Incorrect Clocks

Technical questions regarding Openings, Middlegames, Endings etc.
Post Reply
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18344
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:23 pm

With the clocks now showing 30 and 45 minutes remaining the mistake is noticed.
Presumably at some move number below 35.
Constraints at the venue mean that the game must still be completed within the three hours.

What changes to the clocks would you make to get the game completed?
Either
(a) no changes to the clocks and play as G/90
or
(b) take 15 minutes off each clock, so they show 15 and 30. This might be bad for the player with 15 minutes left.

Sean Hewitt

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Sean Hewitt » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:29 pm

This is covered by Article 6 of the laws of chess
Every indication given by the clocks is considered to be conclusive in the absence of any evident defect. A chess clock with an evident defect shall be replaced. The arbiter shall replace the clock and use his best judgement when determining the times to be shown on the replacement chess clock.
Incorrectly setting the clocks is a 'defect'. Therefore, in your scenario and assuming both players agree that the clocks had 90 minutes on at the start of the game I would reduce both clocks by 15 minutes and then allow the game to continue.

Sean Hewitt

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Sean Hewitt » Tue Mar 24, 2009 4:49 pm

I would ask both players if they would consent to playing the game as all moves in 90 minutes rather than 35/75 + 15. If they agree, the game continues on that basis. If not, then I do not believe that you can force them too - after all, its not the players fault that the clock was set incorrectly. They should instead play on to the first time control and then receive their additional time. If venue constraints are such that the game cannot continue then the game must be declared void.

IanDavis
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:41 pm

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by IanDavis » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:39 pm

I once played a league game where the following happened.

The clocks were set correctly, but upon reaching the time control I did not reset my opponent's clock. It was so long ago now that I cannot remember the reason why. He did not reset my clock. I believe we should have gained something like an additional 15 minutes.
When his clock reached 20 past I claimed a win on time. He was ahead on the board, but he obviously had no time left. He refused to accept this. After some argument I had to leave to catch the last bus home with the rest of the team. Being poor students we could not afford the expense of a taxi from the wilderness in which played. My suggestion of an amicable draw was dismissed by him, and I eventually decided to just let him win if he wanted to win like that.

What should happen in such circumstances?

User avatar
Gavin Strachan
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:06 am
Contact:

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Gavin Strachan » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:32 pm

Hi if you mean 20 mins past the deadline then theoretically should win as you claim flag (rule 6.9). If both times are over the extra 15 then rule 6.12b comes into force and the game is a draw. The clock is not defective the time is considered added retrospectively.

William Metcalfe
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:12 pm
Location: Darlington

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by William Metcalfe » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:47 am

We were playing a league game 2 years ago and instead off the clocks going back 15 mins at the time control they went back 45 mins in 1 game nobody notised till every other game was finished and those 2 players still had 20 and 40 mins left on the clock.luckily the game was soon over.Neither captain new what to do in that circumstance as it had never happened before.
I am speaking here for myself and not the NCCU which i am now president of

Paul McKeown
Posts: 3383
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Hayes (Middx)
Contact:

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Paul McKeown » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:26 am

I think the answer to the original question has been answered, namely
a) take 15 minutes off both clocks, unless clearly disadvantageous to one or both players, and continue with x/1:15+0:15/QPF
b) continue as G/90
c) declare the game void
There is an alternative to a) and b), which is not quite as radical as c), of course, and that is to allow x/1:30, followed by an adjournment. Even where the rules of the competition don't specifically cater for adjournment, this is the sort of situation where sometimes adjournment might, even in this day and age, be the "least worst" alternative.
"Liberty without equality is of noble sound but squalid meaning" - LT Hobhouse

Sean Hewitt

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Sean Hewitt » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:24 pm

Paul McKeown wrote: There is an alternative to a) and b), which is not quite as radical as c), of course, and that is to allow x/1:30, followed by an adjournment. Even where the rules of the competition don't specifically cater for adjournment, this is the sort of situation where sometimes adjournment might, even in this day and age, be the "least worst" alternative.
I think that's a perfectly sensible solution if both players agree.

Paul McKeown
Posts: 3383
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Hayes (Middx)
Contact:

Re: Incorrect Clocks

Post by Paul McKeown » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:27 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:I think that's a perfectly sensible solution if both players agree.
In general I dislike the use of adjournments and feel that adjudications are against the spirit of the game. Even if they were generally to be abandoned, though, I do think they should still be retained on the rule book because of the occasional additional flexibility they provide. The London League provides blind players, for instance, the option to have their games adjudicated, to save them from the difficulties of remembering an adjourned game or fumbling hopelessly through a quick play finish. Fire alarms, burst pipes, roads impassible due to snow, medical emergencies, there are enough reasons to be thought of when the planning might have to be abandoned... I suppose that even telephone matches may even still have their very occasional utility.
"Liberty without equality is of noble sound but squalid meaning" - LT Hobhouse

Post Reply