Fischer - Spasskey 1972 World Championship Game 2:
I was thinking about that game. Fischer never showed up, in protest. The game was scored for Spassky, under the match rules, but was not rated by the FIDE.
In a broadly similar situation, Oscar Panno, as Black, resigned without making a move, in protest, against Fischer's c4(!), in the 1970 Palma Interzonal. This game was rated, and did not end by lapsed time.
and what happend if black refused to start the clock?
If I were playing White, I think that I would make my move, hit the clock, and wait for my opponent to go running to the TD. I might get a warning for a rules violation, but the game would probably continue.
MIAMI LIKES IT
Did we say anything about White not showing up?
johnmusacha wrote:
When the two players sit down to play a game of chess, what rule governs the situation when the White player refuses to make move one?
Surely this has happened.
Is it considered the same as White not showing up at all?
I'm in that pickle myself. India_Chess will NOT move after over two weeks so I will offer a draw. Weirdest thing is, he/she asked ME to play!
No sense in that, mapayt. You are about to win on time.
Never accept a game with a long move time. You should be able to play well with 2 or 3 day max
draw
It depends on whether it's OTB. Not sure about online but the rule in OTB tournaments is that black starts whites clock & it goes from there. IF white never moves & loses on time its NOT rated since no game was ever played & black gets a full point as if they'd won. So it would affect their tournament standing & pairing but not their rating.
This is very interesting. This could be exploited, perhaps.
lol
Yeah, it affects pairings (black would get a point), but would it affect ratings? I think it would be TD's discretion. Note the TD wouldn't be able to send in any scoresheets for that game, so if the white pieces player complained to USCF then TD may get in trouble.
Safe bet to treat it as if white didn't show up. Black gets paired as if he won, but ratings don't change.
In tournament play, Black would sign his scoresheeet as White losing on time. This happens sometimes when a player gets the time of the round wrong. I believe the result stands as a win for Black and is rated (it can not be considered a loss by forfeit, because the White player was present), because White had "not played the prescribed number of moves in the given time."
You can't gain rating points by submitting a blank score sheet signed only by yourself...
Many weekend tournaments don't have multiple time controls, so there is no "prescribed number of moves."
If you want to know what would happen if an official rules committee and 10 IAs were in attendance, observed the whole thing, and had to make a ruling, then sure, maybe they rule it affects ratings.
But logically, should ratings change? Ratings predict future performance based on past performance. If there was no performance, then why should they change?
Practically speaking however, it would just be you, the TD, and your opponent in correspondence with some group within the organization that deals with complaints. And unless you were equipped to videotape the opponent sitting there the whole time, the group has no evidence to enforce a rating change.
'And unless you were equipped to videotape the opponent sitting there the whole time, the group has no evidence to enforce a rating change."
You are promoting the fallacy that the only real evidence is that which is captured on tape.
Are you saying there was no admissible evidence of anything, in any inquiry, before the invention of the camera?
You ever heard of something called testimony?
L.E.L.z
Black wins.
Yeah, it affects pairings (black would get a point), but would it affect ratings? I think it would be TD's discretion. Note the TD wouldn't be able to send in any scoresheets for that game, so if the white pieces player complained to USCF then TD may get in trouble.
Safe bet to treat it as if white didn't show up. Black gets paired as if he won, but ratings don't change.
In tournament play, Black would sign his scoresheeet as White losing on time. This happens sometimes when a player gets the time of the round wrong. I believe the result stands as a win for Black and is rated (it can not be considered a loss by forfeit, because the White player was present), because White had "not played the prescribed number of moves in the given time."
You can't gain rating points by submitting a blank score sheet signed only by yourself...
Many weekend tournaments don't have multiple time controls, so there is no "prescribed number of moves."
If you want to know what would happen if an official rules committee and 10 IAs were in attendance, observed the whole thing, and had to make a ruling, then sure, maybe they rule it affects ratings.
But logically, should ratings change? Ratings predict future performance based on past performance. If there was no performance, then why should they change?
Practically speaking however, it would just be you, the TD, and your opponent in correspondence with some group within the organization that deals with complaints. And unless you were equipped to videotape the opponent sitting there the whole time, the group has no evidence to enforce a rating change.
The premise of the question was, "When the two players sit down to play a game of chess..." White is in attendence. Makes no moves. Loses on time. Black signs score sheet as a win on time. White ever White does or does not do from there is an issue for the TD.
Years ago, I had an OTB opponent ball up the scoresheet, walk out, and toss it after a loss. I won, it went on the tally board, it was rated.
It's an issue for the TD in any case because it's the TD who submits the scoresheets and results to be rated. By talking about how white may act I'm trying to show that the TD faces a dilemma. It's much more common that a player misses a round, so white's possible claim holds more weight than black's honest story.
Given that, how do I predict the TD would act? Either way is possible.
IMO, the super-rational solution is that such a case never affects ratings due to the nature of ratings. It's my hope that if a TD decided to try to make the game rated that it would be to punish / discourage such rude behavior in the future, not because some pedantic reading of the rule book.
Don't you think a loss of rating points would be a punitive measure to stop such nonsense?
Perhaps I see it from a bit different angle. I have had opponents show up at the board, not expecting to play a girl (my first name is androgynous). I know the "WTH look."
I do understand where you are coming from, though.
That's a reasonable decision.
- At the start of the game black starts the clock
- If he isn't present the TD or one of his helpers will do it.
- If the white player is present he has 2 hours to make his first move. (supposing it's 40 moves in 2 hours). Not one.
- If the white player isn't present he forfaits on time after 1 hour. No rating loss.
- If neither player is present I suppose after 1 hour the score will be 0 - 0. No rating changes.
- If the white player doesn't move before his 2 hours are up he WILL lose the rating points since he was present for the game.
- If the white player is present and the black player is not the white player will win after one hour on forfait. Doesn't matter if he made his first move or not.
That should just about cover it.
And @ Kaynight. No, it's NOT a major problem. Nor a minor one.
BTW. This is for most tournaments. Not the ones where you HAVE to be present before the round starts.
JamieDelarosa wrote:
No sense in that, mapayt. You are about to win on time.
Never accept a game with a long move time. You should be able to play well with 2 or 3 day max
The game has a 24-hour window. Even worse, I can't claim a win on time, just "abort."
When the two players sit down to play a game of chess, what rule governs the situation when the White player refuses to make move one?
Surely this has happened.
Is it considered the same as White not showing up at all?
Black starts the clock, and after 1 hour wins by time forfeit.