fallen and they should not care on what move the player is on. However, once the player has proved they have made the requisite number of moves, if that is the stage of the game the flag fall is relevant to, then the game should continue.

Just to clarify, is it true that if FIDE rules are followed and both players are in time pressure and have missed recording a half-dozen moves, then defensively calling your own flag doesn’t make you any less liable for reaching the time control than if your opponent actually had been keeping score?

If only one player is in time trouble then is the other player obligated to continue keeping score until that player is also in time trouble?
[/quote]

@Article 8

8.4

If a player has less than five minutes left on his clock at some stage in a period and does not have additional time of 30 seconds or more added with each move, then for the remainder of the period he is not obliged to meet the requirements of Article 8.1.

8.5

a. If neither player keeps score under Article 8.4, the arbiter or an assistant should try to be present and keep score. In this case, immediately after a flag has fallenthe arbiter shall stop the chessclock. Then both players shall update their scoresheets, using the arbiter’s or the opponent’s scoresheet.

b. If only one player has not kept score under Article 8.4, he must, as soon as either flag has fallen, update his scoresheet completely before moving a piece on the chessboard. Provided it is that player’s move, he may use his opponent’s scoresheet, but must return it before making a move.

c. If no complete scoresheet is available, the players must reconstruct the game on a second chessboard under the control of the arbiter or an assistant. He shall first record the actual game position, clock times, whose clock was running and the number of moves made/completed, if this information is available, before reconstruction takes place.

8.6

If the scoresheets cannot be brought up to date showing that a player has overstepped the allotted time, the next move made shall be considered as the first of the following time period, unless there is evidence that more moves have been made or completed.