US Chess Federation

Correspondence Chess Discussion Forum

About the CC Forum | Current Topic | Next Topic |Prior Topics |

About the CC Forum

Welcome to USCF's Correspondence Chess Forum. We frequently offer a topic for discussion but welcome comments related to any topic already in the CC Forum. We do insist that the tone of the comments be offered and presented in a professional manner. USCF has sole discretion regarding comments not being appropriate for posting on its' website. This area is an excellent opportunity for Correspondence Chess players to be heard and be involved in making USCF Correspondence Chess even better.

You can respond by e-mail to [email protected]

Next Forum topic

The new topic for discussion is:

Current policy for failing to send a move or sending a move but it is illegal/impossible/ambiguous: The players reflection time continues to accumulate until a legal move is sent. In a Golden Knight Final round or in the Absolute Championship, the player is additionally charged a 5 day reflection time penalty. Should this change?

I received an inquiry from a player, whom I have no doubt did just forget to write his move on the card which he sent to his opponent. The player was quite surprised at being held to the entire period of time as reflection time. The gentleman explained that it truly was an oversight. I explained that it is possible that a player could deliberately not send a move or send an illegal move to gain thinking time which is why the rule was made.

A shame, yes. But what can be done? The player explained that the move he forgot to note was a book move which should suggest it was truly an oversight. Any suggestions?

You can respond by e-mail to [email protected] regarding this topic or any other topic of interest to co.

Current topic

Comments received related to Current Topic: Should there be a "free day" for receiving moves by e-mail?

Carl Palmateer writes: "The date and time a move is received by the mailbox should be the time used. If one is to wait until a player checks his mailbox... Where there could be a problem is with transmittal across multiple time zones or the international date line. One possibility is in games with members of the armed forces in Asia and Europe. What happens when one is responding to a move before it was sent?

Adam Bell notes: "I think it is unreasonable to expect someone to check their mail more than once per day. Under the current rules, with instantaneous transmission, I can send a move at 11:58pm and even if my night owl opponent replies in 5 minutes they are considered to have used a day! This makes no sense! Please assign a transmission time of 1 day per email. ICCF does this and it works well. Under their system, if you send an e-mail on the 5th of Jan. you are considered to have received it on the 6th of Jan. This is reasonable."

Comments received related to: Should players be forfeited on a first time violation of the reflection time control?

Chris O'Connell comments, "I'd like to weigh in with a vote for forfeiture for a time overstep. I concur with the other opinions that the time control is sufficient and should be strictly observed, and the penalty should be the same as in over-the-board chess. Also, its so easy for a violator to fudge dates that an overstep is almost hard to achieve!"

Comments received related to: How long should the CCD allow players to submit game result reports after the game has been concluded? What happens if one of the players' memberships has expired at the time the game is rated?

William Vigus comments, "When the TD notifies the players of the intention to close out the games, the players should have a set amount of time (14 days?) to respond. At times, I have had a card mailed to me in June not show up until October so cards can and do get lost. No matter what the status of the losing player is at the time the lost result is reported, the game should be rated if the player was still a member at the time the game finished. If necessary, a photocopy of the resignation card can be submitted as proof. (Everyone should keep these!) The only other option that would be fair for everyone is immediate notification of the winner by the TD of the receipt of the game result. This would be far too costly for USCF to do!! All games that are won "over the board" should be rated without exception!"

Mike Sullivan says, "I think we should have at least one month to send a second notice to USCF if the first one is not received. If one of the players is not a member of the USCF at the time, then I think it should be counted as a forfeit regardless of the actual game results."

Prior Topics in the Correspondence Chess Forum

We welcome your feedback about our site! Please write to: [email protected]

This page was last updated May 15, 1998