What of the case where a TD stipulates for his tournament- 2nd boards of any kind are not allowed. This can be stipulated with approval by CC.
But a player reasons - CC has said it is OK . Period. It is not cheating - (which it is not unless abused). Under all circumstances they feel it is perfectly alright to use one. No specific rule is written strictly prohibiting their use.
I wonder if these people would ignore the guideline and enter anyway... having no ethical qualms.
If the TD is using CC as the server to run his tournament. Then the TD would do well to ensure sure his conditions are in line with CC.
If the TD is unhappy with this outcome. The TD could always use another server.
You are creating a problem that does not need to exist.
The stipulation is inline with CC’s policies - which give TD’s the right/option to make such guidelines as there exists no specific rules written concerning 2nd boards that govern all cases.
I’ve said this before and made example of.
A while back a similar discussion revolved around rules in Daily chess. Specifically the use of The opening explorer tool.
Many were convinced, long time members and TD’s that its use was prohibited by the rules. Nothing specifically was written but their interpretation was clear- it was against the rules.
The rule was written in a generic, simple fashion similar to the Live play rule given- no outside assistance of any kind. That is all that is written in the Fair Play rules.
Eventually staff rewrote its rules governing Daily play . Explorer is specifically mentioned as OK to use making clarification.
I think something similar is needed for the use of 2nd boards. The wording would be quite difficult to ensure no misinterpretation- but something further perhaps is needed.
So it seems after 14 pages we are right back where we started from. How many play games online but use a physical board? Apparently a minority, but still enough to find out if it's ok. And after 14 pages, it's ok. fine, allowed, legal, whatever term you like to use. As long as it's for relaying exact game moves and nothing else of course. Seems like there isn't much more to figure out.
This may seem like a stupid question
Has anyone in this discussion actually contacted CC for any clarification?
It could just save everyone another 265 posts of going around in circles!
I use the computer to play because I don't have any one to play with...
This may seem like a stupid question
Has anyone in this discussion actually contacted CC for any clarification?
It could just save everyone another 265 posts of going around in circles!
Two admins from Chess.com have weighed in on these discussions, and they both said there is no issue with the practice of using a physical board, and they both state it is not against the rules of Chess.com. Yes, I too thought that those answers would be sufficient.
Yes . Two admins have weighed in and do say the practice is OK .
However -you only quote the 1st part and conveniently leave off the caveat - if not used for analysis. You do not copy this important stipulation in an attempt to give a misleading impression- that the practice is perfectly fine anytime, anywhere, in any manner or fashion -not letting people know of the many pitfalls that may befall new players/beginners.
This explains why as yet nothing is in writing OK’ing the practice. It would be foolish and impractical to make but a single statement - OK to use. It’s OK if conditions are followed. This presents the problem - how to make such wording. The issue therefore is left open - one for The Fair Play Team to evaluate and pass judgement - and only them as each case is potentially different. 2ndly and as important- the practice is undetectable. Why go into detail? It can’t be enforced unless directly observed on camera.
New members have posted here saying cool - they want to now use a 2nd board thinking it will Help them to increase their rating.
Such new players have little understanding of the proper use of a 2nd board failing to recognize the practice is a disadvantage. They should be encouraged to use one for unrated games when learning chess if it suits them.
If it’s not understood in some cases - the practice is providing assistance (thought to be) - rating increase for example (with no intent to cheat)then not much else will be.The practice becomes an ethical one - seldom that of potential cheating. Not that the practice will increase anyone’s rating in the 1st place.
I think Robert Earl Keen, Jr. wrote a song about this thread. I saw him do it live way before The Highwaymen covered it. Substitute word "post" for "road" when you listen.
The Post goes on forever....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lTjsU-iJyM
This may seem like a stupid question
Has anyone in this discussion actually contacted CC for any clarification?
It could just save everyone another 265 posts of going around in circles!
Two admins from Chess.com have weighed in on these discussions, and they both said there is no issue with the practice of using a physical board, and they both state it is not against the rules of Chess.com. Yes, I too thought that those answers would be sufficient.
Yes . Two admins have weighed in and do say the practice is OK .
However -you only quote the 1st part and conveniently leave off the caveat - if not used for analysis. You do not copy this important stipulation in an attempt to give a misleading impression- that the practice is perfectly fine anytime, anywhere, in any manner or fashion -not letting people know of the many pitfalls that may befall new players/beginners.
