Chess Player Strip Searched

[MartinCarpenter]

Ok then, some issues with the proposed ACP wording:
1) What does 'carrying' something 'on your body' mean. Yes obvious cases where it would apply. Less so when it wouldn't. Say having a bag/jacket on/under your chair and fetching things from it at need?

As I noted earlier it probably needs saying at least that this means on your person outside the playing area or some such. It'd obviously greatly reduce storage problems if you just had to give things to arbiters when going to the toilet/outside for a walk etc.

2) Electronic devices gets very wide and can lead to some problems, some amusing pedantry, some real:

a) Anybody picking up, or arguably even grasping (touching?!), the electronic chess clock that they're using is definitely carrying and has it 'on their person' and as such should be instantly (their wording) defaulted I don't think this one is even arguable in principle, no matter how absurd.

b) Wristwatches - these are tricky because smart watches are just starting to appear in the main stream and even dumb ones are an obvious sort of place to try and conceal a subtle transmission mechanism. Still even the purely anologue watch I'm wearing uses a battery and so qualifies as electronic.

I think they're probably worth cracking down on for serious events, for more normal ones you'll get a lot of slightly baffled people.

c) More seriously (perhaps), things like pace makers, hearing aids and the stuff that blind players need to play. I guess there are already blanket exemptions from the rules for things like this? There had better be of course, or you'd probably be plain illegal vs disabilty legislation etc.

[Peter Sowray]

So, in the case I cited above, what actions should the Arbiters and Player B have taken?

Apart from noting the behaviour as possibly suspicious, very little. But you don't know it was mobile phone cheating, it could have been consult another player cheating. Equally the player was stronger than previously believed, so not cheating at all. It isn't cheating to play moves stronger than than your rating, even if the ACC would like to make it so.

But it illustrates the practical point. It's one of enforcement. Mere presence of a switched off phone should not be a cause of a game being defaulted. If you want it so, then for many practical purposes you are closing down or seriously restricting competitive chess as an adult leisure activity.

I suspect we're going to have to disagree on this. For reasons I explained up-thread, introducing the ACP rule in the 4NCL and other weekend / hotel-based events would have no impact on many (most?) players. But perhaps you're right that the inconvenience caused to others would be too great. I hope the 4NCL at least gives it some thought and canvasses views. I'm sure this mobile-cheating is a problem, and I fear it's more common than thought. I've no concrete evidence at all - 1% of games played in the 4NCL? - we just don't know.

On the enforcement issue, I'd be interested in the views of arbiters on this. What practical steps could they take to enforce existing rules?

Peter

[Mick Norris]

I can't see myself leaving my mobile in my car at the 4NCL once I have checked out (or before checking in, given I have at least twice had to leave luggage at reception as my room wasn't ready before the Saturday game started)

I particularly can't see me leaving it in someone else's car if I wasn't driving that weekend - in fact, I can't see me leaving it anywhere other than in my trouser pocket, switched off of course for the duration of my game

I don't have any issues if my opponents do the same

Is this a minority view?

Mick

I'm sure you're in the vast majority here and I would have supported your position until quite recently.

But here's an example of the problem ... I recently witnessed the following in an event in England. Player A is up against Player B. It's Player A's move and he is away from the board for at least ten minutes and he is out of sight. It's a complex position, and he has a number of possibilities including one sharp option which might be strong but looks risky. He comes back to the board and plays this move almost instantaneously. His behaviour looks suspicious to me and I sensed that Player B felt the same though he didn't do anything about it. I checked later out of curiosity and the move Player A chose was the engine's number 1 pick.

Was Player A cheating? Honestly, I've no idea - I don't even know if he had a mobile phone on him. But it all felt fishy.

Now don't get me wrong ... I think instances of cheating using a mobile are rare. But ask around and you'll hear of a few cases where players have been caught already. The instances I know about are all players around the 1900-1700 mark. The temptation to have a quick peak at some software is obviously too great.

When I play at the 4NCL, I always have a laptop with me which I use to prepare before the game. Obviously I already have to make arrangements so that this isn't on my person during play and it is no further inconvenience to do the same for my mobile. So, on that basis, I think the ACP rule is a sensible compromise solution to something that is a problem already and may become more of a problem in the future.

But, of course, I understand if you take another view on this.

Peter

Peter

Thanks for your considered response, you should post more often

I do take another view, but then I already have a dim view of some of the arbiters I have met failing to enforce existing rules

[Roger de Coverly]

For reasons I explained up-thread, introducing the ACP rule in the 4NCL and other weekend / hotel-based events would have no impact on many (most?) players.

