Life In 19x19

breakfast wrote:Sound was on minimum possible volume, but it was possible to notice it. Rob already played 30+ moves on byoyomi

I think that you have a legitimate grievance. Also you should expect the rules to be applied consistently from year to year.

I might have some sympathy with the referee's decision if it was obvious that you were way behind - though I still think it is wrong.



I lost a game at a recent tournament (Amsterdam 2009 I think) because the clock was talking Chinese, and at another tournament the conflict with my opponent started before the game began when he wanted to turn the sound right off.

I think that it is always a pity when the referee is called upon. In the instance you describe, your opponent would understand that he had lost on time and should accept that - however unpalatable it may feel for him.

At a recent tournament a referee became involved when he found out that two players agreed to continue when one of the flags had dropped. My belief is that the referee should mind his own business when there is no dispute between the players and there is no evidence of any nefarious intent - or objection from other players. It is, after all, only a game.

breakfast wrote:Sound was on minimum possible volume, but it was possible to notice it. Rob already played 30+ moves on byoyomi

But the sound was not hearable, was it? Does minimum possible volume mean that the clock was actually muted? Or do you mean it was possible to notice because Rob already played in byoyomi and so he should have noticed that there was no sound?

Appeals Committee Decision 7th August 2010

The Appeals Committee ruled that the players are responsible for managing the clock setting and taking care of their time. The digital display clearly shows the difference between the main time and the byoyomi time. The referee’s decision was wrong. The game result is ruled in favour of Dinerchtein.

We recommend that decision is referred to the EGF Rules Commission and furthermore we recommend that these clocks are not used in EGF tournament play, at least for the top boards.

breakfast wrote:

tmge wrote:I believe that during the EGC this incident has happened a few times. I saw someone losing on time on his first byo-yomi period because the sound was low and he didn't notice.
He accepted his loss on time.
(but was losing on the board anyway)

In Tampere? Or earlier?
Can you tell more details please, including tournament name and players names

Sorry for answering late.
It was in Tampere, in the main tournament but I don't know the players' names.
I just happened to witness it. The players agreed without calling the referee.

The decision of the appeal commitee seems like the only wise decision to me.
The problem of these clocks should be adressed. Maybe just putting a warning on the clocks saying "Remember to set the sound level and the language before the game starts" would be enough.
Many people at the EGC were using these clocks for the first time.

I just came back home from Tampere. This problem with the clock happened several times. I know of two other examples, once a 2dan friend lost a game like that and once in my favour in the weekend tournament

If I am not misinformed, also Catalin lost a game like that but I don't know against whom.

I think it would be more sportmannish to give my opponent a byo-yomi period and continue the game, but in my case that was the last (fifth) game of the weekend tournament and I had won all the other four games. So I really wanted to win that game as well just for having won all my games in a tournament for the first time We called the referee and he told that I won on time. I don't have a very clean conscious about that but it was not my fault either. I still has 16 minutes left and if you think that time is also a part of the game, then .... blablabla ...

I think that the reports so far indicate that an electronic clock that manages the byoyomi all by itself absolutely needs a very noticable time alert.

I think that it is very frustrating to lose a won game mainly due to a clock malfunction. A clock that requires constant checking would be a major distraction, and a clock where you do not know that it needs constant checking is simply a trap.

The top players have a 1 minute byoyomi. I would like to know whether Rob van Zeijst really had realized he was in byoyomi, since most players would play within a minute in the late endgame anyway.

Harleqin wrote:I think that the reports so far indicate that an electronic clock that manages the byoyomi all by itself absolutely needs a very noticable time alert.

I think that it is very frustrating to lose a won game mainly due to a clock malfunction. A clock that requires constant checking would be a major distraction, and a clock where you do not know that it needs constant checking is simply a trap.

The top players have a 1 minute byoyomi. I would like to know whether Rob van Zeijst really had realized he was in byoyomi, since most players would play within a minute in the late endgame anyway.

This is also why an electronic clock that manages byoyomi itself is a necessity. So you must have the talking/beeping/singing/dancing clock, and it MUST be in perfect working order.

Personally I do not understand why some people don't like the talking clocks. You don't want it telling you you're about to run out of time? Well, if you're playing against me maybe you could win unfairly as I've been known to not notice my opponent was in byoyomi until more than 15 minutes had passed with a chess clock. So maybe that's a feature. But I think it's better for the clock to tell you so that you can make a move, than for the tournament director or your opponent to tell you that you already lost.

