Author: Jason Williamson
Date: 23:31:37 05/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2000 at 23:41:18, Bill Gletsos wrote: > Artcile 10 is one of the articles that causes the most discussion with the >FIDE rules commission. > Prior to the new laws of chess which came into effect on 1st July 97 after >being adopted by the 67th Fide Congress in Sept/Oct 96 the wording of sudden >death rules used to allow a player to claim a draw if he was clearly winning OR >his opponent was making no effort to win except by on the clock. The removal of >the words clearly winning and being replaced by the term "normal means" was to >stop people who had a winning position but very short of time claiming a draw >due to bad time management on their part. > Even in a simple position of KP V K where the defending king has the >opposition should not be immediately declared drawn by the arbiter under article >10.2a. According to the rules commission the arbiter should rule the players to >play on under 10.2b and provided the player with the lone king shows he knows >how to maintian the opposition then the arbiter should declare the game drawn >even if the player with the long kings flag falls by using article 10.2c. > Before discussing the meaning of normal means lets look at a position from >a normal game of chess with a non sudden death time limit. In this example we >have just reached a position of White Ka1 and Ba2 v Black Ke4 and Be5 where the >bishops are of opposite colors where White has 5 mins left and Black has 5 secs >left and they need to make 15 moves to reach the next time control. Now although >this game should under all circumstances be a draw the rules of chess dont allow >the arbiter to declare it so. If neither player agrees to a draw (article 5.3) >the only way the game can end is via article 5.1, 5.2, 5.4 and 5.5 or article >6.9. If none of the conditions of article 5 occur before Blacks flag falls then >black will lose according to article 6.9 According to article 6.9 the Black >player has lost because it IS possible to construct a checkmate position from >the remaining pieces (White Ka6 and Bd5 v Black Ka8 and Bb8). > Now if this position occured under a quick play finish then black could >claim a draw under article 10.2a since it is not possible to win via normal >means. > Certainly with regards to the Fritz v Tiviakov game in the final position >or even just prior to the end the game should not be declared drawn under >article 10 by the arbiter. > Now you can all complain about whether you agree with that or not but the >intention of article 10 is not to allow a player in Tiviakov's position to claim >a draw because he is short of time but to stop the absurdity of my example >above. Ahh, a lucid and knowledgeable post, something that has been lacking since this tourney has started. Thanks.
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.