You are here:
Home 
Blog Chess Experts Chris Bird FIDE OR USCF CHESS RULES?
Blog Chess Experts Chris Bird FIDE OR USCF CHESS RULES?
| FIDE OR USCF CHESS RULES? |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Chris on Wed, Apr 02 2008 (15:44) | |
|
At the recent Frank K. Berry US Championship Qualifier there was one “ruling,” which has been noted in the Chess Life Online report by Tom Braunlich and Dana Mackenzie’s Blog, related to keeping score while in time trouble. Apparently, Grandmaster Alex Ivanov was not keeping score with less than 5 minutes remaining on his clock. The time control for the tournament was Game/90 minutes with a 30 second increment per move. His opponent, FIDE Master Todd Andrews, rightly complained to the Arbiter and Ivanov was given a warning and told he had to keep score.
The FIDE Laws of Chess, Article 8.4 states “If a player has less than five minutes left on his clock at some stage in a period and does not have additional time of 30 seconds or more added with each move, then he is not obliged to meet the requirements of Article 8.1.”
When Andrews eventually lost, according to Dana’s Blog, “he tipped over his king, said “cheater,” and stomped off in a huff.” From the same Blog, Grandmaster Alex Yermolinsky was quoted as saying “he’s played in enough international tournaments, he knows the rules.”
Outside of the US, I feel that this would be a very cut and dry case. However, inside the US, especially at the major Swiss events around the country, despite them being FIDE rated, the majority of events use USCF rules. I definitely could see some plausibility in Ivanov wanting to clarify exactly which set of rules were in use for this tournament.
The USCF rules allow both players to stop keeping score when either player has less than 5 minutes remaining on their clock. The USCF rules do not have the additional proviso of enforcing scorekeeping when an increment time setting is used.
Of course, I was not at the tournament in person and so I do not know whether any clarifications were announced to the players in respect to which set of rules were in force. One could use the assumption that since the tournament was a qualifier for the US Championship and that it would be FIDE rated, it would be obvious the FIDE rules were in full effect. However, as I have said previously, the majority (probably 95% of them) of FIDE rated events in the US are run using USCF rules.
Personally, in this case the Arbiter ruled correctly (for FIDE rules), first offense a warning and then proceeding to greater penalties if it continues. However, comments like “cheater” and “he knows the rules” are a little harder to agree with given the current practice of using USCF rules in FIDE rated events, unless of course it was made plainly obvious that the FIDE rules would be used.
Since the event, Andrews has followed up further on Dana’s Blog. “There are no referees in chess. Players must ref. their own games and if your opponent requests to you one time to follow a certain rule and you clearly understand the rule, then why would you not follow it? Should one warning to your opponent to follow the rules be enough? Because I gave the GM four or five warning and he refused to correct his scoresheet. At what point should a guy (who is immorally breaking the rules, because he is aware that if he follows the rules, then he would run out of time) be forfeited? Chess doesn’t have any penalties to assess and it’s up to the TDs.”
Of course there are referees in chess. They are there to enforce the rules and obviously, with hindsight, Andrews should have stopped the clocks and immediately sought out the Arbiter/TD rather than continuously requesting his opponent to keep score. There are penalties that can be assessed, especially if the FIDE rules are being used, going all the way to a forfeit in very severe cases.
Lessons to learn from this? Players should be fully aware of the rules that are in use and, if you encounter a problem, it is usually better to stop the game and seek help from the Arbiter/TD rather than try to fight it yourself.
Best wishes,
Chris Bird              |
Advertisement
Chess Quotes
Chess is the touchstone of the human intellect.
-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Copyright © 2008 MonRoi Inc. All rights reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us |
I'm afraid when using the MonRoi there is no quick fix to the solution of someone who is numerous moves behind with their scorekeeping. Obviously with FIDE rules the arbiter could have warned the player and asked him to bring his scoresheet up to date thereby negating the potential problem. This is easily monitored using the MonRoi software as it notifies you if one player, in a game where both players are using a PCM, stops keeping score.
The simplest solution for the problem you encountered is to do exactly what you suggested you would do with a paper scoresheet. Diagram the position and then let the player keep score from that point forward. Probably not the best answer from a MonRoi perspective but about the only way I can see around it.
Chris Bird
The interesting point here is what to do when someone stops keeping score on a Monroi?! If he was using a 20th century scorekeeping device (Paper and pen) , I could diagram the position and say start keeping score from here. How feasible is it to mouse in 50 moves on a Monroi?? His opponent was faithfully keeping score. I guess I could have gone to monroi's presentation of the game, printed the scoresheet and asked him to start keeping score from that point, but not having done that before it didn't come to mind during the complaint.
Chris - any way around this with a monroi? How does one catch up their monroi when 40-50 moves have been unplayed?
Thanks,
Michael Atkins
Anonymous: I personally presume when in the US that the USCF rules are in force, unless specifically noted by the tournament I am participating in.
Andres: The USCF rules specifically allow both players to stop recording when either player has less than 5 minutes. So, if your opponent has less than 5 minutes remaining then you may also stop recording the moves. Please remember this is only USCF rules, the FIDE rules only allow the player who has less than 5 minutes remaining to stop recording and only if there is no increment of at least 30 seconds per move in use.
Michael: If this was the case then there is no excuse for a player to stop recording moves, although I still believe that a warning for the first offense is sufficient.
Chris Bird
In a later round, I summoned a TD to my board to warn an opponent about keeping score with a minute on his clock. My opponent was surprised and unhappy, but complied. He lost the game with only a minimal fight.
Michael Aigner
I thought only the player with less than 5 minutes is allowed not to keep scores. The player who has more than 5 minutes, I believe, is obligated to continue keeping scores until his time gets to less than 5 minutes.
In your posting, you said both players are allowed to stop writing scores when either player has less than 5 minutes.
I posted on Dana's blog a comment regarding the matter because I saw the entire incident unfolding before my very eyes.
The sad part about this case was that when the TD finally showed up and gave his first warning, Ivanov already had taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up on time due to several increments. One has to remember that each time Ivanov pressed his clock to stop his time, he gained an increment between 20 to 29 seconds. He should not have been allowed to stop his clock and gain the increments because he had yet to complete his scores. This a key observation ignored everywhere else.
Todd's mistake was not immediately stopping the clock after the first infraction. I guess it was not clear to him what the implications were at the time being unfamiliar himself to the nuances of the increment rule. In fact, I had to fetch the TD myself because the chorus of complaints began to annoy other players.
In effect, the warning came much too late because the damage was already consequential and irreversible. Also, at this juncture of the scramble, the outline of the winning plan was already obvious even to an amateur player like me.
Andres D. Hortillosa