Author: Steve Coladonato
Date: 04:39:41 04/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2000 at 00:18:28, Paulo Soares wrote: >On April 04, 2000 at 23:22:05, James T. Walker wrote: > >>My opinion about the 50 move rule is that is should be discontinued in games >>which have a sudden death time control. There seems to be no reason for a move >>limit when there is already a time limit. Since a game cannot last "forever" as >>in years past why should there be a 50 move rule? >>Other opinions? >>Jim Walker > >I think that 50 moves rule should be excluded of the chess for games in that >there are an endgame that the theory considers winner. I would not like to see >a game in which a GM could opt for a variant that took him to the win, but that >that variant was impossible of being played due to the 50 moves rule. >If there are a win possibility, for the theory, I think >the opportunity to try the win should be given to the chess >player. > >Paulo Soares, from Brazil I recall many years back that there was a rule which, given a known mate, a player was given either 50 moves or twice the number of moves with best play to effect the mate. I cannot find the book(s) where I read this and I cannot find any references to it today. This actually came into play with KNB vs. K where, with best play, the mate could take up to 37 moves. If the winning player made a mistake somewhere in those 37 moves the actual number of moves could easily exceed the 50 move rule. Hence, double the minimum number of moves which gave the player 74 moves to effect the mate. If not, draw. Something like this might be worth considering for those mates that have been found to be forced but require more than 50 moves to do it. Maybe not double. Maybe 1.5x would be sufficient. Steve
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.