That's incorrect. Assuming you didn't want to leave valuables in your car, or you didn't have a car, what are you going to do with your luggage once you have checked out on a Sunday morning? For that matter, what happens if you haven't been able to check in before the start of play. If there's to be paranoia about a phone in a jacket pocket or bag, there should be equal paranoia about the potential for players to return to their rooms or consulting device equipped friends or relatives in the public areas of hotels.

[David Gilbert]

What seems to be agreed is that concerns over cheating using electronic devices are real. My own fears were raised at last year’s County Championships finals by the volume of players coming down from the playing area five minutes after the start of games and queuing three deep for the cubicles. What was going on there?

FIDE and the Association of Chess Professionals want to be seen to be taking action and have come up with changes to the Laws of Chess that appear to be unattainable or unenforceable for most Congresses and Leagues in England. These came into effect on 1 July 2014.

The Laws make it clear that any player who takes a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication into the playing area has contravened the Laws of Chess and should be punished. Players who leave the playing area during the game without the permission of an Arbiter, whether they have an electronic device or not, should also be punished. Some players support the new Law, others are firmly opposed, but postings on this forum alone are unlikely to influence the hearts and minds at FIDE and the ACP in either direction, at least in the short term.

Chess players must play according to the new Laws and Arbiters are required to enforce them. The draft proposals for disciplinary action against Arbiters who infringe the technical regulations of chess (which I suppose this is?), recommend a punishment of 6 months disqualification where they fail to do so.

However, Leagues and Congress Organisers have been given autonomy to set their own lesser own penalties for infringement of the new Laws.

a. warning
b. increasing the remaining time of the opponent
c. reducing the remaining time of the offending player
d. increasing the points scored in the game by the opponent to the maximum available for that game
e. reducing the points scored in the game by the offending person
f. declaring the game to be lost by the offending player (the arbiter shall also decide the opponent’s score)
g. a fine announced in advance
h. expulsion from the competition.

Given that the Laws of Chess must be enforced the best this forum can do is to influence Organisers on the preferences for the type of penalty to be imposed. Two possible ways are set out beneath based upon a, f and g above:

For Leagues and Congresses, a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication that rings or makes another sound is evidence that a player has brought an mobile phone electronic device into the playing area. In Leagues or Congresses this can result to the immediate loss of the game and a win for the opponent, or for the more tolerant Leagues and Congresses it could be a warning on the first occasion followed by loss for any subsequent infringement. That would not be different from what happens now.

For Congresses, an alternative is for players who bring a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication into the playing area to report that to the Organiser before the start of the first game for that player and pay a small fine, which will be announced in advance. The player is responsible for ensuring the device is switched off and remains switch off at all times in the playing area. Should it make any sound it would demonstrate the device was switched-on and lead to the immediate loss of game. Should a player who has not reported bringing a mobile phone or other electronic device into the playing area be found to be carrying one, whether switched-on or off, that player will immediately lose the game.

[Brendan O'Gorman]

Programme for British Chess Championships now available. It includes the following:

"Mobile phones – Competitors and spectators should avoid bringing phones to the
venue. Players will be immediately defaulted if their mobile phone, or other electronic
device, makes any sound in the playing area. Spectators whose phones make any
sound may be barred. Players must not receive text messages, nor use any form of
electronic storage, communication or computing device. Players who have a mobile
phone in their possession must register the phone number before the
commencement of round 1 of their FIRST section. The registration must be
accompanied by a charge of £1 per player. (All money collected will be
donated to a local charity.)
To avoid accusations of cheating such as having a chess engine running or by
receiving moves by text message all phones must be turned off. N.B. a phone which
is in silent mode has NOT been switched off. Should any player consider that they
have a sufficiently good reason for having a phone which is not switched off, e.g. a
seriously ill relative, then the permission of the tournament arbiter must be obtained."

[Roger de Coverly]

Given that the Laws of Chess must be enforced

That is not a given. Leagues and Congresses when not FIDE rated have long had rules which set aside elements of the FIDE Laws of Chess. If they wish to survive and attract participants, they may have to continue to do so. Even for rated events, FIDE Laws have been ignored when the common practice is the opposite. Re-pairing for absent players is a case in point.

For Congresses, an alternative is for players who bring a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication into the playing area to report that to the Organiser before the start of the first game for that player and pay a small fine, which will be announced in advance.

Why not just add the "fine" to the entry fee and give blanket permission for the presence of switched off devices?

