Here is the situation: a young player (age 9) falls sound asleep during a long evening game. He has been out for over 30 minutes and now has 58 minutes left on his clock while holding a two pawn advantage in the middle game. As the TD, I was trying to ensure that no other player or spectator interfered in the game by waking up the sleeping player. My question is: if the sleeper was purposefully awakened by a person, what is the penalty assessed?:
a) if it is another player who wakes him;
b) if it is a spectator who wakes him;
c) if it is a parent who wakes him.
In cases (b) and (c), I assume the person who interfered should be ejected from the playing venue, but what time penalty should be assessed on the player himself? (It seemed as if he could possibly sleep through the entire remaining 58 minutes as he had opened his eyes at least twice, then adjusted himself to a more comfortable position and gone back to sleep.)
In case (a), should the player who interferes be given a penalty in his game too?
No penalty assessed to the sleeping player. He has already penalized himself 30 minutes.
Probably, the player who wakes him should not be penalized, either (whether it’s his opponent, another player, a parent, or a spectator). Waking up a sleeping player is sort of a natural thing to do.
How would one know for certain that the player was just sleeping? The position on the board shouldn’t even be a factor. It would seem like it would almost be the responsibility of the TD to make sure he was ok, even if that meant waking him up.
Add to the problem: What if the sleeping player is snoring?? I once was a spectator at an event where the sleeping player was snoring. I left it to the TD and participants to deal with. Sorry, but I don’t know what was done.
Another time I remember seeing Jerry Hanken asleep during his game at the US Open. I knew him and his opponent. I simply made the sleeping gesture [hands by head, with head tilted] and move on.
An experienced spectator should know not avoid any direct interference in a game. That does not mean the spectator can’t bring something to the attention of a TD.
We had a kid that played in our club from about 9 or so until he left for college. His father is one of the strongest players in the club.
Anyway this young man had scoliosis and had numerous surgeries with the result that he was very short. He was a pretty strong player by the time he got to about 7th or 8th grade, 1600ish. He had taken lessons from a number of masters and even a GM or two.
He would make his move and then kind of lean back at the edge of the table looking at the ceiling or upper corner of the room. He would do this even when it was his move. He would only look at the board when his opponent made his move, to see what the move was, and then again to make his own move. Obviously he was calculating the position in his head.
One time he did this with an officer in our club. The officer, Wayne, was a bit irked thinking that at least the kid should give him the respect, give the game seriousness or whatever, to look at the board. Well, after staring up at the ceiling for most of the game, this kid proceeded to beat Wayne soundly.
So, what would you do if instead of looking at the ceiling, he just closed his eyes looking as if he were asleep? So, not disturbing the player that looks asleep would be the right thing to do.
Now, the snoring player is a distraction to the other players near enough to hear the snoring. Telling this player to stop the distraction would be the right thing to do, of course if his opponent or one of the other players complained. This is US Chess, where we don’t interfere with the game. Now, if this were under FIDE rules, then we might need to see if this person were talking with aliens…humor…laugh now…sort of…
I have had similar situations two times that I recall.
My answer is that as long as the player is not disturbing others (snoring) or is in medical distress then the TD has a responsibility to not interfere. If a player interfered, I would likely give a warning and leave it at that. Of course if the player was an interested party such as a teammate or relative, I would likely impose a greater penalty. In the case of a spectator, ejection from the room seems appropriate.
Both cases I recall were intoxicated players passing out.
In the first instance, the intoxicated player was resting his head on his hands. His hand gave way and he did a faceplant on the board displacing the pieces. Clearly, I had to intervene as the TD one to ensure the player was OK and two to reset the board correctly. However, the intoxicated player’s opponent (a police officer) complained that I had no right to intervene!
In the second instance, the intoxicated individual merely went to sleep and was not disturbing anybody. We let him sleep and his flag fell. His opponent packed up the pieces and the individual continued to sleep. He eventually woke up and asked me what happened in the game!
This reminds me of the famous story of Bobby Fischer staying up all night playing blitz and then falling sound asleep the next day in his game with Art Bisguier. As Art tells it, “I made the worst blunder of my chess career - I woke Bobby up!” Bobby went on to dismantle Bisguier in their game.
I ask my young students to behave a certain way at the board. If their opponents fails to press the clock, they are to remind them. Should an opponent fall asleep, which is not uncommon among young children, they have been told to wake their opponent up. This is a part of the chess etiquette they have been taught. They are to win the game in a way they can be proud to show to others.
