Dartford & Swanley 2 V Petts Wood & Orpington 3

Press / Admin Comment

A dispute arose on board 6 after it was discovered that the clocks had been set incorrectly with no increments. The Petts Wood player lost on time as his clock ran out first. The Dartford player admitted afterwards that he had spotted that no increment was being added but failed to mention it at the time. I’m assuming that it is the responsibility of each player to check that his/her clock has been set correctly, so the result stands, but would be grateful for the tournament controller’s confirmation. Roy Parsons, Petts Wood Captain.

Roy Parsons

Incredibly disappointed

As Kent Tournament Secretary I am incredibly disappointed to read the above. First & foremost players place a lot of trust in their Captains to get things right and secondly I don't know of any Away Captain who checks that the Home Captain has set the clocks correctly. Again, the Away Captain will usually trust that the Home Captain has done his job correctly. So the Home Captain here has messed up in setting up the clocks incorrectly and no-one noticed beforehand. Mistakes happen, I understand that, and I also understand that neither Captain or the Away player noticed while the game was in progress. What is disappointing however is that the Home player DID notice and chose not to bring it to anyone's attention. Given that the Home player won on time I can only assume that this was a deliberate tactical decision taken by the Home player to take advantage of the situation. Whilst definitely not cheating, and maybe arguably not gamesmanship it is definitely unsporting. I can understand if one player chooses not to mention to his opponent that he has not stopped his clock after making his move. That is the opponents responsibility and no player is responsible for the game management of another player. However, this is something quite different as, as I have previously explained, players generally trust their Captains, and especially the Home Captain, to have set the clocks correctly. I'm sorry, but this 'Victory at all costs' mentality leaves a sour taste in my mouth. In an ideal World, the player who noticed the increment wasn't being added should have stopped the Clocks and drawn the attention of his opponent and the team Captains to that fact. Then the Captains could have calculated the missing time and added it to both clocks, adjusted the clocks to add increment from that point onwards and then restarted the game. But obviously we're not in an ideal World and unfortunately the result stands.

Martin Stewart

I fully agree that team

I fully agree that team captains should ensure that clocks are setup correctly, however it is PLAYERS responsibilities to look at their boards as well as the clocks. I am the home player in question and I have valid reasons to not bring the matter/this to anyone's attention 1. When I noticed it the game was already more than halfway through I had 30 min left and my opponent had 50 2. It is too late to do any changes ... normally this is changed within first 30 min of the game. 3. Why should I tell this my opponent? - He/she is responsible for watching their clock - If the opponent notices this will they stop? 4. The clock is the same for both players - increments or not it is the same for both players 5. I don't speak during the game - first to not disturb other players, second any word means that the player speaking is offering a draw which I don't want! Finally here is the FEN of the game: 8/8/1p1b1k2/1P1P2p1/4KpP1/1N2p3/r7/3R4 b - - 4 49 Move 49 both players have around 7 minutes on the clock - evaluation of this position is -8.5 (I am playing black) - Do I really win on time? His clock ran out - shall I continue playing with winning position and his flag down? Let's just be honest and don't blame the clocks for loosing positions

Miroslav Danov

Final comment

Having spoken to members of our club, the consensus was that I should appeal the result of last night's game. Personally, having read the comments of my opponent it appears that words like 'integrity, honesty and fairness' do not apply. Although Martin's comments about fair play were appreciated, the final outcome was not. The game should have been pronounced ' null and void ' in my opinion. Having tried to read the rules and regulations for the Kent league, it appears the only rule is turn yor mobile phone off. Because of this i have decided to take a break from playing any more matches in the Kent league for the foreseeable future and I request that Martin removes my captaincy from PWOCC 6. John Cook will endeavour to find a replacement.

Anthony Langley

the above

If the clocks were not set properly,the whole match should be declared void. It was not played according to the stipulated format. Outcome of games is irrelevant.

Martin Newman

precendent

We had this exact scenario occur to us earlier in the season vs Sidcup. A spectator noticed there was no increment, alerted the captains and both sides got the extra time added to the clock. No dramas. That is what should've happened. I am surprised the clocks were not stopped the moment this was realised by one of the players and the clocks corrected (actually even the away player could've done this towards the very end - our player had 2 minutes left when it was noticed...). If no player (or the arbiter) raised it before the clock run out I dont think there is any recourse - at least I cannot see anything to that effect in the FIDE handbook. The fact that the home player chose to remain silent about it leaves a sour taste, although it does look like the position was already winning so why not just add the time and win it over the board? Thats perplexing. I do hope that online play is not creeping into OTB. Fide Handbook 6.10 b. 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.

David Rogers

TO MARTIN STEWART : All of

TO MARTIN STEWART : All of the complications about who should have done what are irrelevant . The match was not played according to the stipulated format .You need to declare this match VOID.

Martin Newman

format

I am not sure it is right to say that a match is voided just because the clocks were not set correctly from the outset. It is clear that a valid standard play match was played and completed here, albeit with a time control different to that of the other boards. Furthermore, according to the Kent league rules (10e) the time allowed for a match will be 2.5hrs (thats 60+15, or 75+0 which is what occurred here) unless the captains agree otherwise - most of the time the hosts opt for 75+15 with implicit agreement from the away captain. If the match were less than 2 hours (thats 45+15 or 60+0) it would not be eligible for standard grading and would count as a rapidplay game instead - in that instance I think it would be correct to void it as it wouldnt mean the game length criteria of the competition laid out in https://www.kentcountychessassociation.org.uk/rules/. Perhaps there are some arbiters lurking around who know the answer to this question definitively.

David Rogers

David Rogers ....David: What

David Rogers ....David: What you say is "clear" would not be clear to anyone with a legal mind . The players were not playing under the rule that they thought they were..........even if in total they played for what would have qualified as an acceptable length of game. Playing with a 15 second increment is a different recent innovation. It even modifies one`s style because you have the resource that even if one gets short of time , one will always have 15 seconds to make a move.........and regaining time is even a possibility.

Martin Newman