Wrong Color Promotion

Running Chess Tournaments
1

We had an interesting incident in our most recent Chess Club rated game.

Two people were playing in an endgame, I was playing Black. I had realized the defeat of two ideas during the game resulting in being down 2 pawns. I was losing.

However, my opponent was a relatively new and lower rated adult and he had shifted into the mode where he quit taking notation and only hit his clock button occasionally. I was playing for a swindle and draw.

He promoted a Pawn to a Queen and placed a Black Queen on the square, he was playing White. Neither of us noticed this color problem and I pushed my pawn hoping to promote myself.

This fellow’s 8 year old son was standing next to the board, watching. When I reached for my pawn, he started talking with his father. I was listening to music and pulled the earbud from an ear to see what he was saying. The boy said that the Queen was the wrong color.

Now, there are a few points and/or issues that obviously came up:

  1. I immediately said that the boy was not supposed to talk to us during the game.

  2. The boy calling this to our attention broke the father’s reverie and he was no longer going to play in that previous mindset, thereby greatly reducing my chances to accomplish the swindle.

  3. I resigned in disgust and remonstrated the boy for interfering. I then started putting my set and clock away.

  4. I am not the best loser in the world and was quite frustrated and upset. I was actually going to leave the club for an indeterminate amount of time.

  5. My immediate frustration was that the game was interfered with and there was no real justice action to make it correct.

  6. Yes, I believe the placing of the wrong color piece for promotion was an illegal move and would be treated as such. The TD could have deducted some time from my opponent’s clock at worst. And if the illegal move would have gone on for the minimum 10 moves it would have stayed.

My opponent convinced the TD to give me the draw to mollify me. Later, the next morning, I called the TD and told him that I indeed had resigned and Wayne and I (the only 2 certified TDs in the club) agreed the game should be scored as a win for my opponent. I communicated with my opponent and he assured me that both he and his son were fine and they really looked forward to continue coming to our club to play. So there was no damage (I am currently on my rating floor (but not for long, I tell you!!)).

I have witnessed people interfere with games before, usually regarding the clock time. To me it is very frustrating for pretty much everyone. The aesthetics of a US Chess rated game is that it is between the two opponents. There is usually no way to undo the interference and its affect on the game.

In the vast majority of cases, the person interfering is not being intentionally malicious. So I don’t see any kind of justice trying to penalize that person. And penalizing an observer does nothing to justify that interference to the opponents in the game.

So, what would you good TD’s do in such a situation? And how do you interpret the both actions, promoting to the wrong color and game interference by an observer?

2

You left out important information. How much time was on the clocks?

Alex Relyea

3

Yes, there seem to be some details missing.

If both players were interested in playing “for the good of the game”, then the placement of the wrong color Queen while promotion would be called immediately. Personally, I would prefer to win games honestly, and would tell my opponent he had placed the wrong color Queen on the board. Where was the TD? In late games and time pressure the TD should be present to note irregularities. If he is off “doing his correspondence”, then he is not doing his job well.

“Remonstrating” at a child, who was the only person who was not oblivious to the situation, is over the top. He just learned that it is possible to win unfairly, that he can be punished for telling the truth, and the game of chess is played by players who will do anything to win. A great life lesson.

Taking advantage of newbies, or baby bunnies, through the use of rules is not a moment in which to take pride. The right color Queen should have been replaced, no time penalty assessed, and the game should have gone on. Resigning in a huff is poor sportsmanship, and one should not be rewarded with a draw for rating or prize purposes, even if the opponent graciously offered it to assuage hurt feelings. Someone trying to swindle deserves no pitty or reward.

Change the circumstances just a little. Would you have been proud of yourself for trying to swindle a 5 year old?

4

You may or may not have had remedies. That you didn’t obtain any is attributable to the fact that you never actually made a claim, either by calling the Director or speaking up in a timely manner.

Equity aids the vigilent and equitable.

