Rushed finish

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).