FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

[Vlad Rekhson]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

Here's a suggestion. Give it to the arbitrator for safekeeping.
Here's a better one. Don't bring your phone into a chess tournament.

Ok, but the Arbiter doesn't want to keep 20 cellphones. Why does he need to be responsible for everyone's cellphone in a regular local tournament?
The second point is good, of course not always possible for everyone like coming back from work on a bus as an example.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

That is a good point; however, we have to consider the alternatives especially when people don't have a bag with them. In general, if the cell phone is on a table in our smaller tournaments (say under 30 people) it is not difficult to watch out for it and it would be not so easy for someone to steal it. Again, for those concerned with their cellphones, the best course of action is not to bring them in to the tournament room.

Vlad

You're right, Vlad, that it is (regrettably) a problem that needs to be taken seriously but I have trouble doing that. To me, someone who would publicly put their integrity/reputation on the line for the small amount of dollars and rating points that would be available in local tournaments is just so pathetic that they're deserving of our pity rather than our anger. People talk about the phenomenon of low self-esteem, well you must need an electron microscope to see the self-esteem of the poor bastards who would cheat at chess for the ego gratification they get from fifty ill-gotten dollars and the same number of ill-gotten rating points. Just thinking about it makes me cringe in embarassment for them. When the prizes are big we can all understand that some people of weak character will be attracted. And we can also understand that honest tournament participants should not be victimized by the scum. But when the potential benefits amount to peanuts?? Maybe at small tournaments everyone should chip in a dollar for a 'YOU POOR PATHETIC BASTARD' prize for anyone caught cheating.

I recall, many years ago, a member of the London YMCA chess club trying to cheat in a skittles game against an elderly partially-sighted opponent. The cheater tried to slip a captured pawn back on the board. Can you imagine where that poor bastard's ego must have been?

[Kerry Liles]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

You're right, Vlad, that it is (regrettably) a problem that needs to be taken seriously but I have trouble doing that. To me, someone who would publicly put their integrity/reputation on the line for the small amount of dollars and rating points that would be available in local tournaments is just so pathetic that they're deserving of our pity rather than our anger. People talk about the phenomenon of low self-esteem, well you must need an electron microscope to see the self-esteem of the poor bastards who would cheat at chess for the ego gratification they get from fifty ill-gotten dollars and the same number of ill-gotten rating points. Just thinking about it makes me cringe in embarassment for them. When the prizes are big we can all understand that some people of weak character will be attracted. And we can also understand that honest tournament participants should not be victimized by the scum. But when the potential benefits amount to peanuts?? Maybe at small tournaments everyone should chip in a dollar for a 'YOU POOR PATHETIC BASTARD' prize for anyone caught cheating.

I recall, many years ago, a member of the London YMCA chess club trying to cheat in a skittles game against an elderly partially-sighted opponent. The cheater tried to slip a captured pawn back on the board. Can you imagine where that poor bastard's ego must have been?

100% agree Peter. In club tournaments and most small local tournaments I think the honour system should be trusted and sufficient. A corollary of that is that *anyone* who is caught cheating should be banned loudly and widely (assuming it is proven!). FIDE can take care of the 'professional' tournaments etc. and probably their rules have jurisdiction in any FIDE rated event. In larger tournaments like Canadian Open or events where qualification and/or large prizes are offered, I think there should be a no cell phone at all rule (and such events are large enough to justify paying someone to provide an 'electronics' coat-check facility (small fee to offset running costs?).

In a club tournament, if my opponents phone went off I am pretty sure I wouldn't care on the first instance at least... I usually have my cell on vibrate during club tournaments and I can check the message in the presence of another unaffected club member to make sure it isn't urgent... Common sense is severely diluted these days.

[Vlad Rekhson]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

In a club tournament, if my opponents phone went off I am pretty sure I wouldn't care on the first instance at least... I usually have my cell on vibrate during club tournaments and I can check the message in the presence of another unaffected club member to make sure it isn't urgent... Common sense is severely diluted these days.

I can understand the sentiment; however, the FIDE rules actually apply to all CFC events so technically if an event is CFC rated, players can not have a cellphone on them regardless if it is on or not and if they have it on them they should be forfeited. We actually apply this rule in all of our rated events because that is the official rule. Whether it makes sense or not is another issue, but if this rule is not enforced then the Arbiter can be challenged if he doesn't enforce it.

[Roger Patterson]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

There is an article in the Globe and Mail today about Volvo producing cars next year that don't have keys - the owner's cellphone will unlock and start the car. So, a no cellphone policy will be banning Volvo owners..... Somewhat more generally, blithely assuming that not bringing a phone to a tournament is no hardship for players is untenable.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...ticle28834586/

As for the idea that leaving a cellphone on the table is a reasonable idea and unlikely to be stolen, well you could also leave your wallet on the table too and see how that works out. I think someone who thinks the public visibility of the item in question is enough of a deterrent against theft underestimates how brazen thieves can be and how uninterested other people are in looking after your property.

[Alex Ferreira]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

Hi,


Thanks for sharing the arbiters' magazine, great read / compilation of articles, some of which had already been published elsewhere.


