Default Times

[Roger de Coverly]

The FIDE president's latest attempt to close down international amateur chess appears to have been thwarted.

http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... arter-2009

from which

The PB approved changes in the Laws of Chess including that the default time would be zero unless otherwise specified in the regulations of the tournament.

So as a question for all those "responsible for the regulations of tournaments". What will be your default times? Is the ECF board going to recommend default times for English events? The de facto position is 30 minutes for tournaments and 60 minutes (with some exceptions) for evening leagues and county matches.

As far as I am concerned, zero default times would be an immense personal negative to participation and 15 minutes a marginal to serious one depending on travel issues. As it stands at present, late arrival is penalised by the loss of the time by which one is late, so the penalty is proportionate to the lateness with the default penalty time being one hour. Making the penalty for a ten second late arrival, the loss of the game is disproportionate. Had it applied in 1972, Spassky would have retained his title with a whitewash.

[Sean Hewitt]

I would have though half an hour defaults for tournaments with an hour for the rest.

With a tournament, you want to be able to re-pair and for that you dont want to make players wait an hour. If you re-pair earlier (say 30 mins) with a one hour default time, you have a problem if the absent player then shows up!

[IM Jack Rudd]

The rule for my tournaments is a half-hour re-pairing time and a one-hour default time. If you turn up between the re-pairing and default times and cannot be re-paired, you get a half-point bye.

[Richard Thursby]

A zero default time would have a profound effect on anyone who is habitually late (and might make them arrive on time!). You can also imagine if the start time is (say) 19:30 and a player arrives with his watch saying 19:29 to find he has been defaulted because someone in the room has a watch saying 19:31. I wouldn't want to be around to see the fallout of that one.

At least one of the leagues I have played in has a rule that if the home team has not set up to start the match at the agreed time, the time difference between actual and agreed starting times is deducted from their clocks. Are we going to say that in this case the home team loses the match by default?

[Richard Bates]

The FIDE president's latest attempt to close down international amateur chess appears to have been thwarted.

http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... arter-2009

from which

The PB approved changes in the Laws of Chess including that the default time would be zero unless otherwise specified in the regulations of the tournament.

So as a question for all those "responsible for the regulations of tournaments". What will be your default times? Is the ECF board going to recommend default times for English events? The de facto position is 30 minutes for tournaments and 60 minutes (with some exceptions) for evening leagues and county matches.

As far as I am concerned, zero default times would be an immense personal negative to participation and 15 minutes a marginal to serious one depending on travel issues. As it stands at present, late arrival is penalised by the loss of the time by which one is late, so the penalty is proportionate to the lateness with the default penalty time being one hour. Making the penalty for a ten second late arrival, the loss of the game is disproportionate. Had it applied in 1972, Spassky would have retained his title with a whitewash.

For the avoidance of future problems (ie. some organiser forgetting to publish their default time), is there any reason why the ECF couldn't introduce a national bylaw which stated that for all tournaments in the UK the default time is 1hr unless varied by the local organiser?

[John Saunders]

Re-pairing?! I vaguely recall there being a big hoo-ha about this involving one of England's leading players (can't remember which one) at a major event somewhere in these islands a few years ago... and that a spineless bunch of FIDE-istas at some obscure committee were bullied into agreeing with his stance that re-pairing MUST NOT HAPPEN in FIDE-rated events (despite the fact that it has happened in UK opens since the dawn of time). But perhaps it was all talk and never actually made it into the regulations. Or perhaps I just dreamt the whole thing. I'm now at an age where such things can happen...

[Roger de Coverly]

At least one of the leagues I have played in has a rule that if the home team has not set up to start the match at the agreed time, the time difference between actual and agreed starting times is deducted from their clocks. Are we going to say that in this case the home team loses the match by default?

That's one reason amongst many why league rules should retain their current default times and why zero default would mean the closure of amateur chess as we know it.

I think the various English leagues and congresses will have more sense than to adopt zero default and that the ECF should officially endorse this stance and recommend say 30 minutes for congresses and 60 minutes for leagues as the default/expected standard for English events. I'm quite confident with the first but not the second and what they put in the entry forms for the Torquay British will be a test case of sorts on the attitude of the ECF board to this. The stance taken by the 4NCL will be another of course.

[Richard Bates]

At least one of the leagues I have played in has a rule that if the home team has not set up to start the match at the agreed time, the time difference between actual and agreed starting times is deducted from their clocks. Are we going to say that in this case the home team loses the match by default?

That's one reason amongst many why league rules should retain their current default times and why zero default would mean the closure of amateur chess as we know it.

