Equipment for Disabled Players

[David G Congalton]

David,
Who was consulted over the use of incremental time controls?
Were CS consulted?
Where disability issues taken into consideration?
By announcing this type of time control, you are effectively banning disabled players particularly blind and deaf/blind from participating in the event. You simply cannot do that.
I would ask you to reconsider this

Steve

I did not consult with anybody over the use of incremental time controls. There was a lengthy discussion on the forum regarding incremental time controls which I considered before making a decision.

Disability issues are always taken into consideration. Last year at least 3 players who have disability issues took part and I did everything I could to assist where required.

With regard to "effectively banning players" I do not believe I am doing anything of the sort.

Thomas Luther won the 1st World Chess Games for Disabled which was held October 25-29 in Dresden, Germany. The competition was a 7-round open tournament that followed the Swiss pairings system, and only for disabled chess players. There was a separate team ranking and each team consisted of four players.

The time control was 90 minutes for 40 moves followed by 30 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move from move one.

[Adam Bremner]

I am a bit confused. How does including an increment stop people playing? I have never had to play a blind/deaf player, and have always been concerned that if I did and we got short on time, how morally correct it would be to win a time scramble purely because I could move the bits faster. An increment surely avoids this. What is your take on this Steve?

Applause to David for doing something progressive btw.

[JRedpath]

David,
Who was consulted over the use of incremental time controls?
Were CS consulted?
Where disability issues taken into consideration?
By announcing this type of time control, you are effectively banning disabled players particularly blind and deaf/blind from participating in the event. You simply cannot do that.
I would ask you to reconsider this

Are you serious Steve?

I'm not in favour of increments either, but to say it is banning disabled players from participating is ridiculous!

The tournament organiser has the right to impose whatever time control they want and like it or not increments seem to be chosen time control for the majority of FIDE events now.

[StevieHilton]

I want to deal with the points made by Joe, Adam and David.

Joe,
Yes I am serious. Incremental time controls are very difficult for blind players in particular to deal with. Unless proper equipment is provided, then it will be very difficult for a blind player or a deaf blind player to participate in such a tournament, where such time controls exist. I said it makes things more difficult for us.
Don't we have the same rights in a tournament as our able bodied friends?

Adam ,
I never said that time increments stopped blind players from playing, but it does make things more difficult for them to do so. Deaf/Blind players do make use of an assistant where as blind players don't always make use of an assistant.

David,
I never said that was your intention, the reality is that time incremental time controls do make things more difficult for the blind and deaf/blind player.
I know the event you were quoting. I also know most of the blind players who were taking part in that event and they said that the time control was very difficult to play to. I know that our teams in the FIDE Olympiad play under the same time control, and many of them tell me it is very difficult for them getting used to the time control.
As tournament organiser, you do have the right to organise the time controls as you please, but I am asking you again to reconsider the time control.

[StevieHilton]

Joe,

"Are you serious Steve?

I'm not in favour of increments either, but to say it is banning disabled players from participating is ridiculous!"
I said effectively banning not actually banning. disabled players will be at a disadvantage with this time control thus making it more difficult for them to enter such events.

[Adam Bremner]

Adam ,
I never said that time increments stopped blind players from playing, but it does make things more difficult for them to do so.

How? Perhaps you can answer my time scramble point?

[StevieHilton]

Adam,
Without appropriate equipment, ie: a talking digital chess clock, which costs a minimum of 140 euros.
You have to treat players equally Adam. If the blind player gets into time trouble then thats tough on them .
I speak as a blind/visually handicapped player who gets into time trouble frequently 8) There is nothing wrong with that. The point I am making Adam is that the playing conditions should be equal for all and until there is appropriate equipment available for blind players then there cannot be equal conditions for everyone.

[Adam Bremner]

OK, so the issue is with the equipment rather than the actual increment? In which case could that be solved by one of:

1) An assistant provided
2) CS provision of that clock type/ bringing one along if you own one
3) Opponent stating clock times after each move (no more of an issue than notation)

I don't know what the FIDE standard is for this at international congresses, but maybe that could be used?

