lyn, I'm not trying to inflate the argument, but "unethical" is a fair
term. "Cheating" wasn't mentioned, and that would have been too
strong a word, but to fix the outcome of the games by agreement
between the players, even if openly, would be against the spirit &
ideals of the tournement. I appreciate that you were only asking if it
would be OK, and it looks like it would be frowned upon.
And there are plenty of unethical practices around that I can't do
anything about - like salesmen aranging business meetings in a
location that their wives just happened to want to go on holiday while
I'm still stuck here in the rain :o(
Thanks.
Pre arranging a draw is fixing the result in advance.With respect I'm
not asking for that,I'm asking is it okay if we cut down the number of
games we need to play to arrive at the result.The draws are just
tools,wont affect the result.In the end the pairing ensured one of us
has to go out,any number of draws can't change that,so fixing results
is not relevant here.
Lyn.
Isn't a prearranged draw between top players disparagingly referred to
as a "Grandmaster's draw" with a time honored tradition in chess?
Unethical, frowned on, but...not uncommon?
Not trying to fan any flames here - genuinly curious. In the little I've
read about the history of tournaments, this seemed to have been a
common strategy. I know in looking through my chess databases, I've
run across a large number of drawn games, often very early, between
top players. Seemed to be common in the 1950s-1960s. Does it still
go on?
A grandmaster draw is one in under 20 moves...and yes sometimes
they are prearranged...but it's not like they tell the tournament
director they are doing it due to the reason I have already stated.
It became a habit of the Soviets doing it in tourneys where Bobby
Fischer was playing to make him have to work even harder to win
every game. He complained about it and actually got a FIDE law
passed about games being drawn in uder 20 moves...I think they
have since revoked this law.
Dave
