Is a mutual flag fall a draw?

[Tim Harding]

"Valid claim" is not defined, I would have said that to be valid, you must stop the clock with one flag down and the other standing. If it's a digital clock running on increment, it will usually have frozen in that state anyway. Otherwise the both flags down = draw comes into effect.

The one that comes into play is where you have to play a fixed number of moves in a fixed time, say 40 moves in 100 minutes that some Congresses still use. Leagues too of course where they have an intermediate time control. White plays his 40th move, restarts the clock. Without moving Black points out that the flag has fallen, I think that's a valid claim but I suspect I have seen an arbiter rule otherwise.

I agree that "valid claim" or procedure for claiming is not defined. I would take "valid" to mean simply that it's true the flag is down.

A digital clock should not be (cannot be?) set to freeze at flag fall in a multi-period game, e.g. the common FIDE control of 40/90 with 30 second increment, followed by an additional 30 minutes after move 40.
If a flag falls, as it usually will do at some point in a long game, the arbiter has to then check whether the required number of moves were made. (Article 6.4)
If both scoresheets show it has, the game continues without disturbing the players.

[Stewart Reuben]

I differ with some arbiters regarding this.
If White'flag falls and neither the arbiter nor Black notices, then Black's flag falls - IT SHOULD BE A DRAW. My reasoning is that it takes a conscious action to call a flag fall. If Black was unable to do so in time, then it should be a draw.
Aha, others say. But I can tell which flag fell first, using a digital clock. BUT 6.12.2 The player may not make a claim relyimg only on information shown in this manner. (This manner refers to screens, moitors, demonstration boards and clocks.

[MSoszynski]

I differ with some arbiters regarding this.
If White'flag falls and neither the arbiter nor Black notices, then Black's flag falls - IT SHOULD BE A DRAW. My reasoning is that it takes a conscious action to call a flag fall. If Black was unable to do so in time, then it should be a draw.
Aha, others say. But I can tell which flag fell first, using a digital clock. BUT 6.12.2 The player may not make a claim relyimg only on information shown in this manner. (This manner refers to screens, moitors, demonstration boards and clocks.

Interesting. How else can a player make a time claim other than relying on the clock information (or what he thinks the clock shows)? What the arbiter then relies on to decide the claim is another matter.

Consider the case of a player who, losing on the board, claims a draw once both flags are down. The clock will tell the arbiter several things; why should the arbiter be so selective as to exclude information about the first flag fall?

[Michael Farthing]

Because the flag has not fallen until a player claims. (The flags are all Schrodinger flags).

[Brian Towers]

I differ with some arbiters regarding this.
If White'flag falls and neither the arbiter nor Black notices, then Black's flag falls - IT SHOULD BE A DRAW. My reasoning is that it takes a conscious action to call a flag fall. If Black was unable to do so in time, then it should be a draw.
Aha, others say. But I can tell which flag fell first, using a digital clock. BUT 6.12.2 The player may not make a claim relyimg only on information shown in this manner. (This manner refers to screens, moitors, demonstration boards and clocks.

Oh dear, Stewart, you are being rather naughty today. Let's have a look at what 6.12 says in full, shall we?

6.12.1 Screens, monitors, or demonstration boards showing the current position on the chessboard, the moves and
the number of moves made/completed, and clocks which also show the number of moves, are allowed in the
playing hall.
6.12.2 The player may not make a claim relying only on information shown in this manner

The "claim" is one relating to "clocks which also show the number of moves". I can't claim a 50 move rule draw based on the move counter data of the clock. It would be ridiculous to say that I can't make a claim regarding flag fall based on what the clock indicates.

[Andy Stoker]

Isn't it obvious? If your flag has fallen, behave like a grown-up and tell your opponent. You've lost the game.

[Stewart Reuben]

Andy. That would be rather odd. Your opponent's flag may also have fallen. You surely mean you should behave ethically if your flag has fallen first and neither the arbiter, nor your opponent noticed. What has that to do with your age?

