Standards code

[donaldheron]

I am surprised that there does not seem to be a topic open on this already (maybe there is and I did not search enough). When I renewed my membership my attention was drawn to this and I am glad it was because I might have missed it as I do not look at the Chess Scotland web-site very often: as one gets older one realises that a person has a limited time so concentrates on the important. I am concerned that yet more rules are being imposed on chess players who only want to play chess and that these might be hidden to some players: those not from Scotland or not on the interweb or those, like me, who think it is already a big effort to keep up with the real rules. To look at some of the specifics: I looked at the section on general principles and could not find any - I was hoping for something like Jesus' principle of love which, if you keep to, a person would almost be sure to be keeping the main laws of Judaism. Instead - just words. The important section for me is Chess Scotland Members. This begins by stating that members do not bring the game into disrepute - I thought that was already in the laws. Then the next important section, for me, is Players. It begins with arriving late. I cannot think of an instance where a player would arrive late without a good reason since the player will already be losing time or the game. The second is agreeing a result in advance of a game: I can see where this is coming from but this action can be innocent - for example in one congress it was the last round and my opponent, an older person like myself, wanted to get home early; so I asked him if he was offering a draw and if he had been I could see no harm in it as we were bot out of the running anyway. Deliberately failing to play one's best - how can anyone know if this is deliberate? Unreasonably failing to resign a lost game - what is unreasonable? what is lost? An example of the abuse of this "principle" is that of Peter MacFarland (not Para Handy but of the Wandering Dragons) when he was playing in a simultaneous at the Edinburgh chess club and had sacrificed a piece for a mating attack only to be told that he was a piece down and must resign. Failing to dress appropriately - a matter of opinion surely. Playing while unfit to do so - most older people are unfit: are we to be banned? Failing to submit results - I have always taken the view that it is in the interests of the winner to submit results otherwise the organiser could default both. Showing disrespect for the officials - always a dangerous thing to do anyway since they can impose penalties anyway - but sometimes an arbiter can be wrong! Ethics are important but they are for judging a person's own behavior, not others. Also they need to be simple - not a set of rules. If these are to be used for judging others and imposing penalties then make them part of the rules, subject to the usual scrutiny of rules to make sure that they are fair and enforceable. This is a long statement therefore there are probably some holes or misconceptions in it but this is a subject that needs to be talked about before those people who like to tell other people what to do, because they love power, tighten their vice-like grip on ordinary people (not a complaint about chess - yet, but as Tony Benn said "each generation must fight again for its freedom").

[Chris Perkin]

There does exist a standards committee within Chess Scotland which meets up when something crops up. I think most regular players adopt good standards without much effort. I suppose some players new to chess might not be aware of some things, eg having a mobile phone on during a game, but I think most problems can usually be quickly sorted out.