Best excuses

[Alex Holowczak]

In my view, if a player cannot propose a date for resumption on the night, he should lose the game.

That depends. If one player insists on an adjournment, and the other player is happy to carry on, then why should the person who is happy to carry on be forced into a decision over a date?

This is what I'd expect Peaches Geldorf to come up with!

My experience is that roughly one in four adjournments lead to unnecessary complications, usually benign, such as being unable to agree a date without a lot of palaver. I have never heard a good reason not to agree to a date, the usual one is that a player has forgotten to bring his diary.

The reason I couldn't agree a date was good, I thought. I couldn't actually get to Oldbury from Redditch without incurring huge personal cost (taxi), and all the other players in my team had finished, so weren't prepared to give me a lift. Except that one might be able to. So, I had to ask him if he was prepared to give a lift etc. (Getting to Redditch is fine, the train is about. I can get a train from Redditch to Birmingham New Street, but would be consigned to sleeping in The Pallasades overnight, or booking a taxi. Doubt I'd get home before 12am. Of course, for one night, my team were going, so I could get a lift.

I had to resign that game in the end, even though it wasn't resignable, meaning we could only draw 3-3. Which is why I'm not playing in away matches which are adjournments next season.

[Roger de Coverly]

I presume Roger means "adjournment", not "adjudication". Does "forced" mean a groundswell of opinion, rather than anything intrinsic to Quickplay Finishes?

Adjournment of course.

What had happened was that the previous year's AGM had been presented with a motion that adjudication should be abolished. That wasn't that controversial since most players elected either for QP finish or could demand adjournment in preference to adjudication at the end of the session. On the night though, an amendment was inserted that adjournments were abolished as well. Although probably supported by the majority of players, there were opinions expressed and teeth gnashed that the change had been made without the necessary notice. So at the following year's AGM, adjournment was reinstated. It's very rare to find two players both wanting adjournment. Match captains tend to keep quiet about the option as well.

[John Saunders]

I concur with much that Simon has to say on the subject. He has long experience as a player and captain and tells it like it is.

Of course it is undeniable that unscrupulous players seek to exploit adjournments for their own nefarious purposes and this happens more often than it should. I have experienced these as a player and match captain (and that includes my own players as well as the opposition's). But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that QPFs have resulted in plenty of disputes and unpleasantness too.

I am glad that the "anti" lobby is no longer asking the ECF to intervene to ban the two "adj"s from British chess as I think this is something for individual competitions to decide democratically. Let's have a moratorium on that debate.

Personally I've had some great adjournment battles, with my favourite adversary being the late Jon Benjamin - as sporting and creative opponent as one could wish to meet OTB. The main thing that adjournments teach you is that there is no such thing as a "won" or "lost" position (well, not unless you are something like a rook up/down, and not always even then) - nor a "dead drawn" position, come to that. I suppose that also applies in a QPF but then the surprise element is often directly attributable to the limited time available (that is not just an "excuse"!). So often the first few moves after an adjournment can turn logic on its head and you find yourself looking at a position which you never considered in hours of home study. Such experiences are salutary and show you just how little you really know about the transition into the endgame and subsequent endgame technique. QPF technique, it seems to me, is an entirely different ballgame. I'm not quite sure what you learn from QPF, other than the necessity to practise blitz/rapid chess to keep your hand in.

[Alex Holowczak]

I'm not quite sure what you learn from QPF, other than the necessity to practise blitz/rapid chess to keep your hand in.

You should learn what to do before you start, not half way through.

[John Saunders]

I'm not quite sure what you learn from QPF, other than the necessity to practise blitz/rapid chess to keep your hand in.

You should learn what to do before you start, not half way through.

I simply don't understand how you can say that. I would suggest that most of us learn more about chess from playing the game than we do from studying books or taking lessons. However, we learn rather less from a blur of moves made at speed than those played at a longer time control.

[Alex Holowczak]

I'm not quite sure what you learn from QPF, other than the necessity to practise blitz/rapid chess to keep your hand in.

You should learn what to do before you start, not half way through.

I simply don't understand how you can say that. I would suggest that most of us learn more about chess from playing the game than we do from studying books or taking lessons. However, we learn rather less from a blur of moves made at speed than those played at a longer time control.

