Author: KarinsDad
Date: 07:01:53 04/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2000 at 03:55:21, Peter Kappler wrote: [snip] >> >>The 50 move rule is a bogus rule anyway. The reason it is bogus is that the >>Fischer time controls are bogus. > >You lost me there. Fischer time controls have nothing to do with the advent of >the 50-move rule. The 50-move rule was around long before Fischer time controls >became popular. > >--Peter Agreed. I should have not said the "reason it is bogus". The 50 move rule was bogus when introduced. I liked the concept of 2 people, x amount of time, if you got yourself into a position where the 50 move rule could be applied and had little time on your clock, too bad. Try to find a draw by rep. Otherwise, your flag may fall. GMs tend to think of chess as the game itself, separate from the clock. They try to pretend that there is some artistic quality that time controls stifle. I do not understand this when 60% or more of GM games are draws anyway. Time control SHOULD be part of the game. The 50 move rule takes away from winning, drawing, or losing in x amount of time. Fischer rules also take away from this. In fact, you cannot have Fischer rules WITHOUT the 50 move rule or else a game could go on indefinitely. Hence, the 50 move rule was bogus to begin with and the Fischer rules came along and supported a non-existent NEED for the 50 move rule. It does not make sense to put in a rule to protect a GM from fatigue or mistakes once he has arrived at a potentially drawn position and that is what happens with the 50 move and Fischer time control rules. KarinsDad :)
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.