If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Dispute - What do you think, RE: Hart House Tournament Round 4 lose on time
If there was a 2 sec vs 12 sec visible then a digital clock must have been used.
Was it a Hart House Chess clock or one of the player's clocks.
Many details left out from original post.
When a game is down to that fast anything can happen.
Maybe the 12 sec player was not pressing the button hard enough to start the 2 sec clock. I did not witness the game so I cannot make a concrete comment.
Did the losing player appeal the decision?
Was this for First Prize in U1900?
I did not see the game but got the details from Jack. The Clock was digital and belonged to Lily. I think it's a bit ridiculous for Lily to complain about how unfair it is when the clock belonged to her and there appears to be no concrete evidence that the clock malfunctioned.... that could just be me though
Also, as far as I know neither player had done well enough up to this point for them to qualify for prizes.
His view is that it is impossible in a blitz situation to enforce a rule that a player may not move until the other player has completed (by pressing his clock) his move. So, he considers the second player moving (and touching pieces) between the first player releasing his piece and moving to the clock legal. He does insist that the first player is always allowed to press his clock. (so at least some time must elapse on the second player's clock).
Wow, I'm shocked that this is considered acceptable practice. Thanks for the information; it gives me another reason to avoid sudden-death time control tournaments without increments. :-)
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Re: Dispute - What do you think, RE: Hart House Tournament Round 4 lose on time
This reminds me of my first encounter with digital clocks. It was many many years ago at the Mississauga Chess Club. I was just the new patzer at the time, and John Upper was King of the club. The strongest player, and the only guy with a digital clock. It was a novelty back then, a bit mysterious, this must be maybe 20 years ago?
Anyhow, I got paired up against John in a speed tournament. To my surprise, I got what I thought was a clear advantage, on the board and on the clock. John had 12 seconds, I had 3 minutes. Could I knock the king off his throne? John offered me a draw. Why accept a draw when he can't physically make all the moves, even if he was winning? I declined the draw!
John gave me this look, blitzed out I'm guessing 30+moves, I flagged while getting mated, and John had 5 seconds left. :o
"Answer
Let me start with two definitions:
1. Making a move means to play a piece from one square to another square.
2. Completing a move means making a move, stopping one's own clock, and starting the opponent’s.
It is a generally accepted interpretation that a player may make his move after the opponent has made (not completed) his move. Thus, before a player has pressed his clock, the opponent is allowed to make his move, but , after the opponent has made the move, the player still has the right to press his clock.
In my opinion, the sentence "A player must always be allowed to stop his clock" justifies the way the player of the black pieces acted.
We discussed this matter during the FIDE Congress in Dresden 2008. The question was, whether we should forbid a player to make a move before his opponent has pressed the clock. We concluded that especially in time scrabbles, blitz, and rapid games, it is very difficult to see the real sequence of what is happening. Therefore, we did not change this Article of the Laws of Chess."
Re: Dispute - What do you think, RE: Hart House Tournament Round 4 lose on time
I was sitting across the hall from the playing table and could hear and see most of what was going on, in terms of the blitzing, but of course couldn't see the clock. And I could clearly hear the discussions that ensued.
The claim by Lily was made after the conclusion of the game, only because witnesses then stated to her that the clock had not been working.
The evidence about the clock was mixed.
Jack Maguire and some other witnesses swore many moves were played by Jack Ding after the clock showed he had 2 seconds left, and the clock never went down. Enough moves were played that at least one second was used by Jack.
But when Alex Ferreira, organizer, tested the clock after Lily's claim, the clock was working.
Alex referred the claim to arbiter Bryan Lamb. I don't know what Bryan ruled.
I'm now firmly in the camp that increments should be used for anything remotely official.
I find it a total lack of respect to hang your hand over the board and make your move as soon as the other guy seems to have dropped the piece. That way you can easily make 10 moves in less than 1 sec. This practice allows you to actually move your pieces on the opponent's time.
Chess is a 'mind game' after all, and the 1-2 seconds required to move a piece and press the clock should never be a factor.
The claim by Lily was made after the conclusion of the game, only because witnesses then stated to her that the clock had not been working.
Related clauses:
13.7 Spectators and players in other games are not to speak about or otherwise interfere in a game. If necessary, the arbiter may expel offenders from the playing venue. If someone observes an irregularity, he may inform only the arbiter.
6.10b. If during a game it is found that the setting of either or both clocks was incorrect, either player or the arbiter shall stop the clocks immediately. The arbiter shall install the correct setting and adjust the times and move counter. He shall use his best judgement when determining the correct settings.
Players should not only learn openings but rules too.
BTW: 1 sec has 1 000 000 000 000 picoseconds LOL I mean, that there are 1000 milliseconds 9ms), and a clock switch time might be about 30-100 ms. Do your math.
Re: Dispute - What do you think, RE: Hart House Tournament Round 4 lose on time
Hello,
The tournament had 125 players, which is consistent with our normal turn-outs.
That means ~60 boards (some people take byes). We are the University of Toronto Chess Club (Hart House) and have 30-50 members any given year.
It is simply impossible, even if we had the money, to justify in a budget proposal having over 20-25 clocks. In our larger turn-out type events and we hope to surpass the Winter Open (186 players) in the future, this is a real challenge. For us to be able to provide everyone clocks we would probably have to pull from at least two sources (Annex & OCA for example).
In sum, we ask people to bring their own. In this, we cannot dictate an incremental time control all around because we don't have enough digital clocks and know well enough that there are still many people who only own an analog. Although yes, that would be ideal.