I mean, you learn what to do before you start a competitive game. First you practice, then implement your knowledge as the situation arises. You don't get David Beckham practising free-kicks just before he's about to take a particularly important one.

If the issue is that there isn't enough time in an evening, then don't play in an evening. Play in something with longer time controls. The 4NCL or County Championship, for example.

[Paul McKeown]

John,

I think you should bear in mind that Alex favoured awarding a loss on time in KB -v- KoBP if you couldn't piddle around fast enough, or K -v- KNN and other such absurdities.



Of course one can learn from adjournments, most players over the age of 35 or so, have probably experienced quite a few fascinating 2nd or 3rd sessions, but the number is small in comparison to the dross. Most of us simply don't have the time. In general, when my opponent asks me if I would like an adjournment, these days, I tell him that I don't play correspondence chess.

Paul.

[Alex Holowczak]

John,

I think you should bear in mind that Alex favoured awarding a loss on time in KB -v- KoBP if you couldn't piddle around fast enough, or K -v- KNN and other such absurdities.

Changed my mind on that now! In the Warwickshire Championship, there was one player who was deliberately trying to win on time in an obviously drawn position. That made me realise just how daft it is...

Of course one can learn from adjournments, most players over the age of 35 or so, have probably experienced quite a few fascinating 2nd or 3rd sessions, but the number is small in comparison to the dross. Most of us simply don't have the time. In general, when my opponent asks me if I would like an adjournment, these days, I tell him that I don't play correspondence chess.

In the BDCL, you don't even have to ask. One player can just insist. The second player has no choice in the matter.

It's interesting though how the older players (who tend to run the Leagues) always point out that people are dropping out of league chess because they don't have enough time to play, and then don't think to shorten the time limits, so that people do have the time. Particularly when the chief argument is that "We've had them for 100 years..."

[Paul McKeown]

I think you should bear in mind that Alex favoured awarding a loss on time in KB -v- KoBP if you couldn't piddle around fast enough, or K -v- KNN and other such absurdities.

Changed my mind on that now! In the Warwickshire Championship, there was one player who was deliberately trying to win on time in an obviously drawn position. That made me realise just how daft it is...

Glad to hear it! My choice will always be QPF with 10.2, you know when you will be finished, and 10.2 will curb any obviously unsporting behaviour.

In the BDCL, you don't even have to ask. One player can just insist. The second player has no choice in the matter.

Most leagues I play in are like that, sadly.

You then get master logicians (such as on the Sussex League website) coming up with reports of a match where 7 boards out of 8 being adjourned "proving that the majority want adjournments", the non sequitur being that actually 7 from 16 is a minority...

It's interesting though how the older players (who tend to run the Leagues) always point out that people are dropping out of league chess because they don't have enough time to play, and then don't think to shorten the time limits, so that people do have the time. Particularly when the chief argument is that "We've had them for 100 years..."

Yes, a minority (adjournment) tend to hold the majority (QPF) to ransom. As a team captain I could name many players who refuse to play because of adjournments, whereas I would struggle to name any players who refuse to play because of QPFs. Strangely enough, I can think of an inveterate adjourner, who when he is dragged out to play a game with QPF, always seems to outblitz his opponent, yet he still grumbles.

[Alex Holowczak]

Well, I was considering two ways of "revolting":
1) Always insist on an adjournment at the first available time, i.e. move 31.
2) Refuse to play at all.

Not sure which would make most of an impact. I was going to implement 1) in the last league game of the season, but he resigned on move 28...

The other tragedy is that people who don't like adjournments pull out, leaving fewer people behind to fight against it, meaning they always lose out.

[Paul McKeown]

.... and those in favour of adjournments also seem able to make league AGMs drag on indefinitely too...

[Simon Spivack]

The reason I couldn't agree a date was good, I thought. I couldn't actually get to Oldbury from Redditch without incurring huge personal cost (taxi), and all the other players in my team had finished, so weren't prepared to give me a lift. Except that one might be able to. So, I had to ask him if he was prepared to give a lift etc. (Getting to Redditch is fine, the train is about. I can get a train from Redditch to Birmingham New Street, but would be consigned to sleeping in The Pallasades overnight, or booking a taxi. Doubt I'd get home before 12am. Of course, for one night, my team were going, so I could get a lift.

