Author: Pete Galati
Date: 19:37:00 09/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 30, 1999 at 21:51:30, Peter Kappler wrote: >On September 30, 1999 at 21:21:18, Pete Galati wrote: > >>On September 30, 1999 at 20:11:47, Peter Kappler wrote: >> >>>On September 30, 1999 at 19:44:34, Pete Galati wrote: >>> >>>>On September 30, 1999 at 18:30:04, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: >>>> >>>>>engine-engine match. If say black has no time left but white no material >>>>>winboard will still give 1-0 as result. Need to be carefull in automated >>>>>matches. >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>> >>>>>Tec >>>> >>>>If I understand what you descibed, white won on time, the flag fell on black's >>>>clock. It sounds like it's working properly to me. >>>> >>>>Pete >>> >>> >>>His point is that you can't claim a win on time if you don't have mating >>>material. In this case, a draw is the correct result. >>> >>>--Peter >> >>That sounds true to me, I'm not really sure how Chess rules apply to this >>situation, because I want to think that even without any material that white can >>still win on time because black was not able to checkmate white before black's >>flag fell, all of my instinct (questionable) tells me that white won the game on >>time. I don't know where to look that up. >> >>Pete > > >It's definitely a USCF rule, and I'm almost certain that it is a FIDE rule, too. > The Internet Chess Club certainly enforces it, for whatever that's worth... > >Paraphrasing from the USCF's "Official Rules of Chess", 1987: > >"A game is drawn if one player has insufficient material for a possible >checkmate and his opponent's flag falls first." > >I have always had a problem with the wording of this rule, specifically the >phrase "possible checkmate". If my flag falls, and I have just a single rook >pawn and you have just a single minor piece, technically it is *possible* for >you to checkmate me, but only if I play like a complete idiot. Would the player >with the minor piece really be awarded the win here? ICC calls this a draw, and >I think any decent tournament director would, too. > >Here's a trickier example. My flag falls, and I have a pawn against your two >knights. This is actually a forced win in many cases, though it requires >*extremely* precise play by the side with the knights. Again, ICC will call >this a draw, but technically the side with the two knights should get the full >point. > >--Peter Thanks, those sound like very harsh unfair rules, a bit odd. I don't really understand the thinking behind making rules, I'm sure that has allot to do with my not knowing them. 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.