Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 19 Jul '11 14:29
    Right now, there are two kinds of moves which reset the 50 move rule counter. These are captures and pawn moves. The reason for this choice is that those are the only two moves which cannot be undone, so after those moves, and only those moves, do we know for certain that the game is still progressing. Right?

    Wrong.

    There is another kind of move which can never be undone. Granted, it is highly unlikely that these moves are made in circumstances in which the 50 move rule could be affected, but it is conceivable, and therefore these moves should be added to the rule: the first move of any rook, so long as its king has not moved, or the first move of either king, so long as at least one of its rooks has not moved.

    Now let the nit-picking begin.

    Richard
  2. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    19 Jul '11 14:36
    probably the execution of the rochade could be added
  3. 19 Jul '11 15:45
    How about if you actually castled during the 50 moves? Do you believe that the 50 moves should restart also?
  4. 19 Jul '11 16:23
    No irreversible change.
    You can still castle,or uncastle,by hand.
  5. Standard member zakkwylder
    Mouth for war
    19 Jul '11 17:29
    In my opinion, if you've gotten to the point where the 50 move rule could come into play and you haven't moved your king and/or rooks...


    You're doing it wrong.
  6. 19 Jul '11 22:50
    what is the logical connection between moves that can't be undone, and the 50 move rule?
  7. Subscriber sundown316
    The Mighty Messenger
    19 Jul '11 23:31
    Since when can any move,except an illegal one,be undone?
  8. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    19 Jul '11 23:56 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    Right now, there are two kinds of moves which reset the 50 move rule counter. These are captures and pawn moves. The reason for this choice is that those are the only two moves which cannot be undone, so after those moves, and only those moves, do we know for certain that the game is still progressing. Right?

    Wrong.

    There is another kind of move w ...[text shortened]... so long as at least one of its rooks has not moved.

    Now let the nit-picking begin.

    Richard
    Here's one nit-pick: a capture is no guarantee that progress is being made.

    In fact, there are some captures that are not legal specifically because no progress is being made.



    White is not permitted to play 1.Kxa1 here. The position is an immediate draw because of a FIDE rule that states the game is drawn if there is zero possibility of checkmate, even against the most unskilled counterplay. This position meets the criteria before the Queen is captured.
  9. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    20 Jul '11 00:09
    Originally posted by greenerpawn
    what is the logical connection between moves that can't be undone, and the 50 move rule?
    Moves that can't be undone indicate that the position is changing in a permanent way.
  10. 20 Jul '11 08:46
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Here's one nit-pick: a capture is no guarantee that progress is being made.

    In fact, there are some captures that are not legal specifically because no progress is being made.

    [fen]8/1k6/8/p1p1p1p1/P1P1P1P1/8/2B5/qK6 w - - 0 1[/fen]

    White is not permitted to play 1.Kxa1 here. The position is an immediate draw because of a FIDE rule that states t ...[text shortened]... st unskilled counterplay. This position meets the criteria before the Queen is captured.
    permit me a nit-pick;

    white is permitted to capture. in fact white is forced to capture.
  11. 20 Jul '11 08:48
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Moves that can't be undone indicate that the position is changing in a permanent way.
    Yes, I see.

    Widening the debate, are there any situations where computers have now shown that a win is possible in some specific endings where more than 50 moves are required?

    If so, should not the 50 move rule be amended to, say, an 80 move rule for that particular ending?
  12. 20 Jul '11 09:10
    Originally posted by greenerpawn
    Yes, I see.

    Widening the debate, are there any situations where computers have now shown that a win is possible in some specific endings where more than 50 moves are required?

    If so, should not the 50 move rule be amended to, say, an 80 move rule for that particular ending?
    They did that without computers having anything to do with it.Don't recall which ending(s),think Troitsky had something to do with it.
    Later they went back to the old rule.Not sure why,I think so many exceptions started popping up that it got too complicated.

    As for computers.They're currently at 'white wins in 517',and it's actually mate in 529.
    http://timkr.home.xs4all.nl/chess2/diary16txt.htm
    Look at n°316
  13. 20 Jul '11 20:30
    Originally posted by torten
    No irreversible change.
    You can still castle,or uncastle,by hand.
    However, if you lose the right to castle, you can no longer castle in one move. That's one move which will never be possible again in that game. Hence, irreversible.

    Richard
  14. 20 Jul '11 20:38
    Originally posted by sundown316
    Since when can any move,except an illegal one,be undone?
    All normal moves can be undone simply by making the opposite move. Moving your queen from a4 to b3 can be undone by, the next move, moving it from b3 to a4. You could move your queen through all squares, and your opponent could be moving his through them all in a different order. You could easily avoid the 3-repetitions rule by moving in irregular patterns. The 50-move rule exists to avoid such a situation.

    Even moving out of check can be undone if your opponent first moves his checking piece back to where it was. The only moves which cannot be undone are those which permanently remove an option from that game. These moves are pawn moves, because a pawn may not move backwards; captures, because a captured piece can not reappear on the board (except through promotion, but that's a pawn move!); and, as I am arguing in this thread, moves which make castling impossible (which, as Ponderable so astutely noticed, includes all castlings themselves).

    Richard
  15. 20 Jul '11 20:39
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    However, if you lose the right to castle, you can no longer castle in one move. That's one move which will never be possible again in that game. Hence, irreversible.

    Richard
    True.Shall we contact fide?