Tata Steel 10th-28th Jan 2020

[Richard Bates]

If we are to be barred from wearing watches, I trust this will only happen in venues with visible and accurate clocks.

Hardly a challenging threshold, but... why, out of interest?

[Roger de Coverly]

. Alex’s point was that sometimes organisers will opt for a solution (not allowing any watches as an alternative to having to check all of them) which allows them to concentrate on other things. It’s hardly an unreasonable position.

That's where we disagree. I consider it unreasonable. What is the problem with self-certification? If your watch is a cheap digital or any analogue, it isn't smart, so what's the issue?

If anyone wishes to consult devices during over the board play with witnesses, they have three problems to solve. The first is how to input the moves played to a device. The second is getting a suitable device, and the third getting the recommendations or evaluations back to the player.

Tournaments like the Hastings Masters with live coverage of every board, solve the first two problems for any potential cheat, so it's necessary to make sure that devices capable of receiving analysis are out of use.

But the more challenging problem is how players are cheating successfully when coverage is unavailable and play is fast. Using a smart phone or even a smart watch is perhaps a little too obvious, so it's wearable technology potentially that's a problem. Lucky hats and concealed earpieces are potentially suspect. Thus ban headgear where possible as potentially more suspect than a traditional pen or watch.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"JustinHorton wrote: ↑

If we are to be barred from wearing watches, I trust this will only happen in venues with visible and accurate clocks.
---
Hardly a challenging threshold, but... why, out of interest?"

I may be missing the point, but some players will be taking medication at fairly specific times.

[Alex Holowczak]

I imagined it can run chess programs.

I expect so although some need an active mobile phone. If internet enabled, it could also look up the assessment on chessbomb or similar.

What was being suggested is that all watches were banned, which I would regard as over the top paranoia.

Depending on the model of watch, it can run chess programs, it can browse the Internet, it can send text messages, it can make phone calls. Think of it as a mobile smartphone that you wear on your wrist. Without rigorously studying the wrists of hundreds of players, and inspecting any devices that might be worn by them, arbiters have no real way of knowing which of these things any given device will do. Increasingly, organisers have decided to ban all wristwatches for this reason. My expectation is that at some point in the not too-distant future, watches will find their way into the Laws of Chess, perhaps as part of the mobile phone rule.

If we are to be barred from wearing watches, I trust this will only happen in venues with visible and accurate clocks.

In the Isle of Man, where watches were banned, there were indeed visible digital clocks in the room - we used a couple of laptop computers to provide exactly that.

[Roger de Coverly]

I may be missing the point, but some players will be taking medication at fairly specific times.

Younger generations may have given up on watches because they carry phones all the time. But if you are in a phones banned environment like a chess tournament, that doesn't apply.

[Alex Holowczak]

. Alex’s point was that sometimes organisers will opt for a solution (not allowing any watches as an alternative to having to check all of them) which allows them to concentrate on other things. It’s hardly an unreasonable position.

That's where we disagree. I consider it unreasonable. What is the problem with self-certification? If your watch is a cheap digital or any analogue, it isn't smart, so what's the issue?

Well, Boeing self-certified the 737 Max...

Obviously everyone who is going to cheat will self-certify their watch as not a problem and wear it.

If anyone wishes to consult devices during over the board play with witnesses, they have three problems to solve. The first is how to input the moves played to a device. The second is getting a suitable device, and the third getting the recommendations or evaluations back to the player.

Not really problems at all, you just go to the toilet/leave the playing area periodically, and take a look then. Just like you would with a phone if it was permitted to be in your possession. This conversation has made it clear to me that actually, you don't know what these devices are. If I played against you, I could use a smartwatch to cheat quite easily and you'd be none the wiser until you ran the game through Stockfish afterwards.

[JustinHorton]

If we are to be barred from wearing watches, I trust this will only happen in venues with visible and accurate clocks.

Hardly a challenging threshold

I am far from sure why you think so.

why, out of interest?

Because we're entitled to know the time. We're playing a chess tournament, not entering an isolation tank.

[Matt Bridgeman]

A little lift from a website about cheating in casino's, from the 1960's no less! It is a little scary to think what technology might be out there flying under the radar.

