British Chess Championships 2010

[Richard Bates]

But it's also possible that as Rayner arrived late he was defaulted and that he was the one who subsequently appealed on the basis that he had been given permission to be late.

To the extent that the other players in the tournament knew what was going on, a Rayner default was the most likely original decision. I cannot be sure but I think the win had been claimed seconds before Francis arrived.

On the basis of the time being 2.45pm or the digital clock showing 1:10? Because the latter, I have learnt, occurs after 29 minutes and 30 seconds

[JustinHorton]

To the extent that the other players in the tournament knew what was going on, a Rayner default was the most likely original decision. I cannot be sure but I think the win had been claimed seconds before Francis arrived.

I believe that's right. Though of course it can be argued that this was preceded by a decision that the game would be allowed to take place, though as Angus wasn't actually told this - which is half the problem - this isn't at all clear.

I'll repeat that my view is that the player should have been told it was up to him to arrive on time or be defaulted, and that this is certainly what would have happened had it occurred in the competition for which the Major Open is a qualifier.

[JustinHorton]

The rules seem a bit muddy

I reckon a hippopotamus could wallow in them.

[Richard Bates]

No, that's quite right, but it doesn't follow from that that he was refusing to play.

Are you saying that Angus French was happy to play? Or are you saying that he refused to play?

Neither. If he was happy to play, he wouldn't have appealed, but he didn't refuse to. He was given time to write an appeal, and of course he can't both do that and play the game!

It seems to me that this is a deficiency in the appeals process.

[Alex Holowczak]

On the basis of the time being 2:45 or the clock showing 1:10? Because the latter, I have learnt, occurs after 29 minutes and 30 seconds

The rules are not clear here, either.

6.6a) Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game. Thus the default time is 0 minutes. The rules of a competition may specify otherwise.

So we're specifying 30 minutes. When is the start of the "session", though? You could argue two interpretations:
1) The scheduled start time, 2:15pm
2) The start of the clocks, which probably won't be at exactly 2:15pm

[JustinHorton]

It seems to me that this is a deficiency in the appeals process.

Quite, but it's unclear to me what would have happened if the appeal had said the game should take place. Presumably it could technically have taken place the following morning, i.e. right now.

I should say I don't particularly want to have a go at anybody over this, but it seems to me there were deficiencies both in the procedures and in the execution, and one would hope this would be accepted and attention paid to improving both. I've no reason to think it will be otherwise.

[Roger de Coverly]

1-1/2 suggests to me the following thought process: Rayner (in effect) requested a half-point bye.

The Championship programme requires 24 hours notice of a half point bye.

Byes in subsequent rounds must be notified to the appropriate control team at the event and at least 24 hours before the releant round. 

[Richard Bates]

On the basis of the time being 2:45 or the clock showing 1:10? Because the latter, I have learnt, occurs after 29 minutes and 30 seconds

The rules are not clear here, either.

6.6a) Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game. Thus the default time is 0 minutes. The rules of a competition may specify otherwise.

So we're specifying 30 minutes. When is the start of the "session", though? You could argue two interpretations:
1) The scheduled start time, 2:15pm
2) The start of the clocks, which probably won't be at exactly 2:15pm

I think you've slightly missed my point. I'm raising the possibility it might have been incorrectly ruled that Rayner didn't make it on time, on the basis that half an hour had elapsed on the digital clocks. When due to a misunderstanding of how they work, he may actually have made it with seconds to spare!

[Ian Thompson]

On the basis of the time being 2.45pm or the digital clock showing 1:10? Because the latter, I have learnt, occurs after 29 minutes and 30 seconds

30 minutes and 30 seconds, I think, not 29 minutes and 30 seconds.

[JustinHorton]

So we're specifying 30 minutes. When is the start of the "session", though? You could argue two interpretations:
1) The scheduled start time, 2:15pm
2) The start of the clocks, which probably won't be at exactly 2:15pm

I have a feeling the London League rules specifically deal with this, though I stand to be corrected.

[Alex Holowczak]

It seems to me that this is a deficiency in the appeals process.

Quite, but it's unclear to me what would have happened if the appeal had said the game should take place. Presumably it could technically have taken place the following morning, i.e. right now.

There was no reason why they couldn't have started playing last night in this case; but I don't know what the time was when the decision was taken. The rules allow for an adjournment in exceptional circumstances...

[Alex Holowczak]

On the basis of the time being 2.45pm or the digital clock showing 1:10? Because the latter, I have learnt, occurs after 29 minutes and 30 seconds

30 minutes and 30 seconds, I think, not 29 minutes and 30 seconds.

Richard is almost correct. You start with 1:40:30 on your clock (1:40:00 + 0:00:30; the increment for the first move).

It will say 1:10 when you're down to 1:10:59, so it would have taken 0:29:31 to get there. This is short of the 30-minute default time.

[David Sedgwick]

Default time:- Players arriving 30 (10 for Rapidplay) minutes or more after the start of a session shall lose, unless the arbiter decides otherwise. Repairing will normally be offered after that time."

The rules seem a bit muddy as to whether you win by default for a half-hour no show in the Championships or Major Open. They talk about repairing but as it's internationally rated isn't there the Short precedent?

Yes. Presumably that's why the rules say that repairing (sic - it should of course be "re-pairing") will be offered, not that it will take place.

Also what possible repairing could you do in round 10 of the Major Open apart from Rayner-French?

None, of course. Obviously this is intended to refer primarily to the first round of a tournament. The words "where this is feasible" could usefully be added at the end.

[Richard Bates]

Also what possible repairing could you do in round 10 of the Major Open apart from Rayner-French?

None, of course. Obviously this is intended to refer primarily to the first round of a tournament. The words "where this is feasible" could usefully be added at the end.

Presumably you could play a filler.

[Eoin Devane]

So, as I understand it, it would seem that Rayner was deemed to have arrived after the default time and was consequently defaulted. This suggests that there was a breakdown in communication between whoever spoke to him on the phone and assured him that he would not be defaulted and whoever sanctioned the default. This, in my view, is the primary problem here.

To be honest, my view is that if we are to have these rules in place, they ought to be enforced. Several of us on here regularly use public transport to get to chess matches, myself included, and usually try to plan our schedules so as to leave plenty of time to account for unexpected delays. I don't see why a player should be able to ring up the arbiter and get around these rules. Harsh, yes, but I think we ought to be consistent, and we do have several other rules that are particularly harsh and are rigorously enforced (mobile phones, for example). Perhaps I don't fully understand the circumstances, but in my view this sort of ruling sets a dangerous precedent with regards to players running late being able to call ahead and potentially avoid the default (whereas those not taking a mobile phone with them would be unable to do so).