This explains why as yet nothing is in writing OK’ing the practice. It would be foolish and impractical to make but a single statement - OK to use. It’s OK if conditions are followed. This presents the problem - how to make such wording. The issue therefore is left open - one for The Fair Play Team to evaluate and pass judgement - and only them as each case is potentially different. 2ndly and as important- the practice is undetectable. Why go into detail? It can’t be enforced unless directly observed on camera.
I have to give you credit for being sensible. At the beginning of this topic a few people, including me, said using a real (or second) board was ok, with the exception that it couldn't be used for analysis. You said no, that's "incorrect" and that a second board was always not allowed because it was outside assistance.
I see you now agree that it's ok, if conditions are followed.
Ok - enough on my part. It is not always allowed and is of outside assistance in some cases. I presented examples but people want to argue it is universally OK without restriction and can’t possibly ever by of any assistance because it is not cheating. Cheating usually implies intent - for thought when none is being made when choosing to use one. No rule is in place using the terms “2nd board”. End of story.I think PG misinterpreted my position. The use of a 2nd board is a good tool if used ethically - for unrated chess - training/ adaptation and making the transition to 2D chess.If people want to continue the practice that’s their business. I for one care less. Simply inform new players it is a disadvantage- playing 2D is not that difficult to become accustomed to. A 2nd board presents unnecessary ethical issues for new players if they jump right into rated games.
Ok - enough on my part. It is not always allowed and is of outside assistance in some cases. I presented examples but people want to argue it is universally OK without restriction and can’t possibly ever by of any assistance because it is not cheating. Cheating usually implies intent - for thought when none is being made when choosing to use one. No rule is in place using the terms “2nd board”. End of story.I think PG misinterpreted my position. The use of a 2nd board is a good tool if used ethically - for unrated chess - training/ adaptation and making the transition to 2D chess.If people want to continue the practice that’s their business. I for one care less. Simply inform new players it is a disadvantage- playing 2D is not that difficult to become accustomed to.
Ummmmmmm, what do you make of this scene then? I would say one of the players (MVL) is looking directly up at the very huge board on the wall. Do you think those positions are from some other tournament on the other side of the world?
Do you think that there is some rule that they are not allowed to look up at those boards? If that was the case, why the h-ll did they make them so large and put them right next to the players? And where is the chief TD that should be handcuffing Maxime and hauling him backstage to be smacked around with a vinyl chessboard until he confesses he was cheating by looking up at that board? 
Geez - demonstration boards have been in use for centuries. I completely miss any point trying to be made . What relation do they have to the issue ? None that I can see. The issue is bringing a 2nd personal board to the playing field - one that the player is physically able to move pieces about. Totally unrelated to demonstration boards.
Here is a more compelling issue -
The touch move rule OTB . Touch a piece and it must be moved.
Online chess - not so.
The nature of chess interfaces allows for a mouse to pick up a piece, hover over a square and return it back to the original square - and choose another move.
If this is allowed online on your computer - (which sure seems to be a form of analysis)
Why not on your 2nd board? Your opponent has that ability - but it is not allowed on your 2nd board.
A valid argument. Does it not seem fair/equal to pick up a piece and take it back on a 2nd physical board ? - think about that one !
Geez - demonstration boards have been in use for centuries. I completely miss any point trying to be made . What relation do they have to the issue ? None that I can see. The issue is bringing a 2nd personal board to the playing field - one that the player is physically able to move pieces about. Totally unrelated to demonstration boards.
What I have been saying ad nauseam now for two or three days, is simply duplicating moves from a 2D screen to a 3D board (but not moving them around) is not cheating. It is the same thing in reverse as duplicating moves from a 3D board onto a 2D display. Again, not cheating.
that is ALL I have been talking about thru this entire discussion thread. I am not talking about moving pieces around and trying out tactics and candidate moves, etc. - THAT would be cheating. Simply duplicating moves from one medium to the other is not cheating. That is my ONLY point.
No difference. DGT boards have placed the issue more in a grey area than before.
So this is enough proof that chess.com does not have any issues with using physical boards providing the user is just relaying the moves and not moving the pieces whilst analyzing.
So we are back to....
Using a physical board inappropriately in live chess is cheating.
Using a physical board appropriately in live chess is not cheating.
It all comes down to moral courage, doesn't it!
Ladies and gentlemen, please stop overthinking this!