Chess Scotland Noticeboard

Andy McCulloch · King Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 280

My interpretation of rule 9, in appendix E, is exactly the same as Jim's. The rules are not particularly clear, and perhaps they could be improved upon. Part f, as stated by Steve, is the end of the rules pertaining to VI players.

SteveHilton · King Joined: 24 Jul 2007 Posts: 443 Location: Greenock

Jim,
There is no rule that says the ablebodied player must make use of an assistant. That option is just being made available to him should he/she needs it. Some players are not used to playing VI players for example moving both sets of pieces on the main board can daunting.
Surely giving the able bodied playing an option for help is fair and equitable

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758

Jim Stevenson · Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:26 am Post subject:

Steve, weren't we discussing the role of the assistant in aiding the VI player, rather than the general, but obviously essential, requirement to be fair to any sighted player requiring assistance as well?. Clearly the intention of 9a and 9b is to provide this help to the sighted player if he needs it.

And tut tut Phil, what happened to the second half of my sentence? Shocked

I am sure that I read on some noticeboard recently that the tendency of the ungrateful, and unelected, masses to make wild observations based on selective quotations was the bain of, shall we say, an elected office bearer of a national chess organisation's life? Laughing

SteveHilton · King Joined: 24 Jul 2007 Posts: 443 Location: Greenock

Jim,
That was all I was trying to do was to point out the rules regarding play with the visually impaired are also there to help the ablebodied player when they are faced with a VI opponent.

The rules that we have talked about here are written with the Visually Handicapped in mind, but there are none to deal those who are wheelchair bound or deaf.

I do not know if the ICSC has has set rules governing play with the deaf, or if the IPCA have rules for playing with their players.
FIDE cannot change the rules governing play with the VI without the cooperation of the IBCA as we are the authors of those rules which have been accepted by FIDE

Common sense is need by our arbiters and I am sure that they will provide this when deal with players of all handicaps

SteveHilton · King Joined: 24 Jul 2007 Posts: 443 Location: Greenock

I would add the ICSC is the international body for deaf chess players
The IPCA is the international body for chessplayers who are physically handicapped

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

Notwithstanding Andy's sensible points (many of which are, in time-honoured fashion, completely ignored), surely everyone must have worked out that the answer is six - assuming standard wind speed and average pinhead diameter.

Jim Stevenson · Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:22 am Post subject:

Indeed there is the assumption that where the sighted player has access to an assistant, the VI player also has access to an assistant. There has to be such an assumption as otherwise how can you make any practical use of rule 9? Of course, most experienced VI players have no need, and no wish, for such an assistant.

This is different from the obviously unsatisfactory case of the VI player wanting an assistant but not having access to one. It is also different from the more common case of one or both players wanting an assistant but not having access to one. We should remember that sighted players often have little prior warning that they are going to play a VI player.

Fortunately this is a safe assumption to make in practice. In the very rare situation where this was not the case ( can you give me practical examples?), I think this would be a case where your altruism would come into play and the sighted player would be happy to share his assistant. Very Happy

Steve touched on a good point when he says that the sighted player is often knocked out of his comfort zone when playing a VI player, and subsequently plays quite impulsively and superficially. And how does one play good chess without 100% focus and concentration? Fortunately the VI players I have played against over the years have mostly been both gentleman and experienced players who try to 'assist' their sighted opponents Smile

I well remember playing a 100+ move game years ago at Paignton with Paul Benson, over four mad time scrambles, as he defended Q v. Q +B ( no pawns) in textbook fashion, all the while oozing calm and control. Very impressive Cool

SteveHilton · King Joined: 24 Jul 2007 Posts: 443 Location: Greenock

"The second part of your sentence contains an assumption that I thought Steve would be commenting upon. To explain the, as yet ,unmade point. Frequently there will no willing and able assistant available for the VI player. We don't want to end up with a set rigid rules with which a VI player can only comply when he recruits an assistant for himself."

Phil makes a valid point in the above quote from his post. It is very difficult to get an assistant to travel with a team to help the VI player in his/her game.
I think that a lot of arbiters will consider this when making a decision in a matter concerning the VI player. I do have complete trust in the ability of arbiters here in Scotland to make common sense decisions
Like Phil, I would not like to have rigid rules that have no scope for common sense decisions

Paul Denham · Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:07 pm Post subject:

Interesting & very important thread.
I think Chris Hampton's comments were very thought provoking.

PD

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758