PDA

View Full Version : Evil Days Ahead: End of the Rubinstein Rule



Jonathan Berry
11-25-2008, 03:24 PM
Evil Days Ahead: End of the Rubinstein Rule

FIDE is proposing that, as of July 2009, games be forfeited
if a player is not present at the scheduled start of the game.
There may be a "compromise" of 15 minutes suggested, but that
too is flawed.

I need not tell other Canadians about the vagaries of public
transit. A bus may be late or not appear at all. To avoid
forfeiture, bus-enabled players will have to arrive over 30
minutes early, and often stand outside a locked door in the
snow or rain.

That is just one of the nightmares of a zero or 15- minute
rule. Among the others are logistical and administrative.

But here's one that they surely didn't think of: a zero or
15 minute rule encourages cheating. A nasty form of
cheating is the thrown game. In 2008, if a player does
not show up at the start of the round, he is often hunted
down by friends or tournament directors and dragged to the
board before the Rubinstein one hour has elapsed. If he
wants to throw the game, he has to make bad moves, or
intentionally exceed the time control: quite an investment
in time for doing nothing. Either way, he loses both
rating points and face. In 2009, the same player just
appears ten seconds late, apologizes to the opponent, loses
no rating points, experiences no internal conflicts, and
the rest of the day is his.

If forfeit games are rated, that opens up the full
panoply of thrown-game cheating.

If games in which no moves are played are left unrated (
as at present) the zero or 15- minute rule opens up a new
method of cheating. The norm hopeful will have to pay the
unscrupulous opponent simply to show up on time for the
game.

I encourage all FIDE member nations to vote against this
rule change at the 2008 General Assembly in Dresden.

Jonathan Berry
IA, FM, GMC

Jonathan Berry
11-26-2008, 03:05 AM
Rules over common sense. The rot begins:

http://chessexpress.blogspot.com/2008/11/olympiad-day-11.html

Peter McKillop
11-26-2008, 01:47 PM
Jonathan, why do they call it the Rubenstein rule? Was Akiba chronically late or are we talking some other Rubinstein?

Jonathan Berry
11-26-2008, 03:22 PM
According to lore, the great Akiba Rubinstein was very shy. Or became that way after WW I. There's probably a Greek word for it. Some sort of phobia. Anyway, he reportedly would arrive for his games with 5 to 15 minutes left on his clock. I don't know what the primary control was in those days, but it was at least 2 hours. So Rubinstein would arrive say, an hour and 50 minutes late, play his moves (and usually win), then disappear until well into the next round. Tournament organizers wanted to see more of this chess legend, so they invented the one-hour rule.

I remember reading that in chess books decades ago. Curiously, when I tried to cross-reference the term "Rubinstein Rule" in 2007, all google found was references to Artur Rubinstein, the pianist. Yet I recall hearing the term in arbiter parlance often. The web is a faithful record of our culture since about 1993, but before that is hit-and-miss.

John Coleman
11-26-2008, 03:53 PM
According to wiki, which knows all (since about 1993), Rubinstein sufffered from anthropophobia (literally, "fear of people", from Greek roots phobos, fear, + anthropos, man); the pathological fear of people or human company.

Pierre Dénommée
11-27-2008, 12:36 AM
The worst new rule proposal that I have seen is the one that forbid the arbiter from calling double flag down in blitz and rapidplay when no increment is used. The players may decide to continue the game at slow pace forever. The arbiter should never call a single flag down, but as it is explained in FQE book, double flag down is a different issue because not calling it may perturbate the schedule of the competition. Under this rule, a game involving children may last far longer then it should.

Jonathan Berry
11-27-2008, 12:34 PM
Pierre,

At least the rule about not calling double-flag fall has the germ of a good idea behind it. I believe that Gijssen is still the rules über-writer. If you explain the problem to him, he can re-write the new rule in such a way that the problem you foresee will not happen. Maybe. I guess in a situation where a draw is not good for either player, yes, they will simply ignore the knowledge that both flags are down and continue until mate. If the new rule is intended to allow that, then, yes, Gijssen might have a tough time rewriting the rule. Perhaps something like this: "The arbiter shall call both flags down except when both players are moving instantaneously".

But the zero forfeit rule--though decked out in an evening gown--will still be a sow. Figuratively. No offense intended towards our porcine friends.

Pierre Dénommée
12-10-2008, 10:03 AM
The new Laws of Chess have not been approved at the FIDE AGM. They will be finalised at the next Presidential Board meeting.

The FIDE president want the game to be automatically lost if a player is not present at the beginning of the game. He also want to remove from Arbiters the right to forgive a late player and from the organiser the right to choose the length of time after which a player loose. Loosing would be mandatory for late players, like the actual cell phone rule.

Source English Chess Federation http://www.bcf.org.uk/national/index.html .