There’s a piece of chess clickbait which occurs with tiresome regularity. The players are deep in the endgame, but have so little time remaining that the game cannot be concluded with dignity. Pieces land in between squares, or get dropped and clatter across the board. In their final seconds, players will attempt to move before their opponent has completed their own move, which is just as farcical as it sounds. One should not blame the players: against a well-matched opponent, such situations are inevitable from time to time. The arbiters sometimes get flak for not intervening, but in the heat of the moment, nobody knows if a rook landed cleanly on a8 or just outside the lines, and interrupting the game to check would do nothing to improve matters.
The responsibility lies with the organisers. Digital chess clocks have existed for decades, and almost all modern tournaments are played with a time increment. The World Blitz Championship is played at three minutes for each player, with a two-second increment after every move, which eliminates the vast majority of disputes.
The only explanation for playing without increment is that organisers believe that these incidents make the event more exciting. On the contrary, fans of any sport welcome clear rules of engagement, with as little subjectivity as is practical. The controversial cases always attract attention, but deliberately designing the rules to encourage them is perverse.
As I write, the second Tech Mahindra Global Chess League is taking place at Friends House on London’s Euston Road (ends 12 October). Teams are headed by stars including Magnus Carlsen, Vishy Anand and Hikaru Nakamura. But, you guessed it, no increment, and with entirely predictable results. One of many games which ended in a desperate time scramble was Nihal Sarin, representing the PBG Alaskan Knights team, against Daniel Dardha (Alpine SG Pipers). Sarin had a trivial win on the board, but no time to execute it. But Dardha still had a rook left, enough to give checkmate, so he would have been awarded a win if Sarin’s time had elapsed. With two seconds remaining, Sarin stopped the clock and claimed a draw on the grounds that Dardha had no realistic hope of winning on the board, to which he agreed. The rule supporting this originated when chess was played with analogue clocks. It was always an imperfect solution, requiring the arbiter’s judgment about realistic winning chances, but at the time there was no decent alternative. Magnus Carlsen, on the same team as Dardha, vented his frustration on camera in the players’ room. ‘We can do this, but then we shouldn’t play without increment… I understand it’s a rule, but it’s bullshit…’ On X, he posted, ‘This happened after Nihal [Sarin] had made several illegal moves and the arbiter never stepping in – we’re not a serious sport unfortunately.’
Perhaps here the arbiter should have stepped in, but in a wider sense the point is moot, when the simple measure of playing with increment would eliminate so many problems. But I have to agree with his conclusion – these shambolic scenes make a mockery of the game.
A neat finish below, where the move 27 Qxd8 is tempting, but White must be careful: 27…Qxd6 28 Qxg5+ Kh7 29 d8=Q Qxd8 30 Qxd8 Bc5+! even wins for Black. Duda found a better solution.
Jan-Krzysztof Duda-Santosh Gujrathi Vidit
Tech Mahindra Global Chess League, 2024 (see diagram)
27 Rg6+! fxg6 28 Qe6+! A crucial extra check. Kh7 29 Qxg6 mate
Comments