Both games I've played in this season (v Wallasey & Waterloo) have been very friendly, though keenly contested, matches and I'd like to extend my compliments to all participants.
Is my experience to date indicative of the current state of the MCA? I hope so
Generally speaking I would say yes, however I think it all depends on the level you're playing at. Higher up the league you will experience a much more competitive edge to games. I'm not saying a greater desire to win because we all want to win, rather a greater desire not to lose if that makes any sense. Sometimes sportsmanship can go out the window.
I was involved in a particularly unpleasant incident last season which resulted in me having to replay a game (in which I had an advantageous position) from scratch. I then lost the rematch. People have given me their opinions of my opponents sportmanship over this incident and I have my own.
Thankfully major incidents like this are rare and we should all remember that at the end of the day its just a game.
I am of the view the League could do more to support and promote sportsmanship in the League by reviewing the rules under which we play.
The FIDE laws of chess are designed and written primarily for the highest levels of chess as played by Grandmasters. For example, when games are posted live to the world on the internet then it makes sense that the participants must be isolated from the viewing world in order to prevent communication between the two. Otherwise, one might as well have a PC with the latest software by the side of the chess board. It is not clear how relevant the rule on mobile phones might be for a local match at the club, if relevant at all.
I believe the League could look at the rules on mobile phones and the two minute finish, for example, and see if they could be amended with a view to the promotion of sportsmanship in the League. Players have every right to behave as they sometimes do while the FIDE rules apply to the local league. More could be done if there was a will to do so and perhaps there is not.
I think tampering with the rules could be problematic. Many players play in various leagues and tournaments and it would be hard to image playing under differing conditions all of the time. Most of us play seriously but for fun so it may seem excessive playing under strict FIDE rules designed for people who make a living from playing chess.
Rules that dont directly influence the outcome of a game are a problem, such as the mobile phone rule. Is a mobile phone going off a significant distraction to an opponent to allow him or her to claim victory? I would say no, others may disagree but while the rule is there it should be enforced, otherwise there is no point having a set of rules at all.
Maybe a better idea for this rule would be a 'two strikes and you're out system';
First ring - Warning
Second Ring - Forfeit the game
Or maybe an announcement before a match starts to remind players about the phone rule.
Hi John, I have played in the MCA since 1983, in the main the sportsmanship within the league is as you have experienced this season, however I did experience one rather ugly incident last season when my opponent who well up in material had neglected his clock and lost on time and then in a quite petulant response to my offered handshake proceeded to sweep the board of its pieces, clock, pens and scoresheets all ending up on the floor! which somewhat soured what had been a hard fought game. This behaviour is rare and unwarranted and I hope not to see its like again.
Hi Ian, The ruling on mobile phones at local level should be amended to "if they ring then just turn them off" I would never claim a win in such a case, I would much rather outplay my opponent over the board.
Me neither and I hope it never happens again. I was playing white and there was a blitz finish approaching a time control. There was some confusion as to whether we had reached the control but we agreed we had so turned the clocks back. At this point my opponent claimed it was his move which I disagreed with. I couldn't recreate the position and my opponent wasn't interested so no further play occurred. After much debating in the following days I reluctantly agreed to replay from scratch.
The problem was it was a cup final and the result of the match depended on the game. Only a win for me was good enough to win the cup so I felt I had to replay the game or it would be declared void and the cup lost.
In general, I believe arbiters should be the servants of chess players and not the masters telling players what to do.
I believe the two minute rule works best when operated by experienced players familiar with the workings of the rule. My general experience of club chess suggests there are many players who play regularly but the majority of players only play club chess and many players in this category are less than familiar with the rules.
There have been occasions in which one of the players has lacked the knowledge or the confidence to claim a draw under the two minute rule and has lost on time in a superior position or one in which the opponent could not win by normal means.
What to do? Blame the less active players for being less active? One might suggest a rule designed for professional players is conferring an advantage on one section of players at the expense of others.
Is it sporting to shuffle around waiting for a point on time? It is easier to transfer the onus of sportsmanship onto the hapless opponent who didn't know how to deal with the situation. It is their fault rather than our lack of sportsmanship. Should they sicken of such treatment and give up club chess that will be their fault too.
The problem is there for all to see. The League decide the rules and have responsibility for the rules under which we play. We have a rule designed for regular players and arbiters present to monitor the conduct of the players during the time scramble. This is not replicated in club chess and injustices are being done in the name of this rule. Before a rule can be amended one has to accept that injustices are being done and manage something more than shrug one's shoulders and mumble something about an imperfect world.
Taking off the arbiter's hat and putting the player's hat on, we could place the onus on those wishing to claim a win on time that they could reasonably win the game by normal means. Not a perfect solution and I don't claim to have one but I would like to see an end to some of the sickening rubbish I have seen perpetrated over the board.
Hi Kronsteen, seems like a bit of gamesmanship has gone on in that tie, I have always known what the last move played was, and I take it you and your opponent would both have seen the last move played, usually the game score is recreated from working back from the current position, at least the last move would be ascertained. I guess you can put it all down to experience and rely on the "Powers of Karma".
Hi IanC, I feel that the way forward regards the two minute rule is the proposal I made in the "Clocking" Thread, hopefully this change would eliminate the "sickening rubbish" encountered.
