This happened at my tournament yesterday…Player A is in a complicated middle game position. His opponent, player B, is on move. Player A leaves the board briefly to get a cup of water. While he is away, player C at the next board over, executes a move in his game, but inadvertently punches player A’s clock instead of his own. He does not realize his error, and his opponent, player D, either also does not realize the mistake, or decides just to let player C’s clock run until he notices his error. In any case he says nothing.
Player A returns to the board, sees his clock running, and assumes player B has moved, and that it is now his move. He sits down and tries to figure out what player B’s move was. After five minutes of fruitless endeavor he finally asks player B what his move was. Player B now says that he didn’t move, that player C hit player A’s clock.
What actions should you take here? Does it matter that players A, C, and D are adults, but player B is a young child?
In the actual game player A thought the occurrence hilarious, and didn’t want anyone penalized, or any time restored to his clock. He was mostly just relieved to know that he hadn’t lost his marbles when he couldn’t figure out which piece player B had moved. However, I can see where other players might have a different take on this situation.
Assuming player B noticed the wrong clock being hit (which is at least suggested here), in a perfect world player B would immediately summon an official to deal with the problem.
A young player might not know to do that, but I can think of some adults who might choose not to summon an official.
Was this a space-limited setup? (I’ve been to events where some boards were set so close to each other that the edges of the boards were touching, and players had to hold their scorebooks in their laps.)
Glad to hear player A dealt with it well, I’ve know too many players who would not have.
It was a normal set-up. There were two boards to every table, and the tables were the standard 6’ tables. It might also be relevant that this was the Class A section with a minimum 1700 rating required to play up into it, so that although player B was a young child he was not an inexperienced player.
Player A earned a lot of brownie points with me for the way he handled this situation.
That is a problem difficult to answer without being in the room and having a feel for the players involved. It’s hard to say from your information if the player on move noticed the clock and willfully ignored it to try to gain an advantage, or was simply ignorant of the error. If the player was not waiting while his opponent’s time was running to try to gain advantage but actually thinking about moves, I would simply attempt to add time to the side of the player whose clock was inadvertently pressed while deducting the same amount of time from the other side. I’d also give the player from the other game a warning about it, though I’m sure they already felt embarrassed about their mistake.
Player A is completely blameless in this situtation. He has spent five minutes trying to determine what his opponent’s most recent move was, as he believes he is now on the move because his clock is running. He has been harmed by losing five minutes of his time, plus whatever (undetermined) length of time his clock has been running. Player A has made a legitimate effort to determine what has happened in his absence.
Player C is at fault for pressing the wrong clock. However, player C’s opponent is now on the move and has had the advantage of not using his own time. (Note that player C’s opponent is under no obligation whatsoever to point out to C that he has not pressed his own clock. In fact, except in blitz, under US Chess rules, C’s opponent is not allowed to move until C presses his own clock. This follows from a strict reading of rules 6B and 9G.)
Player B is aware that he is still on the move and that his opponent’s clock is running. No reasonable player, adult or child, should think this is a proper situation. Player B is directly at fault for not restarting his own clock, not summoning a TD, and not notifying player A in a timely manner when A returned to the board and was trying to determine what B’s non-move was.
Unless it is possible to determine how long A was away from the board, I would assume two minutes away from the board to fetch water, plus five minutes lost believing he was on the move. I would also award player A the standard penalty of two minutes because his opponent was aware that A was not on the move but still allowed A’s clock to run. So, I would add nine minutes to A’s clock and subtract seven minutes from B’s clock. I would then restart B’s clock and the game would continue. Player C deserves no penalty; his error has cost him time off his own clock, and I would not restore that time nor make any change to the clock of C’s opponent.
I agree with Ken. I would feel the same way if B was not experienced; a player needs to learn there are consequences for bad behavior and this is a cheap lesson. While a player has no legal obligation to speak when their opponent fails to press his clock, when a third party presses his clock he cannot be allowed to take advantage of that.
Have seen this problem before in a room where too many boards are put on the tables and clocks allowed to sit next to each other. At the very least, the time should be restored to make player A whole. All of the players should know better. Their actions and silence are indicators of a very bad set of ethics with regard to playing chess. It is difficult to punish someone for accidentally hitting a clock at another board in the heat of battle. His opponent, who may or not noticed, was advantaged by the mistake. It is the TD’s discretion to reset all clocks to what he deems an appropriate time without it necessarily being considered a punishment. A warning to all for carelessness and poor behavior is in order.
This type of problem can be nipped in the bud by having all clocks facing one way rather than be set next to one another on the tables. We have them all facing a walkway space between the tables so that the TD can see all clocks easily. We also try to put more space between the boards if possible. Of course, there is always a person who will complain or put his clock in the wrong place. The clock is placed correctly and we move on. If you can anticipate potential problems because of the way the room is set up, you have fewer problems like this on game day. As the TD, you set up the rules for how the boards and clocks will be set for use. My preference is for symmetry rather than randomness when boards, sets, and clocks are arranged. Part of the reason our tournaments provide sets and boards for use.
I think that the main cause of player C’s problem was that in his game he played white, and his opponent had the choice of which side of the board the clock should sit on. It was on player C’s left, and he is right handed. After making his move he used his right hand and hit the clock on his right side, which was player A’s clock.
While the TD has the right to determine which side of the board the clocks shall sit on, I never use that power. I let the players in each game make that determination. Two games on a six foot table is not crowding, and the distance between the rows in our set-up was generous, so there was plenty of space for TD’s to walk and observe the clocks.
