Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 01:44:27 05/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
I agree with Bruce. I think Tiviakov is a bit extra pissed off now Van Wely has taken the lead alone with a lighter program ahead. I'm sorry but I disagree with Tiviakov. Proper time allocation is part of the chess game, and particularly on slow time controls a grandmaster like Tiviakov should plan better. If he didn't, he had too hard a time to fight his opponent. He resisted him in position but not on time. And because of his bad time allocation there was always the possibility he'd make a blunder, which would have lead to a rapid Fritz win. If Fritz still has mating potential, Tiviakov is sour but IMO wrong. The draw in this game consists of wining on time but losing on position for Fritz and the other way around for Tiviakov. Fair. I have seen it in my games even more often: I nearly fell to the floor out of sheer rage that my opponent let me trip on time in a toally lost position, but after cooling down I had to realize that's the way it is. BTW looking through my own database I must come to the conclusion that occasionaly I have done well myself by winning on time. If the rule is "losing on time is losing on time if the opponent has still mating potential" that's it. Maybe all you were saying that offering a draw is the rude act, but accomplishing a result is what's at stake, better: accomplishing the best possible result. The more remarkable that if Frans Morsch *didn't* offer a draw, Tiviakov would have lost for sure. What's the point then about *rude* behaviour? I'd wish my opponents were as lenient with me when I'm in time trouble. :) Jeroen ;-}
This page took 0.01 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.