Canada is completely in the stone age when it comes to FIDE-rated chess. You can argue that this is a good thing, since combined with very limited sponsorship, any chess tournament here has a modest prize fund, and norm tournaments are few. Also being a fairly small community and our geography limits ability to travel, it is not surprising we have had few / limited real cheating cases, at least involving phones. The average player with a CFC rating under 2000 does not yet have a FIDE-rating, and plays no FIDE-rated games. We are very slowly bringing / integrating / forcing FIDE ratings into our pool of players. Do we really want to be hardcore on every rule that is applied in top FIDE world events? Seems like a good way to discourage people to even wanting to be part of it. Where do we draw the lines? How do we differentiate from CFC to FIDE rules and apply guidelines accordingly? Some clubs with CFC but unlikely FIDE rated games, still allow for some grace with cellphones going off. Clearly this is a case of distraction and not of cheating. Clubs often provide the environment where an amateur goes from playing with his friends to playing rated chess in tournaments. Since Canada (CFC) does not find it a priority of an instant conversion rate / assimilation / migration / whatever-you-want-to-call-it to arrange so that all chess players in Canada are assigned a FIDE-rating, we will continue to be lagging. We will continue to have mixed Mickey-Mouse tournaments where one section is FIDE-rated, the next one isn't, yet they are played in the same hall. We will continue to have some clubs choosing to hold back on rating tournaments with FIDE because they do not want to forfeit someone when a phone goes off, which apparently in some ways it is somewhat (almost? not really?) acceptable in CFC-only rated events.

As someone mentioned, it is completely impractical for an arbiter / organizer (except maybe for a Canadian-Open or norm type event) to have people whose lives are on their cellphones, surrender them for the duration of the day. Neither would an arbiter really want that responsibility, since in Canadian events one arbiter might be responsible for over-viewing 50+ on-going games. Placing the phone turned off on the table is easily the most honest and co-operative action a chess player can take. It indicates: "I have a phone (who doesn't?), it's turned off, it's in your (opponent, arbiter) sight, I have nothing to hide". Of course the cellphone should NEVER go to the washroom with a person during the game. And I almost want to meet the person who would have the nerve to snatch a phone from a game table while the player is away from the board!

On the note relating to an arbiter playing in a tournament... I think this depends somewhat on what kind of event this is. Naturally this should not happen in a large event where the likelihood of there not being enough arbiters is already very high. What about a club tournament? An 8 player Round Robin, or a match, among friends? One issue is supervision... of course an arbiter should avoid being a player if supervision of other games is a necessity. If an arbiter is part of a classical time control 8 player Round Robin, supervision is fairly basic. The other issue is conflict of interest. Should a conflict arise during a game, an arbiter would have to remove himself and look at the scenario from a third-person perspective, with clarity of mind and without looking at his own interests as a player. Sure, easier said than done :-) -- I however don't necessarily see the exclusion of an arbiter from playing in a small, low-stakes, friendly environment, etc... to be a must in all cases.


Alex Ferreira

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

... And I almost want to meet the person who would have the nerve to snatch a phone from a game table while the player is away from the board! ...
Alex Ferreira

Lowlifes snatch purses, items from stores, all sorts of things. The chance of getting caught and having it proven you were stealing ("Oh sorry, I thought that was my phone.") is really low, I would think. Not necessarily players but also random spectators would have opportunity, so saying that thieves are expelled from CFC events for life might have little effect. I've heard of people having their chess equipment stolen, I don't see why phones should be any different.

[Pierre Denommee]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

I have attended the FIDE internet Anti Cheating lecture.

According to the actual Anti-Cheating guidelines, a norm tournament must use an anti-cheating device. The least expensive is the handheld metal detector from Garrett. No norm tournament should be registered with FIDE without mentioning which anti cheating device will be used. The ACC wants FIDE to stop rating high level tournaments in which no anti cheating measure are applied. It is already the rule but it is not strictly enforced.

Metal detectors should be used at least randomly at the playing area entrance. It is important not to scan only suspects. This could lead to a perceived humiliation or decrease of a player reputation if nothing is found. The players should feel about the detector as they feel in an airport : passing through the metal detector does not imply any kind of guilt. In big FIDE event such as the World Cup, everybody will pass the detector as they do before boarding the airplane to the tournament. Also, if a player complains about his opponent, both players should pass the metal detector test because all players must be treated equally.

It may not seems relevant to us, but in European countries where chess gets private sponsorship, the sponsors are unhappy and are threatening to withdraw if noting is done to control cheating. If nothing is done, in 5 years, there will be no more sponsors and organized chess will collapse. That is why arbiters, organizers and the ACC must work as a united team to prevent cheating.

Admittedly, cheating is not a huge problem locally because our small tournaments offers little money compared to the world largest Open tournaments. Risking a suspension form FIDE for a 400$ first price that might be shared does not seems logical.

[Nigel Hanrahan]

"If nothing is done ... no more sponsors and organized chess will collapse."

... in European countries where chess gets private sponsorship, the sponsors are unhappy and are threatening to withdraw if nothing is done to control cheating. If nothing is done, in 5 years, there will be no more sponsors and organized chess will collapse. That is why arbiters, organizers and the ACC must work as a united team to prevent cheating.

This should sober up anyone who has, hitherto, been trivializing the importance of controlling cheating.

[Aris Marghetis]

Re: FIDE Arbiters’ Magazine No 2

I just (finally) was able to online-attend a recording of the recent Anti-Cheating lecture. I thought it was a very good idea, and the presenters did a VERY good job at being engaging and informative (over 3 hours went by fast). I hope that they have more of these, and that more arbiters attend, to in effect build "critical mass" of consistency.