Author: Peter Berger
Date: 14:16:29 04/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2001 at 15:54:58, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >On April 29, 2001 at 10:47:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 29, 2001 at 05:10:24, Peter Berger wrote: >> > >[snip] > >>>In case the 3rd repetition position will be reached by a certain move it could >>>say : >>> >>>" I intend to play 49. Rc8+ and claim draw by repetition ." >>> >>>That ICC and WinBoard/XBoard currently don't support doing it like this doesn't >>>mean it can't be done at all . An enhancement of the WinBoard protocol adding a >>>"claimdraw" as Miguel A. Ballicora suggested would be a good start . >> >>If it was done in winboard and winboard was made compatible with _all_ >>chess servers, this would be easy. But not all servers handle that case, >>meaning winboard would have to behave as it does now for those servers that >>don't... >> > >That's true, but it does not mean that the protocol could be improved. >Winboard could receive the command "claimdraw move" and send >move >1/2-1/2 >to FICS and ICS since these servers do it wrong. When the servers improve >their protocols, winboard is ready as well all the compatible engines. >Besides, I wonder if sending those two commands in batch, Winboard could >improved any possible race condition in the server (before the opponent >replies). > >>>>I have seen that scenario played in major WC type events. I once watched >>>>Korchnoi do exactly that in a US Open game... He made the move on the board, >>>>wrote it down, claimed a draw, and got the arbiter... >>> >>>I don't get your point here - so Korchnoi did wrong ..; the rule explains >>>exactly how it should be done . >>> >>>pete >> >>If I am not mistaken, "your move is not completed until you press the clock >>button to stop your clock and start your opponent's clock." Therefore making >>the move on the board does not invalidate a draw claim. > >Not under FIDE. 6.1 "The move is completed: in the case of the transfer of a >piece to a vacant square, when the players hand has released the piece" >and some other examples. > >It is different under USCF (probably, the only place in the world) where >there is a distinction between move "determined" and "completed" (includes >punching the clock) (rule 9g, 9g1 and 14c2, 14c4). USCF rules are kind of weird >because it allows the claiming after moving but it is strongly discouraged and >not recommended. There is even some contradiction if we read carefully. >My comment: it is even dangerous to claim in this way. You move and do not >punch the clock. Well, what if a reply immediately on the board? I just say >that you forgot to punch the clock. I would not want to be involved in that >mess... > >So Korchnoi did not do it wrong because it was in a US open (aren't US Open >suppose to be played under FIDE rules so it can be FIDE rated? I wonder) >Anyway, I would not learn rules from those super-GMs. They many times >get away with things that no other will. > >Regards, >Miguel Thank you very much for posting this message ; I was completely puzzled as it felt like Dr. Hyatt and Andrew Dados were unfriendly and didn't _read_ and _listen_ where I was _so_ sure to simply be right ;-) . Another example for the fact that it's always wrong to assume everything is just the same in other countries . In Germany the rules have been like the FIDE ones since I have started playing chess in a chessclub about 20 years ago - it was interesting to learn it used to be different in the US . Regards, pete
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.