On a couple of occasions, I have had to check on players and wake them up. People with diabetes are known to drift off in a way that appears to be sleeping, but is dangerous for them. Even if they are healthy, I still would prefer as a TD that players play the game in “a spirit of good sportsmanship” rather than snicker how they won the a game because their opponent fell asleep. Intoxicated players should be woken and told they have forfeited the game for failing to “conduct themselves in an orderly fashion” covered under Players’ Responsibility in the Rulebook. Any such waking should be by the TD or the opponent, not by a spectator or other interested party. You may disagree with above, but I believe that the TD has the discretion to ensure that all games be conducted on a level playing field.
I agree with tmagchesspgh. Both because there is value in good sportsmanship, and because you cannot know whether the sleeping player has a medical problem or is just sleeping. I would wake the sleeper.
If someone else, other than the opponent, wakes the sleeper I would give a warning and explain that the concerned person should have contacted a TD.
If this is contrary to the rules, and waking the sleeper is not a matter within the TD’s discretion, then IMO the rules should be changed. The game is not so important that I would risk letting the sleeper drift off into a serious medical problem.
I agree that it can be difficult to tell. However, it seems to me that if there is no reason to suspect medical distress that rule 21D TD non-intervention applies. 21D specifically limits director intervention to" "d1) Answering rules questions d2) Correcting illegal moves observed d3) Warning players d4) settling disputes d5) Informing players (late arrival of opponent or opponent excused for extended period of time) and d6) Collecting fees. I also obviously fully agree that even though medical distress is not covered in 21 that a TD has a right and even a responsibility to intervene in a case of medical distress. Further, I believe that if there is ANY reason to even SUSPECT medical distress that a TD should intervene - better safe than sorry. There could be many reasons to suspect medical distress including previous behavior, medic alert bracelet etc. However, absent any reasonable suspicion that is is something more than just falling asleep, I think 21D has to prevail. In my opinion a TD waking an opponent (absent a REASON to do so) is similar to telling him to hit his clock. Yes the opponent is certainly allowed to tell an opponent to hit his clock but a TD (and even worse a spectator) has no right to do so. If a TD chooses to intervene and cannot articulate a reason why he did so. I think the opponent has every right to complain that the TD violated rule 21D. Of course the TD could always fall back on “I wanted to make sure he was OK”, but in my opinion this rings shallow if there is not at least SOME reason to believe that he didn’t just fall asleep.
Certainly, a player may choose to wake his opponent up. I have no issue with that. I also have no issue with a player who chooses not to do so.
At the end of the day, the game is between the two players. Spectators clearly have no right to intervene and the TD MUST have a reason to do so.
Even though medical distress is not covered in the reasons a TD is allowed to intervene, I think any reasonable person would agree that a TD is allowed (and most would probably agree has a responsibility) to intervene in such a situation.
It seems the only issue is how much suspicion a TD needs before he should intervene. I suppose at the extremes we have a) Any sleeping should be investigated to the extreme of b) there needs to be some actual evidence like bleeding or stop breathing. I am much closer to A than B, but I still need to have some reason to believe it is more than just sleeping.
I disagree that a TD should eject a non-disruptive, sleeping, intoxicated person. As long as they are non-disruptive, I see no justification for ejection. If we were to eject a non-disruptive sleeper, I think we would be on a slippery slope - what about the person who worked graveyard shift and falls asleep? I don’t want to be in the position of trying to decide a sleeper is alcohol induced rather than sleep deprived. I think you have to revert to OBSERVED BEHAVIOR that fails to “conduct themselves in an orderly fashion” and I don’t think just sleeping (even with an odor of alcohol) is enough to eject a player from a tournament.
Just to clarify the conditions of the original post: the player was clearly sleeping and being observed by his father who was not concerned about anything other than his son’s clock was running. The father asked me if he could wake his son and I told him we could not interfere in the game absent a clear reason to intervene and I likened it to telling a player to hit his clock when he did not realize it was running (clearly prohibited in the rules). Eventually, the child finally woke up, realized it was his turn and played the game to the finish. (He lost and he later explained that his pawn advantage was a mirage as his king was weak.)
I would really like to hear from someone like Tim Just or his ilk who can give a definitive answer on what the USCF rules are on this.
I guess I am not definitive enough. I thought I quoted the rule pretty well and gave my opinion of its interpretation. I don’t pretend to be the fount of all TD knowledge and certainly other NTDs may disagree with me, but I think I have this one pretty close to dead on (recognizing that one’s opinion of whether a player is or could have a medical issue is likely the real crux of the matter for most experienced TDs). The USCF rule is 21D on pages 95-96 of the rulebook. Exceptions to it and possible interpretations are of course up for debate.
