Its my understanding that any tournament that is FIDE rated must follow the FIDE laws of chess .
Officially I guess this is true. I think in practice a lot of tournaments brush some of the sillier rules under the carpet. I can't remember ever playing in a competition where the zero tolerance to lateness rule is enforced strictly.
Its my understanding that any tournament that is FIDE rated must follow the FIDE laws of chess .
Officially I guess this is true. I think in practice a lot of tournaments brush some of the sillier rules under the carpet. I can't remember ever playing in a competition where the zero tolerance to lateness rule is enforced strictly.
Isn't the zero tolerance to lateness rule one where there's an "at the discretion of the organizers ...." clause?
Just looked it up (on the website not my outdated printed copy):
|
6.6 |
a. |
Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game. Thus the default time is 0 minutes. The rules of a competition may specify otherwise. |
|
|
b. |
If the rules of a competition specify a different default time, the following shall apply. If neither player is present initially, the player who has the white pieces shall lose all the time that elapses until he arrives, unless the rules of the competition specify or the arbiter decides otherwise. |
Not saying "ALL" announcements do this, but MANY say "FIDE-Rated, but will follow USCF Rules", since they are also USCF rated. All games played in the United States are.
Is that allowed? I thought to be FIDE rated, the laws of chess had to be followed and the only areas where the arbiters would have flexibility are where the laws specifically give discretion for modifying the laws.
Tournaments that offer FIDE norms must follow the FIDE rules to the letter. Not so with simply rating it.
For example, to get FIDE Norms in your tournament, you can't ever use a time delay. There are only certain time controls that are approved, like 40/2, SD/1, no delay, or 40/90, SD/30, 30 Sec Increment. There are a limited number of others, but I don't have the whole list.
However, if you decide to do 40/2, SD/1, Delay/5 Seconds, you can still FIDE Rate the event, but GM or IM Norms will never be available in such a format of tournament.
usually it is when either player is under 5 min. for any time control
That's actually not correct, it's if either player is under 5 minutes in a sudden death time control. If you are playing say, 35/90, SD/60, you are expected to write down the first 35 moves of the game, and all moves thereafter until one player or the other is below 5 minutes, at which point it's optional, though recommended as otherwise you can't claim 3-fold repetition or 50 moves.
all tournaments I have been to have allowed people to stop once one is under five minutes for any time control
I've met very few directors that understand more than 50% of the rulebook, so it doesn't surprise me at all!
the FIDE-rated tournaments that I have been in in the US, the TD specifically announces before the tournament starts that FIDE rules apply. The two main differences from my standpoint - 1) the TD can intervene without prompting from either player 2) with an increment on the clock, all moves must be notated.
The difference here is I'm guessing you've been to the larger tournaments in the United States that offer GM and IM Norms (i.e. World Open in July, Chicago Open in May, etc etc). I'll wager you haven't been to many of the 5-round weekend tournaments with time control 35 moves in 90 minutes followed by sudden death in 60 minutes with a 5 second increment, Open Section will be FIDE rated, but will follow USCF rules.
The difference here is, because of the time control, and the fact it's only 5 rounds, you can't get an IM or GM norm, but FIDE will still rate any time control that meets its minimum, which is G/90 if using a 30 second increment, and G/2 if not.
Usually when my opponent touches me inappropriately, I kindly ask them to move away.
I've met very few directors that understand more than 50% of the rulebook, so it doesn't surprise me at all!
I've seen a TD Award a game to a player who mated his opponent with an illegal move, leaving his own king in check.
The reason? "Checkmate ends the game, you should have complained before".
Living in Africa can be fun :)
Its my understanding that any tournament that is FIDE rated must follow the FIDE laws of chess .
Officially I guess this is true. I think in practice a lot of tournaments brush some of the sillier rules under the carpet. I can't remember ever playing in a competition where the zero tolerance to lateness rule is enforced strictly.
Isn't the zero tolerance to lateness rule one where there's an "at the discretion of the organizers ...." clause?
Just looked it up (on the website not my outdated printed copy):
6.6
a.
Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game. Thus the default time is 0 minutes. The rules of a competition may specify otherwise.
b.
If the rules of a competition specify a different default time, the following shall apply. If neither player is present initially, the player who has the white pieces shall lose all the time that elapses until he arrives, unless the rules of the competition specify or the arbiter decides otherwise.
And here's a prime example why the smaller 5-round tournaments that only FIDE rate the Open section will often say "FIDE Rated, but USCF Rules apply".
For an instance like this, it would follow the USCF rule that not showing up for 60 minutes results in a forefeit, even if the time control is longer, so if the time control is 35/90, SD/60, then once the clock reads 29:59, if no first move is made, you can claim a forfeit win.
Secondly, if both are late, USCF rules are different than FIDE. First one to show up sets the clock with equal time removed from both clocks. So if Black shows up first, and the time control was Game in 2 hours, and he's 12 minutes late, he sets both clock for an hour and 54 minutes, and then starts Whites clock. If White shows up first, he does the same thing, but then starts his own clock, makes his first move, and hits the clock so that it's Black to move, and Black's clock runs until he either shows up for forfeits.
Are there any senior TDs ( USCF ) here ? What about FIDE arbiters ?
Senior TDs, definitely in larger tournaments that have FIDE Norms (like GM or IM). All the directors from the Continental Chess Association are Senior TDs. The CCA is who runs the majority of the large tournaments, like the World Open, Chicago Open, Philadelphia Open, etc.
FIDE arbitor, not necessarily
I've met very few directors that understand more than 50% of the rulebook, so it doesn't surprise me at all!
I've seen a TD Award a game to a player who mated his opponent with an illegal move, leaving his own king in check.
The reason? "Checkmate ends the game, you should have complained before".
Living in Africa can be fun :)
This is true in the USCF. In the USCF, the responsibility is on the player. Checkmate ends the game in the sense that if I make the move while my clock is falling, I still win. However, if his mating move is illegal, you can still say "Illegal Move - Stopping the clock and getting the director". You better have a complete scoresheet. If you quit taking moves, you can forget it! I suggest taking moves whenever you possibly can, even below 5 minutes, more than anything else to protect yourself!
It is ridiculous to have separate tournament rules between national federations and FIDE. It is one thing if you wish to give the organizer flexibility on some rules if the alternates are announced ahead of time - such as time penalties instead of instant forfeit for certain infractions. But rules involving the play of the game should be consistent.
Suppose an event is to be rated by both bodies in part, like the World Open (rated FIDE for eligible games only). Will only those FIDE-ratable games be required to follow FIDE rules? Or will following USCF rules be acceptable for FIDE ratings?
It's just silly. PICK A RULE and STICK WITH IT for all players everywhere.
This is a good point, but national or even local organizations can't be forced to accept FIDE rules. Many USCF people are FIDE members, too, but there is nothing that says USCF people have to ever play in FIDE games, or vice versa. Another good example of the separation is the FIDE ratings and the USCF ratings. There are FIDE events and USCF events. Since there's no real international government or a FIDEPD, how can they force others to bend to their will?
I agree, though, that there needs to be standardization. I'm sure foreigners have a difficult time in their first USCF torunaments and USCF players feel awkward in their first FIDE games. At least they haven't gotten to the point of having separate rules for the actual game.
I've met very few directors that understand more than 50% of the rulebook, so it doesn't surprise me at all!
I've seen a TD Award a game to a player who mated his opponent with an illegal move, leaving his own king in check.
The reason? "Checkmate ends the game, you should have complained before".
Living in Africa can be fun :)
This is true in the USCF. In the USCF, the responsibility is on the player. Checkmate ends the game in the sense that if I make the move while my clock is falling, I still win. However, if his mating move is illegal, you can still say "Illegal Move - Stopping the clock and getting the director". You better have a complete scoresheet. If you quit taking moves, you can forget it! I suggest taking moves whenever you possibly can, even below 5 minutes, more than anything else to protect yourself!
Really? You need a complete scoresheet to prove an illegal move when both kings are in check on the board?