Should a player who has not reported bringing a mobile phone or other electronic device into the playing area be found to be carrying one, whether switched-on or off, that player will immediately lose the game.

I don't find that an acceptable playing condition and the practicalities of it are doubtful at large events. It could mean everyone travelling home after the Sunday rounds having to declare the contents of their luggage.

[Roger de Coverly]

Players who have a mobile
phone in their possession must register the phone number before the
commencement of round 1 of their FIRST section. The registration must be
accompanied by a charge of £1 per player. (All money collected will be
donated to a local charity.)

This does rather miss the point. It shouldn't be mobile phones but devices capable of running chess software. The point of registering the phone number rather escapes me, as a tablet is just as useful to a potential cheat, if not more so.

This is arbiters creating work for themselves.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

What seems to be agreed is that concerns over cheating using electronic devices are real. My own fears were raised at last year’s County Championships finals by the volume of players coming down from the playing area five minutes after the start of games and queuing three deep for the cubicles. What was going on there?

Why didn't you question this at the time? It could have been people arriving late (after a number of hours travelling) and electing to start their games and go to the toilet instead of the other way round. The queuing three deep bit depends on how many toilets were available. If people are going to get suspicious any time someone goes to the toilet, this will get ridiculous. Some people, for various reasons, go to the toilet more often than others. I tend to go at least once due to drinking water during the game.

[MartinCarpenter]

Well if we've reached the stage of people registering phone numbers for a 1 pound charge, its already got somewhat absurd What on earth are they planning to use this information for?

I really can't think what you'd usefully do with it. Phone them all in a cycle to try and produce defaults or something?
(Well actually if you had high powered NSA style snooping tech but really )

[Richard Bates]

What seems to be agreed is that concerns over cheating using electronic devices are real. My own fears were raised at last year’s County Championships finals by the volume of players coming down from the playing area five minutes after the start of games and queuing three deep for the cubicles. What was going on there?

The concerns may be real. As evidenced by your following statement it doesn't follow that those concerns are always justified! What do YOU think was "going on there"...? They were serving chips and beans in the canteen...

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I presume David Gilbert was also in the toilets, if he was observing this. Question is, what was he doing there??

[Paul Buswell]

Programme for British Chess Championships now available. It includes the following:

"Mobile phones – Competitors and spectators should avoid bringing phones to the
venue. Players will be immediately defaulted if their mobile phone, or other electronic
device, makes any sound in the playing area. Spectators whose phones make any
sound may be barred. Players must not receive text messages, nor use any form of
electronic storage, communication or computing device. Players who have a mobile
phone in their possession must register the phone number before the
commencement of round 1 of their FIRST section. The registration must be
accompanied by a charge of £1 per player. (All money collected will be
donated to a local charity.)
To avoid accusations of cheating such as having a chess engine running or by
receiving moves by text message all phones must be turned off. N.B. a phone which
is in silent mode has NOT been switched off. Should any player consider that they
have a sufficiently good reason for having a phone which is not switched off, e.g. a
seriously ill relative, then the permission of the tournament arbiter must be obtained."

I understand that the same principle will apply to all sections, high to low, at Hastings 2014/15. I have not seen the entry form yet but my sources are well placed. If that is the case I will not be playing at Hastings: in my view it is all just too silly, the existing rules being adequate for amateur chess.

PB

[Roger de Coverly]

I have not seen the entry form yet but my sources are well placed.

It seems to be a "decision" or "recommendation" of the CAA, who seem to be taking the view that "no penalty" isn't a "lesser penalty". I would have thought the ECF AGM in October an opportunity to challenge this, if it hasn't already been reversed by player boycotts.

[David Sedgwick]

It seems to be a "decision" or "recommendation" of the CAA, who seem to be taking the view that "no penalty" isn't a "lesser penalty". I would have thought the ECF AGM in October an opportunity to challenge this, if it hasn't already been reversed by player boycotts.

I understand that the same principle will apply to all sections, high to low, at Hastings 2014/15. I have not seen the entry form yet but my sources are well placed. If that is the case I will not be playing at Hastings: in my view it is all just too silly, the existing rules being adequate for amateur chess.

I'm sorry that you won't be playing at Hastings. Is it really too much hassle to quote your mobile phone number on the entry form?

British arbiters are doing their best. The problem has been caused by the present wording of Law 11.3.b, which has been the subject of worldwide condemnation.

If the wording doesn't survive Tromso, as I fervently hope, things will look different in a few months time. I also hope that in this instance different will mean better.