Chess Player Strip Searched

[Matt Fletcher]

http://www.uschess.org/content/view/12677/763/

Claude Shannon, the father of information theory, in his famous paper “Programming a Computer for Playing Chess,” estimated the number of possible unique chess positions to be roughly 1043

Chess is much easier than I thought!

[Roger de Coverly]

Chess is much easier than I thought!

There's a missing ^ in there as the number 10^43 rings a few bells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number

[Matt Fletcher]

Chess is much easier than I thought!

There's a missing ^ in there as the number 10^43 rings a few bells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number

Absolutely - it just amused me to read it as written...

[E Michael White]

Chess is much easier than I thought!

There's a missing ^ in there as the number 10^43 rings a few bells.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number

Whereas for the game of GO a comparable estimate is 10^170.

Shannon's Chess estimate includes some illegal positions and excludes some which should be included but the overall message is probably correctish.

10^170 is a large number. It's approximately the cost in £s of ECF Bronze membership in the year 9985, if inflation at 5% pa is assumed in the future.

[Ian Thompson]

Meanwhile, CCA, an organisation running a number of major US tournaments has come up with its own guidelines independently of FIDE.
http://www.chesstour.com/devices.htm
with a discussion at
https://www.uschess.org/forums/viewtopi ... e4c054480e

They may be independent of FIDE, but I think they are, at least in part, based on USCF rules or guidelines. I'm pretty sure the last tournament I played in in the United States (which was organised by the USCF, not CCA) had the 10 minutes or half your remaining time penalty in place.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Two posts deleted because of what is arguably a libellous allegation against a forum member. Please don't do that.

[David Sedgwick]

Two posts deleted because of what is arguably a libellous allegation against a forum member. Please don't do that.

As the person arguably libelled, I would like to thank you for taking prompt action.

For the record, I didn't actually request that the posts be deleted. I did request that action be taken to prevent a recurrence.

[Sean Hewitt]

I received the following this morning, which apparently originates from the Chess Arbiter's Assocation

Comments for Arbiters on 2014 Laws.

If an event is to be FIDE rated then the FIDE Laws must apply.

The following default situations will apply to all British events which do not state otherwise on their entry forms.

• The default time is 30 minutes for standard games and 10 minutes for rapidplay.
• For Rapidplay and Blitz events the normal Laws will be amended as in Appendix A4 (B4)
• Appendix G (Quickplay Finishes) will apply to events without incremental time controls. Draw claims in the last two minutes (G6) will not apply where 5 second increments (G4) is possible. (Even though no arbiter may be present, leagues should consider adopting this option.)
• A total ban on mobile phones would be unacceptable at British events. Therefore the
penalty of a loss should be amended to a fine or warning (but see below).

Illegal Moves (7.5b & Appendix A4b)

For inexperienced players (indicated by age and/or grade) it is advisable not to enforce this Article
with its full vigour. Each illegal move should be penalised by giving the opponent additional time until the arbiter decides it is too distracting. The opponent will be given an additional 2 minutes in standard play and 1 minute in Rapidplay. (The tournament entry form should state if this exemption applies. An error could still be punished to the full extent of the Laws.)

Arbiter Declaring Game Drawn (9.6b)

5 fold position occurrences require observation of the game. The 5 repetitions should occur within 8 moves to be valid. As always it is the position which is important not the moves.

The 75 move rule is interpreted as - The Arbiter may use the evidence of a clear scoresheet in which captures and pawn moves are easily distinguishable to add to the number of moves counted by him or his assistant that were observed but not recorded. It is best that there is no gap between the end of recording and the beginning of counting. This rule does not require the arbiter to attempt to record the game.

Players are advised that although indicating captures is no longer necessary it would be useful in these circumstances.

11.3 Mobile Phones Ban

It may be that some organisers will wish to ban mobile phones etc. from their event. That is acceptable. The entry form should state this.

It is acknowledged that for some people having a mobile phone with them at a chess event is a necessity. Therefore the default situation should be:

Where there is no safe keeping place for mobiles etc. the following will apply:

If anyone intends to bring a phone with them to a chess event they should register that position and their phone number with the organiser. Such phones should be switched off completely (there may be exceptions for doctors on call etc).

If such a switched off phone makes a sound, e.g. low battery beep, then Law 11.5 applies.

If the phone is found to be switched on then the player should be defaulted.

In the application of these guidelines the entire tournament shall count as one instance.

The entry form should provide space to register the phone and number. The penalty could be a fine of £1 used for a good cause.

Some organisers may wish players to register at the event. Another penalty which may be issued would be a warning.

