ECF Council Meeting 12 April 2014

[Stewart Reuben]

From 1 July 2014

11.3b. During play, a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone and/or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue. If it is evident that a player brought such a device into the playing venue, he shall lose the game. The opponent shall win.
The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty.
The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9.

The London League can thus allow mobile phones in the playing venue as before. If it becomes evident that a player brought one in, surely by its ringing, then the rules will say 'a lesser penalty'. Perhaps a warning? Or disapproval? But they will no longer have to say 'contrary to the FIDE Laws of Chess'. I never saw how anybody could be forfeited if there were no arbiter present.

12.8 Unless authorised by the arbiter, it is forbidden for anybody to use a mobile phone or any kind of communication device in the playing venue or any contiguous area designated by the arbiter.

By the way, neither Geurt nor I will be inspecting anybody's clothes!

Returning to rates of play.
SCCU Counties Championships is 35 moves in 105 minutes, followed by all the moves in 30 minutes.
I hadn't appreciated that instead using 40 moves in 105 minutes, followed by all the moves in 30 minutes would have terrible consequences. But I did appreciate that 35 rather than 40 would not prepare a player well for events where the first time control was after 40 moves.

[NickFaulks]

The London League can thus allow mobile phones in the playing venue as before. If it becomes evident that a player brought one in, surely by its ringing, then the rules will say 'a lesser penalty'.

If the thing announces itself by ringing I favour a severe penalty, which would only start with forfeiture of the game. I am sick of having my concentration broken by deafening Arctic Monkeys ringtones, which feel as though they will never end. For me, the question is what happens when it is in someone's pocket, turned off, and falls out when they reach for their handkerchief. There, the penalty can be the mildest of warnings.

[Roger de Coverly]

The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty.

So is it acceptable for the rules of the competition to specify no penalty for possession of a switched off phone or other device? It's what league rules will likely say anyway, and possibly Congresses too, but is that "contrary to the FIDE laws of chess"?

It's just that one Congress organiser, after consulting a senior arbiter felt it necessary to insert a clause in the entry form as follows:-

Mobile Phones: Mobile devices of any kind are not permitted in the playing hall while games are in progress, whether switched on or not. Players may not have a mobile device in their possession in the playing hall or elsewhere during their game.

It's not an event that intends to be FIDE rated.

[Roger de Coverly]

But I did appreciate that 35 rather than 40 would not prepare a player well for events where the first time control was after 40 moves.

I don't see it as greatly relevant. The bigger leap is from games where all the moves have to be completed inside ninety minutes, to those where you have four hours or much longer. Your pace of play may have to be different as both you and your opponent have more time for in depth calculation or attempted strategic insights.

If you are only getting an extra 15 minutes, it's pragmatic if possible to ignore the first time control and aim to reach it with time in hand.

I never thought ECF Juniors were done many favours when selection events were at G/75 or G/90 for international events that were at the usual 40/90+30 with 30 second increments.

[NickFaulks]

It's not an event that intends to be FIDE rated.

Then why on earth would they mention it unless they actually want it?

[Stewart Reuben]

I agree that the sound the phone makes is incredibly irritating. But, in the absence of an arbiter, I think forfeiting somebody is impossible. The Congress Organiser to whom Roger referred chose his own variant which is surely within the new Laws.
There should be a lesser penalty. Perhaps a tut tut from the player's match captain.
Some events have a financial penalty and the new Laws will permit that. Thus, if the captain can collect it, £1 for the first ring; £2 for the second as so on. That is usually much better than a loss. The opponent came to play chess. After 6 moves the player's phone goes off. The opponent wins. He is also disadvantaged.

Roger you are wrong. If you usually play with a first time control of 35 moves and then play in an event with 40 moves it is very disconcerting for some. Many players are not pragmatic.

Worse is this practice, everywhere but in Britain, of starting the last round earlier. In the recent European Senior Team Championship in Croatia every round started at 3.30pm. EXCEPT the last which started at 2pm. Result an Austrian turned up too late and could not be found in time. His England 1 opponent was also upset, although he scored a free point for the team and we won the match.
Some events have the rounds in the afternoon and the last in the morning. This destroys people's biorhythms.

