An Arbiter`s Notebook
Contents
1. CIDMWARWNYeE Black Lone K K B K B K B K N ARON 6 K N 7 K N 8 K Q R 2B B N P 2N Result 2 12 0 1 YY 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 SIDAKRWNS Best regards Peter Verbeeren Belgium Answer One The answer is yes in all cases Answer Two In my opinion it doesn t matter how much time is left Only the position is relevant Answer Three I refer to the first sentence of Article 7 4 a of the Laws of Chess If during a game it is found that an illegal move including failing to meet the requirements of the promotion of a pawn or capturing the opponent s king has been completed the position immediately before the irregularity shall be reinstated As you can see the player makes an illegal move It does not matter that he replaced the pawn after he had pressed his clock And completing an illegal move has different penalties In normal games the opponent receives two extra minutes and the third illegal move has as consequence that the offending player even loses the game e In Blitz and Rapid games with adequate supervision the same happens as in normal games e In Rapid games and Blitz games with inadequate supervision the arbiter shall intervene if possible If the arbiter declares the game lost for a player then the opponent must have sufficient material to checkmate the player by a series of legal moves If such a checkmate is impossible the arbiter declares the game drawn Answer Four If it is clear2. If players in general do not record some moves there is for me no need to rewrite the whole scoresheet What is easier than to compare the two scoresheets and to find out which moves are missing To answer your main question it is correct to intervene if something is amiss Thus I have no problem that the arbiter intervened but to force a player to rewrite the whole scoresheet goes too far in my opinion Question Sir I am from India and have a problem that is common to youth tournaments We know that any player touching a piece must move that piece only if it is not an illegal move My question is how do we know and prove that a player touched the piece when the one player claims that the opponent touched the piece but the opponent says he did not touch it When I oversaw some tournaments as an arbiter I gave decisions by inquiring surrounding players and also according to the positions on the board Were my actions and decisions correct Please guide me in this regard Akalamkam Ramakrishna India Answer If an arbiter did not witness what happened it is almost impossible to make a decision that satisfies both players If a player claims an illegality committed by his opponent and the opponent denies this illegality the arbiter s decision can be based only on the facts he observes If he has not seen that a piece was touched the piece has not been touched If a player claims that the opponent accepted a draw offer and the prop
3. piece or pawn in the center of the intended square As you have to keep adjusting the opponents pieces it takes your mind off of the game and you can lose patience with opponents who persistently place their pieces incorrectly Personally I consider this to be a form of gamesmanship and not within the spirit of the game Is there a rule that states a player when making a move should place a piece or pawn within the intended square on the board If such a rule exists what is the penalty for not placing the pieces within the intended squares Kind regards John Smudger UK Answer You are right There is no article in the Laws of Chess that describes how to place the pieces on the squares Nevertheless the player may inform the arbiter that the behavior of his opponent is annoying I am sure when the player shows him how the opponent is placing the pieces on their square the arbiter will take measures I refer to Articles 12 6 and 12 7 It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever This includes unreasonable claims unreasonable offers of a draw or the introduction of a source of noise into the playing area Infraction of any part of Articles 12 1 to 12 6 shall lead to penalties in accordance with Article 13 4 Question Hi Geurt I have some questions Question One White has king and bishop Black has king queen and rook Black s flag falls Is it a draw because White is not able to checkmate the blac
4. the device you can spot threefold repetition of position The diagram is visible and helps you to identify the identical positions What is your opinion in this matter Regards Paul Peter Theulings Netherlands Answer As far as I know it is possible to turn off this function This means there is no problem on the point you mentioned in your question Question Dear Mr Gijssen I have the following situation In a youth championship an arbiter is suddenly interested in checking Player A s scoresheet and realizes that the scoresheet is missing some moves So the arbiter begins to verify the moves on the board using Player A s time Then he continues verifying on another table where the clock had already been stopped After that the arbiter discovers that Player A s scoresheet is missing two moves So he makes Player A rewrite the scoresheet however now she has only four minutes on the clock instead of ten minutes and forty five seconds as when the problem began Player A was three pawns up but hurried made some mistakes and finally lost Was it correct to have the arbiter intervene without a request by Player A Must she rewrite the scoresheet Thank you for your answer Robert Cuadros Peru Answer It is very important to me that you mention it happened in a youth tournament I have stated quite often that an arbiter in a youth tournament has also to act as a teacher and has to take into account the lack of experience of these children
