Another arbiting question

[Nigel White]

This question is prompted by an incident in a recent game.

In a recent evening league game, when I was focussed on winning an endgame in which I was a pawn up, I fell for an out-of-the-blue mating combination. My opponent made their move, announced it was 'mate', stopped the clock, stood up to walk away and turned the clock off. Sitting there still somewhat shell-shocked, I pointed out that it wasn't actually checkmate. But in this instance, there was an obvious forced mate, so the outcome of the game was not contested.

I was wondering what would should happen if an erroneous claim of mate is made and the clock is turned off, when there is in fact no forced mate. In my recent incident, I had only a hazy notion of of the respective clock times, so it would have been difficult to reset the clock with any confidence that it reflected the actual times when the clock was turned off. Would it make any difference if any acceptance of the false claim had been made, such as a handshake?

[Sean Parker]

I would have restarted the clock made my move and wait till he lost on time!!

[Nigel White]

I would have restarted the clock made my move and wait till he lost on time!!

But I couldn't restart the clock, because it had been turned off (not just stopped).

[IM Jack Rudd]

OK, the most relevant rule appears to be rule 7.1, which helpfully tells you that if the clocks have to be reset, the arbiter should use their best judgement as to what they should be set to.

(Also, your opponent's behaviour is clearly a violation of the rule that forbids unauthorized pausing of the clock, and this is subject to general penalties under rule 12.9; again, arbiter's judgement as to what should be done.)

[Alex McFarlane]

There is no easy answer to this one.
Regarding the clock the arbiter should use their best judgement. I would also punish the player who turned the clock off if that was the player wrongly claiming mate.
Having been called over as an arbiter my first question would be to establish who switched the clock off (and why)? If it was the player who accepted the 'mate' then, by that action, I would declare that they had effectively resigned. If it was the player declaring mate they would be asked why they had done so before the opponent confirmed it. Such action could be an attempt to 'con' the opponent.
With regard to shaking hands, that is meaningless. There have been lots of cases where one player thought that a draw had been agreed and the other that the opponent was resigning. But timing and actions are all important. Most players will instinctively accept an offered hand, especially if it was unexpected. I would ask the 'loser' why they shook hands. If the handshake was 30 seconds or more after the move and the announcement then an argument that they were surprised by the opponent gets weaker.
If both players had reset the board then I would decide that the player had resigned the game.
Coming up after the scoresheets had been handed in would be too late to change the result.
Basically the timing and reactions are important and would be judged on a case by case basis. This is actually a common situation discussed in IA seminars.

[IM Jack Rudd]

This sort of thing, incidentally, is a good argument for writing clock times down on your scoresheet; if there are known clock times, you can revert to those.

[Roger de Coverly]

Basically the timing and reactions are important and would be judged on a case by case basis. This is actually a common situation discussed in IA seminars.

I should imagine that false claims of mate are relatively commonplace in events for low rated players, juniors in particular. It might be worth asking players to only pause the clock rather than switching it off at the supposed end of the game. Not everyone would know where the on/off switch was though, particularly with a less common timer.

[NickFaulks]

I would also punish the player who turned the clock off if that was the player wrongly claiming mate.

Turning off the clock is an outrage. Given the facts described here, I can see a strong case for defaulting the player who did that, even if it may seem excessive - what other penalty is there?

Some years ago, one of my players was trying to win an ending when his opponent made a fatuous claim of no winning chances, at which point he ( our player ) stormed out of the room in indignant fury. Stupid behaviour ( even though the game was technically over, with only the result to be decided ) and the league's management immediately defaulted him.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Switching the clock off seems very strange. When I finish a game, it is quite common to leave the board with the clock still running, or maybe paused at some stage. Obviously, if it's the last game in the match, someone would switch it off, but not immediately.

[Ian Thompson]

Switching the clock off seems very strange. When I finish a game, it is quite common to leave the board with the clock still running, or maybe paused at some stage.

I routinely turn the clock off at the end of a game, but only after the pieces have been reset, so there can be no doubt the game is over.

[NickFaulks]

Also, your opponent's behaviour is clearly a violation of the rule that forbids unauthorized pausing of the clock

Surely turning off the clock, and thereby destroying any evidence, is much more serious than merely pausing it, which may be a reasonable action.