Checkmate not recognized - game id 5000682

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
There is still the issue of a timeout win having been averted here.

I know that. I'm just saying that black wouldn't be able to offer draw unless it makes a valid move, that's all.

"You must also make a valid move to offer the draw."

Originally posted by DrunkKash
I know that. I'm just saying that black wouldn't be able to offer draw unless it makes a valid move, that's all.

"You must also make a valid move to offer the draw."

Agreed.

If there is a move and I don't find it myself, can I then ask my opponent? May he answer my question?
If 'no' on both questions: Do I really have to resign (or let the game go to time out)?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
If there is a move and I don't find it myself, can I then ask my opponent? May he answer my question?
If 'no' on both questions: Do I really have to resign (or let the game go to time out)?

well after being pointed out that there IS a legal move, and that the site is not malfunctioning, I think it would be beneficial homework to be forced to actually learn the most basic rules of chess. 🙂

Originally posted by FabianFnas
If there is a move and I don't find it myself, can I then ask my opponent? May he answer my question?
If 'no' on both questions: Do I really have to resign (or let the game go to time out)?

The short answer is "Yes." The rule is unambiguous. We could all easily come up with scenarios that seem to challenge the logic of it, but in the end the rule is the rule.

From your post "Everyone knows that this rule is directed specifically at move selection."

I agree completly with that sentence. Here we have the help of letting the player know which move he has possiblity to choose among. And when it is only one move to choose between there is no difference in which order you write down the move (you have only one way to do it ).

I sill think that we have not violated the TOS 3(b) in this thread.

Originally posted by DagamoStyle
From your post "Everyone knows that this rule is directed specifically at move selection."

I agree completly with that sentence. Here we have the help of letting the player know which move he has possiblity to choose among. And when it is only one move to choose between there is no difference in which order you write down the move (you have only one way to do it ).

I sill think that we have not violated the TOS 3(b) in this thread.

You and I will have to agree to disagree on our interpretation here. Fortunately for the people involved my opinion is just that, my opinion.

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
You and I will have to agree to disagree on our interpretation here. Fortunately for the people involved my opinion is just that, my opinion.

I think the site moderators' opinion matters as well. I am curious to see how they respond to this thread.

I think you have all gone a wee bitty overboard here.

Both players thought there was something wrong with the software.
No player asked for any help in playing the game so the clue
that everything was OK with the Red Pawn software was valid.

Cut them some slack, they are both obviously pretty new to the game.

Good game boys - exciting stuff.

Black - try to soften up your opponent with minor pieces before
bringing the Queen out.

White - well defended. Always check every check (it may be mate).

26. exd8=Q+ Kxd8 27.Qb8+ Kd7 28.Qb7+ Kd8 29.Re7!
and mate on c7 or d7 if he plays 29...Ne8.

26. exd8=Q+ Rxd8 27.Qc7+ Kd8 28 Qe7 mate.

Originally posted by xnomanx
Hasn't the "outside help" line been crossed here a long time ago with the little "hint" about the site FAQ?

I imagine that the little "hint" has just potentially prevented a draw or flag from falling; hardly a "trivial" piece of help because it potentially altered the entire result of a game.

I think not commenting on games in progress means not commenting- and yes, that means even little "hints".

What a load of rubbish.

The rules of the movement of the pieces is freely provided on the site. Directing people to that help section to learn about the movements of pieces is a common courtesy.

Are you suggesting that if situation involved a rook movement instead and someone directed a correspondence chess player to a book or site that explained that rooked moved horizontally as well as vertically, and that they then used this information to move, that they would be guilty of 3(b)?

What a fuzz over nothing, breaking TOS etc. Two players who learned en passant and who will never forget it, priceless.

This thread will be useful to pass on to someone who needs to learn en passant...nothing like seeing it in action...and following the debate about the TOS will be good too.

Can anyone tell me how to paste a link to a thread in a message...I see how to retrieve the thread id from the URL but I'm not sure what to put in the angle brackets before and after it...thanks

Originally posted by Mahout
Can anyone tell me how to paste a link to a thread in a message...I see how to retrieve the thread id from the URL but I'm not sure what to put in the angle brackets before and after it...thanks

I would say go look in the FAQ, but then I might be breaking the TOS, so I wont...

😛

Originally posted by Mahout
This thread will be useful to pass on to someone who needs to learn en passant...nothing like seeing it in action...and following the debate about the TOS will be good too.

Can anyone tell me how to paste a link to a thread in a message...I see how to retrieve the thread id from the URL but I'm not sure what to put in the angle brackets before and after it...thanks

[ threadid ]94188[ /threadid ] without blanks gives Thread 94188

More interesting stuff at FAQ

Originally posted by FabianFnas
More interesting stuff at FAQ

Hey, Fabian.

I hope that someone doesn't follow your link to the FAQ and learn something about the movement of the pieces in there. If they do, and (heaven forbid) actually use that move in a game you would be almost certainly be responsible.

Perhaps you should resign all your games now. It is a foregone conclusion....

😀