1. Joined
    02 Apr '02
    Moves
    56253
    28 Dec '06 10:58
    I lost a game on a timeout whilst on vacation over christmas. I have no problem with people claiming timeout wins, time is part of the game agreed at the start. However on vacation is another issue. But not the one I want to discuss here.

    I feel if my opponent is justified in claiming a timeout, he must have at least mating material on the board to claim a win. I had two connected passed pawns and a bishop against my opponents lone king. a completely won game and no matter how much I blunder cannot be lost only drawn.

    Therefore I would like to see timeouts awarded a draw if the claimant has no mating material.
  2. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    28 Dec '06 11:37
    Originally posted by crusoe
    ... Therefore I would like to see timeouts awarded a draw if the claimant has no mating material.
    The game we are talking about is Game 2548886 where crusoe (black) has two pawns and a bishop and his opponent (white) only has his king left. White has no chance at all to win. He has however a slim chance to have a draw. Therefor i totally agree with crusoe that he whould have a draw on the time-out instead of a loss.

    However the rules must change first and then be applied to all games from then on. The current rules doesn't imply a draw for this time-out.

    So let's change the rules: If the opponent don't have winning material a time-out should only render a draw, not more.
  3. Standard memberAiko
    Nearing 200000...!
    Joined
    23 Mar '04
    Moves
    207922
    28 Dec '06 12:30
    Originally posted by crusoe
    Therefore I would like to see timeouts awarded a draw if the claimant has no mating material.
    But not after a system has been implemented that prevents persons like you entering banded tournaments hundreds of points below your own band, Mr. Sportmanship Crusoe.....
  4. Joined
    07 Jun '05
    Moves
    5301
    28 Dec '06 12:321 edit
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    So let's change the rules: If the opponent don't have winning material a time-out should only render a draw, not more.
    Agreed. This will be a pain to implement, I think, but it ought to be done.

    Gezza
    ps. Aiko has a point ...
    pps. edit was to add ps.
  5. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    28 Dec '06 14:59
    I've got an idea. Don't start a game you can't finish in the time you agreed on. That way you don't need to worry about it.

    P-
  6. Joined
    16 Oct '06
    Moves
    4532
    28 Dec '06 15:56
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    I've got an idea. Don't start a game you can't finish in the time you agreed on. That way you don't need to worry about it.

    P-
    Given that none of us can predict the future, that means that no one will ever start another game.
  7. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    28 Dec '06 17:14
    Originally posted by Ian68
    Given that none of us can predict the future, that means that no one will ever start another game.
    This discussin tends to be one of the "immunity during vacation" kind of discussions.

    I say, as always, that one shouldn't be time-outed during the vacation. I've proposed the solution for this. A lot of problems seems to emanate from the todays system. It can easily be solved with a little immunity.
  8. Standard memberrhb
    Ginger Scum
    Paranoia
    Joined
    23 Sep '03
    Moves
    15902
    28 Dec '06 22:45
    War is War, Losers.
  9. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    28 Dec '06 23:59
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    This discussin tends to be one of the "immunity during vacation" kind of discussions.

    I say, as always, that one shouldn't be time-outed during the vacation. I've proposed the solution for this. A lot of problems seems to emanate from the todays system. It can easily be solved with a little immunity.
    You don't need to worry too much, cuz some users will abuse this system as well. They'll throw the vacation flag up just to upset another user... some will even go as far as to take all the time at the end of the year, and take the rest of the time at the start to drag a game out 3 months.

    Regardless of how it is done, there will always be users complaining about something... We'll just have new threads like "User --- went on vacation with one move to mate!"

    P-
  10. Joined
    07 Jun '05
    Moves
    5301
    29 Dec '06 00:21
    Originally posted by Phlabibit

    [snip]
    Regardless of how it is done, there will always be users complaining about something... We'll just have new threads like "User --- went on vacation with one move to mate!"

    P-
    Maybe you are right, but crusoe wanted to suggest something else:

    Have the site behave the same as over the board chess when the clock runs out. If the player who has "won" on time does not have mating material, then the game should be drawn.

    There are a number of times when it is significant. I have watched a player with 4.0 points in a tournament play the highest rated second placed player in the last round, who only had 3.5. In that game, the leader sacrificed a rook for his opponent's last pawn, guaranteeing him at least a draw, and a tournament win, even though he was in time trouble.

    You are just talking about vacation, which is another issue entirely. I'd be irritated if the site did not support claiming a draw after 3 repititions, or if it allowed my opponent to leave his king in check. This is just another rule of chess, which it appears that the site does not implement. Why do you think it is a bad idea to implement it?

    Cheers,
    Gezza
  11. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    29 Dec '06 00:421 edit
    Originally posted by gezza
    Maybe you are right, but crusoe wanted to suggest something else:

    Have the site behave the same as over the board chess when the clock runs out. If the player who has "won" on time does not have mating material, then the game should be drawn.

    There are a number of times when it is significant. I have watched a player with 4.0 points in a tournament pla te does not implement. Why do you think it is a bad idea to implement it?

    Cheers,
    Gezza
    That isn't how a chess clock works... is it? Your flag drops, game is lost.

    P-

    Just found this...

    http://www.uschess.org/tds/clockrules.php

    Seems there is need for a person to decide one way or the other on the outcome. Hmmm.

    I still don't care for it. How old is this rule?
  12. Standard memberRagnorak
    For RHP addons...
    tinyurl.com/yssp6g
    Joined
    16 Mar '04
    Moves
    15013
    29 Dec '06 01:08
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    That isn't how a chess clock works... is it? Your flag drops, game is lost.

    P-

    Just found this...

    http://www.uschess.org/tds/clockrules.php

    Seems there is need for a person to decide one way or the other on the outcome. Hmmm.

    I still don't care for it. How old is this rule?
    BDP makes a good point in this thread...Thread 56428

    D
  13. Standard memberskeeter
    515 + 30 days
    Account suspended
    Joined
    08 Mar '03
    Moves
    38202
    29 Dec '06 01:161 edit
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    That isn't how a chess clock works... is it? Your flag drops, game is lost.

    P-

    Just found this...

    http://www.uschess.org/tds/clockrules.php

    Seems there is need for a person to decide one way or the other on the outcome. Hmmm.

    I still don't care for it. How old is this rule?
    Agreed, and just where and how did 14 days of timebank get squandered?? Hmmmm.

    You blew it crusoe, so just build a new bridge and get over it.

    skeeter
  14. Joined
    16 Oct '06
    Moves
    4532
    29 Dec '06 01:351 edit
    Article 6.10 of the FIDE Laws of Chess states:

    Except where Articles 5.1 or one of the Articles 5.2 (a), (b) and (c) apply, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by the player. However, the game is drawn, if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled counterplay.

    (emphasis added)
  15. Standard memberskeeter
    515 + 30 days
    Account suspended
    Joined
    08 Mar '03
    Moves
    38202
    29 Dec '06 01:491 edit
    Originally posted by Ian68
    Article 6.10 of the FIDE Laws of Chess states:

    Except where Articles 5.1 or one of the Articles 5.2 (a), (b) and (c) apply, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by the player. [b]However, the game is drawn, if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled counterplay.


    (emphasis added)[/b]
    What an absolute flouncer. This is a corresspondence chess site and FIDE rules and regs don't rate or apply here. Jesus wept.

    skeeter
Back to Top