29-03-2016, 04:44 PM
First, I’m not sure what CS rule Andy is referring to; that was not relevant to my decisions on Sunday. However, we should start with the FIDE Law for Blitz which allows for two situations, the ideal one being:
The Competition Rules shall apply if
a. one arbiter supervises one game and
b. each game is recorded by the arbiter or his assistant and, if possible, by electronic means.
Under these conditions, it would be possible to claim a draw by repetition in a blitz game. This clearly could not apply at the Team Lightning. I consider that it follows that when responsible for 40 games the arbiter cannot be expected to follow any one to the extent of watching for repetitions or 50-move rule draws, etc. Claims for these would therefore lack the necessary proof. The ethics of playing for a win by “negative” means are a different issue.
The solution is of course to move to the use of a time limit with increments, such as 3 minutes + 2 seconds per move; that will come in due course.
The Competition Rules shall apply if
a. one arbiter supervises one game and
b. each game is recorded by the arbiter or his assistant and, if possible, by electronic means.
Under these conditions, it would be possible to claim a draw by repetition in a blitz game. This clearly could not apply at the Team Lightning. I consider that it follows that when responsible for 40 games the arbiter cannot be expected to follow any one to the extent of watching for repetitions or 50-move rule draws, etc. Claims for these would therefore lack the necessary proof. The ethics of playing for a win by “negative” means are a different issue.
The solution is of course to move to the use of a time limit with increments, such as 3 minutes + 2 seconds per move; that will come in due course.