I see no point in acting like a martinet. I try to use the power given to me as TD sparingly and judiciously. As much as possible I let the players play, and I stay out of their way.
Player C had an accident. Player D did absolutely nothing wrong; he wasn’t aware of the problem at all. Player A did nothing wrong. To say “their actions and silence are indicators of a bad set of ethics” is wrong. Only B showed anything resembling bad ethics.
I was the equivalent of player C in a tournament about 30 years ago. I was quite tired and reflexively hit the clock on my right instead of the correct clock on my left. At least in that case it was only a matter of seconds that were lost.
The only thing we can do is sort things out when they are found out. The only adjustment I would be inclined to make, if any, is an transfer of the elapsed time (as best as can be determined) from player B to player A, with no further penalty. B is on move and is entitled to consider his move without disturbance. Further, D has an expectation that this be resolved in such a manner that C’s error is not called to his attention.
The rules reasonably presume that players will operate their clocks properly. When they fail to do so, the best one can do is the best one can.
Allow me to throw in a monkey wrench here. (I love doing that.) It seems to me that, if the clocks are back-to-back, the odds against any of the four players pressing the wrong clock are decreased, not increased.
There’s nothing wrong with it; there’s just no reason to do it. Again, doing something just because the rules allow you to do it is not a good reason for doing it.
No tournament, no matter what size it is, is run for the benefit of the TD. As TD I am just the grease that makes the tournament wheels turn smoothly. By philosophical intent I don’t impose myself on the players and the games any more than is necessary. This isn’t necessary.
It’s necessary if you want the ability to watch multiple time scrambles at the same time. If you have a ton of TDs or you don’t think that’s a necessary thing to do, it’s not as important. However, practically speaking setting the boards facing the same way will result in 90%of the clocks facing the same way and accomplish most of the goal within Scotts philosophical framework.
Sorry, but I’ve seen more than my share of playing areas where there just isn’t a feasible way to set it up with aisles on both sides. For instance, if you have 30 feet wide, four 6 foot tables per row, two tables on each side of a 6 foot center aisle is most convenient for TD’s and players.
If space considerations force you to deviate from what you would like to do, that sometimes cannot be helped. You do what you have to do. Sometimes it is necessary to make concessions, but I don’t direct in those places if I can help it. These days I limit the events in which I direct, and it’s nearly always in a gymnasium or ballroom where a restricted space such as you describe does not come into play. But even if I were to direct in a space with only a center aisle I still don’t see that as mandating that I tell the players which direction the clocks should face, or on which side of the table they should sit. YMMV.
I disagree. The main cause of player C’s problem was that he was sloppy about what he did. No matter how the clock placement is determined, every player is faced with the likelihood that about half the time the clock will be on the side of the board that is less convenient for him. There’s really no way that C could have hit the wrong clock button if he had actually looked at the clock when he was pressing the button. It’s really pretty simple: The clock that’s facing your board is your clock, and the clock that’s facing the other players’ board is their clock. And there was no reason for C not to look. He’d already determined his move, so there was no reason for him to keep looking at the board.
There are really two situations here - one in the C/D game and one in the A/B game. The C/D problem is that C determined his move but didn’t complete it by hitting his clock button (though he mistakenly believed he had). The A/B problem is that while B was on move and A was away from the board, a spectator (i.e., C) inadvertently hit B’s clock button. It’s pretty clear that the mistake was inadvertent on C’s part, since C had nothing to gain and something to lose by not hitting his own clock button. And the solution, for C, is to watch what he’s doing in the future.
It’s unclear from the description whether D realized what had happened. As Ken has pointed out, D was certainly under no obligation in the C/D game to let C know he hadn’t hit his button, nor should any time adjustment be made in that game. But it sounds like B knew what had happened in his own game, and since A was away from the board and did not witness what happened, it was poor sportsmanship for B not to tell a TD what had happened, though it can be argued in light of Rule 16Y that B should have done this in a manner that C could not overhear.
Several TDs have expressed a preference for what I would call a “best practice” for setting up as room, whether it is a large room or small. This “benefits” not only the floor TD to monitor the games, but the majority of players. If a player comes in late, finds his pairing and goes to his board, he knows what side to go to in a row. The few, and I mean very few, who wish to put the clock on the other side because they prefer it that way, are just going to have to get used to following the protocols that the organizer has set up.
When you see tournament where the organizing body provides sets and boards, and sometimes clocks, the rows as set up provide a picture that is professional looking. Most players appreciate that and agree to place their clocks accordingly. I have seen few to argue that, and those were people who brought analogue clocks to the tournament. It is appropriate to make accommodations for disability, but since when is left handedness a defined disability? Black gets a preference of placement only if this is allowed by the organizer/TD who has the discretion to set up the tournament the way he wants. If, as an organizer/TD, you prefer to do things differently, then you may end up with some unanticipated problems. We have looked at ways to prevent or mitigate problems, not merely be slaves to particular sections of the Rulebook. Rules often are codifications of best practices rather than have argument and anarchy. I have seen enough arguments when players complained about which side to set the clock, whose pieces to use, size or color of the pieces, where to play after complaints about lighting, wanting to use their scorebook rather than the organizer provided scoresheets, etc. Consumes time and energy, besides annoying the other players.
This coming weekend we will be holding a tournament at the Monroeville CC. All of the provided boards and sets will be set one way. All of the clocks will be placed so that the TD can observe them for accuracy. Our club’s tournament, our customs or “rules.” And you get pizza and snacks.