Harleqin wrote:I think that the reports so far indicate that an electronic clock that manages the byoyomi all by itself absolutely needs a very noticable time alert.

And this time alert at the border of basic thinking time and Byoyomi must be independent of the sound level of the clock. Best solution would be that this alert has ACTIVELY to be switched off by the player.

If you compare the situation to using analogue clocks, there is a clear sign that nobody can overlook (IF he has a look): the flag has fallen !

This it true even for the opponent who - if the player does not notice - usually would give a hint that Byoyomi has begun. Just because there is no one really counting on for the player.

So Tournament rules should make clear that a player can only clain a win by time if both players have agreed that Byoyomi for a player has started. A remark on the result sheet would be helpful.

Main problem with this issue was that there was only one byouyomi period available. When organizers decided to use only one byouyomi period instead of three, they also doomed Zeist or other top player (not to mention all other players who played with 1x30 sec killer byouyomi!) will lose by time. It is just too hard to control time in difficult situations, if there are no backups in reserve.

It is foolish to say that time control is part of the game, if it is too difficult part of game to handle even for 7-dan. 3x50 sec is far less prone to accidental timelosses. Especially in Weekend tournament where there was just 1x20 sec over time controls was absolutely horrible to play. (Having Ing clocks did not make things any better.)

Liisa wrote:1x30 sec killer byouyomi ... too hard to control time in difficult situations, if there are no backups in reserve. ... in Weekend tournament where there was just 1x20 sec over time controls was absolutely horrible to play.

Time to think about introducing Fischer Timing, even if it is only used for overtime management...

Liisa wrote:Main problem with this issue was that there was only one byouyomi period available. When organizers decided to use only one byouyomi period instead of three, they also doomed Zeist or other top player (not to mention all other players who played with 1x30 sec killer byouyomi!) will lose by time. It is just too hard to control time in difficult situations, if there are no backups in reserve.

It is foolish to say that time control is part of the game, if it is too difficult part of game to handle even for 7-dan. 3x50 sec is far less prone to accidental timelosses. Especially in Weekend tournament where there was just 1x20 sec over time controls was absolutely horrible to play. (Having Ing clocks did not make things any better.)

I fully agree with this and would add that the time system with a number of byo-yomi periods is the best. It leads to fewer games lost on time and fewer games lost on silly mistakes or dubious bluff play towards the end of the games. It's simply more satisfactory and better go if the games don't end in such ways, regardless of whether you win or lose.

On the other hand, once the rules have been decided the players have to adhere to them of course. The decision of the appeals committee in the casa discussed above seems very good to me.

cheers,
Henric

The 3rd arbitration instance is still investigating the case. The 2nd instance decided just before round 10, during which some of the involved persons were playing. Time in between the end of round 10 and prize giving was too short for us to solve the case until the prize giving. We will announce the final decision.

From http://www.eurogofed.org/egf/ecrules.htm

Thinking Times

* The thinking times are the same for both players and depend on the higher ranked player as follows:
o 4 dan - 7 dan: 2.5 hours basic time + 1 minute byoyomi
o 3 kyu - 3 dan: 2 hours basic time + 45 seconds byoyomi
o 4 kyu or below: 1.5 hours basic time + 30 seconds byoyomi
However, if the clocks cannot manage 45 seconds byoyomi, then 40 seconds byoyomi is used.

Of course, some interpretation had to be done, because the new Ing Timers can handle only 10, 20, 30 and 60s byoyomi.

Cheers,
Vesa

Personally I do not understand why some people don't like the talking clocks.

It doesn't take a great leap of imagination to realise that deaf people play go, too. Also, although I'm not in a position to confirm this myself, I'm told that talking clocks irritate or confuse people on adjacent boards.

I've seen games where people with difficulty seeing have been helped by their opponents when using tick-tock-only analogue clocks, but whether such sportsmanship can fairly be expected when big prizes are around is hard to say.

Maybe the most fundamental point is that a bad workman always blames his tools?

John Fairbairn wrote:Maybe the most fundamental point is that a bad workman always blames his tools?

No, not at all. I rather think that this is an unfair generalization.