[ If this looks familiar it is because I posted it on Facebook ]
Here’s one for y’all!! In my over 40 years years of directing tournaments, THIS question had never come up – nor, entered my mind! … … Tournament about a month ago – an “Extra Rated Game” – had players “Lot for colours,” as they say … player draws the White pawn … and asks, “Can I play with the Black pieces?” … I thought for a moment, and said “I don’t see why not.” … [thinking of winning the coin flip before a football game] … “I guess it is no different than picking between kicking off or receiving (or, picking which goal to defend).” … … and all the USCF Rule Book says (under the seldom-needed Rule 29E4c is “… the director may choose to allow opponents with equal color entitlement to colors choose their own colors by lot …” … but, nothing with any more specifics … … … the FIDE Rules do state (for Round Robins) the players draw lots and their is other verbage that states they must play the assigned colors … but, nothing specific for Swisses … … the only thing it DOES specifically say is in Rule 5.5 (Guidelines for Playoff Matches) in referring to a needed “Armageddon” match “The winner of the drawing of lots for colours may decide to play with white or black pieces.” … … … … … so, until someone tells me otherwise … in the rare case of “lottin’ for colors” … I will treat who ever “draws the White Pawn” or wins the “coin flip” or whatever as “Do you want to “receive” – (play White pieces) – or, 'kick off” – (play Black pieces)?!? … … … … … BTW … … never had happened in my forty years until about a month ago … … and happened AGAIN last Saturday!!
If Mr. Maness wishes to do that, and I see no reason why it should not be allowed, I’d recommend two things. a) He announce it immediately before the “drawing” occurs. Imagine if the player who drew White the previous round lost, and blames it on his inability to choose Black. b) He use something not so intimately connected to chess. An actual coin toss would be good. This way it is more obvious to the players that the winning player would be able to choose. In any case, be consistent!
FWIW, I would NEVER allow players to choose their colors for a rated game. For a casual unrated game, they can play Chess 960 for all I care. In the unlikely event that I direct an Armageddon game, I will determine the colors by sealed bid.
A thousand times this. Pairings and color assignment are the indelegable responsibility of the director. Delegate them to the players, and there be dragons.
I have seen players win the toss that determines top-board colors for round one of a small Swiss, then choose to play Black. I always interpreted the toss as giving the player who wins the toss the choice of colors. If a 2300 wins the toss and is paired with an 1800 he might choose Black, accepting a possible extra Black for the event but saving his White game for when it might prove to be more of an advantage.
That is precisely what happened in the last event I directed. In small tournaments I have played in over 30+ years it is tradition for the TD to gather the troops just before round one, coin in hand, and ask one of the top-board players to call it in the air—then ask the toss-winner which color he prefers. Generally that’s White but not always.
If you do not plan to give the toss-winner choice of color for round one, then it’s likely best to hold a ‘private coin-toss,’ either literally or with the help of a pairing program, and not ask one of the players to call it in the air.
That might work better for larger Swisses, especially if paired using software in smoky back rooms. The public coin-toss involving, say, players 1 and 7 out of 12 in a club or local Swiss, is a pretty consistent tradition in the backwoods rated events I have seen since the 1980s.
I used to play in Quad events where, players would have 1 white, 1 black, and a toss for color. I usually preferred doing the coin toss, and in most cases where I won the toss, I would take black, because one of the tie breaks for these events was whoever had 2 blacks would be a determining tie break on who would win the trophy. This all stopped when the tournament director basically ruled that whoever won the coin toss would be required to take white, and it was nice to be as unpredictable as possible and I would ask my 3rd round opponents if they would want to take white against me since this rule change occurred. Most of them did say yes, but when I proposed this to a young, 11 year old boy, he went to his father and felt that I had a certain trick up my sleeve, and he turned down my offer. So we did the coin toss in front of the tournament director, and since he won the toss, the TD required this young boy to take white against me.
Hi David. Sounds like that TD might have been Ken Thomas, maybe?
If the players are allowed/instructed to toss a coin, then the winner of the toss should be allowed to choose which color to play. If the TD does not want to permit that, then he should either set the pairing program to random colors (or whatever is the technical term) or else “toss a coin” literally or otherwise on his own. To tell players both that they have to toss for colors and that the toss-winner must play White seems less than ideal.
If one permits this, one is permitting the top ranked player not only to play black, but to compel all oddly-ranked players to the break point to play black.
That’s the Director’s call. Letting a player determine that is inherently dirty pool.
Why is custom, tradition, and BTW once the rule, “dirty pool”? The players think this is fairer than allowing a dictator choose the color. Many players consider the TD, whether true or not, a biased party. He is the one, with his pairing program, who compels the colors and makes neutral pairings that players find sometimes to be suspicious.
If toss winner choice of color was once the rule, it has not been since I’ve been active. The toss is the mechanism by which the director assigns color, not the mechanism by which the top seed or the median seed assigns color.
I dispute that this is true. If it is true, it is not well founded, nor do I care. Delegating choice of color to a party with a vested interest in the prize fund is malpractice. If it was once the rule, there is a reason it isn’t any longer.
When I have an ERG where neither player has a due color I always toss a coin and state explicitly that if the player who calls the coin toss does so correctly he will have White, if he calls it incorrectly he will have Black. Most players, if they have a preference, think this is fairer than having the pairing program select the colors. Not everybody trusts the pairing program to be set to actually select the colors by random chance.
What’s the benefit in dictating the choice in an ERG situation? A player might, for instance, prefer the opportunity to work on his black openings and thus choose black in this non-counting game.
Because it’s not a non-counting game. It doesn’t count toward either player’s tournament score, but it does count for rating. If a player wants to work on his black openings he can do so in casual games.
With all due respect, that’s not a reason for prohibiting the player winning the toss from choosing black. It has zero impact on a tournament, so I fail to see the TD’s compelling interest in insisting the winner take white for an ERG.
That might depend on whether or not it’s the last round, and on how the pairing program, or the TD, handles colors when extra rated games are involved.
If it’s the last round, of course the TD would have no such compelling interest.
But if it’s an earlier round, and if the TD chooses to (possibly) use colors in the extra game to help decide colors in the future round(s) of the main event, then the TD might possibly have an interest.
Personally, I don’t like having the players toss for color, ever. So, when pairing an extra game involving a player in the event vs a player (such as a spectator or a TD) not playing in the event, I might be inclined to assign the player in the event the color he would have been due in the event.
I’m sorry, Mike, but you are wrong. The TD has a compelling interest in being impartial and favoring no one player over another. As Brennan Price has pointed out, it is simply bad practice for a TD to give a player with a vested interest in the outcome any advantage, including letting him choose which color he will play.
In a casual game I don’t care if the players choose colors by arm wrestling, but even an ERG is a serious game, and deserves to be taken seriously. Be well.
