European Union Youth Chess Championships

[David Sedgwick]

David, I do not agree that Matthew 'had the move'. White does not have the move until the clock is started. Under your interpretation we could have dozen's of White moves (and presumably Blacks as well) before the game has officially started!!

I don't understand your last sentence. However, I have to concede that you and E Michael White have convinced me on the substantive point.

All the same, I stand by the last sentence of my earlier post:

"I think this sad incident demonstrates that, when playing under the zero tolerance rule or similar, it remains prudent not to leave the board until you've made your first move."

[Sean Hewitt]

I'm not sure that the decision to give the player a loss is wrong. It seems to me to be pretty much in accordance with the spirit in which the law was written. Now of course i will argue vociferously that the law is ridiculous, unjust and unnecessary but that is a different issue.

If one considers the believed origin of the law - Karpov keeping Kirsan + dignitary waiting at the start of a game - then i don't really see the material difference between someone turning up late and someone turning up early and then disappearing for the start of the round. The purpose of the law is not to establish that you will be present at some point to play the game, it is simply to be present.

I concur. At the European Championships in Aix Les Bains players had to be at the board when play started to avoid being defaulted. Daft though this rule is, it's the only workable interpretation of it.

[Alan Burke]

Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if the rules of chess said that both players had to be at the board at the specified start time ? At football/ rugby/ cricket, etc; those involved have to be in position and ready to play for the official time when the match is to begin (and even being at the venue before the kick-off time doesn't mean they can then delay being ready for the start of play.)

I can also imagine the uproar if, under current default time rules, the two players were at their board ready to begin on time and an arbiter decided that he wouldn't turn up until almost 30 minutes after the start time - if officials are expected to be there for the start of a match then why shouldn't the players ?

[Roger de Coverly]

Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if the rules of chess said that both players had to be at the board at the specified start time ?

That was what the FIDE president wanted.

It would be even simpler if no-one (at an amateur level) played chess at all. Because that's what the effect of defaulting players not present at their boards would be. Whenever it's investigated, you find most sports, games and pastimes have flexibility over start times.

I can also imagine the uproar if, under current default time rules, the two players were at their board ready to begin on time and an arbiter decided that he wouldn't turn up until almost 30 minutes after the start time

Most games of chess in the UK are played under conditions of "no arbiter present". There was once a tournament where the arbiter was present but asleep. I think the players decided to start play anyway.

[Ian Thompson]

At football/ rugby/ cricket, etc; those involved have to be in position and ready to play for the official time when the match is to begin (and even being at the venue before the kick-off time doesn't mean they can then delay being ready for the start of play.)

Bit if they are not the consequence wouldn't normally be immediate loss of the match. It would more likely be fines or points deductions. What do you think the reaction of the crowd would be if they were told to go home because there wasn't going to be a match due to one team arriving late?

I can also imagine the uproar if, under current default time rules, the two players were at their board ready to begin on time and an arbiter decided that he wouldn't turn up until almost 30 minutes after the start time - if officials are expected to be there for the start of a match then why shouldn't the players ?

It happens frequently that officials do not start games on time, particularly in the first round of tournaments. My experience is that players and spectators just put up with it.

[Justin Hadi]

There was once a tournament where the arbiter was present but asleep. I think the players decided to start play anyway.

Was the arbiter well-lunched?

[Alan Burke]

Roger ... Yes, there are the 'amateur' events which are probably policed in a more leniant way, but the matter at hand was concerning a European Championship and if chess wants to boost its standing within the sporting world, then surely it's attitudes have to become more professional, especially at the more senior tournaments (including World, European, British Championships) ? It has been discussed about chess becoming part of the Olympics - can you imagine the IOC being totally happy about promoting an event which people want to watch, either live or on television, and the competitors are nowhere to be seen at the scheduled start time ?

I would disagree with you that MOST sports, games, etc have flexible start times - a match in the football Premier Division isn't advertised as beginning at "sometime between 3pm and 4pm" and even in the local amateur league the matches have definate kick-off times. It also seems very unsportsmanlike for one competitor to deliberately not turn up on time - I am sure that many people watching a boxing match have often been annoyed by one of the boxers delaying the start just to try and get a psychological advantage.

With regard to matches played without arbiters; yes, local league matches are 'self policed' by the teams, but again, would you be totally happy in beginning a match at the British Championships if Alex, Lara, etc were not there at the set start time ?

