Zero move game: should it be graded?

[John McKenna]

Geoff Chandler>Played 1.c3 draw agreed then everyone would have nodded their head and said fair result no argument... What about getting the two players to sit down and play a one move draw in front of a witness. Would that make you all happy. I actually think it would, I think some of you really want this too happen. And what next?<

Next they could all have a long postmortem - the possibilities after 1.c3 are practically endless.

And, if there is still time left a thematic 1.c3 tournament where everyone in the club gets to play white and black at least once.

That should make it all worthwhile.

Sorry, it will never happen, I forgot that everbody just wanted to go home early and catch the football.

[Alex Holowczak]

This sounds rather as though you're suggesting reviving in a modern form the old "BCF Rules for Events Played under its Auspices".

Your predecessor Adam Raoof was thinking along the same lines, but abandoned the idea after it was roundly condemned on this Forum.

It's getting late, so I'm going to leave you or someone else to search for the thread.

I don't think I am.

I'm suggesting that FIDE write the Laws, and allow organisers of tournaments the right to amend certain bits, without detracting from the game of chess. The ECF may have certain amendments for things like the British Championships, but these would not be binding on every graded tournament.

In an ideal world, the Laws would be written to cater for the masses rather than the elite, and FIDE would write their own amendments to my proposed (2) for their own events; rather than the other way around. I think that's the better way to go, since the top players will be more aware of the amended competition rules than the typical club player.

[Ian Thompson]

My view is that a game should be graded once both players are subject to the Laws. By that I mean, for example, that they are prohibited from receiving advice, would lose if their mobile phone rang, etc.

"Prohibited from receiving advice" - so we shouldn't grade leagues where adjournments are possible? I don't think that would be the intention (would it?), but that precise wording could be misconstrued.

My comment neither says, nor implies, that.

[Stewart Reuben]

Alex H > FIDE should structure their Laws into 2 sections: (1) The fundamentals of the game, and (2) The technical elements of the game.<

But they already do and have done since 1997. Articles 1-5 are basic. The rest are the Tournament Rules.
The full Laws are mandatory for FIDE Rated chess.
Any event which is not FIDE Rated, but is graded by the ECF, should state wherever the rules differ what those difference are. The ECF Rules should make it clear that this is a requirement. This the London Chess League does concerning mobile phones. In an ideal world, each organisation making a change should first seek permission from the person responsible for grading, ultimately you of course.
Thus mobile phones just a warning, not a loss. Fine provided stated.

Adjournments are permitted within the FIDE Laws. There is a whole section on them.
Adjudication are most decidely not. That is not over the board play.
If a league decided to allow games where the knights and bishops were swapped that would be against the FIDE Laws.
Patently the FIDE Rule requiring at least one move to be made by each player was introduced as a result of the zero tolerance Law.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Wasn't there a league game, where someone sprinted into the venue about five minutes from default time, only to discover he had already won as his opponent's phone had gone off? That must have been a zero or half-move game, which presumably was graded.

In the original game, one solution would be to start that game early, watch the players go 1.e4 e5 draw, then record the result. I have played in matches where one game started half an hour early by agreement.

[Stewart Reuben]

A mere 30 minutes! Anand played Levitt is the first round of the British Chess Championship in 1987 six months in advance.Vishy was going to play in the World Junior in the Philippines and the last round of that was too close to the first round of the British. So they played a four game match with the first counting in the British. It was drawn, a proper game.
Then Vishy won the World Junior and he contacted me that he was too 'ill' to come to the British. Thus Jonathan played his first round game, drew it and thn it turned out it was against a player who was not otherwise in the tournament. Vishy won the match 2.5-1.5 by the way. The match was, of course, both rated and graded.

Shortly leaving Helsinki to go to Tallinn by ferry.

[David Sedgwick]

Wasn't there a league game, where someone sprinted into the venue about five minutes from default time, only to discover he had already won as his opponent's phone had gone off? That must have been a zero or half-move game, which presumably was graded.

My recollection is that:

a) it was in a Surrey League match;
b) it wasn't graded.

I could well be wrong on both counts. If it was in Surrey, it does seem rather odd that there wasn't a major dispute about it.