For games not under the supervision of arbiters (e.g. some league games) it is recognised that
mobile phone use may be needed. This should be done with the knowledge of both captains. When this is done a more lax approach can be used. It is inappropriate to impose a penalty when any noise emitted is less than the ambient noise in the room.

If dealing with a blind player and an illegality occurs as in D8. The clock should be treated as in
Article 7.1

Players should be made aware that it is in their own interests to record captures with x as in Article
C9.

Neither Rapidplay nor Blitz states that the arbiter cannot call flag-fall. Therefore the arbiter should call flag-fall as detailed in Article 6.

I was particularly amused by "The following default situations will apply to all British events which do not state otherwise on their entry forms" given that the CAA do not have the authority to make such a claim.

[Roger de Coverly]

11.3 Mobile Phones Ban

It may be that some organisers will wish to ban mobile phones etc. from their event. That is acceptable. The entry form should state this.

It's not just mobile phones though, what about laptops and tablets?

I doubt the practicality or desirability of organisers or arbiters collecting phone numbers of mobiles expected to be at their events.

It isn't noise they should be worrying about. A device capable of suggesting chess moves should be switched off at or before the start of a game and remain switched off for the entire duration of the game. You can then argue about how much you distrust the players that you want to enforce this with physical measures, perhaps suggesting that players should not in particular leave the board when it was their move. The other practical problem is tablets and computers in use by accompanying persons. It's the layout of the building at Sunningdale that causes it, but whenever you go outside the playing hall to get a coffee or use the facilities, you could lose count of how many computers and tablets you might walk past.

[John Foley]

An article on cheat detection and the work of Ken Regan has been published by Chess Life. The author Howard Goldowsky does a good job explaining a complex subject.

[Chris Rice]

The following is a terrible game played in a Barcelona tournament earlier this month between two reasonably low rated players (1431 v 1636). So why are you wasting my time with this I hear you ask? Well as I understand it four of the organisers believed Black lost this game deliberately. It appears they didn't interview the loser, Salvador Sanchez, but immediately proceeded to throw him out of the tournament for being guilty of infringing Article 12.1 "The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute." and report him to the FCE (think that's the Catalan equivalent of the ECF) for further disciplinary action. I think it was probably the right outcome given Black's 12th and 13th moves but I can't remember this ever happening anywhere else?

[Event "XVI International Open Promotion Martinen"]<br> [Site "Barcelona"]<br> [Date "2014.06.07"]<br> [Round "7.9"]<br> [White "Freixa Rofastes, Ernest"]<br> [Black "Salvador Sanchez, Ricardo"]<br> [Result "1-0"]<br> [WhiteElo "1431"]<br> [BlackElo "1636"]<br> <br> 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 c6 3. dxc6 Nxc6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Be2 Bxf3 6. Bxf3 Nf6 7. d3 Nd4 8.<br> Bxb7 Rb8 9. Bf3 Nxf3+ 10. Qxf3 e6 11. O-O Bc5 12. Nc3 Bxf2+ $4 13. Rxf2 Nd5 $4<br> 14. Qxf7#

[Roger de Coverly]

I think it was probably the right outcome given Black's 12th and 13th moves but I can't remember this ever happening anywhere else?

I doubt it has happened and it sets dangerous precedents. It is far from uncommon for players to sacrifice pieces for no apparent reason or even to overlook mate in one threats.

On the other hand it's an elegant helpmate in a position where black could plausibly just resign by virtue of being two pawns down.

[NickFaulks]

An article on cheat detection and the work of Ken Regan has been published by Chess Life. The author Howard Goldowsky does a good job explaining a complex subject.

Yes, there's some good stuff hidden away between the dross. I was particularly interested to read

"Former World Champion Viswanathan Anand said that one bit per game, one yes-no answer about whether a sacrifice is sound, could be worth 150 rating points.
“I think this is a reliable estimate,” says Regan. “An isolated move is almost un­catchable using my regular methods.”"

I made this exact point at the ACC meeting in Tallinn, and was told to leave such matters to those who understand them. I am happy to see that it is now received wisdom.

Regan's proposed next generation of methods looks to be pointed in a sensible direction, but I still find it all rather tendentious. I remain unconvinced that subtle forms of cheating, particularly if used by top players ( who are supposed to play mostly good moves ) will be discovered and stopped without searching for, and finding, concrete evidence.

[MartinCarpenter]

They won't. Not statistically anyway.

The comforting thing is that subtle cheats are very rare. Imagine having a computer on tap - you'd need to be very self disciplined indeed to only use it once or twice a game.

[NickFaulks]

The comforting thing is that subtle cheats are very rare.

Don't you mean they're very rarely uncovered?

In any case, having a computer "on tap" is logistically difficult, and can probably be eliminated. A couple of well-timed beeps per game is another story.