Mobile Gambit and a Hyper-Flank Opening
Submitted by
on Sat, 01/10/2009 at 2:08pm.
If you haven't read SonofPearl's new post about “Proposed FIDE Rule Changes” you should get yourself over there and read them now. In fact, if you're not tracking SonofPearl you're missing one of chess.com's most informative sources.
He lists three main changes: the first is an obvious attempt to limit grandmaster draws, the other two—those that bring a story to mind—are about plain, old-fashioned, good manners.
Mobile Phones:
Without the permission of the arbiter a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue, unless they are completely switched off. If any such device produces a sound, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. However, if the opponent cannot win the game by any series of legal moves, his score shall be a draw.
Anybody who has played an OTB tournament will have had some experience of the disruption that can be caused by mobile phones. It's less of a problem now that players automatically forfeit the game if their phone rings during play, but the new amendment extends that forfeit to “any sound” emitted by the phone.
Of course, the rule can be abused.
Two or three years ago, during a junior tournament in Australia, one player found himself in a losing position. Rather than resign he came up with a strategy. He knew his opponent's mobile phone was in his satchel under the table, and he knew the lad kept it turned on. He also knew the phone number. And how did he know all this? His opponent was a friend, of course. He then had another guy call his (soon to be ex) friend who was promptly disqualified.
Late Arrivals:
Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game, unless the arbiter decides otherwise. Thus the default time is 0 minutes. The rules of a competition may specify a different default time; or:
Any player who arrives at the chessboard after the start of the session shall lose the game.
And about time, too!
I get very restless with people who are habitually late for appointments and, whenever possible, avoid them. Richard Ianelli in his “Devil's New Dictionary” defined LATE this way:
-
Showing a high level of low regard for others.
-
Not in time to avert worry but too early to be given up for dead.
-
Possessing a seemingly unlimited supply of imaginative, and often amusing, excuses.
I played in the first Sydney International Open in 2007. I'd been hopelessly outclassed in most of my games and needed a win in the final round to raise my score from “disgraceful” to “almost respectable”. My opponent who, on rating difference alone, would have been favoured to win, was uncharacteristically late.
As the game clock moved ever-so-slowly toward the 60-minute forfeit I had mixed feelings. Sure, I'd get my point, but there was absolutely no satisfaction in it.
Then, just when I was getting ready to claim the win, he arrived. I was annoyed but he had the good grace to apologise and we settled down to play. What happened next was the funniest chess game I've ever played.
Mr NN must have assumed that if he used an unorthodox opening against a lower-rated player, I would be confused by the unusual position and blunder quickly. The problem with that kind of thinking was that I wasn't the one who was short of time.
You just can't give that kind of advantage to a pissed-off opponent, even if he is only a patzer.
| 816 reads | 21 comments