Possession of (or by) Mobile Phones

[MartinCarpenter]

Indeed its so easy to cheat in bridge you need rules to correct people who are 'cheating' without knowing they're doing it They still manage to play the game quite happily.

Car boots are very much not a general purpose storage solution. Chess event venues are public knowledge do if people also know that the cars in those events are liable to contain multiple complete sets of baggage - and pricy, easy to flog etc mobiles - you've definitely got a major risk.

I had my 'baggage' with me several times at Div 3/3N last time round. Wouldn't have been at all convenient to store it the times I did. Probably wouldn't have played to be honest. Not at all surprised it isn't that noticeable in the hall - not like you need a big/visible suitcase for a weekend playing chess!

Actually I can't think why baggage is an issue? It isn't like you're going to be picking it up to take it to the toilet with you

If you're worried about it containing computers transmitting stuff, well anyone setting that up could do it from a remote location almost as easily. Bags in the hall isn't perfectly secure but its actually one of the saner solutions for letting people store stuff like mobiles etc.

[David Sedgwick]

If you have your mobile phone on your person with chess programs installed on it switched off, during an evening league match or whatever, what is to stop you going to the WC during the game and turning it on?

The fact that it's against the rules and cheating. In matches played without arbiters, you need a certain amount of trust and respect otherwise you might as well close down.

Exactly. Moreover, that's true even with an arbiter present.

Before the advent of the current concern about electronic cheating, players could cheat in two different ways.

They could inflate their grade by methods such as consulting books or stronger players during play.

They could deflate their grade by deliberately throwing some games.

One of these has indeed given rise to concerns in amateur chess from time to time. Which one?

Has anything really changed?

[Steve Rooney]

There may not be a dispute regarding the mobile phone rules for events at the professional level, but as far as amateur chess goes it is an utter nonsense. Smartphones with chess-playing capacity have been around for some time, yet how many instances of cheating with a phone have even been alleged, let alone proven?

We have our county agm coming up next week and if any other leagues have adopted or are considering a form of words that avoids the nonsense of defaulting players for possessing a phone at an evening match, I would be interested to see it.

[MartinCarpenter]

A small handful have been caught doing it, but that's part of the reason not to be that worried - relative to most of the other ways you could dream of to cheat electronically taking a mobile into the toilet with you is incredibly easy to catch!

The only people doing it would be opportunistic and not especially likely to repeat offend. The really dangerous sorts of cheats, who plan it all in advance etc, would be likely to do something a lot more subtle

[Paolo Casaschi]

A small handful have been caught doing it, but that's part of the reason not to be that worried - relative to most of the other ways you could dream of to cheat electronically taking a mobile into the toilet with you is incredibly easy to catch!

The only people doing it would be opportunistic and not especially likely to repeat offend. The really dangerous sorts of cheats, who plan it all in advance etc, would be likely to do something a lot more subtle

True, but those dangerous cheats will most likely raise very quickly to rating level a way higher than mine (I'm only a lousy 180 player after all). Very unlikely for me to ever come across any of them. Not my problem then. So much discussion, new rules and restrictions for the players for something that ultimately is not my problem. So frustrating.

[Roger de Coverly]

We have our county agm coming up next week and if any other leagues have adopted or are considering a form of words that avoids the nonsense of defaulting players for possessing a phone at an evening match, I would be interested to see it.

The current Berkshire wording is below. This dates from several years ago and some marginal rewording may be needed to give explicit permission for a switched off phone to be present and to apply the same to other electronic devices, although it's implied by the content.

(I)

Exceptions to the FIDE/ECF Rules
(a) Mobile Phones
The use of a mobile phone during the match is not allowed. Match Captains may leave the playing area to give directions to the venue. Any
phones in the playing area must be on silent mode. Any sound from a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication shall result in a two minutes added to opponents time.
(b) Recording Moves
The recording of a move on a scoresheet or in a scorebook , before the move is played, will not result in a loss. A scorebook must not be used as a database of moves during the game.
(c) Notation
The use of recognised notation systems other than algebraic will not result in a loss

[Steve Rooney]

A small handful have been caught doing it, but that's part of the reason not to be that worried - relative to most of the other ways you could dream of to cheat electronically taking a mobile into the toilet with you is incredibly easy to catch!

The only people doing it would be opportunistic and not especially likely to repeat offend. The really dangerous sorts of cheats, who plan it all in advance etc, would be likely to do something a lot more subtle

True, but those dangerous cheats will most likely raise very quickly to rating level a way higher than mine (I'm only a lousy 180 player after all). Very unlikely for me to ever come across any of them. Not my problem then. So much discussion, new rules and restrictions for the players for something that ultimately is not my problem. So frustrating.

If someone took my glasses away I wouldn't be able to read anything on my phone these days anyway.

[Tryfon Gavriel]

If this is really going to be imposed for normal ECF league game matches (can the ECF state the official position in this?! ), this surely is going to be a pain to a load of people.

The cure seems worse than the problem. How many recent UK league matches have had cases of engine cheating?! And FIDE want to impose the ban on mobile phone devices being present - which most captains already surely ask everyone to turn off at the beginning of the match?! Come off it. Seriously ?!

For tournaments, it might be more bearable. I was once defaulted in the Barnet Congress because the Iphone made a noise. I thought it was switched off. So for other tournaments after, I didn't take it with me. But club matches - isn't this going too far ?!

[Steve Rooney]

We have our county agm coming up next week and if any other leagues have adopted or are considering a form of words that avoids the nonsense of defaulting players for possessing a phone at an evening match, I would be interested to see it.