[David G Congalton]

I understand that there is a not insignificant cost for players who may have to purchase a talking chess clock themselves (or other equipment) to participate in the event but I fail to see how the equipment organisers provide would be different for these players whether incremental time controls are used or not.
I think it comes down to economics both micro and macro. On an individual scale it’s really a matter of whether the individual can afford the investment and this is a decision which all of us take, regardless of whether we have a disability or not.

Looking at things on a wider scale, the price of digital talking clocks will be decided by the supply and demand for the clock. If all of the world tournaments decided not to use the incremental time control then the talking clocks would remain very expensive. However, if every tournament used incremental controls then the demand for the clock would rise, the manufacturer can produce more and the cost price and hopefully the selling price will come down.

By introducing incremental time controls Prestwick it could be argued that I am at the head of the queue in Scotland in helping to bring the price of such clocks down, in the long term.

Like it or not Steve, incremental time controls are the way forward for all players. Indeed, a look at the first six calendar entries for different countries on the FIDE other tournaments calendar underlines this.

Australian Open Championships, 2nd Jan to 13th Jan 2013 – 90 minutes for 40 moves, followed by 30 minutes for the remaining moves, with an increment of 30 seconds from move 1.

REGULATIONS 7th HERAKLION CC OPEN “CONCEPT”, 2-6/1/2013 - TIME CONTROL: 90 min for 40 moves + 30min + 30sec per move from the first move.

9e Open international d échecs de Vandoeuvre (France) Cadence : 90 minutes par joueur (+30sec/coup)

1st Winter Sea Deluxe Open in Gabicce Mare, 2nd to 6th January, 2013, in Gabicce Mare, Italy - Open A will be held over 9 rounds of Swiss system; Time control: 90′x40 + 30′ + 30″ from beginning. Top rated are: GM Robert Ruck (Hungary), GM Vladimir Petkov (Bulgaria), GM Sinisa Drazic (Serbia), IM Torstein Bae (Norway), IM Guido Caprio (Italy), GM Goran Kosanovic (Serbia), WIM Bjerke Silje (Norway) - Open B, C and U16 will be held over 7 rounds; Time control: 90′x40 + 15′ + 30″ from beginning.

16. Schachfestival Bad Zwesten 2. Januar – 6. Januar 2013 - Modus: 7 Runden Schweizer System, DZW/ELO-Auswertung, Bedenkzeit 90 Minuten / 40 Züge, 30 Minuten / Rest der Partie + 30 Sekunden pro Zug ab erstem Zug (Fischer Modus)

Schachfestival Basel: Cadence 100 min 40 moves + 30 minutes and 30 seconds per train from start

I'm not sure how far down the list I would have to go to find a non-incremental time control but I would suggest that Scotland is behind everyone else, regarding time increments and that players who might require assistance in some form or another to particpate in an incremental tournament are effectively barring themselves from wider participation in events worldwide by not embracing progress and advances in technology.

Is it really fair to all players to ask them to wait for an incremental time event in Scotland while one or two players delay investing in equipment they require to participate in the way they would like? Especially, when the organisers are willing to help provide an assistant or find an alternative solution for the event.

With specific regard to Prestwick everyone is, as always, welcome and I will do all that I can to assist.

[StevieHilton]

Adam,
There is not a talking digital clock that is approved by FIDE. There are two clocks that are used by blind players in FIDe rated tournaments. One is German made but it is not in production at the moment. The other is from Spain and costs about 140 Euros plus cost of postingThe German Clock costs a little bit more. The Spanish Clock can do 3 part time controls but the German only 2. I use the Spanish one at my tournaments both here and abroad.

David,
I have Never been against incremental time controls but there is a serious concern at the lack of equipment available to visually handicapped players The onus should be on CS to provide appropriate equipment for use by the visually handicapped Just because Prestwick is going to be the tournament to use these type of time controls, does not necessarily mean bringing the costs of such equipment down in the long term, unless actual orders are made for such equipment These clocks can be used as regular digital clocks You only hear the voice when you put the earpiece in your ear, so as not to disturb your opponent and so they would benefit everyone
I note that you have not stated an alternative to thse time controls