Years ago, at the Chicago Chess Mates Chess Club, I witnessed the following scene at a tournament.
Elderly players A and B are playing.
Player B steps away from the board while player A is thinking.
Player A makes his move, and pushes his clock, and then steps away from the Board.
After a short while, player B comes back, sees A has moved, and responds with a move, and forgets to push his clock, and steps away from the board.
A comes back, sits down - sees B’s clock is running and gets up and leaves.
B comes back having seen that A sat down and has now left, and sees that his clock is running, and so assumes it is his move, and MOVES AGAIN, presses the clock, and steps away.
A comes back, sees his clock is running and that B has moved twice, just as B steps up. A protracted argument ensues, A accusing B of cheating by moving twice.
Agreed, and perhaps USCF and FIDE should both address this issue. The rule should be something like “a player may not begin to move (i.e. may not touch a piece) until his opponent has had a reasonable chance to press his clock”. In the USCF case, there could be a TD Tip saying something like “a director who wishes a more precise definition of ‘reasonable chance’ may use the following: 5 seconds regular, 3 seconds quick, 2 seconds blitz”.
What I really should have written (and what I actually meant) was that if the player insists on pressing the opponent’s clock, then option (f) is the one I would suggest. However, just as I am fond of writing that a widespread incorrect practice is still incorrect, I will also write that a widespread improper practice is still improper.
With just a quick bit of thought, I like your suggested wording about requiring the opponent to have a reasonable chance to press the clock before a player may move.
Wholeheartedly agreed. However, I cannot agree that moving while an opponent’s clock is still running is or ought to be illegal or incorrect. Particularly in time scrambles, giving the player ahead on time the capability of feinting a press of the clock before actually doing so, hoping to induce the opponent to move and claim a violation, causes infinitely more problems than the status quo.
Players have a right to punch the clock after they move. They do NOT have a right to force their opponents to consume unnecessary time by punching the clock whenever they please after they move.
I was referring specifically to option f. I’m sure lots of kids press their opponents’ clocks for them, but how many of them actually wait until they move, then press both clocks in rapid succession?
OK, let’s test this out with the world’s second-dumbest time control: 40/2, SD/60. (That’s 2 minutes, not 2 hours.)
The clock is running . . .
(Pardon me, I’m fiddling with iTunes while I let the time run down)
And the answer is, on move 8, it adds 1 hour to both timers and changes the “PRIMARY” indicator to “SECONDARY,” the countdown halts, and the display blinks. The button light does not change from green to red. And if I hit the pause button, the timer resumes counting down from 01:00.
So there’s a pause, but no flag.
OK, now re-running the experiment but making sure that I get all 40 moves in before the time runs out. And on move 42 . . . it goes straight into the secondary time control, no blinky display, no having to press the pause button.
With respect to USCF blitz, Rule 15–A legal move is completed when the hand leaves the piece. At this point, the opponent is on move and may move.
With respect to other USCF play, you have offered a credible argument that moving before the opponent presses is not contemplated by the rule set. If a player were to actually claim this conduct to be a violation of a rule, I would be inclined to exercise the discretion granted to me under Rule 1C2b to apply the non-standard penalty of a warning for the first n offenses in a game, where n is about equal to the number of moves in a typical long game. I would feel very comfortable justifying this approach on appeal.
If one doesn’t punch the clock after making a move, does that not benefit ones opponent. If my opponent moves and just sits there, I am happy to let him run down/out his clock.
Based on my experience, lots of children (primarily on the bottom boards when a clock is placed on a long-running game that had not started with one). That may mean that you are just letting out your inner child.