The current Berkshire wording is below. This dates from several years ago and some marginal rewording may be needed to give explicit permission for a switched off phone to be present and to apply the same to other electronic devices, although it's implied by the content.

(I)

Exceptions to the FIDE/ECF Rules
(a) Mobile Phones
The use of a mobile phone during the match is not allowed. Match Captains may leave the playing area to give directions to the venue. Any
phones in the playing area must be on silent mode. Any sound from a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication shall result in a two minutes added to opponents time.
(b) Recording Moves
The recording of a move on a scoresheet or in a scorebook , before the move is played, will not result in a loss. A scorebook must not be used as a database of moves during the game.
(c) Notation
The use of recognised notation systems other than algebraic will not result in a loss

Many thanks Roger

[NickFaulks]

What stops amateur bridge players from cheating in the absence of all the precautions that are taken in the professional game?

Not the best example. In the absence of screens, all manner of inferences are gleaned from partner's behaviour, sometimes deliberately but far more often, I would hope, inadvertantly.

How does this work in high stakes rubber bridge? I've never played, but assume that miscreants become known and don't find many games.

[Mick Norris]

There may not be a dispute regarding the mobile phone rules for events at the professional level, but as far as amateur chess goes it is an utter nonsense. Smartphones with chess-playing capacity have been around for some time, yet how many instances of cheating with a phone have even been alleged, let alone proven?

We have our county agm coming up next week and if any other leagues have adopted or are considering a form of words that avoids the nonsense of defaulting players for possessing a phone at an evening match, I would be interested to see it.

We had our AGM on Saturday and there was no mention of mobiles, cheating or FIDE

Manchester League Rule is:

Mobile phones are allowed in the playing area. However they must be either switched off or switched to silent mode for the duration of play. Match captains must remind players of this requirement immediately before the commencement of play.

If a player's phone rings audibly during his game then he automatically forfeits the game. If the opponent cannot win the game by any series of legal moves, it will be declared drawn.

[Stewart Reuben]

David Sedgwick >Before the advent of the current concern about electronic cheating, players could cheat in two different ways.
They could inflate their grade by methods such as consulting books or stronger players during play.
They could deflate their grade by deliberately throwing some games.
One of these has indeed given rise to concerns in amateur chess from time to time. Which one?
Has anything really changed?<

David, the principal means of cheating used to be the two players colluding, particularly in Swisses. One scenario is where two players have 4/5. 5/6 will win a prize, so they agree one will win. Ron Harman offered the opinion that the player who threw the game should get the lion's share of the money. I was once in that situation 3 times in the same year. all 3 games were drawn and it was very annoying. This collusion has diminished as far as I know.
There are other ways of cheating that I don't intend to mention, in case players would do it, but haven't thought of it.
Currently the FIDE Anti-cheating committee is concentrating on electronic means of cheating. That is why the current interest.

In my book 'Need to know? Poker' I listed 10 ways of cheating and didn't even mention electronic surveillance or cheating online.

[E Michael White]

I suppose you can read it that way, although it was not the intention of the people who wrote the regulation. In any case it seems unlikely that the current wording will survive Tromso. Some members of this forum have even put their views to FIDE, where the relevant Commissions are taking them into account.

It does not surprise me if the ENG words used in the rule do not clearly state the intention of those who wrote the rules. It has been my view for a while that the RTRC should be split into two or three separate bodies covering :- statement of the intent of the rules, writing of the rules and checking rule integrity both versus normal ENG language and for conflict against other FIDE rules. When roughly the same group perform all these functions they will defend to the hilt what they write with reasons such as:- that was not the intention or we should not try to cater for all idiots. The latter reason being given once by a member.

I guess the overall intention of the rule is to prevent cheating by giving players access to advice brought in from outside sources or consulting a chess engine during the game. In that case the rule does not seem to go far enough as it doesn't bar arbiters and others from having mobiles in the playing area. Most moves can be encoded into 7 binary digits as positions rarely have more than 127 moves available. This number could be emailed to an arbiter who could then pass on the message via body language or arrangement of his attire eg jacket buttons undone or hand in pocket etc. The arbiter would be able to parade in front of the player without suspicion.

I don't think the new rules should panic anyone connected with the 4NCL or other team events as Mike Truran could invest in a few of these units with a compartment for each team. I'm not saying this company is better than any other.

http://www.elitelockers.co.uk/lockers/p ... s-lockers/

[Roger de Coverly]

FIDE have now published a modified version of the Laws of Chess.

http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... chess.html

It still doesn't answer the question as to what is supposed to happen if you aren't in the habit of taking a bag to chess matches.

For local league purposes we simply agreed that having a mobile phone in your possession was allowed, provided it was turned off at the start of play and remained turned off for the entire duration of the game. No arbitrary distinctions as to whether it was in a bag, a jacket or any other form of clothing were considered necessary.

[NickFaulks]

For local league purposes we simply agreed that having a mobile phone in your possession was allowed, provided it was turned off at the start of play and remained turned off for the entire duration of the game. No arbitrary distinctions as to whether it was in a bag, a jacket or any other form of clothing were considered necessary.

Clearly you are not at all concerned about electronic cheating in your local league, and I expect that I would agree, so why have a rule at all? I see no point whatsoever to the rule you have. If my opponent walks out of the playing hall carrying a mobile phone, and I have any suspicion that he may be intending to use it to cheat, then I do not care whether it is turned off. I assume that he has the technical expertise required to turn it on.