'Edward Thorpe: The Wearable Computer
By the time the mid-’60s rolled around, Edward Thorpe had already proven one of the most formidable names in the gaming business. Originally finding his calling in blackjack, Thorpe’s blackjack system turned out to be so successful that it not only got him banned from numerous Las Vegas casinos, it also prompted minor rule changes in the game to give the edge back to the house.

The method behind his next idea came from his own natural and studied intellectual ability and his connections at MIT. Following his victory in blackjack, he and MIT professor Claude Shannon worked on a wearable computing device. This small machine fit around his waist and gave out sound to an earpiece. Taps of the foot would mark when the ball moved past a certain point, and machine would then convey predicted winning positions via various audio tones.

Considering this occurred in the 1960s, this was no small feat. In fact, this is credited as one of the world’s first cases of wearable computers, which stands as an incredible accomplishment in itself.'

[Richard Bates]

If we are to be barred from wearing watches, I trust this will only happen in venues with visible and accurate clocks.

Hardly a challenging threshold

I am far from sure why you think so.

Because any organiser making any sort of effort should not find it difficult to provide? That they might not do so is a different issue.

[JustinHorton]

Hardly a challenging threshold

I am far from sure why you think so.

Because any organiser making any sort of effort should not find it difficult to provide? That they might not do so is a different issue.

Well maybe, but it is a genuine issue.

[Roger de Coverly]

This conversation has made it clear to me that actually, you don't know what these devices are. If I played against you, I could use a smartwatch to cheat quite easily and you'd be none the wiser until you ran the game through Stockfish afterwards.

You would be looking at your watch more frequently than normal, once a move presumably. If cheating solo without an accomplice, the moves would have to be input to the watch. My point really is that a smart watch cannot be disguised as an analogue watch or even a older design digital watch. But do you know differently? If so, please explain what we are looking for or at.

[Alex Holowczak]

This conversation has made it clear to me that actually, you don't know what these devices are. If I played against you, I could use a smartwatch to cheat quite easily and you'd be none the wiser until you ran the game through Stockfish afterwards.

You would be looking at your watch more frequently than normal, once a move presumably. If cheating solo without an accomplice, the moves would have to be input to the watch. My point really is that a smart watch cannot be disguised as an analogue watch or even a older design digital watch. But do you know differently? If so, please explain what we are looking for or at.

The point is not that "a smart watch cannot be disguised as an analogue watch or even a older design digital watch". The point is that there are various different types of digital watch, some of which might or might not be a smartwatch. Without an arbiter inspecting it, it is hard to tell. In fact, some might even be a Fitbit, which may or may not be able to communicate with the Internet depending on the model. To the untrained eye, it looks like a smartwatch, and players have been defaulted for wearing fitbits because it looked like it was a smartwatch.

There are some players who spend quite a lot of time away from the board. In the Isle of Man, there were a couple of quite exceptional meanderers. I can think of a number of other players who do this at a more amateur level, or could develop the habit if they worked out it might be beneficial to do so for some reason. If they're away from the board then you wouldn't think anything of it, but they could look at the watch then and a passer by might not think anything of it either.

You are right that it is obvious what a smartwatch is, and it is obvious what a cheap plastic £10 analogue watch is. That's not the problem. It's a spectrum, and the problem is all the different types of devices that might be worn on a wrist that lie somewhere inbetween.

[Roger de Coverly]

If they're away from the board then you wouldn't think anything of it

On the contrary, you can be suspicious if your opponent is absent. That's particularly the case at some of the 4NCL venues when there's an area where support teams can lurk. Was that not the problem with the Smart Watch in Telford that the support team were analysing the game in the lobby and communicating the result of the analysis to the player?

[Nick Grey]

Banning headgear may be racist and earpieces is discrimination against those that have hearing aids. Yes that's me.

Absence of clocks on the wall is a big zero at Olympia. I cannot wear a watch or jewellery.

I think in certain areas the anti-cheating has gone too far. But if the penalties were lifetime bans that will help.

[JustinHorton]

Banning headgear may be racist

What a very silly thing to say