I think the various English leagues and congresses will have more sense than to adopt zero default and that the ECF should officially endorse this stance and recommend say 30 minutes for congresses and 60 minutes for leagues as the default/expected standard for English events. I'm quite confident with the first but not the second and what they put in the entry forms for the Torquay British will be a test case of sorts on the attitude of the ECF board to this. The stance taken by the 4NCL will be another of course.

With the 4NCL rule on defaults I think it pretty unlikely that they will change anything from the current 1hr.

[Mike Truran]

I think you would be pretty safe in an assumption that the 4NCL will not be moving from its present position.

[Richard Bates]

I think you would be pretty safe in an assumption that the 4NCL will not be moving from its present position.

No chance you'll move it from 1hr to 1 day then Mike?

[Mike Truran]

Now there's a thought!

[Stewart Reuben]

The actual Law has yet to appear. Then we will formulate a recommended appropriate local law. I do not know whether there is written in arbiter's discretion, as currently. It is difficult to see how this can apply for zero default time.
I do not see how zero default time can apply to any event where the arbiter is in charge of more than about 5 games. just imagine it for the 4NCL or British! I don't see how there can be arbiter's discretion for zero default time. A player knows he has won. Now the arbiter says, 'Oh, no. Your opponent had a good reason. He has just saved the life of the FIDE President and is now one minute late.' It would be psychologically very disturbing to know you have won by default and then be told you have to play.
It is not for the ECF to dictate how games are played under different conditions (nor should it be for FIDE).
My fear is as a previous writer has touched upon. What a mess when the arbiter and each player all have different views of what the regulation means. People do not read the regulations in an entry form. For example, in 2003 in Gibraltar Nigel Short did not know it was a 10 round tournament!
By the way the Commonwealth Championship in Malaysia 14-21 July has announced zero tolerance.
But I would actually support zero-tolerance for the new 8 player super-tournament in London in December. I wish I had thought of that in 1983 when Zoltan Ribli was discourteously late every round.
Note, events which are not FIDE Rated do not have precisely to follow the FIDE Laws.
Of course Torquay will have a note on the entry form.
Stewart Reuben
Secretary FIDE Rules Committee

[Richard Bates]

But I would actually support zero-tolerance for the new 8 player super-tournament in London in December. I wish I had thought of that in 1983 when Zoltan Ribli was discourteously late every round.

Stewart Reuben
Secretary FIDE Rules Committee

Surely if you were concerned about this then it would make far more sense to use other measures? For example, you could withhold a proportion of appearance fees for every game that a player arrives late. (or if you didn't want to be punitive have a "bonus" pool to be distributed to players arriving on time). The advantage of "elite" tournaments is that you can negotiate contracts with individual players stipulating what is expected of them. Similar in substance to the playing conditions in cricket to try to ensure that play is completed within the allotted hours.

It is all very well advocating "zero tolerance" to ensure that players get there on time... until somebody actually falls foul of it! At which point everyone - the defaulting player, the other players not involved in the game in question, the spectators, the sponsors (and the game as a whole when the press treat it as a laughing stock) - loses out.

As for introducing a draconian rule to deal with supposed "rudeness and discourtesy"* (as opposed to commercial or promotional reasons - needs of photographers etc). Perhaps any player who doesn't remotely share this view of lateness for chess games could put a card besides their table saying "i don't take any offence to you turning up late for my games - please take as long as you wish!" ? Personally, I feel that the idea that being late is discourteous goes hand in hand with the idea that one is consequently being delayed from doing something else. So for example it is discourteous to not resign in a hopeless position because you are preventing your opponent from moving on to do something else. In comparison turning up late to a game has no delaying effect at all since the latecomer is simply using up time that they are otherwise entitled to utilise for thinking.

*whatever happened to the old-fashioned concept of etiquette?

[Roger de Coverly]

Of course Torquay will have a note on the entry form.

But what will it say ? 0 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes or 60 minutes.

I suspect many amateur players will find short default times offensive and decide to teach a lesson to tournament promoters either by refusing to participate or by disrupting the tournament with a mass walk-in just after the default time.

[Stewart Reuben]

I guess Manuel Weeks will choose 30 minutes for Torquay. That is what is favoured by the CAA I understand.

I am on record as stating that zero tolerance without the organiser being able to choose differently would have resulted in a 10-20% reduction in the amount of FIDE Rated chess. We are being spared that.
I guess the zero tolerance with organizers being allowed to choose differently will result in 5% loss of FIDE Rated activity due to confusion.
Stewart