Brian I have never before had anybody state that what I wrote in 6.14 in 1996 referred only to the clocks, not the screens etc. I particularly had in mind the following: Demonstration boards sometimes had a move counter on them, adjusted after each move by an operator. The operator might show that 40 moves had been made, just as so-called move counters on clocks often do the same incorrectly. Now White continues thinking. He is told he has lost on time. 'But the move counter shows I have made 40 moves!' The arbiter says, 'Yes. But you have only made 39' and proceeds to prove it to White.

You have your score sheet in front of you. The clock indicates that it is move 99. You note that the last time there was a pawn move or capture was on move 49. So you claim a draw. This needs verification, possibly from the opponent's scoresheet, possibly the electronic score of the game, possibly the arbiter's record.

There was some debate, many years ago, about whether the move 'counter' should be displayed. Was that not giving advice? I disagreed, provided it was the same for both players.
In case anybody does not know. It is a push counter, not a move counter. Quite frequently the button is pushed the wrong number of times.

[Brian Towers]

Brian I have never before had anybody state that what I wrote in 6.14 in 1996 referred only to the clocks, not the screens etc.

And you still haven't! Try reading in context. It isn't that difficult.

[Jon Tait]

The "claim" is one relating to "clocks which also show the number of moves". I can't claim a 50 move rule draw based on the move counter data of the clock. It would be ridiculous to say that I can't make a claim regarding flag fall based on what the clock indicates.

Clocks don't show the number of moves, they show the number of times the clock has been pressed. It's not necessarily the same because people sometimes forget to press their clocks.

[Roger de Coverly]

Clocks don't show the number of moves, they show the number of times the clock has been pressed. It's not necessarily the same because people sometimes forget to press their clocks.

With increments it becomes more important to insist that the clock is pressed even when the opponent has forgotten. I think using the clock's counter is the way of enabling 50 move claims in games with increments of less than 30 seconds.

[Brian Towers]

Clocks don't show the number of moves, they show the number of times the clock has been pressed. It's not necessarily the same because people sometimes forget to press their clocks.

With increments it becomes more important to insist that the clock is pressed even when the opponent has forgotten. I think using the clock's counter is the way of enabling 50 move claims in games with increments of less than 30 seconds.

I'm not quite sure how this would work.

Currently the laws are so restrictive that if you record using descriptive rather than algebraic notation then you can't use your scoresheet to support these claims -

Scoresheets using a notation system other than algebraic may not be used as evidence in cases where normally the scoresheet of a player is used for that purpose.

I would suggest that if you think you might be able to claim you need to ask the arbiter to watch your game and count while you also do so and then make your claim when you think you have reached 50 moves. If the arbiter demurs you can point out that he is obliged by the rules to declare the game drawn after 75 moves without pawn moves or captures.

As I await the incoming flak from fellow arbiters I would add that I have stood watching a junior game counting the moves, pausing my count when called away, resuming when back before eventually declaring the game drawn after 75 moves in a game with no pawns and just one or two shuffling pieces left.

[Roger de Coverly]

I'm not quite sure how this would work.

Provided the game has been scored to at least as far as the last pawn move or piece exchange , you know at what move count the relevant endgame started. A subsequent claim (by a player) can be validated by asking the clock to display its count. I'm primarily thinking about league chess with 10 or 15 second increments and no arbiter present.

[Brian Towers]

Roger, when I said "I'm not sure how this would work" I wasn't referring to the mechanics. I was referring to the rules. The only reason I phrased it as diplomatically as I did was because I've already used up my daily quota of "bo**ocks!"

[Roger de Coverly]

I was referring to the rules.

I'm unconvinced that all arbiters are aware that DGT 2010 clocks always count. For local league play, it's common enough to set aside some of the FIDE stuff when it isn't appropriate.