Ian ... Yes, there is always going to be the odd occasion where a player (or a team in the football Premier League) arrive late due to unforseen circumstances; but on those occasions the player (or team) can at least let the authorities know of their delay so that alternative arrangements can be made - and having been involved at the very top level in a far more professional sport, I have had occasions where the above has occured. If a chess player is delayed (ie traffic accident, etc) then by letting the officials know, the authorities can at least inform the opponent and make a judgement on how the situation should be handled. However, I can see no reason why on 99.99% of occasions, players cannot be in position to start a game at the set time and that any delays should be regarded as a 'one off' rather than just 'part of the game'. If players, officials, spectators, were told that matches HAD to start at a set time, then they would be there. The fact that players and spectators 'just put up with it' if a match begins late seems indictive of a game organised in an amateurish fashion instead of trying to promote itself in a more professional manner.

If someone was due to start work at 9am and they didn't arrive until 9.30am without giving any reasonable explantion, do you think the boss would 'just put up with it' ?

I just feel that a bit more professionalism and discipline needs to be brought into the chess world and that players should be on time for their games as scheduled - if they can be there before a default time of 30 minutes, why can't they be there half an hour earlier ?

[Roger de Coverly]

Roger ... Yes, there are the 'amateur' events which are probably policed in a more leniant way, but the matter at hand was concerning a European Championship and if chess wants to boost its standing within the sporting world, then surely it's attitudes have to become more professional, especially at the more senior tournaments (including World, European, British Championships) ? It has been discussed about chess becoming part of the Olympics - can you imagine the IOC being totally happy about promoting an event which people want to watch, either live or on television, and the competitors are nowhere to be seen at the scheduled start time ?

It was a European Junior event at younger ages, the standard of players probably below the Open or major at any weekend Congress. As regards matches starting on time, Wimbledon tennis can be notorious for this, particularly when top players have to make their way to outside courts.

In the British Championships, virtually all players were present by 2.15 pm so there would be no good reasons for spoiling the event by random defaulting.

If you desperately need it for a live television audience, you can have intolerance to lateness at really top events. That is no reason to introduce it for amateur players. That said, Wimbledon never seems that bothered by exact time-keeping.

I would disagree with you that MOST sports, games, etc have flexible start times - a match in the football Premier Division isn't advertised as beginning at "sometime between 3pm and 4pm" and even in the local amateur league the matches have definate kick-off times. It also seems very unsportsmanlike for one competitor to deliberately not turn up on time - I am sure that many people watching a boxing match have often been annoyed by one of the boxers delaying the start just to try and get a psychological advantage.

Other sports do not have officials standing there with stop watches waiting to default players not absolutely ready to go at the prescribed time. Chess already has penalties for late arrival, you forfeit the time on the clock. This isn't an option available in other sports, games and pastimes, but they usually work on the premise that the idea of sports, games and pastimes is to take part, rather than to win on a technicality before play even commences.

If someone was due to start work at 9am and they didn't arrive until 9.30am without giving any reasonable explantion, do you think the boss would 'just put up with it' ?

Flexible working hours. You start your clock, or record your time sheet, when you arrive and stop your clock when you leave. These schemes may have defined working hours as being from 8 am to 7 pm with core time of 10 am to midday and 2pm to 4pm. So you are expected to work for 7 hours, with 4 of these during core time. Outside of this, your time is to some extent your own.

I just feel that a bit more professionalism and discipline needs to be brought into the chess world and that players should be on time for their games as scheduled - if they can be there before a default time of 30 minutes, why can't they be there half an hour earlier ?

You schedule to arrive on time or shortly before. If you have half an hour or an hour as default time, you have a margin against travel delays. Take that away and you just don't enter events where you cannot guarantee to be present on time. This applies to almost all club games and morning rounds of tournaments. If you don't have players, you don't have events.

but again, would you be totally happy in beginning a match at the British Championships if Alex, Lara, etc were not there at the set start time ?

The nearest I can get to this is the incident at an international tournament where the arbiter was present but asleep. The most senior player present decided to start the clocks at the appointed time. After all, anyone 5 minutes late should suffer the normal 5 minute clock penalty.

[Richard Bates]

The fact that players and spectators 'just put up with it' if a match begins late seems indictive of a game organised in an amateurish fashion instead of trying to promote itself in a more professional manner.

