[BrianWall-ChessList] Florida TD Harvey Lerman on I need a TD ruling

Mon Sep 21 19:01:35 MDT 2009

----- Forwarded message from Harvey Lerman <harveylerman at embarqmail.com> -----
    Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:52:29 -0400
    From: Harvey Lerman <harveylerman at embarqmail.com>
Reply-To: Harvey Lerman <harveylerman at embarqmail.com>
 Subject: Re: [BrianWall-ChessList] Damian Nash on I need a TD ruling
      To: Brian Wall <brianwallchess3 at taom.com>, BrianwallChess at Yahoogroups.com,
Chess_Improvement at Yahoogroups.com, Brian Wall Chesslist
<brianwall-chesslist at lists.taom.com>

Interesting comments.
1. DuWayne is correct on much of what he said, but he is incorrect in saying
that the clock must be "corrected". That is true only if the clock was set
"incorrectly", such as G/60 instead of G/120.
2. Once a game has been played with time delay off, it stays off and a player
can't turn it on just because he is running out of time.
3. Julian is correct in what he said.
4. Both correctly say that with no more than 2 minutes left and NOT using time
delay, that a player can stop the clock  and claim a draw by "Insufficient
Losing Chances" (ILC). But this doesn't automatically allow Time Delay to be
added. The opponent can now agree to a draw. But if he doesn't, only if the TD
is unsure how to rule would he have the time delay turned on (Or replace the
clock with a time delay clock.). And he would then readjust the claimant's
clock so that he has HALF his remaining time (I.e. now no more than 1 minute.).
In the case sited it was obvious that the TD did not agree with the claim and
told the player to continue the game. (He could have also subtracted a minute
from his clock!)
5. The clock could have been quickly stopped again and the decision questioned
by an appeal.
6. If appealed after the game was over, it is common for the Chief TD to
disallow it, as the game is over. By continuing to play, the player "seems" to
be accepting the first TD's decision. But since it is a judgment call by the
first TD, it is difficult to overrule that. I, for one, deny most ILC claims,
if the opponent has more than a piece and couple of pawns left. (or unless the
claimant is a queen ahead in an endgame.), But the position can be considered
and the rulebook has examples. For instance Q vs Q or R vs R (with nothing else
but Ks on the board) may be ruled a draw.

Harvey Lerman

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Brian Wall
  To: BrianwallChess at Yahoogroups.com ; Chess_Improvement at Yahoogroups.com ; Brian
Wall Chesslist
  Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:33 PM
  Subject: [BrianWall-ChessList] Damian Nash on I need a TD ruling

  Apparently Patrick could have claimed a draw based on insufficient losing
  chances because of sudden death rules. Then his opponent could accept the draw
  or risk losing with a new delay.

  Duwayne says a clock set wrong should be corrected when discovered, Damian
says
  a clock cannot be changed once the game starts.

  Duwayne and Damian both say the clock can be changed after a sudden death time
  control draw calim with less than 2 minutes of the clock.

  BW
  -------
  Damian Nash

  ----- Forwarded message from chess at krusemer.com -----
      Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
      From: chess at krusemer.com
  Reply-To: chess at krusemer.com
   Subject: Re: I need a TD ruling
        To: Brian Wall <brianwallchess3 at taom.com>

  Hi Brian.Â Â

  A very similar situation occurred last weekend on one of the top boards at the
  Santa Fe Open, which I directed.Â Â The higher-rated player had a winning
  endgame but only seconds left on his analog clock. Â His opponent, who had
  plenty of time left, turned down a draw offer, expecting to win the time
  scramble. Â I stood by watching, unable to interfere with the game, but
  knowing that the player in the dire situation could make a legitimate claim,
if
  only he knew how to. Â After the game (a draw by perpetual) I educated him
  about what he could have done:

  1) Stop the clocks and make a claim of a draw based on "insufficient losing
  chances" (Section 14H of the USCF rule book).

  2) The TD would not be able to adjudicate the game, because there were still
too
  many complexities in the position, ruling the outcome is "unclear."

  3) The TD would then be required to follow the procedure to resolve the
  situation, addressed in rule 14H2a (because digital clocks were readily
  available at that point).

  4) The game would continue with a digital clock (with delay) substituted for
the
  analog clock.Â Â

  5)Â Important note:Â Â Half the claimants time would be removed from his
  clock.Â Â So, instead of 10-seconds on an analog clock, he would now have
  5-seconds on a digital clock, but with an extra 5-seconds per move because of
  the delay feature.

