Arbitration question

[David Sedgwick]

Hello. How do the rules for online play differ from OTB rules?

Soheil, I saw that you attended Laurent Freyd and Tomasz Delega's webinar on YouTube. It is available on the FIDE YouTube Channel if you want to watch it again.

At present, the Rules for Online Chess are neither clearly documented nor universal. They vary from site to site.

There is a little more about this in the ECF Online County Championship thread at viewtopic.php?f=35&t=10773&start=60.

One obvious difference is that in online chess, if you touch a piece, you don't have to move it.

We await guidance from the FIDE Rules Commission, of which your fellow countryman, Mehrdad Pahlevanzadeh, is Secretary.

[Roger de Coverly]

At present, the Rules for Online Chess are neither clearly documented nor universal. They vary from site to site.

In some cases the implementation can depend on interpretations by the programmers. On ICC twenty years ago, various positions of limited material awarded an instant draw without having to claim or force stalemate. However these included King and Knight against King and Knight.

[Stewart Reuben]

Soheil

online. If you touch a piece with your cursor, you don't have to move it. Just let go and try again.
If a position is reached for the third time, with the same player to move; then the computer declares it drawn.
It is usually impossible to aggravate your opponent.
I don't know whether they have a default time at the beginning of the game, afer which the player loses. Or whether the time control is simply followed.
When castling, simply move the king two squares towrds the rook. If legal, the computer simply completes the move.
Illegal moves are impossible. The player simply loses time until he makes a legal move.
There may be others.

[Roger de Coverly]

If a position is reached for the third time, with the same player to move; then the computer declares it drawn.

I suspect that one may vary by server and you have to make a claim on some. Same with the 50 move rule .Unsporting players may force you to make 50 moves in an opposite bishops ending if they have more time and it's not on increments.

[Stewart Reuben]

I am sure Roger is correcta and these matters vary from server to server.
However, I am sure there is no 75 move rule where the arbier steps in and decares a draw.
I don't know whether they look ahead and, if they see the position cannot be won ny either side, then ceclare the game drawn.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Hello.
If you touched a piece which has no legal moves, does it have a penalty or warning?

[IM Jack Rudd]

No.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Save for, perhaps, you could be warned for distracting your opponent if it was felt to be a deliberate tactic?

[soheil_hooshdaran]

No new answer?
What defines distraction to the opponent at all? How do you determine if it was on purpose?

[Michael Farthing]

Soheil, the opponent describes it to the arbiter. The arbiter says to the player "Your opponent finds that distracting. Please avoid doing it"

It depends on the arbiter using his skill and judgement to detect when the opponent is just being awkward. In that case the arbiter uses exactly the same words but addresses them to the player making the complaint.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"What defines distraction to the opponent at all?"

That is difficult to define. One player complained to me that people were looking at his game. Now if they were very close to him, or moving about in his line of sight waving their arms, I can understand his annoyance. But he did not like people looking at his board at all, even if they glanced at it from 3 metres away. You really have to expect people to look at the board if you play in a tournament.

One player complained that I got up and went for a walk (during a potentially limitless session). Hard luck.

Some players are distracted by their opponents fidgeting, or eating or drinking at the board, or shaking the table, or adjusting the pieces all the time (obviously if they do it when it's your move, that is distracting.)

It is all a matter of judgement. Whether it is deliberate or not is more difficult, but you could assume that someone playing in their first tournament might genuinely not know they are being distracting, whereas a grandmaster probably would know.

[Stewart Reuben]

If you find yourself in a position which is not precisely covered in the laws; then it is good to remember that your decision may have to be defended in a court of law of the country.
There was a strong player who used to make his move, press the clock and then adjust the piece. That was not against the Laws at that time. He did it several times and I told him not to do it. I even gave his opponent extra time; that stopped him. I observed his games later in the tournament. It was all very unpleasant.
The next set of Laws included what is now 6,2,5 Only the player whose clock is running is allowed to adjust the pieces.

A young player used to run his hands through his hair. That distracted me, perhaps because I am bald. I told myself not to be silly, provided he was doing it when his clock was going.

After the Second World War, before my time, The late Gerald Abrahams used to eat oranges at the table with great gusto. Oranges were hard to come by at that time. People told me there was little doubt in their mind that it was a deliberate ploy.

The late Dr Fazekas used to tap a piece against the table during speed chess. There was no arbiter. I produced a pen and tapped that on the table. 'Don't do that, boy', he said. I just looked at him and stopped. He never again did that against me in play.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"The late Dr Fazekas used to tap a piece against the table during speed chess. There was no arbiter. I produced a pen and tapped that on the table. 'Don't do that, boy', he said. I just looked at him and stopped. He never again did that against me in play."

A friend told me that an opponent used to put his false teeth by the board as a distraction. I think he said that was Fazekas, but I may be wrong.

[Leonard Barden]

The late Gerald Abrahams used to eat oranges at the table with great gusto. Oranges were hard to come by at that time. People told me there was little doubt in their mind that it was a deliberate ploy.

A friend told me that an opponent used to put his false teeth by the board as a distraction. I think he said that was Fazekas, but I may be wrong.

In the British Championship at Hastings 1953, Abrahams not only consumed his oranges but also chain-smoked cigars whose ash was deposited in mid-board. At one stage during the tournament there was a fire alarm, which might have been triggered by Gerald's habit. I think somebody from the BCF may have spoken to him, for by Nottingham 1954 there were fewer oranges or cigars and his main distracting habit was his Talmudic rocking back and forth in his chair, which gave him the nickname of "runaway rocking horse".

Faz could also be pretty distracting, but although I played him several times I don't recall any false teeth in my line of vision and think this must be someone else. My most difficult Faz occasion was at Southsea 1951 when I was thinking, the floor was not carpeted, and he paced up and down behind his chair stomping his hobnailed boots.

In those years people were more loath to complain than now and there were fewer officials observing play, so I toughed it out and managed to win anyway.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"which gave him the nickname of "runaway rocking horse". "

Best nickname ever...