When flying out of O’Hare to the US Open I found that by chance I had chosen the same flight as a fellow Illinoisan. We were even sitting in the same row (he was in the aisle seat and I was in the window seat) so I figured we’d spend a good portion of the flight chatting.
An Oriental man came by with his 12(?) year-old daughter and asked the tall, long-legged Illinoisan if he would switch seats so the man could sit next to his daughter. It turned out the father had a middle seat and that wouldn’t work for a tall guy needing an aisle seat that makes it easier to stretch out.
I noticed an Oriental woman right behind the two and asked if they were married. When it turned out they were I asked where her seat was. Learning she had an aisle seat meant that long-legs could make the switch and put the mother next to the daughter. Then I offered to switch seats with the father so the entire family could sit together.
It turned out that the father’s middle seat was over the wing in the emergency exit row and thus had significantly more leg room and would have been more comfortable for my fellow Illinoisan than an aisle seat was. The absence of my long-legged associate meant that I spent a good portion of the flight having a pleasant chat with the person in the window seat discussing both the US Open and some scholastic chess tournaments as well as various things she was interested in. When we were getting off the plane I did wish her luck when she represented North Dakota in the Miss America pageant later this year.
When my fellow Illinoisan caught up to me and learned what was involved with the seat he was offered and turned down he did seem, shall we say, a bit chagrined.
Hence the title of the thread.
Admittedly this is only loosely tied to chess but I did have multiple people, including a moderator, suggesting I post it on the forums.
While I’m sure Mr. Reed did not intend the photograph to serve as such, it is an excellent example of why clock press counters are not a good thing. Please kindly note that White’s press counter shows “14” and Black’s press counter shows “15”, and then please kindly explain how this has arisen. For extra credit, please analyze the effect on the game when the clock decides to add one hour for the second time control based on the press counter. (Hint: US Amateur Team East 2011, round 6, board 1.)
This has arisen because the players have failed to operate the clock properly and have failed to correct an obvious error. I have no sympathy for players who fail to operate the clock properly and who fail to correct obvious errors.
Black will gain the time earlier than he should. He could have avoided this by (a) showing up on time, (b) correcting the counter when he did show up, or (c) correcting the obvious error at any time during the first time control.
If Black fails to do any of these things, as Black failed to do at US Amateur Team East 2011, round 6, board 1, he may suffer the consequences, because the players (himself included) failed to operate the clock properly and failed to correct an obvious error. If that happens, I have no sympathy.
Move counters are helpful, and one hundred percent accurate when players operate their clocks properly. We do not and should not make rules or best practice crafted around players operating their clocks improperly.
Hopefully, move counters have no official standing in making decisions with time claims? I imagine that adjustments to time after the control is made are based on scoresheets (electronic or otherwise). If time is improperly added due to additional presses without moves the situation should be redacted. The clock should do no more than keep track of time.
Use of the term “Oriental,” I have heard, is regarded as offensive in West Coast communities and “Asian” is preferred. In fact, “Oriental” means “East Asian” and “Asian” strictly includes South Asian and Central Asian. It is not a useful term when greater specificity is desired.
I cannot decide on appearance whether a person is Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Vietnamese. I would certainly describe a person as Oriental, whether it was offensive or not.
I was envious of the leg room (Jeff wound up in the emergency exit aisle). Had I been seated next to Miss North Dakota, I would still have been sleeping. Would she would have been transfixed by my beauty? Even if I were thirty years younger and had a full head of hair, I’d hope she wouldn’t objectify me.
As I was 4 minutes late to the game, it’s likely that White moved and punched my clock. The counter (which I didn’t notice during the time scramble) did indeed confuse me at move 40 (when I had 45 seconds left); I even spoke to a TD on White’s 41st who confirmed that I could not rely on it. So I double-checked my scoresheet…
I will wait for the moderators to spin off the clock-press counter posts to another thread before deciding if I want to join in the agony there, but one practical point for now:
It seems very strange for a player to start his own clock when the opponent has not yet arrived. It’s not intuitive.
The scenario Mr. Brock describes is precisely what happened at USATE 2011. It could be avoided by the excellent suggestion Boyd Reed made in a previous thread on this issue: Announce “Start White’s clock” rather than “Start those clocks” or similar, as we often hear.
That assumes players would listen and follow instructions…point is—as someone said two paragraphs back—it seems very strange for a player to start his own clock when the opponent has not yet arrived at the board. Especially true for veterans, who go back to analog-only days when that did not matter. I understand why players with White do not do so; in most cases I do not think it’s gamesmanship, or sharksmanship or whatever.
The reply: Yes, but if everyone knew and followed the current rules and procedures to a tee, there would be no problems…is not helpful. In some other tournament praxis areas, I sympathize with that POV. In this case, it will never happen.
I concur with Mr. Mark’s opinion here. However, my reply to those who oppose move counters is not quite captured by the above quote.
A more accurate representation of same: “Players are responsible for knowing how the equipment in use for their game operates. If it is operated improperly, the onus for that is on the players. I will never support a rule that would eliminate the use of a perfectly functional feature simply because some players don’t know - or attempt to circumvent - either of the two foregoing sentences.”
(As an aside…I considered splitting the thread, but there are a few posts that deal with multiple issues. So, I’m inclined to let it go for now.)
Another (admittedly minor) source of confusion is whether the press counter is intended to show how many moves have been completed (Chronos) or the number of the current move (Excalibur). As a director, I have seen players confused why the press counter on the Excalibur is showing “40” but the clock has not added the time for the next time control.
If we have to stop the clock to reset for the secondary time control because the tool used by the clock to do it automatically is illegal, I’m going to submit an ADM to make analog clocks preferred equipment.
Is there a digital clock model that requires the use of a clock-press counter and thus uses the clock-press count to add the secondary time, perforce? All clocks I know of can be set so that no one needs to re-set them for the secondary control. Not sure about the Zmart-whatever clock, as I’ve not used it. All others can be set so your ADM would be moot.
I’m fairly sure the Excalibur requires the use of the press counter. I tried setting it for a 40/90 SD/30 d/5 time control once and not use the press counter, but it did not work as expected. However, I could easily have botched that experiment.
