What is the result if his flag falls

Technical questions regarding Openings, Middlegames, Endings etc.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:17 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:A 10.2 decision focuses on whether could, or was trying to, win the game had his opponent not ran out of time before he could deliver the checkmate.
But what should apply when given 5 seconds a move, the player could deliver mate, but given 0 seconds a move there isn't enough time?

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:33 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:A 10.2 decision focuses on whether could, or was trying to, win the game had his opponent not ran out of time before he could deliver the checkmate.
But what should apply when given 5 seconds a move, the player could deliver mate, but given 0 seconds a move there isn't enough time?
I assume you mean a 5-second increment. If there's 5 seconds per move, then Article 10 (Quickplay Finish) doesn't come into force at all. So you can't make a 10.2 claim. This rule comes into force specifically to cater for cases where there is 0 seconds per move.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:45 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:I assume you mean a 5-second increment. If there's 5 seconds per move, then Article 10 (Quickplay Finish) doesn't come into force at all. So you can't make a 10.2 claim. This rule comes into force specifically to cater for cases where there is 0 seconds per move.
A position which would be simple enough to play with a 5 second increment but where the winning process is lengthy. So you would win if you have an increment. If you don't have an increment, I'm trying to get a clear statement of when you get a draw and when you get a loss. In all cases the player short of time is winning on the board. This is particularly a problem where no arbiter is present, because the after a 10.2 claim give a draw on flag fall option isn't available.

Your original statement
A 10.2 decision focuses on whether could, or was trying to, win the game had his opponent not ran out of time before he could deliver the checkmate.
I am asking what happens if it is the player would could deliver checkmate who is the one running out of time. The 10.2 claimant is the attacker, not the defender.

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1757
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex McFarlane » Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:38 am

Hi Roger.

Sorry I didn't get a chance to speak to you yesterday at the London Classic.

The person claiming a 10.2 must demonstrate by his moves that he knows what he is doing. Effectively, these moves must also deprive the opponent of any chance of counterplay.

If either of these points is not achieved then the claim fails.

The standard of the players can affect the decision in that a lower rated player is more likely to miss something in a position and therefore to play less accurate moves thereby giving the opponent more opportunity for counterplay.
I have given a draw to bare king against K+R in a Minor. I would not expect to do that in an Open.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:56 am

Alex McFarlane wrote:The person claiming a 10.2 must demonstrate by his moves that he knows what he is doing. Effectively, these moves must also deprive the opponent of any chance of counterplay.
I don't see anything in 10.2 that the claimant has to do anything whatsoever other than making a claim and summoning the arbiter. There's an onus on the opponent to make sufficient attempts .

What constitutes "sufficient" is undefined.
10.2 wrote: If the player, having the move, has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may claim a draw before his flag falls. He shall summon the arbiter and may stop the clocks. (See Article 6.12.b)

a.If the arbiter agrees the opponent is making no effort to win the game by normal means, or that it is not possible to win by normal means, then he shall declare the game drawn. Otherwise he shall postpone his decision or reject the claim.
b.If the arbiter postpones his decision, the opponent may be awarded two extra minutes and the game shall continue, if possible in the presence of an arbiter. The arbiter shall declare the final result later in the game or as soon as possible after a flag has fallen. He shall declare the game drawn if he agrees that the final position cannot be won by normal means, or that the opponent was not making sufficient attempts to win by normal means.
Alex McFarlane wrote:I have given a draw to bare king against K+R in a Minor.
I think that's unfair on the player with the rook if fifty moves hadn't elapsed or a repetition hadn't occurred.. It should be wrong that running yourself out of time should thwart an opponent in a position than can be won.

I would like to see a reword of the first sentence of 10.2a to say

If the arbiter agrees that it is not possible to win by normal means or that it is possible but the opponent is making no effort to win the game other than on time, then he shall declare the game drawn.

I'd also think that making sufficient attempts to win by normal means should be downgraded to only attempting to win on time. It should be entirely legitimate that a winning attempt might involve testing the opponents resources and repeating or nearly repeating the position to set up a different idea.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:17 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote: I think that's unfair on the player with the rook if fifty moves hadn't elapsed or a repetition hadn't occurred.. It should be wrong that running yourself out of time should thwart an opponent in a position than can be won.
It isn't unfair though. If white has KR, black has K, black claims under 10.2, then white just moves his rook around aimlessly, it should be a draw. Obviously if white was in the process of the mating procedure, and black runs out of time, then white wins (because he has been making progress). Moving a rook around aimlessly isn't progress.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:38 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote: It isn't unfair though. If white has KR, black has K, black claims under 10.2, then white just moves his rook around aimlessly,
My point is that if time isn't an issue, the player with the rook can move aimlessly for fifty moves (if done without three fold repetition) before a draw can be claimed by the defender and arbiters aren't allowed to intervene before that.

I don't think running out of time in a lost or losing position should improve a player's drawing chances.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Dec 15, 2010 2:48 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:I don't think running out of time in a lost or losing position should improve a player's drawing chances.
Sure, but...
Roger de Coverly wrote:the player with the rook can move aimlessly for fifty moves (if done without three fold repetition) before a draw can be claimed by the defender and arbiters aren't allowed to intervene before that.
... in that precise scenario, do you think it's fair that black should lose on time when the player with just a King is watching his opponent move his rook about aimlessly, playing for a win on time?

