One further complicating factor that’s left out is that of one or both of the players arriving late. In my case, the real opponent arrived late by the same amount of time that the wrong opponent realized he was sitting at the wrong table.
Based on Harold S.'s similar scenario post (now moved to another thread), I now would take into account the lateness with higher precedence in the calculation of time to allot. I agree that the player who was at the right time and at the right place but did not verify the identity of their opponent bears some responsibility, but shouldn’t be penalized for the real opponent’s lateness (who might have made the issue disappear by being there on time). Therefore,
A player arriving late, or later by a greater amount than his opponent, gets time deducted for the difference.
Any time both players were late in common (up to the arrival and set up of equipment of the first player) must be split evenly.
After the equipment is set up correctly and the time starts, any period of time that both players are in fact in the playing hall, just at the wrong boards, must also be split evenly.
Based on this, I would have still have had no time deducted from my game, since the lateness happened to take exactly the same amount of time as the clearing up of the confusion.
The challange for the corect, but late, opponent here is that when they arrive they have zero chance to start their game because the set-board-clock are being used by another player; therefore, the situationn is no different for the late player than the one where no equipment was set up at all. Either way they can’t start their game.
That (hopefully!) short amount of time should be split evenly as well, as wbport suggested a few posts back. So you are right, a small amount of time should have been deducted from my clock. I would say it took us a minute to set up from the time the opponent arrived.
The consistent point made here is that you must confirm that you are playing the proper opponent. What if you ask your opponent’s full name (per other thread where the guy only asked for the first name) the guy nods yes and you play? Maybe you even show his name written on the score sheet and he agrees. Later you find out that he misheard you or misread and now you are playing the wrong guy.
It seems to me the only person responsible for being at the right spot is you. It’s not my fault someone else messed up and said he was my opponent.
As such, the fair thing is late opponent gets time from round start deducted and both get deducted half of the time required to fix the mess.
A great example of why the long-standing tradition at the start of a game with a previously unknown opponent is, “Smerdly?” “Yes - Trikunikov?” “Yes, nice to meet you.” “Good luck.” (accompanied by handshake).
We’re arguing a knotty point of rules here, when simple traditional courtesy would have prevented the error in the first place!
I’m sure I should be taking some offense at this. Not exactly sure why, but everyone else around here seems to be taking offense all the time, and I feel like I’m missing out . . .
And hope that if the tournament has more than one of the 29 different Kevin Wangs or 98 different James Smiths (or 24 Jim Smiths) in MSA, that the correct one shows up at your board.
P.S. checking driver’s licenses at a K-8 scholastic might be difficult.
Fortunately I don’t have problems with mistaken identity. If someone is sitting across from me it’s 99.9% like that he knows he’s playing me. The other .1% was the time back before I got married. 1978 World Open. I saw on the pairing sheet (hand written) Petersen went to the board sat down and played the guy and won in 15 moves. Unfortunately my maiden name is spelled Peterson. I had gone and played Glenn Petersen’s opponent. The game didn’t count, I had to go play my real opponent who much higher rated then me and got crushed.
Wait a second. If you’re late arriving at the board and your clock is running, then are you even allowed to ask your opponent for his name? What if you don’t hear him clearly, or can’t read his scribbled name on the score sheet? Do you have to go get a TD just to confirm your opponent’s identity?!
Remember that the game is already in progress. Your clock is running. The rules only permit you to offer draw, resign, say “I adjust”, ask to read his score sheet, or make a claim. You’re not supposed to say anything else.
Yes, I have played Eastern European opponents whom I never understood nor could I read anything on their score sheet. I have also heard nightmares from World Youth events on exactly this topic, especially during round 1.
No, you don’t have to. But if you sit down and start playing the wrong opponent or on the wrong board, you’re going to have to live with the consequences. Last tournament I saw a C-player sit down and set up at a board in the top section because he didn’t know the difference between his board number and his pairing number.
Just to avoid such issue, I don’t print the player’s pairing number on the pairing sheet.
While I never used PairPlus, I believe there wasn’t an option to turn off the printing of the pairing number on the pairing sheet. TD’s locally worked around this issue by starting the first board in a tournament as 101. Thus, if the tournament had 100 or fewer players there wasn’t going to be an issue with a player confusing his pairing number with the board number.
I considered that, but I hate to inconvenience the vast majority of players because of a few. Note that after the first round I prefer to have the pairing sheet display score rather than rating, so without the pairing number it can be difficult to find your opponent on the wallchart. But if we’re going to discuss pairing sheet and wallchart design, someone should start a new thread.
I think you’re taking the what you’re allowed to say during a game rule to the extreme.
I have had kids and older opponents ask me to write my name on their scoresheet. If someone asks me my name, I flip my Mon Roi over where I have my name printed in 16 point type on a label. If they can’t read that, that’s their problem not mine.
Michael, I love what you do for the game, but you’re taking this to an unjustifiable extreme.
If Black starts his clock at the beginning of the round, White comes late and asks Black’s name, and then Black complains to me for distraction, I would have to suppress laughter to issue the immediate, firm, and justified denial.
Mileage in FIDE may vary, but World Youth participants ought to be able to find the board.
I have to agree with Mr. Aigner here, and I think it’s especially true in the opposite case, and the one we’re especially considering. If I’m on time, and my opponent’s late, and he comes to the board, I’m not going to ask him his name before I “allow” him to move the pieces.
