| |
BGonline.org Forums
Director's ruling at the Chicago Open...
Posted By: Stick In Response To: Director's ruling at the Chicago Open... (rory)
Date: Friday, 27 May 2016, at 6:14 p.m.
Oh how I sometimes miss the days when we were just accusing me of cheating, at least I got a kick out of that. When it's the ethics of other people somehow that is a lot more exhausting.
First, not naming names when describing the situation is the absolutely correct thing for a TD to do. If something is ever taken to a committee, if possible when explained if the committee is not hearing from the players directly, it should be stated as "Player A said this..." "Player B said that". Involving names when trying to get an unbiased opinion can only harm the situation.
That being said, not that most people have read and weighed in on the matter I only see it as harmful to withhold the names in question. Steve Brown was the player who had 1 minute 30 seconds left on his clock and had 3 of his opponent's checkers closed out and forgot to hit the clock at the end of his turn. Michel LaMote (Belgium) was the player with 4 seconds left on his clock and didn't notify Steve that he was failing to hit the clock.
There are many things to address so stick with me. (get it, Stick with me!? I crack myself up) When you attend a tournament it is your job to know the rules assuming the rules are readily available. Rory's rules are clearly posted on the tournament page. This is sufficient in my mind as you should look at them and be aware of what you're getting in to before you get to the tournament. If any clarification is needed you could obviously send an email ahead of time or ask upon arrival.
As has been pointed out but can't hurt to restate. The spectator(s) did nothing wrong. They noticed something quite out of the ordinary and took it to the director or tournament staff. The rules allow you to do this and I am in complete agreement with the rules for such a scenario.
I have to agree with Neil K. 'The player (Steve Brown) who timed out when his opp was closed out was a dufus.'. How you are a seasoned tournament player and fail not only to not hit your clock at the end of your turn as you have been doing the entire match (and tournament most likely) but you also failed to notice how low your time was running. There's really no excuse for this.
I, however, don't agree with Neil in the sense of the ethics of the player involved in not telling his opponent to hit the clock. I know Michel quite well and I am 100% positive he did not think this was cheating or trying to take a shot. If he was trying to take a shot I believe when questioned as to whether he knew his opponent's time was running out the correct answer would have been 'No.' and act oblivious.
Whether or not Michel knew it was a legal moves tournament only he could tell you. Even if he did know that I don't believe he knew to what extent that entailed. I think I've had the conversation with him before that things similar to that are part of the game and you, the player, are responsible for your actions or lack thereof. In other words, in his mind Steve was failing to take care of business and Michel didn't think it was on him to remind him of that. That does not absolve him from his actions or responsibility in the situation. He failed to read or know beforehand the rules so he's guilty in that respect but I don't think his ethics are in question.
As to TraumaBG's "In Atlanta this year during doubles my partner must of told me 15+ times to not remind the other team to hit their clock and I couldn’t get him to understand why I would continue to remind them. "
I will remind someone to hit their clock when they forget to, even multiple times, but if it gets to that point I'm done. It is not my job to exhaust myself paying attention to all the minutiae of that game that you're supposed to be taking care of yourself. As a courtesy and knowing it happens to everyone from time to time it's no problem reminding you now and then. If it becomes something I'm doing time and time and time and again, sorry, you suffer the consequences. For example, often times people cube and forget to hit the clock. I almost always immediately say "Clock" but if it happened 3 games in a row I'd tell the person next time I wasn't reminding them and I'd purposely sit there until they realized they needed to hit the clock.
Something similar came up at the Las Vegas tournament where I knew I would be playing a clocked match v. someone who often used two hands to move the checkers and hit the clock. In doing this it not only robs me of time and gains them time, but it is also quite distracting for the opponent's hands still to be over the board after his clock has been hit and it's supposed to be my turn to play. I told Howard before the match started that I wouldn't put up with that shit. He said it only happens 'every now and again'. I asked him to define that more clearly. He said 'every couple/few games'. That I am fine with. If once every two or three games you space out and use two hands to move and hit the clock I'll remind you, no big deal. If it is happening multiple times within' a game though I expect the director to appoint someone to monitor the match and penalize the opponent when it happens.
As was also pointed out but never hurts to restate, Rory as TD has the right to do whatever the hell he sees fit. One thing that didn't happen the way it sounds and I think it could have is a committee should have been called. Michel had the right to request one and he clearly didn't agree with the ruling as it happened but he never formally requested one. It's a tough line because I can see that if Rory said something along the lines of "Michel, would you like me to take it to a committee?" that might upset Steve who would wonder why he pushed it, esp. if the decision was reversed.
I think a fair ruling was made but I'm still a little salty that Steve received no punishment for failing to follow procedure. I love to revert to 3rd grade arguments but ... Mom, he started it!
Stick
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.