Ian Thompson
Posts: 3543
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Ian Thompson » Wed Dec 15, 2010 2:57 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Roger de Coverly wrote:the player with the rook can move aimlessly for fifty moves (if done without three fold repetition) before a draw can be claimed by the defender and arbiters aren't allowed to intervene before that.
... in that precise scenario, do you think it's fair that black should lose on time when the player with just a King is watching his opponent move his rook about aimlessly, playing for a win on time?
It's less unfair than depriving the player with the winning position of the chance to win it if he's trying his best to win but doesn't know how to.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:00 pm

Ian Thompson wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Roger de Coverly wrote:the player with the rook can move aimlessly for fifty moves (if done without three fold repetition) before a draw can be claimed by the defender and arbiters aren't allowed to intervene before that.
... in that precise scenario, do you think it's fair that black should lose on time when the player with just a King is watching his opponent move his rook about aimlessly, playing for a win on time?
It's less unfair than depriving the player with the winning position of the chance to win it if he's trying his best to win but doesn't know how to.
Yes, agreed. Emphasis added on the important words of your last comment!

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1757
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex McFarlane » Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:24 pm

To clarify my earlier statement.

When I have given a draw to the bare king I have counted at least 30 moves and know that (many) more had been played before I arrived at the board. I also do not give the draw unless the king knows how to defend ie stays away from the edge of the board. I would not give a draw if neither player knew what they were doing (unless I knew 50 moves had been played or a mate was not possible within 50 if the flag fell sooner) as K+R may stumble into the win.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:55 pm

Alex McFarlane wrote:When I have given a draw to the bare king I have counted at least 30 moves and know that (many) more had been played before I arrived at the board.
I suppose that's a practical tip for a defender. If you think a 10.2 claim might be necessary, then either keep score or count moves for as long as possible in the 5 minutes to 2 minutes zone. I was thinking about defending KR against KRB but it would apply with any ending where pawn moves were unlikely or impossible.

I did witness a GM once keeping score for much longer than seemed necessary. The reasoning was that the breakthrough he was defending against might plausably need more than fifty moves to set up. This was the game http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1210274. The last pawn move had been at move 66 and the next capture 41 moves later.

Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Simon Spivack » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:57 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:I would like to see a reword of the first sentence of 10.2a
No matter what the formulation, there is the reality that some arbiters are uncomfortable with having to inject their own assessment of the position and to take cognizance of the playing strength of the two principals. On the other hand, I don't believe I am alone in wanting responsibility for handling my own time and not having it managed for me.

The sort of compromise I can live with is for an incremental rate to be applied for a tiny part of the final playing session only. For example, in the recently concluded FIDE open at the London Chess Classic, I'd have been quite content with forty in two, the current first session time control, followed by the balance in twenty-five minutes with an increment of five seconds a move from move forty-one. Thus a game would have go on for more than a hundred moves for the session to be longer than at present; furthermore, at sixty moves per five minutes for the Fischer increment, it is hard to believe any games will detain anyone over much.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:03 pm

Simon Spivack wrote:The sort of compromise I can live with is for an incremental rate to be applied for a tiny part of the final playing session only. For example, in the recently concluded FIDE open at the London Chess Classic, I'd have been quite content with forty in two, the current first session time control, followed by the balance in twenty-five minutes with an increment of five seconds a move from move forty-one.
There are some problems with this - mostly arbiters again.

Some arbiters are totally against the notion that you have an increment applying only for part of the game. The Dutch one who writes for chesscafe.com in particular. Other arbiters don't like the idea that the clock should tell players when they've reached the time control where increments don't apply to the first control.

At Dresden 2008 the ACP (representing IMs and GMs) argued successfully the case that there should only be a limited number of time controls permitted for norm events. The London Classic time control of 40/2,20/1 with the increment coming in at move 60 was not amongst them. There are signs of dilution though, I had thought that with increment , two of the limited permissible controls were G/90 and 40/90 + 30 both with 30 second increments. There's a Croatian organiser who considers that 40/90 + 15 with 30 second increments is also legal on the grounds that it's slower than G/90. A Scottish norm may depend on the acceptability of this.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: What is the result if his flag falls

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:38 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Simon Spivack wrote:The sort of compromise I can live with is for an incremental rate to be applied for a tiny part of the final playing session only. For example, in the recently concluded FIDE open at the London Chess Classic, I'd have been quite content with forty in two, the current first session time control, followed by the balance in twenty-five minutes with an increment of five seconds a move from move forty-one.
There are some problems with this - mostly arbiters again.

Some arbiters are totally against the notion that you have an increment applying only for part of the game. The Dutch one who writes for chesscafe.com in particular. Other arbiters don't like the idea that the clock should tell players when they've reached the time control where increments don't apply to the first control.
Actually, you couldn't be further from the truth on this one.

The major problem with this, and why it would NEVER be used in an event like London, is that that time control isn't eligible for norms. So very few people would bother to enter.

Also, his name is Geurt Gijssen. :wink:

Post Reply