Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 01:23:52 06/01/02
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
---------------
Would you consider Bughouse, Crazyhouse, and Atomic Chess a chess game, i hardly
believe so! If anything it's a basterized version of chess! Our traditional game
called "Chess" is slowly changing into another form i'm afraid!
It's such a shame how FIDE is screwing with the traditional time controls and
among other things!
Regards,
Terry
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.