5. Book EADSARE SRITTLES Heo E REVIEWS ST U DIES COLUMNISTS An Arbiter s Notebook Geurt Gijssen Find us on Facebook Translate this page MIHAJLO SAVIC dA Te bigirak The Ael of AGE FICE Boring Beguieiiaed Free Shipping On all Orders More than 75 UPS Ground or Media Mail we BOOoOnRST ORE Feels fel i EMPORIUM ChessCafe com Must a Touched Piece Always be Moved Question Dear Mr Gijssen I would like to ask two questions about the Handbook Both of them refer to item C 06 in the FIDE Tournament Rules in the Annex to the FIDE Tournament Regulations specifically regarding tiebreaks Question One Subsections d and g both state The greater number of games played with the black pieces Is this an editorial error Perhaps this refers to in at least one case more games won with black pieces and or the best result with black pieces win draw Could you please clarify these points Question Two b1 The Koya System extended The Koya System may be extended step by step to include score groups with less than 50 or reduced step by step to exclude players who scored 50 and then higher scores As this may be interpreted in different ways does FIDE advise to follow a specific criterion to start tie break for example To start with the first score group or is the criterion to be chosen at the principal arbiter s discretion Thanks in advance for your kind attention Yours sincerely FA J
6. a win for the virtual opponent and vice versa For each next round the virtual opponent gains half a point For the opponents in other rounds of the player who gets a result by default For reducing the consequence for the opponents when calculating Buchholz each result by default of a player is counted as a half point draw for the Buchholz of the player s opponents FIDE Swiss Rules 1 Are these both FIDE recommendations equivalent 2 If one of these recommendations has priority which one and since when 3 If neither during the tournament opening procedure nor in tournament regulations the chief arbiter has announced which of the recommendations will be used with the computer program Swiss Master 5 1 does it imply that final standings calculated by this program will be considered per default 4 Given that drawing in a Swiss tournament is made by Swiss Master 5 1 how shall the chief arbiter rule upon the player s appeal against calculating Buchholz by this program per default if for him draw against virtual opponent is favorable Neither during the opening procedure nor in tournament regulations there has been any mention of the method applied Swiss Master 5 1 calculates Buchholz as draw against the player himself Best regards Yauheni Kakhno Russia Answer It was an oversight by all concerned that both systems draw against the player himself and applying a virtual opponent were published in the FIDE Handbook It was sim
7. avier U Gilmet Uruguay Answer One You are right g should be the greater number of games won with the black pieces Answer Two I want to make it very clear that the chief arbiter is not responsible for the regulations used in a tournament this is the responsibility of the organizer Second FIDE provided it is not the organizer of an event does not give advice regarding the application of any tiebreak system Thus the organizer decides which tiebreak system will be applied but the organizer may ask for advice from anyone he wishes including the chief arbiter Moreover all criteria to be applied in a tournament must be part of the regulations of the tournament and communicated with the players in a timely fashion The regulations of the tournament must be sent to the players with the invitation Question Dear Mr Gijssen I would like to know your opinion about the following episode I was deputy arbiter in the sixteenth world senior championship 2006 played in Arvier Aosta Valley Italy A game of the third round reached the diagram position FEN Srlk 1p4b1 p5p1 2Prn2p 1P4q1 4Q1B1 P4P2 2RR1K2 w 0 33 Black s last move was 32 Rd8xBd5 Purchases from our chess shop help keep ChessCafe com freely accessible 888 Miniature Studies by Genrikh Kasparian Chess Informant 110 by Chess Informant sis I Y EC DVADESETI VEK Gligoric s Music CD by Svetozar Gligoric After White s move Black sum
8. k king Suppose Black has in addition a pawn Is this won for White after Black s flag has fallen I think yes because Black can blunder his queen and rook and promote his pawn to a knight In this case it is possible to checkmate the black king Is this rule applicable for all types of chess Question Two Suppose that in the situations mentioned in the first question White has only two seconds left at the moment Black s flag has fallen Then it is debatable whether White is still able to checkmate Black s king within these two seconds Does it make any difference how much time White has left Question Three A player plays one of his pawns to the last rank presses his clock and replaces the pawn by any piece of the same color Does he lose the game because the move is illegal Question Four A game is played with a digital chess clock Both displays show 0 00 but in one of the displays a flag is shown indicating which flag has fallen first Is it a draw Question Five A player attacks the opponent s king with his king but the opponent does not notice it Can the player claim a win Question Six I found the following list made by Mr Sahasrabudbe appearing in your July 2002 column White s flag has fallen Is this list still applicable White K any force K opp col B N P K Q R same col B K opp col B N P any all other e g K Q N K R B N P K Q K R B N P any all other force e g K Q N K any force
