Mobile Phones (and Grandmasters)

[Steve Collyer]

....
If you don't feel in a position to play without your blasted mobile on the table next to you, then perhaps you shouldn't turn up for the match & let someone else have a game?
As I said before, people somehow managed to do without mobiles at chess games up until the '80's.

...Talking of which - Most people somehow managed to do without toilets until the 19th century but I wouldn't want to go back to those times by choice...

A laughable comparison.
What about cholera, filthy streets and so on?
Hardly the same cost/benefit scenario as keeping your mobile in the car during a game of chess.

[Ian Kingston]

A few thoughts on, and experiences of, this law.

As a player, I've only once had my opponent's phone ring during play. Well, four times actually, but all in the same game. I'd travelled a long way to play and I really didn't want to hang around doing nothing for two hours or more. I won the game, but it was never a certainty on any of the occasions on which the phone rang. Each occurrence caused my opponent to leave the room and take the call, costing him time on his clock, so I was gaining an advantage by ignoring the law. Was I cheating?

As a spectator I've seen it happen a few times. On one occasion an elderly patzer literally punched the air in delight when his 10-year-old opponent's phone rang during a league match. Whatever you think about the law itself, that's pretty contemptible behaviour. Once, at the 4NCL, a team mate who was over half an hour late for the start suffered death by mobile. He wasn't pleased, but accepted the ruling. In a league match, one fellow club member's phone rang, but his opponent ignored the offence. The phone was turned off, but somehow managed to turn itself on again (or perhaps it hadn't been turned off properly) and rang a second time. Again, play continued.

As a controller, the situation has only occurred once. A phone rang, the owner jumped up and left the room, and I glared at him. His opponent happened to be a member of the same club and said nothing. I let it go. I know - it could easily be said that I neglected my duty. If someone else's phone had rung during the same tournament I might have had a very tricky decision to make: 'You let X off, so why not me?'.

A lot of people keep talking about 'claiming' the win. But the law says: 'If a player's mobile phone rings in the playing venue during play, that player shall lose the game'. There's no need to make a claim or even to involve the arbiter. The result could simply be reported in the usual way. If the game continues, then it does so in defiance of the Laws of Chess. Of course, if both players want to continue playing, then the arbiter could conceivably apply Article 13.2 ('The arbiter shall act in the best interest of the competition') to allow them to carry on, although that would contradict Article 13.1 ('The arbiter shall see that the Laws of Chess are strictly observed').

It bothers me that mobile phone results are graded and rated. I suppose that this is necessary - a player in a lost position could arrange for his phone to ring in order to avoid losing grading/rating points - but in the absence of such cheating it seems odd.

The tightening of the wording of the law from 1 July is a good thing.

Despite my lax approach to applying this particular law, I'm now inclined to think that it should be strictly enforced and that players should simply get used to it. I'll go on record now as saying that if my phone should ever make as much as a tiny beep while I'm playing I'll simply record the loss on the scoresheet and head for the bar. I'm not sure what I'll do the next time my opponent's phone rings. I ought to be consistent and take the win, but I suspect I'll let circumstances influence my decision.

[Kevin Thurlow]

The point about "claiming" the game is a good one - I have won more than one game on time when material down, and the opponent has accused me of being unsporting by "claiming" the win. Their hopes raise when I say I am not claiming anything, then fall again, when I say "your flag's down <or showing 0.00> - you have lost". If the law says it's a loss, nobody has to claim anything.

I was arbiter at a tournament where one player's phone rang, he immediately apologised and resigned, but later (when I was in a different room) someone else's phone rang and the player switched it off before my colleague could locate the offender. At this point, the one who had resigned was a bit narked...

I just remembered an incident in a club match in the lowest division of Surrey, where the opposing captain who was graded 85, but must have been older, fiddled with his phone when he sat down, so I thought he's switching it off, but no... He picked it up and said, "HALLO, YES WE'VE JUST STARTED. TALK TO YOU LATER." Unfortunately our player took no notice at all, and it is unclear in the Surrey rules if anyone else (like the captain) can pounce. Ironically, our player was beating a much higher graded player in a later match, then his own phone rang and the opponent immediately but slightly apologetically wanted the win. And of course, we shrugged and said "fair enough".

The trouble with letting people infringe laws/rules is that you tend not to get the same reaction when you infringe! And how do you decide which laws NOT to enforce? OK, you don't want to win on phone - if someone picks up a piece which will lead to instant loss when he moves it and he changes his mind, do you think, "oh it will ruin the game - I will let him change it"?

Kevin

[Ian Kingston]

I just remembered an incident in a club match in the lowest division of Surrey, where the opposing captain who was graded 85, but must have been older, fiddled with his phone when he sat down, so I thought he's switching it off, but no... He picked it up and said, "HALLO, YES WE'VE JUST STARTED. TALK TO YOU LATER." Unfortunately our player took no notice at all, and it is unclear in the Surrey rules if anyone else (like the captain) can pounce.

