Arbitration question

[Ian Thompson]

Just one further point - if a player castles 'correctly' (in as much as he touches the king before the rook) but the king in fact has no legal move, does the obligation to move a touched piece then devolve to the rook?

No.

Are you sure about this? The rules state -
4.3 Except as provided in Article 4.2.1, if the player having the move touches on the chessboard, with the intention of moving or capturing:
4.3.1 one or more of his/her own pieces, he/she must move the first piece touched that can be moved.

Those rules are over-ridden by 4.4.3 - "If a player having the move intending to castle, touches the king and then a rook, but castling with this rook is illegal, the player must make another legal move with his/her king (which may include castling with the other rook). If the king has no legal move, the player is free to make any legal move."

[Roger Lancaster]

No.

Are you sure about this? The rules state -
4.3 Except as provided in Article 4.2.1, if the player having the move touches on the chessboard, with the intention of moving or capturing:
4.3.1 one or more of his/her own pieces, he/she must move the first piece touched that can be moved.

Those rules are over-ridden by 4.4.3 - "If a player having the move intending to castle, touches the king and then a rook, but castling with this rook is illegal, the player must make another legal move with his/her king (which may include castling with the other rook). If the king has no legal move, the player is free to make any legal move."

Yes, many thanks to Alex and Ian for clarifying. I'd missed that particular Article.

[Tim Harding]

In the final round (with an earlier start) of a FIDE-rated classical tournament, with a 60-minute default time, one player in a top board game has not arrived and his clock is running.

The game affects the destination of substantial prize money and a title.
The title will be decided by default if the missing player does not arrive.
(Or it may just mean other contenders must win whereas otherwise a draw might be sufficient.)

The FIDE Arbiter Manual appears to be silent on such situations.

Does the arbiter have the right to telephone the absent player and remind him?

If he does have the right, how long after the start of the round should he wait before making the call?

If he does have the right but doesn't do it and the default occurs
OR
If he doesn't have the right, but makes the call anyway, and the absent player arrives just in time because of the call...

then what, if anything, should be done?

[IM Jack Rudd]

I'd say that in general, if the rules are silent on such situations, it's because they don't want to be prescriptive on them, and that would mean the arbiter has (absent any other instructions) both the right to do so and the right to not do so.

[Stewart Reuben]

This is a common occurrence. If the arbiter intends to contact only certain players, that is showing favouritism which, of course, is unacceptable.
The first round of one Lloyds Bank Masters, a player had not arrived yet. I knew his room number and knocked on his door. He hadn't bothered to arrive on time, because the first round is always late. I told him, not in the LBM.
Kasparov was late for a round and it was the day the clocks went forward. He went to GARRY's room and said to him,. ''Didn't you remember that you were told the change in the time.. Garry responded, 'I think I vaguely remember something about that.'
I was the Chief Arbiter for the Commonwealth Championship in Calcutta. I had carefully insisted that the last round start at the same time as all others. Late in the tournament they found an excuse for starting the last round in the morning. I drew up a note explaining the change in schedule and required ALL the players to sign that they had read it and understood.

[Roger Lancaster]

This is a common occurrence. If the arbiter intends to contact only certain players, that is showing favouritism which, of course, is unacceptable.
The first round of one Lloyds Bank Masters, a player had not arrived yet. I knew his room number and knocked on his door. He hadn't bothered to arrive on time, because the first round is always late. I told him, not in the LBM.
Kasparov was late for a round and it was the day the clocks went forward. He went to GARRY's room and said to him,. ''Didn't you remember that you were told the change in the time.. Garry responded, 'I think I vaguely remember something about that.'
I was the Chief Arbiter for the Commonwealth Championship in Calcutta. I had carefully insisted that the last round start at the same time as all others. Late in the tournament they found an excuse for starting the last round in the morning. I drew up a note explaining the change in schedule and required ALL the players to sign that they had read it and understood.

Yes, key point is common treatment for all but there can be practical problems. For example, two players don't show up on time. You alert the first but then find you can't locate the second who consequently gets no reminder. S/he is defaulted but later learns first player was alerted ...

[E Michael White]

In the scenarios presented by Tim, it seems to me that the arbiter should never remind a player of the early start.

FIDE law 12.6. year 2023.

The arbiter must not intervene in a game except in cases described by the Laws of Chess. SNIP ------------------------------------------------------- The arbiter shall refrain from informing a player that his/her opponent has completed a move or that the player has not pressed his/her clock.

If players want to have reminders the Laws need a careful rewrite for this one.

[SeanCoffey]

From the latest FIDE Laws of Chess:

"6.7 Default time:

6.7.1 The regulations of an event shall specify a default time in advance. If the default time is not specified, then it is zero. Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the default time shall lose the game unless the arbiter decides otherwise."

I am intrigued by the last five words here, which I had not noticed before. In the situation described by Tim, suppose the player had turned up an hour and ten minutes late. The wording above seems to indicate that the arbiter could simply wave play on. What is the usual practice?

[Stewart Reuben]

If somebody turns p an hour and 10 minutes late, it is inexcusable normally. But what id the opponent is still around and really wants to play the game. Perhaps it may enable him to get a norm.
unless the arbiter decides otherwise.is a get out of jail card.

There is never anything wrong with warning all the players in advance about the schedule.

[Tim Spanton]

If somebody turns p an hour and 10 minutes late, it is inexcusable normally. But what id the opponent is still around and really wants to play the game. Perhaps it may enable him to get a norm.
unless the arbiter decides otherwise.is a get out of jail card.

There is never anything wrong with warning all the players in advance about the schedule.

I was playing in a Scandinavian tournament - cannot recall if it was Norwegian or Danish - with a default time, I think, of 30 minutes. That went past, but the arbiter was reluctant to award me the game. When I went up to him for about the third time, after about 50 minutes since the start had elapsed, he said something like: "I suppose you are wanting to claim the game?" I replied that I was happy to wait if I knew my opponent was coming, and the arbiter then explained that my opponent was driving and was late, but was definitely coming. I was happy to wait. The frustrating thing is in those tournaments where you have to wait for an hour for a non-coming opponent.

[Paul McKeown]

I think as an arbiter you should aim for consistency in such things. If you attempt to contact players who are late for their games, you should do this for all players, always, and regardless of the round. Otherwise you get into difficult areas of partiality. I think in general you shouldn't do it, and you should ensure that if the organiser does it, that the same conditions of impartiality apply.

[Stewart Reuben]

Tim the arbiter got that wrong. You had no need to claim the game, It should have been awarded to you after 30 minutes. He can ask whether you were willing to wait with no certainty of getting a game.
In Britain we often re-paired after 30 minutes if two players would otherwise have won by forfeit.