9. moned me and told me that White had played first 33 Rc1xd5 but soon after he tried to correct his mistake playing 33 Rd1xd5 According to his claim Black asked me to enforce the regulation First of all I asked which piece White touched first Both players agreed that White touched first the Rc1 I decided not to compel White to move the Rcl but I let him play 33 Rd1xd5 My decision derived from the following reasoning e The thirty third move was a capture else White had to move the Rcl e Itis evident that White intended to capture the black rook with his Rd1 and not to move the Rcl I convinced myself that White touched the Rc1 not deliberately according to article 4 3 of the Laws of Chess but only as a slip of hand lapsus manus Note that the two white rooks are very close Was I wrong I showed the case to many people arbiters and players and more than eighty percent said I was wrong Now I still have doubts For this reason your judgment will be very important for me Thank you very much Renzo Renier Italy Answer I refer to Article 4 3 of the Laws of Chess If the player having the move deliberately touches on the chessboard a one or more of his own pieces he must move the first piece touched which can be moved b one or more of his opponent s pieces he must capture the first piece touched which can be captured c one piece of each colour he must capture the opponent s piece with his piece or if
10. mple the first period is also the last one Question Dear Geurt I have a question for your column regarding Rapid play Recently in a tournament with a time control of game in fifteen minutes my opponent made a move with his rook and dropped the piece but didn t hit the clock Then he took the rook again and moved it to a different square The original rook move was perfectly legal and a huge blunder I called the arbiter and he ruled that since he hadn t hit the clock he could move the rook to wherever he wanted as long as it was legally possible Was his decision correct Which articles apply to this situation Yours sincerely Rafael Montero Spain Answer I refer to the first sentence of Article 4 6 When as a legal move or part of a legal move a piece has been released on a square it cannot be moved to another square on this move The move is then considered to have been made This article states clearly that a legal move has been made at the moment the player has released the played piece on a square The move cannot be changed Essential is the release of a piece on a square and not that the clock was pressed Question Dear Mr Gijssen FIDE has recognized the Monroi device for recording chess games The user manual mentions replay buttons on the bottom of the screen so it seems you can backtrack earlier played moves and previous positions in the game In my opinion this is not in accordance with the FIDE laws of the game With
11. n illegal move was completed before the flag fall it is not unreasonable to follow the same procedure Answer Two Games can be played with different time controls I give three examples 1 A time control of forty moves in two hours followed by one hour for the remaining moves 2 The time control can also be forty moves in 100 minutes then twenty moves in fifty minutes and finally fifteen minutes for the remaining moves with an increment of thirty seconds from the first move 3 The time control can be that all moves must be played with a time control of two hours for each player This first example contains two periods of play the second three and in the third example there is only one period of play In these examples it is possible that at the end of each period both flags have fallen This article deals with the assumption that it is unclear which one fell first If it happened at the end of the first period in the first example the game continues The same is the case at the end of the first and second period of the second example But if it happens that both flags have fallen and it is known which one was first the situation is different As you can see we then have the case that in a period that all remaining moves must be played in that period In this case the game will be declared drawn Your problem was probably that it is clear which period is the last one in the first and second examples but in the third exa
12. osal had not been recorded on both scoresheets or the arbiter did not hear the proposal and the opponent denies this proposal then there is no proposal These are some examples In general if the arbiter was not a witness and there is no evidence that something happened by consulting possible witnesses the arbiter should order the game to continue from the actual position that is on the board The main topic next month will again be Article 10 2 of the Laws of Chess 2011 Geurt Gijssen All Rights Reserved Have a question for Geurt Gijssen Perhaps he will reply in his next ChessCafe com column Please include your name and country of residence Yes I have a question for Geurt Comment on this month s column via our Contact Page Pertinent responses will be posted below daily ABOUT THE TSP OF PAGE HoMe COoLU MH AS CINKS ARCHIVES CHESS CAFE ChessCafe Home Page Book Review Columnists Endgame Study The Skittles Room ChessCafe Archives ChessCafe Links Online Bookstore About ChessCafe com Contact ChessCafe com 2011 BrainGamz Inc All Rights Reserved ChessCafe com is a registered trademark of BrainGamz Inc
