A discussion has arisen on the Boylston Chess Club blog (boylston-chess-club.blogspot.com … rules.html) about whether a player can legitimately stop the clocks in order to ask the TD a rules question. In the particular case under discussion, both players had less than a minute remaining to make the first time control, and one of the players stopped the clocks to ask the TD about the rules related to claiming a time forfeit and having a complete scoresheet. The experienced players participating in the discussion all seem to be highly offended by the idea that you can legitimately stop the clocks in such a situation.
I have advised players (in other events) that they can stop the clocks and seek a TD if they have a rules or procedural question.
I could only find two relevant rules:
5I: “A player who wishes to make a claim of any sort or see a director for any legitimate reason may stop both sides of the clock before claiming and/or finding a director.” [my emphasis]
21D1: A tournament director can intervene in a game in order to answer “rules and procedural questions.”
So - is asking a rules question a legitimate reason to stop the clocks? Does the answer depend on the relevance of the question, or the experience of the player? And if not legitimate, what is the appropriate penalty?
In my opinion, stopping the clock for any reason other than making a claim of some kind is an abuse, and should be penalized. (Example: A player very short on time stops the clock to ask some trivial rules question to which he knows the answer. This gives him time to catch his breath and look at the position.) The “standard penalty” of two minutes added to the opponent’s clock seems appropriate, though if it’s a first offense and the player seems to be acting in good faith a warning might be sufficient.
Agreed, that a player must make a CLAIM if he stops the clocks for any reason.
If his claim is found to lack merit, then his clock should be penalized.
The rule book should not use vague non-empirical language like “legitimate reason”.
.
Well, I wouldn’t go quite that far. It would be difficult to list every possible reason for which a player may stop the clock to seek a TD. E.g., “975: Rabid dog enters the playing room. 976: Opponent sacrifices a chicken. 977. Opponent climbs on the table and calls on everyone to repent.” (I only made up two of those.) That’s why TDs need discretion.
Well, the way I read 5I, it contradicts your statement. It implies fairly clearly that there are legitimate reasons, other than making a claim, for stopping the clocks. I’m just trying to understand what those reasons are, and whether asking a rules question is one of them.
I read that as a catchall for “exceptional circumstances” (you know, fire, flood, earthquake, insurrection). I would not put asking a rules question in that category. It’s up to the player to know the rules. He can ask the TD a question, but he shouldn’t get extra time for doing so.
We often announce at the beginning of a tournament that the time to handle an issue is when it happens, not after the game is over. Stop the clock and get a TD to resolve it then and there.
Now I suspose that could be abused. But I don’t think that it ever has been, at least in my experience.
Depending on the circumstances, though, I might issue a warning rather than impose a penalty – was the offender a newbie, were there repeat violations, etc.