Changing the Rules?

I recently participated in a tournament where the coordinator said that "The En Passant move cannot be used". I was wondering if this was a common practice in high school tournaments or if this is just weird.

Also, in that same tournament the coordinator said that there would be no draws or stalemates, and if one did occur then the winner would be the one with more time on their clock. This was a real shock to me, I've never heard of rules like these. It was even more controversial because the championship match in the tournament was a draw by insufficient material, however the guy with more time won.

I just wanted to hear your thoughts on this stuff.

Weird on all accounts.  Were the rules made clear before signing up, or was it a surprise sprung on everyone once they arrived at the tournament?  I'm assuming the event wasn't sanctioned by any official governing body, correct?

The tournament was done through the School board in my District, so it was not all that big, but i know that about 10 schools came. Also, all of those rules were a complete surprise, neither I, nor the rest of my team knew it would happen.

that's cool

Sounds ridiculous and inappropriate to me. The e.p. move is fairly uncommon, but banning its use changes the game. Prohibiting draws in all cases is also not right. It sounds like a lazy or incompetent tournament director.

I'd lean towards incompetent.

Yeah, I wouldn't play in anything he arranged again, the rules don't need to be changed, especially not in that way.

I would say that he was inexperienced, but i don't want to disrespect him because he is the only person in our community supporting chess in our high schools to such an extent. 

Maybe it would be wise for him to accept feedback from some of the players.

this sounds really weird what kind of tournament was this? is this a common practice in high school i don't know it's just weird

There is no excuse for disallowing e.p., except laziness in the rare instance of having to explain the rule to someone who does not know it. By disallowing it, it opens up a tactical resource which should not be available, potentially changing the outcome of a game. The damage is worse than simply playing by the rules.

Disallowing all draws may make the TD's job easier -- results are clear and potential tie-breaks fewer. Tough. Draws are legal and perfectly valid results of chess games. Deal with them. Arbitrarily assigning an unearned victory based on time remaining is just wrong.

I understand wanting to keep someone who is helping to promote chess. I just hope, for the sake of those involved, he can learn to do it properly rather than continue to promote not-exactly-chess. He needs to rectify his inadequacies rather than rewrite the rules.

I guess if it's an informal tournament for beginners, he may want to avoid the e.p. rule altogether to avoid having to explain it to some little kid who got screwed over by it. But it's the TD's job to make sure the thng goes correctly, and by the real rules.

That's totally messed up.

But interesting!

So this means that if I have more time than my opponent, and can force a draw by repetition, then I can win in this manner? So it REALLY pays to know your openings. I'm surprised that they knew to have chess clocks but didn't know that adding these, um, interesting rules would change the fundamental strategy of the game.

Very interesting comments. I completely agree with Bur_oak on the fact that these rules must certainly be fixed and reverted back to original.

Also, I know for a fact, after facing these guys, that they are beginners similar to me. However, as beginners they should be taught the correct way of chess as i was taught through chess.com.

@Ozzie: They only had clocks on the players who made it to the top 8, so as you can see, it was not a major tournament (however this is my first tournament so I cant say too much). 

How did they resolve the "non-draws" in the round(s) prior to the introduction of clocks?

Weirdly enough they just ignored the game, as if it had never been played, and then you would just continue to your next opponent. 

Yea i know, thats strange....and stupid.

That's just bizarre, that's some hillbilly stuff... -- is this one of those high schools where they don't teach evolution?

Okay, sorry for the cheap shots but seriously your TD, chess supporter that he is, needs to be straightened out.

You need some chess figure or institution that he respects to tell him how to properly run a chess event.

You could get write a letter to USCF describing the situation and

A) request that they send him a tournament directors handbook..

B) request that they contact your TD and encourage him to run more orthodox chess events

(I have never personally dealt with USCF (beyond getting a membership) so I have no idea what kind of response you can expect... frankly I haven't heard positive things about USCF, but that's just gossip without any experience behind it)

Alternatively you could contact someone locally who is some kind of authority on chess (perhaps there's a titled player nearby) who could diplomatically tell your TD that his rules innovations are not sound. 

It was a non-sanctioned event, and based on what geekman said above mentioned it sounds like a little gentle guidance would be a more appropriate course of action.

geekman, perhaps you could direct the TD to this thread for a little insight into how such rule modifications are received among a more chess-savvy audience.

Unbelievable! 

I'm printing this thread out right now so i can give it to my coach who will mail it to the TD. Thanks for all the comments, this will hopefully change the way future turnaments are played here.(btw, this was my final year in high school so i wont be able to experience these new changes )