2016 Olympiad - Baku

[Roger de Coverly]

I have taken the view that a captain is not allowed to intervene to tell a player that a draw would be a good result

It's acceptable to tell players the match score, or at the very least keep the match card up to date so players can see for themselves. As a player, I would look at the other games to decide whether a draw was an acceptable result. You would do this in a Congress last round as well, if critical. I'm thinking of circumstances where you could force a repetition if you wanted too, or exchange everything to an obviously level or drawn ending. As a captain, I disapprove of early draws against supposedly weaker opposition particularly with the white pieces, but otherwise I would expect players to manage their own level of risk.

[Martin Carpenter]

Fine for the majority of players that, some? Well......

Waving score sheets at people definitely happens in close matches, although I've never been absolutely convinced of the point. If a draw is enough to seal the match then your opponent should know that too! I'm not sure how many people can effectively change the level of risk in their play mid game.

You have to be really quite good to do that I think.

[NickFaulks]

It's acceptable to tell players the match score

Even if they don't ask and are clearly immersed in their own game and oblivious to anything else? In the final minutes that is quite understandable, so is the captain allowed to say "a draw is all we need"?

[Roger de Coverly]

I'm not sure how many people can effectively change the level of risk in their play mid game.

You have to be really quite good to do that I think.

It's partly a question of time management, players who are apt to lose the thread when short of time should be allowed to take a draw if it is still on offer or likely to be accepted. Others are very good at managing to retain winning chances even down to their last minute.

Teams where players have an understanding of each other's style can have an advantage there. You need a point and a half for the match. One of the games is yours. You could take a draw, giving that your team mate is winning in the other game but short of time.

[Roger de Coverly]

so is the captain allowed to say "a draw is all we need"?

Presumably that's when approached by the player. If it's the last game to finish, then yes. If otherwise, it could be construed as advising a player on the state of his game. If there's more than one game, the captain should just convey the match score. It' should be acceptable to look at other unfinished games as part of deciding whether to accept or offer a draw, or even whether to pursue a line of play likely to draw.

A typical circumstance might be that a six board match is tied at 2 each. Both remaining games are relatively unclear and during a period of play where players are playing quickly. You can tell from spectator reaction that the other game has finished, but what was the result?

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I think the rule is that the captain shouldn't proactively provide information, but can provide certain types of information when asked by the player. When I am captaining (which I am not this season, thankfully!) I tend to do something like put the match score sheet near the last game to finish, and try and tell the players before the match to keep an eye on the score and ask if they are unsure what the score is. If you have two games in time trouble, finishing at the same time, and I am one of the players, I sometimes ask the captain or other team-mates to let me know how the other game finishes. Is that acceptable, a request for future provision of information?

[Chris Rice]

I was quite surprised to find that the Captain's regulations didn't seem to operate like the 4ncl although admittedly its been a few years since I played in that. http://www1.bakuchessolympiad.com/files ... ations.pdf The Captain's Regulations seem to indicate, as has been expressed above, that the regulations weren't breached. The relevant part reads:

DURING THE ROUND:

Chairs for the Captains will be next to the Arbiter’s chair. The Captains have the right to communicate with their players according to the Laws of Chess, as follows:

The team captain must not stand behind the opposing team during play. If the Team Captain wishes to speak to one of his players, he shall first approach the Match Arbiter. The Team Captain shall then speak to the player in the presence of an Arbiter, using a language the arbiter can
understand. The same procedure shall be followed if a player needs to speak to the Captain. A Team Captain is entitled to advise the players of his team to make or accept an offer of a draw, unless the regulations of the event stipulate otherwise. He shall not intervene in a game in any other way. He must not discuss any position on any board during play. The Team Captain may delegate his functions to another person, provided he informs the Match Arbiter of this in writing in advance.

[LawrenceCooper]

The team captain even has the authority to proactively order the player to offer a draw

Is this the correct interpretation of the Competition Rules? I'm not sure, although it does appear to read that way.

That was my understanding, albeit I had no intention of doing it myself.

I did wonder if giving a player a bottle of water could be construed as giving advice (to play on) if done so in a match tied 1.5-1.5 and the players have repeated the position but given the above regulation it wouldn't have been an issue this time.

[LawrenceCooper]

I was quite surprised to find that the Captain's regulations didn't seem to operate like the 4ncl although admittedly its been a few years since I played in that. http://www1.bakuchessolympiad.com/files ... ations.pdf The Captain's Regulations seem to indicate, as has been expressed above, that the regulations weren't breached. The relevant part reads:

DURING THE ROUND:

Chairs for the Captains will be next to the Arbiter’s chair. The Captains have the right to communicate with their players according to the Laws of Chess, as follows:

The team captain must not stand behind the opposing team during play. If the Team Captain wishes to speak to one of his players, he shall first approach the Match Arbiter. The Team Captain shall then speak to the player in the presence of an Arbiter, using a language the arbiter can
understand. The same procedure shall be followed if a player needs to speak to the Captain. A Team Captain is entitled to advise the players of his team to make or accept an offer of a draw, unless the regulations of the event stipulate otherwise. He shall not intervene in a game in any other way. He must not discuss any position on any board during play. The Team Captain may delegate his functions to another person, provided he informs the Match Arbiter of this in writing in advance.

What did surprise me was that although captain's weren't allowed to stand behind the opposing team there was no attempt made to stop players doing so. In one match the arbiter placed my chair behind the opposition (as opposed to my own team) and took a great deal of persuading that it might be advisable to move it.

[NickFaulks]

I think the rule is that the captain shouldn't proactively provide information

I'm seeing a lot of "presumably" and "I think", but does anyone actually know? I don't, and this issue affects the results of club matches in the UK every week.

[Alex Holowczak]

What did surprise me was that although captain's weren't allowed to stand behind the opposing team there was no attempt made to stop players doing so.

There was from this Olympiad match arbiter.

Usually when prompted, the players would mutter an expletive under their breath, hold their hand up, and quickly but sheepishly scuttle around to the other side.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Which matches did you arbit, Alex? Did you get any of the top matches? Which was the most 'exciting'? (If you are allowed to divulge such snippets of information?)

[Alex Holowczak]

Which matches did you arbit, Alex? Did you get any of the top matches? Which was the most 'exciting'? (If you are allowed to divulge such snippets of information?)

The tournament is divided into sectors. There were 4 sectors in the Open, and myself and Alex McFarlane were both in Sector 2, which covered matches 11-36. I tended to oscillate between about match 26 and 31.

The most interesting was Croatia v Bangladesh in Round 9, where it looked like Bangladesh might draw 2-2, but the Bangladeshi board 1 - who appeared to my eye to be winning easily if he could find the right way to do it - blundered into a draw by repetition, which won the match for Croatia. I think that was the match where I didn't understand the Croatian board 1 playing Ra2 on about move 30odd, and assumed it was my lack of knowledge. I checked on the computer afterwards - mainly to ensure the draw by repetition I awarded was correct! - and it seemed to agree with my assessment.

But you're only looking after four games at once, so there's never really too much happening. The move counter was on, so the important thing to check is that both clocks add the extra half hour after the correct number of moves. The other thing was to keep an eye on player and captain movements around the playing area, or when they went to the toilet without asking etc.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Thanks. Were there any language problems, or was it necessary to ensure the teams had someone able to speak English? Or was it a case of players whose first language is not English knowing key English phrases?

[Roger de Coverly]

I did wonder if giving a player a bottle of water could be construed as giving advice (to play on) if done

Blueberry yogurt anyone? Was there a regulation that players were not allowed to be fed at the board during the Olympiad?