Whoever said anything about a match beginning late??? The game starts when the white clock is started. It doesn't get delayed just because one or both players aren't present. This is completely different from all the other "sports" that you cited. In most sports the contest cannot be started without the presence of both/all competitors. Where there is a tight schedule, and any default won't materially affect the viewing experience for the spectators there will naturally be penalties imposed as the only realistic solution.

Bronstein once thought for 45 minutes over his first move. Perhaps somebody should have stepped in and told him to get a move on because the spectators weren't happy?

[Alan Burke]

Roger .. I do take on board all the points you make, but I still do not understand what is wrong in players having to be at the board for the official start time ?

OK, the event in question was a youth competition, but it was still a European and high-profile tournament and if juniors are disciplined early on it usually lasts into their later years.

You say that .. "Other sports do not have officials standing there with stop watches waiting to default players not absolutely ready to go at the prescribed time." That sweeping statement is not actually 100% true because I have personally been involved in a sport with a much higher public profile than chess and where officials WILL report players to the authorities if they are not ready to commence play at the scheduled start time.

Yes, chess has the time-fault penalty for late arrivals, but it is the player who self-imposes that "punishment" rather than receiving it from the authorities.

Regarding flexible working hours; yes, that might be an option for some firms, but your statement on that matter still doesn't answer the question where set hours are in place and an employee arrives late for work. (Not everyone can work flexihours due to the nature of their business.)

Regarding the travel delays you mention; I did answer that in my previous post in that on those odd occasions, the player could inform the authorities of their impending delay. I did also previously state that "there are the 'amateur' events which are probably policed in a more leniant way" (ie local league, club games), but again, we are discussing games of a higher level where rulings should possibly be more stringent.

In a way, you actually agreed with my point of view with your statement of "If you desperately need it for a live television audience, you can have intolerance to lateness at really top events." If that can be introduced for televised events, then why can't it be the policy for all major tournaments ?

Apart from the very odd occasion when an unforseen circumstance causes a player to be delayed on their way to a game, I have not heard of any valid reason what is wrong in asking players to be at the board in time for the start of play, especially at major events.

Yes, I apprecaite you point of view on the matter; but I just feel that players should be ready to play at the scheduled start time.

Richard ... Ian had previously stated "It happens frequently that officials do not start games on time ... My experience is that players and spectators just put up with it." That was the reference to games starting late.

[Roger de Coverly]

Yes, I apprecaite you point of view on the matter; but I just feel that players should be ready to play at the scheduled start time.

Are you writing as a player or a spectator? If you are writing as a spectator, then I don't consider that you have any rights to dictate that if I'm playing in an event at my own expense, I should have to arrive half an hour early "just in case".

There are very few events worldwide which don't have any amateur players taking part. The only one in the UK is the London Chess Classic, even that event does not deprive the audience of games they have paid to see on a technicality. In fact that event has rules framed to avoid the game 1 e4 e5 draw agreed. It's entirely consistent and spectator friendly that it should also avoid the game 1 e4 black defaulted for being 30 seconds late.

[Alan Burke]

Roger ... Please copy any quote I made about a player having to arrive half an hour early.

[David Sedgwick]

Roger ... Please copy any quote I made about a player having to arrive half an hour early.

With all due respect, that misses the point.

The reason for the standard 30 minute default time is to cater for a player expecting to arrive on time but being delayed for one reason or another.

If you're going to be defaulted if you're even five seconds late, you have to aim to arrive half an hour early.

You've said that this could be accommodated by allowing players to make contact if they were delayed en route. I rather doubt it. Travel delays in London are not infrequent.

[Alan Burke]

David .. I fully appreciate all the points raised, but I just can't see why players are deliberately allowed to arrive after the official start time. I am not against players having an occasional genuine reason for a late arrival and that can surely be accomodated when the need arises.

In the recent British Championships at Sheffield, I know of one occasion where a player on one of the top boards only arrived a couple of minutes before the end of the default period due to traffic congestion on his way from home about 50 miles away - that was a genuine reason for which I would sympathise with the player for any late arrival. However, on another occasion, I saw a player stood chatting on the concourse outside the building after the official start time and only went into the playing hall to start the game several minutes after the clocks had started - that is what I think should be prevented.

[Paul Cooksey]

why?