Averbakh was recognised
as an International
Arbiter (the senior of the two arbiting titles, the other is FIDE
Arbiter) in 1969. As someone who likes to look at the laws of chess
from an evolutionary perspective (if one can see how a particular
rule is arrived at, it can make it easier to understand and
remember), I find accounts such as that given (page 119) of the game
Yukhtman – Spassky, Soviet Championship 1959, in which the future
World Champion claimed a draw by threefold repetition, useful. Apparently the draw claimant was not permitted to stop
the clocks in the 1950s. It's probably worth recalling the laws
applicable now:
9.2 The game is
drawn upon a correct claim by the player having the move, when the
same position, for at least the third time (not necessarily by a
repetition of moves):
a. is about to
appear, if he first writes his move on his scoresheet and declares to
the arbiter his intention to make this move, or
b. has just
appeared, and the player claiming the draw has the move.
…
9.5 If a player
claims a draw as in Article 9.2 or 9.3 he may stop both clocks …
Incidentally,
Yakov Yukhtman (1935 – 1985) was a well known eccentric, his ways
did not always go down well inside the former USSR, particularly
given he was Jewish. He was once banned from playing for three years
by the Soviets. He later successfully applied to emigrate to Israel
and subsequently moved from there to the United States. A formidable
blitz player, he could get the better of most grandmasters. He won
the Ukrainian Championship in 1953. There is an affectionate online
tribute (in Spanish) to Yukhtman here.
There is also a Sunday
Telegraph chess column devoted to him. Averbakh relates some of
Yukhtman's history on page 124. A man who tilted at windmills, a
reader might say, recalling Cervantes and the true history, as he wrote, of Don Quixote. Alas, we can't all settle for tolerance of
life's injustices, real or imaginary, especially when young. I have
a lot of sympathy for an impractical refusal to compromise.
Switching topics to chess
clocks, that necessary weapon in the war against the slowness of
genius and the even more painful slowness of mediocrity have been
used to speed up the game considerably in recent years. I am old
enough to have played when tournament games were adjourned or
adjudicated (in the UK they still apply in many evening league
matches). The passing of the former I regret for when the game was
interesting, the latter I have never cared for. British arbiters have
supplied much of the impetus behind these changes. They have the
advantage of being native speakers of the language of the laws of
chess and have traditionally been well represented in the relevant
FIDE committees.
Quickplay
finish rules were introduced to make the running of a Swiss
tournament over a weekend far more practical. Now, many arbiters are
pushing for the elimination of quickplays through the introduction of
Fischer time controls (had suitable clocks been available earlier, I
rather doubt that quickplay finish rules would ever have been
introduced). The QPF rules on the FIDE website are quite succinct:
10.1 A ‘quickplay
finish’ is the phase of a game when all the (remaining) moves must
be made in a limited time.
10.2 If the player,
having the move, has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may
claim a draw before his flag falls. He shall summon the arbiter and
may stop the clocks. (See Article 6.12.b)
a. If the arbiter
agrees the opponent is making no effort to win the game by normal
means, or that it is not possible to win by normal means, then he
shall declare the game drawn. Otherwise he shall postpone his
decision or reject the claim.
b. If the arbiter
postpones his decision, the opponent may be awarded two extra minutes
and the game shall continue, if possible in the presence of an
arbiter. The arbiter shall declare the final result later in the game
or as soon as possible after a flag has fallen. He shall declare the
game drawn if he agrees that the final position cannot be won by
normal means, or that the opponent was not making sufficient attempts
to win by normal means.
c. If the arbiter
has rejected the claim, the opponent shall be awarded two extra
minutes time.
d. The decision of
the arbiter shall be final relating to (a), (b) and (c).
Contrast
that with the 1995 BCF arbiters' version (click to enlarge):
Note
the greater detail and the absence of a specification as to the
amount of time to be added to the clock of the opponent of a
claimant, should a penalty be imposed.
FIDE,
too, has
appendix D to deal with the situation of no arbiter being present.
Compare the fairly simple:
D. Quickplay
finishes where no arbiter is present in the venue
D.1 Where games are
played as in Article 10, a player may claim a draw when he has less
than two minutes left on his clock and before his flag falls. This
concludes the game.
He may claim on the
basis:
that his
opponent cannot win by normal means, and/or
that his
opponent has been making no effort to win by normal means.
In a) the player
must write down the final position and his opponent verify it.
In b) the player
must write down the final position and submit an up to date
scoresheet. The opponent shall verify both the scoresheet and the
final position.
The claim shall be
referred to an arbiter whose decision shall be final.
With
the BCF guidelines (from sometime in the 1990s, I can't remember the
precise year):
One
thing I have never liked is the inability to appeal against an
arbiter's decision. It has a long history.
I
should caution the reader that the FIDE laws on quickplay are
intended to completely replace any older laws, including those
produced by the then British (now English) Chess Federation.
The
best guidance as to when to award a 10.2 claim I have ever seen can
be found on pages 122-4 of The Chess Organiser's Handbook
(ISBN 1-84382-170-2), a book written by the secretary of the FIDE
rules' commission Stewart Reuben. Note that the most recent edition
no longer contains the current laws of chess, although, in my
opinion, it is still usable (for instance, one can manually insert
replacement Scheveningen tables on page 213).
No comments:
Post a Comment