13. ply a mistake Furthermore I am not sure that all programmers of the Dutch program have included the system of the virtual opponent in their Swiss programs Regarding Swiss Master the Dutch Chess federation informed me that Swiss Master 5 5 build 15 still applies the system draw against the player himself It is possible to download from the website of the Dutch Chess Federation an executable that offers the system of the virtual opponent This produces automatically Swiss Master 5 5 build 18 It means Swiss Master 5 5 build 15 produces only the calculations using the system draw against the player himself whereas Swiss Master 5 5 build 18 produces the calculation of unplayed games in Sonneborn Berger and Buchholz applying the system of the virtual opponent There is a proposal for the Executive Board in October 2011 to choose the system that will be applicable in the very near future The intention is to use the system of the virtual opponent As already mentioned I am not sure that all programs apply the system of the virtual opponent I suggest that if an organizer does not state in advance which system applies the default system should be the system of the draw against the player himself I will keep you informed Question One Dear Sir recently I saw a problem in a tournament I didn t arbitrate the arbiters had many doubts about the decision Player A plays a move which checks Player B s king but Player B didn t
14. see that check and he checks Player A s king illegal move At that moment Player B saw Player A s flag has fallen According to my view the illegal move stands because we can revise the game to a correct position and add two minutes to Player A s time One can argue that according to flag fall Player A lost the game but if we count the illegal move Player A receives an extra two minutes which changes the whole game Question Two Article 6 11 of the Laws of Chess says If both flags have fallen and it is impossible to establish which flag fell first then a the game shall continue if it happens in any period of the game except the last period b the game is drawn in case it happens in the period of a game in which all remaining moves must be completed Sir what does this phrase last period as well as the phrase in which all remaining moves must be completed mean I don t have a clear understanding of these and if you can give me a simple definition for this 6 11 I will be most grateful Regards Malith Akalanka Sri Lanka Answer One I refer to Article 5 1 of the Laws of Chess The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent s king This immediately ends the game provided that the move producing the checkmate position was a legal move I agree that this article does not cover the case you mentioned but it is comparable The game appears finished with the overstepping of the time control but in case a
15. this is illegal move or capture the first piece touched which can be moved or captured If it is unclear whether the player s own piece or his opponent s was touched first the player s own piece shall be considered to have been touched before his opponent s The question is of course did the player in your case deliberately touch the rook on cl My personal opinion is that he did not Therefore I agree with your decision and surrounding argument Question Dear Geurt a player secures an Elo of 2300 very quickly in a tournament qualifying him for a title Does he get the title immediately or must he wait until the tournament finishes Thanks Wilfredo Paulino Dominican Republic Answer You mention that a player secured a rating of 2300 This means you refer to the title of FIDE Master In the title regulations I found the following Title applications based on unpublished ratings shall only be accepted by FIDE after agreement with the Rating Administrator and the Chairman of the Qualification Commission Ratings in the middle of a period can be confirmed only after all tournaments for that period have been received and rated by FIDE I spoke with the chairman of the Qualification Commission of FIDE He confirmed that all titles are awarded at the end of a rating period Question Dear Mr Gijssen from time to time I meet players who move pieces and pawns very lazily leaving part of the base between the squares rather than placing the
16. which flag has fallen first then the game should be declared lost for the player who overstepped the time limit This is a general rule But in case the opponent cannot win by any series of legal moves the game is drawn There is another exception If both flag have fallen in a Rapid or Blitz game and there is no adequate supervision the game is also a draw Answer Five Refer back to the third answer Answer Six As I stated in 2002 the sixth case of king and queen versus king and knight is a draw Also a draw is king and bishop vs king and bishop with bishops on the same color squares As a reader once also pointed out even if we increase the number of bishops on the same color squares it is still a draw Question Dear Mr Gijssen when counting Buchholz in the case of an absence of one of the opponents there are two recommendations 1 Handling of unplayed games For tie break purposes the result shall be counted as a draw against the player himself Annex to the FIDE Tournament Regulations regarding tiebreaks 2 Handling of unplayed games for calculation of Buchholz Congress 2009 There are two points of view for the player himself who gets a result by default or is absent A virtual opponent of the player is used to calculate the Buchholz of the player A virtual opponent has the same points at the beginning of the round and the result by default of a player is treated as a normal result so a loss by default or absence is
Download Pdf Manuals
Related Search