Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 05:56:52 05/31/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 31, 2002 at 03:21:00, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 31, 2002 at 02:54:06, Harald Faber wrote: > >>On May 30, 2002 at 17:10:16, Mike S. wrote: >> >>>On May 30, 2002 at 14:32:25, Harald Faber wrote: >>> >>>>(...) But WHO >>>>in the world has the RIGHT to judge a WON position as DRAW just because it >>>>cannot be won in less than 50 moves?? >>>>I still cannot believe ANYONE defending nor understanding that absolutely not >>>>understandable decision. >>> >>>It isn't the *position* which is judged as a draw, it's the *game*. The position >>>may contain a forceable mate in 87 moves. But - by definition - that chess game >>>can't be won due to the 50 moves rule, against best defense. >>> >>>It is a matter of definition (like: stalemate = draw). You could say, if it >>>needs more than 50 moves without pawn move or capture, it just isn't "won >>>enough" to score as a win. The rule reflects the tradition of chess as a game >>>(for humans, in the first place). >>> >>>We should also keep in mind that there are *very* long winning squences still >>>possible, if they *do* contain pawn moves or captures then and when... >>> >>>Regards, >>>M.Scheidl >> >>And? Who says that after 50 moves without catching a piece or making a pawn move >>the game is draw? Long long ago this might have been right. New researches >>should lay this 50 move rule ad acta. Can you tell me why exactly 50 moves? Why >>not 60? 40? 20? What is the reason for *50*? Who decided that, based on what? >>I still see no justification for a 50 move rule. > >These are the rules. >There are a lot of rules when I do not understand the reason for them but I do >not complain. > >1)What is the reason that I cannot castle when my opponent threats my king? > >2)What is the reason that the position needs to repeat 3 times for a draw and >not only 2 times? > >3)What is the reason that the queen cannot play from d1 to d3 when there is a >pawn at d2? > >4)What is the reason that the board is 8*8 and not 8*10? > >5)What is the reason that the target of the game is to do a checkmate and not to >capture one of the opponents knights? > >I do not ask if there is a logical reason for the rules. >If you want to play with different rules then you are invited to do it but in >that case the game is not chess. > >Uri I think it is a difference between the chess rules themself and the add on rules in order to make matches and tournaments practical to manage. Changing the former and you are not playing chess anymore. The latter should be and have been discussed and somtimes changed but it has been the same game all the time. The 50-move rule is fair enough IMO and gives a practical limit to the games. In 5 minutes blitz however it is not practical at all and not needed. It is just complicated to keep track of how many moves are played and reconstruct the game when someone claims a 50 move draw. There are a lot of other rules of the same sort: how to handle illegal moves, how to interrupt games in order to continue som other time, touching pieces during the game, disturbing the opponent, frequency of draw offers and so on. All of these situations should have rules to make life easier and some of the rules should even be possible to be adjusted by TD's depending on the conditions. It is still chess! Peter
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.