  6) His opponent would then have to decide either to accept the draw offered
  through the claim or to risk losing a lost position.

  The player in Santa Fe did not follow this procedure because of a complicating
  factor,Â one that he was already aware of. Â There is a "TD Tip" following
  section 14H2d that states:

  "There is no rule allowing players, after the game has started, to ask for a
  properly set delay clock to be placed on their game, which would replace an
  analog clock or delay clock not set properly." Â

  Alas, this very experienced tournament player had remembered this much of the
  rulebook, but not the sentences which immediately follow: Â "... Only a TD can
  initiate placing a clock with time delay capabilities on a game after a 14H
  claim [draw by insufficient losing chances] has been made... As a result, the
  player wishing to place a delay clock on the game must first make a 14H
claim."

  I hope this clarifies what your friend in Florida, and the TD, should have
done
  in his situation.Â Â Please share this information with your list.Â It helps
  everyone if tournament players are clear about the rules!

  Damian Nash
  USCF Senior TD
  Moab, Utah

  PS -- as an aside, the player in question, who is a friend of mine and whom I
  like very much, lost a game that he shouldn't have lost because the flag fell
  on his analog clock.Â Then came the game I used in this example, where he drew
  a game which he should have won, again because of the analog clock. Â I
believe
  he could have gone 3.5/4 and won the Santa Fe Open if only he didn't insist on
  using his own, ancient, analog clock!! Â But as we all know, time pressure
  stimulates the adrenal glands, and for some the rush of adrenaline seems to be
  unconsciously more important than the victory.Â Â Chess players are mysterious
  creatures!Â Â Buy a digital clock, people!Â Â :)

  --- On Mon, 9/21/09, Brian Wall <brianwallchess3 at taom.com> wrote:

  From: Brian Wall <brianwallchess3 at taom.com>
  Subject: [BrianWall-ChessList] I need a TD ruling
  To: Kledzian at mfi.net, BrianWallChess at Yahoogroups.com,
  Chess_Improvement at Yahoogroups.com, "Brian Wall Chesslist"
  <brianwall-chesslist at lists.taom.com>
  Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 12:09 PM

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  I have some TDs on my mailing list so I would like an objective opinion.

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Kevin R. Ledzian is a Denver born 1500 that lost to Danielle Rice I believe in
  the 2008 Florida Open.

  His son had a winning position in the 2009 Florida Championship but noticed
that
  his own clock was set incorrectly with no delay or increment. He didn't notice
  this until he was almost out of time, similar to the Tyler Hughes-Philipp
  Ponomarev time dispute a few years ago.

  This also happened to poor Robert Ramirez against me in the 2007 CO Closed.
  I think he lost on time before he noticed there was not a delay like there was
  supposed to be. Ironically he had to appeal to the person who had set my
clock,
  Dean Brown.

  At this point Kevin's son was willing to settle for a draw but the TD said no
  and restarted his clock after which he lost on time in a few moves in a
winning
  position.

  Is there any official USCF policy about what happens when it is noticed -
  during, after or right near the the end of a game that the delay or increment
  has not been set up correctly. This is a fairly common situation and clear
rules
  should be passed. Also what about claiming no losing chances in a won position
  with a few second left.

  Brian Wall

  except from Kevin Ledzian's email

   Kevin Ledzian <Kledzian at mfi.net>

  This TD did not have a copy of the rule book, which I believe is a violation.

  Patrick stated that he wanted to immediately appeal the floor TDâ?Ts decision,
  and
  was told â?ono, no, noâ?¦not possible.â?Â I believe denying an appeal is a
  violation.
   The floor TD then unpaused the clock before Patrick was even seated.Â Patrick
  blitzed out a few moves in a won position before flagging.Â He was distraught.
  Patrick then sought out the chief TD (Blas Lugo) on his own, and was told
  nothing could be done because the game was over.

   Kevin Ledzian <Kledzian at mfi.net>

  Thanks,

  Kevin R. Ledzian

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  BrianWall-ChessList mailing list
  BrianWall-ChessList at lists.taom.com
  http://www.taom.com/mailman/listinfo/brianwall-chesslist

----- End forwarded message -----

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.taom.com/pipermail/brianwall-chesslist/attachments/20090921/e0fc297a/attachment.htm 