[NickFaulks]

Worse is this practice, everywhere but in Britain, of starting the last round earlier. In the recent European Senior Team Championship in Croatia every round started at 3.30pm. EXCEPT the last which started at 2pm. Result an Austrian turned up too late and could not be found in time. His England 1 opponent was also upset, although he scored a free point for the team and we won the match.
Some events have the rounds in the afternoon and the last in the morning. This destroys people's biorhythms.

I have asked several times why so many of the top players in the Euro >65 individual in Portugal defaulted in round 2. Any idea?

[Roger de Coverly]

Then why on earth would they mention it unless they actually want it?

As a question of general custom, tournaments in the UK are played under the FIDE Laws of Chess regardless of whether they are to be internationally rated. It is arguably a condition of them being ECF graded. This dates back to the days when it wasn't possible for them to be rated because of the strength of players participating, the number of rounds, or the time control.

The organiser didn't know what to make of the new Laws of Chess and asked a senior arbiter who advised him that it meant that mobile phones are entirely banned from the venue. It was also hinted that no-one would be too concerned if the rule wasn't enforced.

So to repeat the question, what is the position on possession? So if a player decides to be difficult and notices a switched off mobile phone or other electronic device in possession of the opponent, what sanctions would he be able to ask the arbiter to enforce?

The more recent concern about mobile phones is not so much that they might make a noise, but rather that taken somewhere secluded, they can be switched on and give advice on the game in progress.

In a league anyway, I think you have to trust the players, but there are known cases, the Irish one being one of the better known examples of players consulting their phone or tablet during the game.

[David Sedgwick]

I have asked several times why so many of the top players in the Euro >65 individual in Portugal defaulted in round 2. Any idea?

The clocks going forward would seem to be a good bet.

[Paul Buswell]

Julie Denning ..... read out a prepared statement about the missing Sussex Archives. The words "dismayed" and "carelessness" were used, but it appears that a line has now been drawn under this matter.

This is the Sussex County Chess Association statement referred to above:
"We had, for an extended period, pursued the fate of our County archives that had been entrusted to the ECF for onward placing in the National Chess Library. We are grateful that very recent intervention by the CEO finally saw progress being made. In particular, we were granted access to a Hastings Council storage facility where it was known that other material from the ECF had been lodged, and appeared to be our last hope for finding our archives. Alas, they were not there. These archives provided a unique record of chess in Sussex, going back well over a century. The Sussex CCA is extremely dismayed at their apparent loss, and the carelessness of the ECF in allowing this to happen, but believe we must all now accept that this is what has happened and that no useful purpose will be served by pursuing this further."

PB

[Andy Howie]

So is there a definitive/agreed FIDE position or not on whether a licenced arbiter does actually need to be present at a FIDE rated event, or whether it's OK for him/her to be at the end of a telephone?

As Nick says, the answer is yes if it is a norm event, but no otherwise. The ECF have an email from the Ratings and Qualifications Commission which says exactly that.

Therefore events in England can, have been and will continue to be rated with no arbiter physically present.

I contacted the Chair of the QC last night on this. His reply (and I have it in writing) is that in order for an event to be FIDE rated then a licensed arbiter must be present, not on the phone or just a name.

I have requested that this be put on the agenda for Tromso so that there is clarification for all to see

[Richard Bates]

Sounds like they're making it up as they go along!

[Andy Howie]

Would have preferred Sean and Nicks version to be confirmed to be honest as we want to FIDE rate one of our team knockout tournaments up here. C'est la vie...

[E Michael White]

Sounds like they're making it up as they go along!

You've noticed !

To understand the rules you need a good knowledge of chaos theory. Just as a butterfly flapping its wings in South America causes ENG floods; in chess Sean claps his mitts and a few ENG IM norms may go down the pan !

What's the situation on compliance with the FIDE Tournament Rules ? David Sedgwick has always maintained these don't apply in ENG but the FIDE Title rules say for norm tournaments they must apply.

[David Sedgwick]

What's the situation on compliance with the FIDE Tournament Rules ? David Sedgwick has always maintained these don't apply in ENG but the FIDE Title rules say for norm tournaments they must apply.

Please would you spell my name correctly.

From the FIDE Title Regulations:

"Play shall be governed by the FIDE Laws of Chess and FIDE Tournament Rules."

From the FIDE Tournament Rules:

"The FIDE Tournament Rules shall be used in conjunction with the Laws of Chess and shall apply to all official FIDE competitions. Said Rules shall also be applied to all FIDE-rated tournaments, amended where appropriate.

The emboldening is mine.