With regard to "writing your move down first or after you play", I would question why anyone would want to write down their moves first, and thus take time off their clock? Simply makes no sense.
How often have you played using increments ? The two main things I prefer about increments is that A) neither player can ever stop keeping score and B) far fewer games are decided by the clock or terrible time scrambles at the end .
A isn't totally correct. The only time you have to always keep score is in games with increment time controls of 30 seconds or more.
If you or your opponent have less than 5 minutes on the clock, neither of you have to keep score until you meet the next time control for games with multiple time controls (USCF).
This is true for both non-sudden death time controls (rule 15B) and sudden death time controls (rule 15C). That is from the USCF 5th edition rules and associated rulebook changes that were effective as of January 1st, 2012.
FIDE rules are actually the same, with the exception that only players in time trouble are excused from keeping score until the time control is met; after that they have to completely update their score sheet before making another move on the board. See sections 8.4, 8.5 and 8.6 of the FIDE rules.
How often have you played using increments ? The two main things I prefer about increments is that A) neither player can ever stop keeping score and B) far fewer games are decided by the clock or terrible time scrambles at the end .
A isn't totally correct. The only time you have to always keep score is in games with increment time controls of 30 seconds or more.
If you or your opponent have less than 5 minutes on the clock, neither of you have to keep score until you meet the next time control for games with multiple time controls (USCF).
This is true for both non-sudden death time controls (rule 15B) and sudden death time controls (rule 15C). That is from the USCF 5th edition rules and associated rulebook changes that were effective as of January 1st, 2012.
FIDE rules are actually the same, with the exception that only players in time trouble are excused from keeping score until the time control is met; after that they have to completely update their score sheet before making another move on the board. See sections 8.4, 8.5 and 8.6 of the FIDE rules.
In my experience A is totally correct . I played in FIDE rated events , in Europe for more than 10 years and the most popular classical time control used was G/2 hours and G/90 with a 30 s increment from move 1 . In the games with 30 sec increments both players had to keep score the entire game. I never saw any increment other than 30 seconds used , are they ? In G/2 h a player below 5 minutes may stop keeping score but as long as a player has more than 5 minutes remaining he must keep score which makes more sense than the USCF way of allowing both players to stop keeping score if one of them is under 5 minutes.
With regard to "writing your move down first or after you play", I would question why anyone would want to write down their moves first, and thus take time off their clock? Simply makes no sense.
When I started playing chess I used to first write my move down and the reason was to do a " blunder check " before actually playing the move . After writing the move down , before playing it , I would look at the position and check to insure that I wasnt hanging a piece , overlooking mate , or overlooking that I might be in check .... this simple precaution saved me many games over the decades . Now does it make sense to you why some prefer to do it this way ? I know many who still prefer to do this .
And it makes no sense at all to have "local rules" or variances on a game as standard as chess. A local golf course might declare a cart path a hazard or not, or a ball field might declare any ball hitting a wire or pole to be out of bounds, these are practical matters which change with the venue. But the chessboard is the same everywhere, and so should the rules be.
On the other hand, can you really blame national federations for modifying (improving!) FIDE rules when they have the chance to do so (i.e. in tournaments which are not FIDE-rated)? Some FIDE rules are so daft that it makes good sense from the federations' point of view to discard them if possible.
With regard to "writing your move down first or after you play", I would question why anyone would want to write down their moves first, and thus take time off their clock? Simply makes no sense.
When I started playing chess I used to first write my move down and the reason was to do a " blunder check " before actually playing the move . After writing the move down , before playing it , I would look at the position and check to insure that I wasnt hanging a piece , overlooking mate , or overlooking that I might be in check .... this simple precaution saved me many games over the decades . Now does it make sense to you why some prefer to do it this way ? I know many who still prefer to do this .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi NM Reb, thanks for addressing my question. If I get you correctly, you are saying that the preferred move is written down, then evaluated for blunders, then played or changed? I understand selecting a move, evaluating it etc, but why the need to waste time writing it down? I have never played OTB so maybe I am missing something.
Its my understanding that any tournament that is FIDE rated must follow the FIDE laws of chess .