Correct way to call arbiter

[Alan Tate]

What's the correct way to do this? Can a player stop the clock at any time if he/she has an issue?

[Alex McFarlane]

The player may stop the clock for anything requiring arbiter intervention. This will normally be done on the player's own time.

Note though that if the arbiter considers the reason frivolous then there may be a time penalty. This could be extra time to the opponent, a reduction of the player's time or a combination of both.

[andyburnett]

The player may stop the clock for anything requiring arbiter intervention. This will normally be done on the player's own time.

Note though that if the arbiter considers the reason frivolous then there may be a time penalty. This could be extra time to the opponent, a reduction of the player's time or a combination of both.

What would be considered 'frivolous' in your experience Alex?

[Alex McFarlane]

Non-frivolous would be:
claims of a draw by repetition or 50 move rule
claims of illegal move
request for promotion piece if not available
making a justifiable complaint about the opponent's behaviour
to seek clarification of the Laws

Frivolous MIGHT be:
(repeated) claims of the above without reason
making claims of the above simply to annoy the opponent

Frivolous is:
making spurious claims to gain thinking time when short of time

[Alan Tate]

This will normally be done on the player's own time.

Ok, thanks. What does this mean?

[Alex McFarlane]

Non-frivolous would be:
claims of a draw by repetition or 50 move rule
claims of illegal move
request for promotion piece if not available
making a justifiable complaint about the opponent's behaviour
to seek clarification of the Laws

Of the 5 given reason 1,2 and 3 must be done on your time.
Technically 5 doesn't but I would not be too happy to know that a player had interrupted his opponent's thinking to ask a question on the Laws.
4 would depend on what the opponent was doing and when.

[Alan Tate]

Oh I see, you mean that stopping the clock must be done when it's the player with the request's move.

[Andy McCulloch]

Alex, what would you decide in the following situation?

A player, short of time, but with a superior position, stops the clock and claims that he is being disadvantaged, as he (the complainant) can't see the move, because his blind, deaf and dumb opponent keeps stopping the clock before his assistant makes the move on the board?

[Andy Howie]

My response will probably be different to Alex I would do nothing as the sighted player already has the advantage. Allow to me to explain, sighted player makes their move and presses the clock, the helper has to guide the DB players hand to move the pieces. This takes more time than the reverse which is simply copying a move. All I can say is a big thanks to John Dearie and his wonderful helper who have taught me so much about DB players.

Alex will probably disagree with me

[Alex McFarlane]

Alex will probably disagree with me

Only slightly.

Your basic answer is correct. Both players are being disadvantaged. It should equal out.

I would need to have seen the situation. It is possible that an assistant is trying to help one player by taking a different amount of time to move for one over the other. It is also possible that the assistant was genuinely confused over one move and took longer to play it.

It is common to use an arbiter or other assistant in a match which has reached a critical time period where one of the players has a sight disability. This could also be done in the situation described with the new assistant making the BD player's moves on the normal board.