5

It was Sudden Death Game 75;d5 Neither player was in time trouble. I was the TD and had just stepped out to talk to one of the players as they were leaving so as not to disturb the games in progress. Also this was a Monday night tournament played over 4 Mondays with basically just 10 players. At the time I offered to have the game set up and have the illegal move corrected and play on from there. After some discussion I allowed the players to negotiate a draw. Later that night Ron called and reminded me that he had resigned and that basically ended the game so I reversed the draw to a loss for Ron, which is what I really should have done in the first place. I suggested to Ron that he post this situation here.

My question is if I had seen the wrong color queen placed on the board would I have been justified in interfering in the game as the TD?

6

As long as the players are not in time trouble, the TD is obligated to correct an illegal move, unless you’re playing under an (announced) variant.

Alex Relyea

7

Thank you. That also explains the TD tip about an observer coming to the TD out of range of the players to point it out.
Allowing illegal moves to stand really doesn’t make a lot of sense.

8

I find it peculiar that a player who had just played an illegal move, although inadvertently, would feel he had the right to demand anything. If I were the culprit, I would feel sheepish about it, and would do everything reasonable to make sure my error did not benefit me. In the case cited, I would probably have paused the clock, suggested to my opponent that we simply revert to the position just before the promotion, add 2 minutes to his side of the clock, and continue from there. If my opponent did not find this reasonable, I would have suggested that we summon the TD for a resolution.

By the same token, though, if I were the opponent, I would again feel sheepish (that I hadn’t noticed the irregularity until a few moves later), and would again do everything reasonable to make sure my own inattentiveness did not benefit me. Probably, I would have simply allowed the black queen to be replaced with a white queen, so that the game could continue. If, however, I had benefited from my opponent’s error and my own oversight, such as by using “my” queen to checkmate him, I probably would have offered to revert to the position just before the promotion so that my opponent could promote legally.

In either case I would not scold the 8-year-old. In fact, I would thank him for pointing out the problem so that the situation could be corrected before it got out of hand.

Yes, I know, I didn’t answer the question “what should the TD have done?”. It shouldn’t have gotten to that point to begin with.

Bill Smythe

9

The player that played the illegal move demanded nothing.

10

OK, now I get it. The OP’s opponent was so wrapped up in his music that the OP was hoping that his opponent would stay wrapped up to the extent of getting careless and falling into a swindle or something.

When the boy unwrapped the situation by speaking out, the OP became angry because the interruption brought his opponent back down to earth, where he would be less likely to walk into a swindle.

So, what if the boy had not interrupted? Surely the OP would have noticed the error himself. He would then be on the horns of a dilemma. Should he call the opponent’s attention to the irregularity, thus (again) bringing the opponent down to earth and making a swindle less likely? Or should he follow the morally dubious path of deliberately ignoring the error, thus keeping the opponent in his musical cloud? And in the latter case, how far might this go? For example, might the OP want to attempt a checkmating sequence with “his” new black queen? I’ll bet all hall would break loose then. :confused: :smiling_imp: :neutral_face: It might be just as well that the boy intervened.

This incident reminds me of one at the Lunt Avenue club several years ago. In those days some players had digital clocks and were using the delay, others still had BHB clocks and, of course, no delay. In one of the latter, in a double time scramble, one player inadvertently made an illegal move, with a pawn that had no legal move. The opponent paused the clock and asked for time to be added to his side. In the few seconds it took me (as TD) to adjust the clock, the player who had moved illegally found a crushing alternative, and of course played it and won quickly. The opponent would have been smarter not to ask for a time adjustment, but to instead just punch the clock back and holler “Illegal!”.

Sometimes demanding your rights isn’t the best course of action.

Bill Smythe

11

Since Mr. Zimmerle has provided additional information, I’m prepared to answer Mr. Suarez’ question.

First of all, it is important to remember that this is a club situation, not a major tournament. In the vast majority of tournaments players feel free to talk with spectators or other players. Mr. Suarez’ point one is clearly wrong. Further, I can think of many reasons why an eight-year-old may need to speak to a parent at almost any time. However, none of those reasons involves the father’s game of chess.

