Local Law Variants

[Mike Truran]

Re your penultimate sentence -on another thread I asked Adam R and David S if as prominent ECF officials they would be willing to do what you suggest. No luck I'm afraid.

[Alistair Campbell]

Perhaps it's a cultural thing but you very rarely get other 'sportsmen' arriving after the scheduled start of their game. Football, tennis, snooker - it would be an anathema. Even darts players make it to the ocky on time!

Not that it is particularly relevant, but at the recent Scottish Darts Open, in which I participated (all too briefly) there were numerous defaults, particular amongst players drawn to play on the Friday (although I attribute this more to players who had hoped for a Saturday draw not bothering to take the day off work). It was also common for players not to be ready for the start of their tie, although the unpredictability of the starting time would be a factor.

Slightly more on-topic, if there is a cultural thing, it may relate to contemporary attitudes to punctuality, although I suspect the real reason is that chess players are relatively willing to run the risk of being late is that there is no big down-side, other than a loss of a few minutes, and no particular up-side of being early. "Other" sportsmen will need to warm up to some degree, so they can be later than intended, but still in time for kick-off.

[Alistair Campbell]

I was also very concerned when the Glasgow League agreed a one ring before punishment rule and Chess Scotland agreed to grade these games. My problem was that there were two juniors in the same age group who were very close on grade and I could see future international selection being influenced by their grades where one player had won a game in congress from an inferior position because of a phone going off and the other had lost from a level position despite his opponent's phone ringing in a league match.
I just imagined £,000s being wasted in legal fees.

To be fair, Alex, I think that scenario would largely be a consequence of an overly rigorous adherence to grade as a means of determining selection, rather than the exercise of judgement or discretion. The same situation could result from one player winning a lost position on time with the other losing whilst trying to win a drawn position for their team. In any case, small differences are not statistically significant.

As regards local variants, I've seen more games lost this season due to mistakenly playing to the wrong time control, than lost due to any mobile phone rule. In fact I don't think I've ever heard a moby go in the GCL. Not that you don't have my sympathy - as you say, you can never win. (A description also appropriate to my GCL performances this last couple of years )

[Trefor Owens]

My apologies

[Martyn Harris]

Returning to square one:

Given the other conversation(s) about which rules allow flexibility or not, should the ECF come up with a list of law variations that affiliated Leagues and Congresses can adopt, and still count for grading?

Many associations are quite open about their willingness to introduce local variations. A few examples:

All games shall be played under F.I.D.E. Laws of Chess, except where the Association Rules provide otherwise.

(Huddersfield 2006)

Play shall be governed by the FIDE Laws of Chess unless they are specifically modified by these rules.

(Wiltshire)

Unless otherwise provided all games shall be played in accordance with the current laws of chess as laid down by FIDE.

(Middlesex)

Norfolk and Mersey effectively say the same as these, only in rather more words. Tracking down further examples is not difficult. You can even find cases where in one clause an Association says that FIDE rules apply, and then later outlines rules that are not in accord with the FIDE ones.

Basically these Associations give themselves license to adjust FIDE rules to accommodate local needs or to protect themselves from idiocies handed down from above. Do the ECF refuse to grade their games? Answers on a postcard ...

Clearly it is sensible for any such variations introduced not to conflict with FIDE regulations in a manner that would lead to someone playing in accordance with FIDE rules attracting a penalty under local ones. So no "A player may not use the same hand to move his pieces and stop his clock".

If you don't like the rules your league plays under, the problem is between you and your league, not the ECF. Having a set of approved alternatives is no use to you if your league won't adopt them, whilst the ECF has no interest in clamping down on local variations locally supported.


Roger was first off the mark with suggestions for other laws needing variation:

(1) allow players to write the move down before playing it as recommended in various training manuals.
(2) allow the use of personal scorebooks instead of club scoresheets.

Having sat opposite players who have used (1) to maintain an aide memoir and (2) as an openings reference then I am keen on the retention of what I regard as the spirit of the current rules.

Thus I would have no trouble with
"A player should make his move before recording it. If a move is recorded first, the player must make this move. If this move is not legal, the piece involved is regarded as a touched piece."
and indeed would feel no need to draw an arbiter's attention to someone who by recording and moving in one movement was currently acting in accord with this, though I might at the end of the game point out to my opponent that their scoring action was contrary to the rules.

I guess the de facto position on scorebooks is that they are allowed except where organises/arbiters are sufficiently keen on the use of scoresheets that they insist on the use of the latter. Leaving the scorebook open on the table or using elastic bands to prevent the book opening other than to the current game are good ways of indicating that the book is not in use because of its other contents.

[Rob Thompson]

Our local league uses (2) from above, but not (1), and there have been no problems that i know of from this

[Alex Holowczak]

If you don't like your local rules, at least you have a chance of changing them by turning up a local AGM and arguing your case. This seems a more democratic approach than trying to get ECF to impose rules from above.

Having just investigated this process for my local league, I actually have no power within it to even propose a rule change to its Rules Committee, unless I'm a member of another Committee, which I can only be a part of by being my club's delegate to it (unlikely, given my club's incumbent delegate is already another Committee member), or a representative of the League on an outside body, which would presumably be either the Warwickshire CA or the ECF.

I have zero chance of proposing the rule change, let alone actually being able to present the case.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Then present your case to your club's delegate. There's usually a way to do these things.

[Alex Holowczak]

Then present your case to your club's delegate. There's usually a way to do these things.

He is not supportive of me in this issue, I fear.

Edit: But, he is prepared to forward a document on my behalf to the Committee. Very good of him.

[David Sedgwick]

Re your penultimate sentence -on another thread I asked Adam R and David S if as prominent ECF officials they would be willing to do what you suggest. No luck I'm afraid.

That's a bit harsh. What I said was:

That's a very fair comment, Mike. As with so many things, it's a question of finding the time.

I've now asked Adam to put the idea to the ECF Board. If the Board and/or Council wish to take the idea forward, then I'm prepared to contribute. It would be pointless to devote time and energy to the suggestion if it's not something that the ECF wish to do.

[Mike Truran]

Many thanks David - and apologies for having misrepresented your earlier post.