Can a team captain inform his player about the current match score by either speaking to him or showing him
a written record of the match score? Is such an act by a team captain forbidden by USCF rule 31G4a below?
In a team event last Wednesday a dispute arose on this matter.
31G4a. Captain may not impose results.
Each player alone is responsible for the result of his or her own game.
The team captain may not impose results upon team members.
Also, can a player ask his team captain what the current match score is?
Seeing as a player is already allowed to ask the captain what the likely consequences of a draw would be (which may involve the captain’s opinion of the probable results of other unfinished games and the knowledge of tie-breaks for determining potential trophies) a simpler question of only what the score is so far would seem quite allowable.
Simply showing a score would not, by itself, be imposing a result on a team member. Showing the score is neither specifically allowed nor specifically disallowed. As long as it is within the rules of the tournament I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
P.S. IL HS rules are that the captain/coach can explicitly send messages to a player indicating how the result of their game would affect the match (essentially the other side of the player making the request), but that is limited to only when at least six of the eight boards are finished.
If “imposing” a result means ordering a player to draw, then obviously any communication between a player and a “team captain” regarding the match situation raised the possibility that the captain is surreptitiously telling the player to draw. If the communication is not monitored by the TD, it might not even be all that surreptitious.
How do TD’s enforce this rule?
You stand there and listen to the conversation. Basically the team captain cannot force a player to a result. So the captain cannot offer a draw. If the captain says the player can accept a draw and the player chooses to go for a win, then the player can do it.
If, after the game, the captain is hacked off at the player and doesn’t keep them on the team next time, that is not imposing a result.
The wording of 31G4a seems odd. Why the verb “impose”? Rule 14 describes almost all the ways for a draw to happen in a chess game, and all of them arise either out of the position on the board (e.g. a stalemate), the situation with the clocks (two flags down), by action of the players (draw agreements and successful draw claims), or by action of the TD (14J decisions or adjudications). As you point out, it is hard enough, sometimes, for a player to “impose” a draw even when he wants one. So, how could anybody except a player or TD “impose” a draw?
If the rule is saying that a team captain or a coach cannot act for the player in the game (make moves, make draw offers or claims), why is 31G4a even needed? The rulebook already states that a game of chess is between two players, and enumerates the few things that a captain can do, and these are only slightly more than the rights of a spectator (meaning, no rights at all other than watching). What is the point of this rule?
It may have been to ensure that captains wouldn’t manipulate games for board prize chances (i.e. boards two and three are very drawish but my board two is 3-0 going into the round and your board three is also 3-0 going in, so why don’t we have your board two and my board three resign so the match score is the same and our players have a better shot at a board prize).
And yet that is the point. When you’re directing a team tournament, and the team captain is waiting for the game on Board One to end before immediately submitting a completed result card with all the remaining games shown as draws, you would love to have a specific rule in the rulebook to quote right back at him and even show him in print. A rule which actually says that, even though this is a team tournament, and team tournaments have some different rules and procedures which are not found in “normal” tournaments, here is (are) some things you still can’t do, even if you’re a team captain, despite all the other significant differences which are allowed, including the very existence of a team captain in the first place.
I suspect that that phrase was deliberately chosen with a specific individual (or archetype) in mind. Someone who would try to use the aegis of “team captain” to force the results, and possibly the next round’s pairings in the way that the captain believed was in the team’s best interest, regardless of much the individual opponents of the team captain’s players might object.
I’m not even saying that that indeed was the actual reason for the specific choice of wording, just that one might not appreciate that specific, odd-sounding choice of wording until he had the opportunity to use it himself in one of the unusual team tournament situations.
Common questions from a player are:
What is the match score?
Do I need to win to win the match? (or If I draw will we win the match?) (or How will a draw of mine affect the match result?)
The second line (or its variants) are the type of question that only a captain (if anybody) would be expected to be asked. Some groups allow those questions in only limited circumstances, others prohibit them and others are fine with them being asked. Some groups will allow a captain to convey what results the other currently ongoing games are heading towards while others prohibit any judgement calls as part of the answer).
The first line are questions that could be answered even by a non-chess-playing passerby that saw the match result sheet. It would seem silly to prohibit a player from asking the team captain what the match score was.
P.S. You may want to use teammate instead of player and may want to limit it to game-related contact. It would be silly to prohibit a captain from having any contact with the captain’s own opponent during the game (makes draw offers and refusals, saying check, etc. a bit difficult with no contact allowed). Also, the crowding of the venue may not allow a captain to leave a chair and go to the washroom without bumping a teammate (prohibiting any contact might result in an unpleasant mess).