Zhou-Ding
Neither Bryan or myself can be planted watching everything that is going on, especially when chess is being played in two rooms, there is a skittles analyzes, and the "TD Room" where we keep supplies and people look for one of us when they need something. The second last game had just finished, and as I am collecting supplies that people borrow from us but don't return, carbon copies, etc... I see the crowd watching the last game. I make my way there and the situation is quite intense. Both players are blitzing moves and furiously banging the clock. The clock is of course, facing the wall. -- Whereas I don't remember making an announcement about this, the board mats had originally all been set in such a way that if the clocks were on the right side of black, they would be facing the aisle -- I decided to watch from where I was, as pieces were being misplaced or flying off their squares (and adjusted accordingly, both players were good about this), instead of going around a crowd of 15 people and missing the entire action.
Black calls white's flag. You've read the witnesses' feedback, I got the same on-site from the them. About black's clock not going down. I pick up the clock and see 0.00-0.00 -- So the clock at least worked after white's flag fell to then bring black's flag down as well (within these past 20 or so seconds of a complaint, witness feedback and me picking up the clock).
I switched the mode of Zhou's Saitek 3 clock to 2A, 5 minute blitz, and tested it. It seemed perfectly fine to me.
To me it seemed inhumane that someone could play so many moves in so little (or no) time. Could the clock had momentarily frozen with its abuse?
In any case, the arbiter's decision could realistically probably only be one.
There was no evidence that the clock was faulty (as far as we could tell)
The claim was made after the game was over (immediately after)
So the result stood.
Alex Ferreira
Organizer, Hart House Reading Week Open
..... In this, we cannot dictate an incremental time control all around because we don't have enough digital clocks and know well enough that there are still many people who only own an analog. Although yes, that would be ideal.
....
I have heard before from others that using digital clocks is not possible because not every one owns one and it is too expensive for them to buy one yada yada yada.
I simply don't understand it. When I was a kid, all tournament games were with [analog] clocks and I cannot ever recall someone arguing that a tournament should be played without clocks because, well they were expensive and not everybody had one. Didn't matter, a clock was required for tournament play. Today, a digital clock is the norm for tournament play and that is what everybody should have.
Might be harder for a club to replace all of it's own but again, it is required chess equipment. The Victoria Club has all digital, has even replaced it's old digital clocks. If we can do it, you can. You can also divert say 10% of your tournament prize funds towards equipment and do it over time.
Again: today, a digital clock is a required part of tournament equipment. Deal with it.
Last edited by Roger Patterson; Monday, 25th February, 2013, 03:30 PM.
Reason: clarification
Re: Dispute - What do you think, RE: Hart House Tournament Round 4 lose on time
Great points!
Lots of food for thought.
We could...
A - Do it like in USA, provide zero equipment, and have a situation comparable to when Kamsky's game started over half hour late because he didn't have a clock and had to wait until one became available.
B - Simply have a Sudden Death Time Control all around, uniforming clocks by ability. After all if we, as organizers, stipulate such and players join the tournament, they would be conforming with the rules.
C - Stop hosting tournaments altogether.
D - Fly clocks in from Victoria.
E - Place a cap of 48 players because we own 24 clocks & sets.
F - Spend thousands of dollars buying clocks to use twice a year, because after all, several players don't own equipment (how?), or those who own a set and clock don't wish to lug it around.
G - Or as our former colleague Stuart Brammall has suggested several times, and some organizers have done it, RENT the equipment that we do own, round by round.
Personally, I don't really like any of the options. But the last one may merit more consideration. Something like... $15 deposit per set / clock / round. $10 refunded when equipment is brought back.
It might just provide the incentive for chess players who don't own a set / clock to invest in one, or bring it with them.
... or perhaps ...
H - Ask Strategy Games to send a representative and do that for us ... ? with their own rates.
G - Or as our former colleague Stuart Brammall has suggested several times, and some organizers have done it, RENT the equipment that we do own, round by round.
Just do it and don't look back. Enforce a rule that if no equipment available for the paired players within 15 min - both get zeros. It will take one event when all will bring (buy) digital clocks or will learn to share / borrow / rent.
You may make some exceptions for top-25 boards.
A - Do it like in USA, provide zero equipment, and have a situation comparable to when Kamsky's game started over half hour late because he didn't have a clock and had to wait until one became available.
B - Simply have a Sudden Death Time Control all around, uniforming clocks by ability. After all if we, as organizers, stipulate such and players join the tournament, they would be conforming with the rules.
C - Stop hosting tournaments altogether.
D - Fly clocks in from Victoria.
E - Place a cap of 48 players because we own 24 clocks & sets.
F - Spend thousands of dollars buying clocks to use twice a year, because after all, several players don't own equipment (how?), or those who own a set and clock don't wish to lug it around.
G - Or as our former colleague Stuart Brammall has suggested several times, and some organizers have done it, RENT the equipment that we do own, round by round.
Personally, I don't really like any of the options. But the last one may merit more consideration. Something like... $15 deposit per set / clock / round. $10 refunded when equipment is brought back.
It might just provide the incentive for chess players who don't own a set / clock to invest in one, or bring it with them.
... or perhaps ...
H - Ask Strategy Games to send a representative and do that for us ... ? with their own rates.
Alex Ferreira
Doesn't the CFC have some clocks that they could lend? The FQE lends everything (clocks and pieces) and give material (scoresheets, boards, etc.) for major tournaments. I don't know if the CFC has a lot of chess material though.
Re: Dispute - What do you think, RE: Hart House Tournament Round 4 lose on time
Any non-Goichberg (i.e. non-Continental Chess Association) tournament that I have experienced over the last few years in the US has supplied at least boards and sets (and a fair number of clocks).
Tweet
Comment