I had to resign that game in the end, even though it wasn't resignable, meaning we could only draw 3-3. Which is why I'm not playing in away matches which are adjournments next season.

I shall assume the discussions about the adjournment occurred after the match had ended. Or they could be conducted away from the remaining games.

Alex should have explained the situation to his opponent and agreed a date and place for resumption, with the understanding that he would probably be in touch. If the position had little in it, most people would be amenable to a draw offer. Once home there would have been an opportunity to see whether there was a means to travel and when (ideally several whens). If not, then resignation would be the only choice. Most opponents would alter the date if possible. A lot of leagues have rules that the game be played off within a suitable time frame, say three weeks. However, unless the game is being played towards the end of the season, most league secretaries will permit an extension.

I presume QPFs are permitted, if yes then for future matches Alex's captain could contact the opposing team captain and arrange for Alex, if possible, to play against someone who would prefer a QPF.

It boils down to attitude, if someone is over competitive, there's not much to be done, fortunately, many are not. One time there were two eight board matches on the same night; having contacted everyone in the club I was still a player short. The Third Team was pushing for promotion, the First had nothing to play for. I defaulted on board eight of the First Team. I contacted the opposing team captain, to save his player a trip. Of course the more suspicious would suggest that the opposing team could have been a player short too. This is true, but if someone is that way inclined, they're welcome to the point, much good will it do them. I play for pleasure.

[Paul McKeown]

The reason I couldn't agree a date was good, I thought. I couldn't actually get to Oldbury from Redditch without incurring huge personal cost (taxi), and all the other players in my team had finished, so weren't prepared to give me a lift. Except that one might be able to. So, I had to ask him if he was prepared to give a lift etc. (Getting to Redditch is fine, the train is about. I can get a train from Redditch to Birmingham New Street, but would be consigned to sleeping in The Pallasades overnight, or booking a taxi. Doubt I'd get home before 12am. Of course, for one night, my team were going, so I could get a lift.

I had to resign that game in the end, even though it wasn't resignable, meaning we could only draw 3-3. Which is why I'm not playing in away matches which are adjournments next season.

Alex, you wimp!

I'm sure I've heard stories of Tommy Milligan cycling 80 miles through the snowdrifts of a Scottish winter's night to play a game of chess...

[Alex Holowczak]

Well, the full details: It ended as a 3-3 match draw, because one game that wasn't really drawn (but was more drawn than mine) was agreed a draw, and I took the loss. None of us were too keen on a return visit. Redditch's team were invited to our club venue. Unsurprisingly, they didn't jump at the chance. They were willing to, in their defence.

In the BDCL, once you've picked AD or QP at the start, you must stick to that. AD v QP is AD. Redditch were QP. We were AD. Nothing I could do... You can't just offer a QP if you're an AD team. Once you've made your bed for the season, you've got to lie in it, so to speak. Redditch's attitude towards the whole situation was amicable. Certainly better than mine, I must confess.

We get to play them again in a playoff for Division Five, anyway.

Re: my wimpiness. I had a seven hour round-trip to Sutton Coldfield the other night to play an adjourned game. I set off at 4:45. Got the 688 to Oldbury. A train to Birmingham New Street. The 67 to Sutton Coldfield. Played my game (blundered a pawn when it would have been a clear draw on 10.2... AD games have QP rules in the second session). Thankfully got a lift back to Birmingham New Street from my opponent at 10pm. Stood on Corporation Street to realise the 126 doesn't go there anymore (changed the timetable that day, and the train to Oldbury was useless, the 688 stops running at about 7pm). So I had to get the 120, which came at 10:30, and took me further out of my way. I got home at nearly midnight. This was in the League Individual Tournament. I had a similar marathon journey to Moseley for the previous round.

I can quite understand why most people would consider such a thing too much. I won't be entering the Individual next year! (To add insult to injury, my opponent insisted I play him in friendlies after, which I comfortably won 2-0...)

[Simon Spivack]

Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens