Author: Hans Gerber
Date: 19:29:08 05/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2000 at 22:06:12, blass uri wrote: >On May 16, 2000 at 20:03:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 16, 2000 at 18:14:46, Adrien Regimbald wrote: >> >>>Hello, >>> >>>About the Tiviakov (I don't know if I will ever spell this name right.. :P) >>>incident - >>> >>>A lot of you are still demonstrating a lack of understanding of the rules of >>>chess. It seems that lots of you are basing your standards for chess games on >>>what happens on FICS/ICC. >>> >>>On FICS/ICC, you can flag someone in a completely dead lost position and there >>>is nothing your opponent can do about it, and you can flag in a completely drawn >>>position too. >>> >>>This is not the case in OTB games! (The only reason why things are like this on >>>FICS/ICC is that it is completely impractical to try to enforce the rules as >>>they are OTB, since there are no TDs and/or arbiters around to resolve such >>>incidents) >>> >>>Some of you seem to think that the operator was doing Tiviakov a favour by >>>offering a draw with 2 minutes left. This is completely untrue. Tiviakov at >>>any time could have stopped the clock, called over the TD and claimed a draw. >>>Also - if Tiviakov thought he couldn't have won the game considering the >>>situation on the clock, he would have offered the draw himself - he clearly >>>thought he still had chances to win the game! >> >> >>That is wrong. You can't claim a draw, just because you are a bit ahead in >>material, and _way_ behind on time. I have directed many tournaments over >>the years. This has _never_ been in a rule book. > >It is not in the rule book in all the tournaments but it is in the rule book of >some tournament and I understand now that it is in the rule book of the >championship of holland. > >I claimed a draw when I was down in material and down in time in the israeli >league only because my opponent could not win by normal means. > >Here is the position that I claimed a draw and the decision was that it is a >draw. >[D]B7/8/8/4nkp1/8/8/5K2/8 b - - 0 1 > >If the decision is that white can get a draw in this position by stopping the >clock then it is clear that the decision should be to let tiviakov to get a draw >in the final position. > >I was not sure about the rules of the championship of holland but even if the >rules were against stopping the clock and claiming a draw tiviakov could draw by >repetition(he could play in the final position 117...Nb2 118...Na4 119...Nb2 >and get practically repetition) > >Even in this case offering a draw was not a gesture from Fritz's operator >because it was clear that tiviakov tried to win the game. > ><snipped> >>Offering a draw was certainly a gentlemanly way of handling the issue. Frans >>didn't want to win on time. He saw no way for the human to win in a sudden- >>death ending... had the flag fallen, the human would have _lost_. > >He could not be sure that the human has no chance to win his winning position in >a sudden death ending and it was clear that tiviakov was trying to win. > > >> I don't know >>how you think he could have claimed a draw, unless he had a forced repetition. >>But he had to actually repeat the position a third time before he could claim >>the draw. You can't claim "the possibility of a repetition"... that isn't in >>my rule book... > >He could practically cause Fritz to repeat in every moment that he wanted to do >it. > >Uri Instead of applauding those who try to explain chess and its rules to the computerchess experts it looks as if the experts think that they are losing control or status if they would agree that they didn't understand things. It is unbelievable how Tiviakov was laughed at by some of the best programmers. I want to thank all of you who still try to explain patiently. We should also consider that the experience of internet chess might influence into a false direction. The experts might confuse their contacts with internet GMs with real life contacts with GMs attending classical tournaments. Someone made a quick poll by asking two masters who both "tolerated" Morsch's behavior because they would do the same. The question never came up if these "GMs" could be trusted in relation to real life. Personally I can't think of a single GM who behaves in classical tournament chess like F. Morsch did. He would be the target of a big laughter if not worse things. Funny observation: Some argued that FRITZ had 30 minutes left, a big advantage... It seems completely difficult to understand that exactly this fact makes the behavior so impolite. The argumentation should go the other way round. If both sides had only three minutes _then_ F. Morsch could have offered something and nobody had judged negatively about him. But meaning the 30 minutes and then "granting" a draw that is simply not gentleman-like. (As we know by now it is also against the rules. Because Tiviakov wanted to win and he had a draw always safe in his hands. So a draw offer was nothing but a disturbance.)
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.