I was thinking in the last day about how I could run an OTB tournament going forward, including how I could run one after next week when restrictions in our state begin being relieved. The thing I get most hung up on is the short distance that is across-the-board. One can provide six feet between boards at the cost of square footage of venue. One can lay down a ‘traffic pattern’ so players shouldn’t have to go past each other in close proximity.
But how does one address that two people have to sit across from each other to play?
Then I thought about my nursing final exams, which were required to be taken on campus because they were proctored. (Who wants a nurse who cheats on their finals?) They had thirty of us seated 8-10 feet away from each other, all facing the same direction, looking at our computers. There was a nominal requirement that we be masked and gloved, however, we were all at a more-than-adequate social distance. Some of us relieved our masks (because as nurses we are supposed to know when we are safe and who wants a hot face when test taking?) The proctors could walk safely between aisles to monitor progress.
It struck me that if you had a similar arrangement where a TD or floor monitor could visually see each player’s screen, could ‘walk aisles’ safely but clearly see that the players had a virtual game environment maximized, that a degree of confidence could be made about the players’ inability to cheat. You would have a proctored online game, essentially, with both players in the room.
A bonus would be if that virtual environment would go away and/or put up a message if the player exited from the screen. In our final exams, if the website we were on detected that it no longer had focus the exam would lock up and require the proctor to re-enable the player’s ability to be seen. (I know this from experience, as my trackball’s ‘back’ and ‘forward’ tripped it on a couple of occasions). That would take some technological trickery to perform, and either a partnership with the online platform or an in-house customization of the software environment (for platforms like Lichess which are open source).
I also feel that if a player wants to lay out their own board and pieces for the true OTB/3-d rendering to echo the board that could be allowed, so long as the player keeps the current board position and doesn’t analyze with it.
I don’t know if similar is being considered right now, but I thought I’d just memorialize my thoughts and see if there is any feedback or criticism about the idea.
If the organizer supplied all the equipment and it wasn’t connected to an external network, I don’t see any reason it wouldn’t work. Kids would probably adapt to it faster than us dinosaurs.
True, that… When did I stop being one of those kids who was all up on the latest and start being the dinosaur?
I guess I was thinking of it in the context of players bringing their own laptops and the organizer figuring out how to create the playing environment.
I wonder what the lowest cost system one could purchase en masse would be, but then one has to supply not only computer but monitor, keyboard, mouse… and an ethical staff would need to sanitize the components before and after. (Or ask the players, "Don’t pack your board… wipe down your keyboard!)
Thinking a Raspberry Pi or BeagleBoard or similar, but with peripherals maybe a Chromebook would become cheaper… Then a custom boot system that being a client is the only thing it does. Then throw in a customizable implementation of lichess on a server side with only the players present.
Our club is currently using lichess for unrated play, with everyone just being at home, and we communicate through Discord. But that’s a far cry from
I’m not up to date on all the technology options, either, but I suspect it wouldn’t be too hard to come up with a dedicated system that could handle a couple dozen boards for somewhere around $200 each. Maybe something like chromebooks?
Innovative idea. Some super techy people are going to have to figure out for us how to have 100+ people in a large room using their own computers/laptops/tablets/phones to play.
A bunch of questions. Would you be able to use WiFi to connect to opponents? Would there need to be one piece of software for each player to use to play games? That software would have to be controlled so that no other programs could be accessed. It would time the games, meaning players would not have to bring clocks. Could it be set up so that pairings are sent out online to each player and then have each player send their results back to the pairing TD? Would there be a big open floor for players to walk around and floor TDs to check on the player’s devices? What would the log on/log off protocols be like? Would there be a session before the first round to instruct the players how conduct the games or how to use any provided devices and software? That might require handouts to individuals with detailed procedures or charts with FAQ posted. What size of an area would be adequate to handle a crowd safely? Would you need tech people available to help deal with tough questions? I imagine having enough electrical outlets is going to be a problem. Would there need to be charging stations? Devices vary in their power usage. Yes, there are a lot of questions to answer, even if some of them seem dumb.