As you can probably guess, I believe you made the correct decision.
Tim, where are you when we need you?
Dave Hater
National Tournament Director, Member USCF Rules Committee
I am not Tim Just, and I certainly do not pretend to be of his caliber, but I do have a more than passing acquaintance with the US Chess Official Rules of Chess.
It really isn’t possible to satisfy Mr. High’s request to cite the applicable rule in this case. I hope I will not upset Mr. High with my answer, but I believe the most applicable rule in this situation is rule 1A:
So, a good question would be what “similar cases” that are spelled out in the rules would be a basis for a decision in the case of a sleeping player. I think it is nothing but common sense that, if the sleeping player is in medical distress, rules be d*mned and the director should intervene (and summon medical assistance if the situation could reasonably be interpreted as an emergency).
Assuming the sleeping player is not in medical distress, I can think of two principles that apply. If the player is snoring loudly enough to be a disturbance to other (awake) players, I would wake the player without waiting for a player to complain about the snoring being disruptive. Now, I realize that I am a strong proponent of “the TD does not intervene unless there is a complaint.” (For a recent example, see my comments in the “big rook” thread.) However, in this case, players may in fact be uncomfortable or embarrassed about complaining about a snoring player. Also, the player who is causing the disturbance is not aware of doing so. I would consider the snoring to be more similar to an environmental problem (that is, a problem with the playing environment itself) than a case of intentional annoying behavior. I would not hesitate to take corrective action without waiting for a player to complain if there were, for instance, a noisy ventilation fan in the playing hall (which has happened to me).
On the other hand, if the player is not snoring (or the snoring is quiet enough not to disturb other games), the rule that seems to apply most closely is 16Y (assisting players with time management prohibited). The opponent may choose to awaken the sleeping player, but (again barring medical distress or loud snoring), this choice belongs exclusively to the opponent, not to the director.
I once played in a G/45 and was paired with an fm from out of town. He was snoozing in a back office room when the game started. The td woke him up. I was pretty sure that was illegal but didn’t object. I wanted a game not a point.
I don’t think this is quite the same thing (though I suppose you could argue it is). I don’t think what the TD did was illegal at all. Rounding up players to start the round (or locating missing opponents when the round starts) is before the game starts and I don’t think qualifies as telling a player his clock is running under 16Y even if he opponent has set up the pieces and started the clock. Once the game has started, particularly after the first move has been made , totally different scenario.
Please re-read my original post. I addressed this: “(or locating missing opponents when the round starts) … even if the opponent has set up the pieces and started the clock” A TD getting all players to the board is certainly allowed and is in no sense illegal (even if it involved waking up a player). That is a TOTALLY different scenario then waking a player after that player has begun the game i.e. made his first move. To argue that A TD cannot round up a missing player once that player’s opponent has started the clock is not supportable by any rule that I am aware of. I do not think 16Y supports your interpretation. You can argue that it does, but I believe you are mistaken. I suppose a literal reading of 16Y does support your view, but I do not believe that most experienced TDs would interpret the rule the way you seem to be doing. I suppose at this point we would just have to agree to disagree. If I were the TD in question I would have rounded up that player (and others). I routinely round up missing players in events I direct (and check for misset clocks). Both are considered good TD practice. Your original post is interesting because if I read it correctly you seem to be saying that the TD both acted illegaly and you are quite satisfied that he did so. There is no contradiction there. However, if you were correct, I think you would be arguing for a rules change. Because I do not believe you are correct (and in fact believe the TD acted completely appropriately), I do not believe any rules change is necessary. I do though acknowledge that a “chess lawyer” could use 16Y to make your case. Until that happens, I don’t think 16Y needs to be clarified (though I will bear this discussion in mind for future TD tips of the rulebook).
BTW I hope I was not the YD involved. If so my posts would sound rather self-serving. If I was the TD involved I do not recall this.
I thought I quoted the rule pretty well and gave my opinion of its interpretation. I don’t pretend to be the fount of all TD knowledge and certainly other NTDs may disagree with me, but I think I have this one pretty close to dead on (recognizing that one’s opinion of whether a player is or could have a medical issue is likely the real crux of the matter for most experienced TDs). The USCF rule is 21D on pages 95-96 of the rulebook. Exceptions to it and possible interpretations are of course up for debate.
