Lack of Good Manners on RHP

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
Pikiwedia my big fat hairy Donner [hidden]Don\'t look at me like that, he was. Well, OK, he wasn\'t mine, but he was overweight and hirsute[/hidden]. The real rules, with the caveats Pikiwedia missed out, are here:
http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article

Perhaps more to the point is whether these official OTB rules differ ...[text shortened]... ing for him to make a subtle positional mistake, not for his flag to fall!

Richard

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I haven't been able to find any USCF rules older than this:

All rules referenced below refer to the USCF Official Rules of Chess, 4th Edition, as amended.

Winning “on time.” To claim a win on time, stop both clocks while your opponent’s flag is down and yours is still up (on a digital clock, when your opponent’s indicator light is on, and yours is still off) and state your claim to your opponent by saying, “Flag.” If your opponent does not immediately agree, call a Tournament Director and show the clock to him or her. You must call your opponent’s flag down yourself. No one else can call attention to a flag-fall. If you wait until your flag also falls, the game is drawn, regardless of whose flag fell first.

Mating material needed to win “on time.” To win on time, you must have sufficient material to checkmate. Examples of insufficient mating material are (1) one Bishop and King, (2) one Knight and King, (3) two Knights and King if your opponent has no pawns, unless there is a forced win. If your opponent runs out of time, but you have insufficient material to checkmate, the game is a draw.

Insufficient Losing Chances. If it is your move, you have less than 5 minutes remaining on your clock, and your flag is still up, in certain circumstances you may stop both clocks and ask a tournament director to declare the game a draw based upon insufficient losing chances. This is different from a “book draw,” and requires a position in which a Class C player (1500 rating) has a 90% chance of avoiding a loss to a Master (2200 rating) with ample time for both. It is a judgment call by the Tournament Director whether or not to allow the claim. You can claim such a draw with King and Queen vs. King and Queen, King and Rook vs. King and Rook (no other material), in many opposite-color Bishop endings, or if you have an overwhelming material advantage, such as King, Queen, and four Pawns vs. King and a single blocked pawn, (in this case, you would be claiming the draw only because you lack sufficient time to force a checkmate). But a position such as King, Rook, and a Pawn for each side, even if “drawn” in theory, would probably allow a Master too great a chance to outplay a C player, so your claim would likely be denied. If a game is being played using a clock’s time-delay feature, no claims of insufficient losing material will be considered, since a player in such a position should be able to maintain his/her game without running out of time. This game would likely be drawn by the 50-move rule, the threefold repetition rule, or the 175-move limit.

A Tournament Director has four choices when asked to rule on an insufficient losing chances claim.

He/she may (1) declare the game a draw, (2) deny the claim, and if the claim is deemed frivolous or obviously incorrect, deduct one minute from the claimant’s time, (3) if the validity of the claim is uncertain, temporarily deny the claim, making no adjustment of the claimant’s remaining time, and inviting the claimant to make the claim again later, if the opponent is making no progress, (4) if the game is not already being played with a time-delay clock, replace the game clock with a clock set for a 5-second delay, with the time per side adjusted so that the claimant has one-half of his/her remaining time, not to exceed one minute, and the opponent has all his/her time remaining. The game then continues to completion, using the delay mode. This last method is the preferred choice and will be used during this tournament when possible.

A claim of insufficient losing chances is also an offer for a draw, and if the opponent accepts this implied draw offer, the game is drawn.

I thought this was interesting about FIDE rules.

If player A does not have the possibility of checkmating B then the game is a draw (Schiller 2003:28). (The United States Chess Federation (USCF) rule is different. USCF Rule 14E defines "insufficient material to win on time", that is lone king, king plus knight, king plus bishop, and king plus two knights opposed by no pawns, and there is no forced win in the final position. Hence to win on time with this material, the USCF rule requires that a win can be forced from that position, while the FIDE rule merely requires a win to be possible.) (See Monika Socko#Rules appeal in 2008 and Women's World Chess Championship 2008 for a famous instance of this rule.)


Ruling appeal

The final tiebreak game in the first round match between Monika Socko and Sabina-Francesca Foisor ended in controversy. It was an armageddon blitz game in which Socko (as White) had 6 minutes compared to 5 minutes Foisor (as Black), but White must win the game to advance to the next round whereas Black only needed to draw (or win). With time running out, a position was reached in which each player had only a king and a knight, a material combination which is a draw under normal circumstances. Just after this, Foisor's time ran out and the arbiter Zsuzsanna Veroci ruled it a draw, meaning that Foisor would advance. Socko immediately protested, showing a position where checkmate is possible (but cannot be forced) and reminding the arbiters of the FIDE rules of chess which state that if one player runs out of time and the opponent has the possibility of checkmate, that player loses. Socko filed an appeal, and the Appeals Committee agreed that she was correct on the rules. The game was ruled a win for Socko and she advanced to the next round.

P.S. It pays to know all the rules if you play in important tournaments.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Originally posted by thaughbaer
Not that I've ever wanted to do so but I think it's impossible for a normal user to remove a post. The best they can do is edit it and blank it out but that wouldn't cause your quote of it to disappear.

The post that was quoted here has been removed