The spectator should have been punished under 20M4. An appropriate punishment would be for the TD to remove the spectator from the playing hall. It is never proper for a player to attempt to discipline a spectator, for obvious reasons. However, given the circumstances as I’ve described above, it seems reasonable to make sure that he knows that he is not to interfere (by discussing the board position or clock times) while a game is in progress. A warning seems adequate for a club event.

It is obvious that White promoting to a Black queen is an illegal move. The question remains what to do to White after a spectator has pointed out an illegal move. The situation is worse, though, because it was an interested spectator. The penalty for receiving advice must be the maximum reasonable penalty. I believe that, in an endgame, there is a negligible chance that a newly promoted queen will not be moved or captured within ten moves. Therefore I give Black extra time (two minutes for the illegal move, indeterminate time, but probably two more minutes, for the interference). My time penalty might be more severe if the players were in time trouble, but really the spectator should have run outside to tell the TD and the TD should have intervened. I think given the extreme likelihood of the illegal move being spotted in time to be corrected, that Black was minimally harmed by the intrusion. Of course the position must be reset to the position a move (or is it a half-move) ago and White directed to make a LEGAL move with that pawn.

It should be noted that there are any number of reasonable interruptions that might have refocused White on the game, and no penalty should be assessed for a spectator merely for speaking to his father during the game. Yes, it is better to call him away from the board, but it is reasonable.

After Black resigned, there is no further remedy possible.

Just as an aside, it is terrible for a player, especially an adult, to bully a young child to the point where his father asks the TD to give the opponent a half point after he has resigned. It is reasonable to take action against the losing player.

Alex Relyea

12

Admittedly I didn’t see the actual interference, another person came and got me almost immediately. (literally maybe 20 feet away in the hallway leading outside) But I don’t believe bullying a young child ever occured. Ron has already admitted he was upset and could have handled things better and in the end took the loss etc.

13

Given that Ron posted about the incident, refused to take the half point and acknowledged his own errors, criticism of him beyond what he leveled on himself seems a bit much.

14

I said two sentences to the 8 year old. The first was that he was not supposed to say anything about the game. After saying, “I resign.”, I then told the boy he was not a TD. There was no bullying.

I then began putting my set away, not saying anything else.

After putting my set away I picked up my things and stepped out the door, outside. This is where I told Wayne and a couple of others of my displeasure. The boy was inside and could not hear what I said.

The father went off with Wayne and convinced Wayne to award the draw. Once again the boy witnessed none of this.

It was later when I got home that I called Wayne and told him to give my opponent the win as I had actually resigned and that should stand. It was my idea, after the draw agreement, to give my opponent the win.

You guys assumed the worse of pretty much all those involved in this. And you were wrong on all counts.

I did reach out to my opponent about giving him the win and explain my frustration with this type of interference. Of course I did not blame the boy and told the father this. The father responded very positively and actually expressed his hope the boy would learn from this.

Of course I was and am aware of how to handle this with a warning and at worst a time penalty. This was not my question.

What I want to know is probably something that cannot be, a way to actually rectify the interference.

Bill did get it right on my thoughts during the game. And no one was being malicious at all in this to anyone else.

15

Yep.

16

Bill, punching your clock and saying ‘illegal’ is not a valid claim. And if it is a game with a secondary time control, it probably messes up the clock’s counter. Summoning the TD is the only proper course of action.

17

To the extent it can be rectified, it requires a claim before resignation. Which didn’t happen.

18

No, but it would have a better chance of accomplishing the OP’s original purpose of keeping his opponent off guard.

The OP was not looking for a proper course of action. He was hoping to find a way to keep his opponent blissfully immersed in music.

Bill Smythe

19

Bull. OP clearly stated he was oblivious to the error as well. He may have hoped the opponent would continue to be unfocused, but you imply something far more sinister, and quite unjustly.

20

The OP was the one listing to the music. Unfortunately the Monday night meeting place, even though it is a great site etc, leaves us no control over some other groups noises etc. (you get what you pay for) so headphones are one way to alleviate that issue.