If mobile phones were allowed in the venue then Article 12.2b doesn't apply, since his phone didn't ring. Not sure what other law might have been contravened: distracting the opponent, maybe?

[NeilJerzynek]

the same thing happened to me as the kid in the under 11's,
in this weekends preston congress a tune started to play and went on for almost a full minute, I started to dance a bit in my chair to make it light harted

I always keep my phone off in a case under the table so as not to knock it on

At first people though the tune may have been from the (is it PA system?) but somebody realised that is was under my table, I said it can't be it's off, but there was an alarm that turned the phone on, what was worst is I haven't put any music on my phone yet and as soon as an alarm goes on you turn it off straight away so I did not recongise it

Sorry to all at the congress, it was almost slightly amusing

When it was playing a tune one person said disqualify/ation (1 of the 2) and somebody else told him to shove it

Everybody else came up to me and said 'what happened' from weeker players-to strong players in the open, wearn't bothered and knew it was a freak incident

One friend of mine said if your opponents phone goes off you win the game by default and don't get rating points, is this true?

If it is you could turn your phone on when losing to not lose rating points

[IM Jack Rudd]

One friend of mine said if your opponents phone goes off you win the game by default and don't get rating points, is this true?

It's not true. Once both players have played a move, any awarded result counts as if it were a played-out result for rating purposes...

If it is you could turn your phone on when losing to not lose rating points

...for precisely this reason.

[Roger de Coverly]

One friend of mine said if your opponents phone goes off you win the game by default and don't get rating points, is this true?

If it is you could turn your phone on when losing to not lose rating points

If the congress is applying the laws strictly ( evening leagues sometimes give leeway), then you win and it counts for grading.

[Alex McFarlane]

Slight correction to Roger - Yes it counts for grading and you probably win but the arbiter decides. So if you only had a king left at the time the result would be 1/2 - 0.

[Phil Neatherway]

Yes the arbiter decides. In my local league, my opponent's phone rang after 20 moves and the League decided 1/2 - 0. I'm still trying to understand that decision and I have no idea what impact it had on my grading.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Yes the arbiter decides. In my local league, my opponent's phone rang after 20 moves and the League decided 1/2 - 0. I'm still trying to understand that decision and I have no idea what impact it had on my grading."

Unless you didn't have mating material - the decision is just wrong.

[Richard Bates]

What to make of the Mobile phone regulations at the London tournament?

http://www.londonchessclassic.com/festival_events.htm

FIDE RATED OPEN:

Mobile phones must be switched off in the playing hall. Competitors should avoid bringing phones to the venue. You may be immediately defaulted if your mobile phone makes any sound during play.

WEEKEND CLASSIC:

Mobile phones must be switched off in the playing hall. Competitors should avoid bringing phones to the venue. You may (their emphasis) be immediately defaulted if your mobile phone makes any sound during play.

[Ben Purton]

Unless your Nigel Davies then you can get away with it?

[Matthew Turner]

It was my view that the stipulation for whether you had won if your opponent's phone rang was not the same as for the flag falling (i.e. mating material). For example, lets say I have a king and a pawn and my opponent has queen, rook and king (in a normal position) then if my opponent's phone rings the arbiter can award me a draw and my opponent a loss. As an interesting aside this could produce some strange National Schools' match scores - I wonder how this would be covered by the scores required under the age handicaps?

[Rob Thompson]

Just another mobile phone thoguht - about a week ago i was in a match where there was a noise that sounded very like it came from a mobile. No-one reacted, and play continued. A few minutes later, the noise sounded again. After this happening a couple more times, it was clear that it was either the opposition board 2 or board 3, at which point the board three turns to the board 2 an the following conversation ensues:

"Is that your phone?"
"no"
"Oh, 'cos i switched mine off"

After one more sounding, it was heard no more, but by that time both players concerned had been outside the playing room, out of site. As it was, we won the match, with 1.5 on the two boards concerned, and no action was taken. Should/could anything else have been done?

[Richard Haddrell]

... if my opponent's phone rings the arbiter can award me a draw and my opponent a loss. As an interesting aside this could produce some strange National Schools' match scores - I wonder how this would be covered by the scores required under the age handicaps?

The handicap rules of the Yateley Manor are clear enough. See http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/schrul.htm. The older team wins if it outscores its opponents by a number of points at least equal to the age difference in years (taken as a whole number of years, by truncation if necessary). Eccentric winning margins aren’t a problem. X-and-a-half is at least equal to Y, or it isn’t.

Before anyone asks, if the older team doesn’t win it loses. Drawn matches don’t happen.