Most of the computer labs in schools, libraries, or colleges that I have seen do not have enough computers or monitors to use for a large crowd. Those types of places might be concerned about the use of their technology. We would probably have to bring our own tech with us to link up online at the site. If you have enough floor TDs to monitor, we could hold such gatherings and use safe distancing with one player and his device per table. A player could stay at his own table all day and help to clean up afterward, taking all of his stuff with him, and wiping down his area after the games are over. I think that kids would get it and do just fine. We could be spread out over an area like a cafeteria, basketball court, ballroom, or convention center. Some games could be outdoors on a patio or deck. Park pavilions are possible to use for more of an open air environment for small events or sections. The pairing central would be set so that no other person has access; two or more computers could be used to manage.
We would have to assume that players would play on their honor and not cheat. You might have to have each player sign a pledge, but maybe you trust them to do the right thing as they really want to play and not spoil it for everyone. There would have to be some redundancies like posting pairings on a wall as well as online. What player and TD needs have I missed? This kind of spitballing is good.
“Coronavirus security” (which is the point of all this) would obviously be better if each player has his own hardware that he uses for the entire tournament, and that nobody else needs to touch. But what about players who don’t have such hardware, and can’t afford to get it? Chess has always been a low-tech and relatively inexpensive game – the most expensive thing you need is a clock (and you can even get by without one of those if you’re willing to use whatever your opponent or the organizer supplies), and clocks don’t cost that much. The cheaper the hardware, the more feasible this option is.
Anti-cheating security would be easier to implement with organizer-supplied hardware that is the same for each player. But now the organizer needs deep pockets, especially if he wants to run large events. You can still minimize the need for frequent disinfecting by assigning each player a given table and device for the duration of the tournament – that way you only have to disinfect the equipment at the beginning and end of the event. I am highly skeptical of any honor system. “Cheaters gonna cheat”. The technology has to make it as difficult as possible for them to do so.
Organizer supplied hardware for large events might entail shipping. More costs. There will be many things an organizer for future post virus events will need to consider. I suspect some of them will work right away–others might need considerable tweaking.
Interesting set of questions… One way I could see it going down could be:
Create and spin up an instance of Lichess, on it’s own ‘server’ and hardware. (“Server” in quotes because I do not know what the actual hardware requirements and recommendations for Lichess are. Could it run on a simple Windows 10 PC, or will it take an actual hardware server? Lichess because it is reputedly open source and thus should be available to deploy locally, hopefully without licensing encumbrances. For the rest of this post I’ll brand it “Chess Server.”)
Connect this to a WiFi unit capable of managing the player load. The WiFi basically only connects to the Chess Server, creating a closed intranet. (That server may need to double as a DHCP server or the WiFi router may hand out IP addresses on its own. All requests on the network get pointed to the Lichess server).
One might also create a Chess Server in the cloud on AWS or similar, but then one needs internet access at the play site and one loses the nominal advantage of taking players’ machines off internet and into a private intranet (see below). We’ve found reasons why Lichess itself may not be suitable - newly registered users cannot issue challenges to play, for one.
Several options:
Players bring their own hardware, connect to the WiFi intranet. As others pointed out, this may exclude people who don’t have the hardware. If players do bring hardware, it is essential that the server is prepared with appropriate antivirus and the WiFi point does not allow for peer-to-peer connections but everything gets funneled to the Chess Server.
Organizer brings Raspberry Pi’s, custom set to only open a browser that points to the playing environment.
You pointed out, maybe a University computer lab might be willing to help.
Organizer might have a very limited number of systems available for players without hardware to use, but it is expected that most players will bring their own hardware.
As for cheating, one purpose of doing it this way is so that TD’s can actively patrol for cheaters. This is a reason why all monitors/displays must face in the same orientation, giving the TD a vantage point. It is possible to have technology which actively monitors the connection and detects when a browser window has lost focus or lost maximization. (Think I described that earlier - one testing environment I’ve had to use forces maximization and breaks the environment requiring a manual reconnect if the client tries to minimize or navigate elsewhere, and alerts proctoring staff of this. That system is proprietary, though, and would require custom coding.) I’m thinking it’s doable, but I don’t know how much work is involved in achieving it. TD’s would have to learn how to navigate that new environment.
