English Chess Forum

But don't get too excited - it's one question in a short quiz on board games at

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11088867

It's question 4: 'How many ways are there to end an untimed chess game?', with three options: 2, 3 or 4.

Discuss!

Ian Kingston wrote:It's question 4: 'How many ways are there to end an untimed chess game?', with three options: 2, 3 or 4.

If they mean un-scored as well, it's four. Checkmate, Stalemate, Draw Agreed and Resigns. With scoring it goes up to six with repetition and 50 moves.

There is a potential problem when adopting an increment of 10 seconds that you lose repetition and 50 moves unless a third party keeps score after the players stop.

there's also mobile phone defaults, making it 5 or 7

Don't forget adjudications, but they aren't written in the FIDE Laws...

I suppose there's also the case where one player is forfeited for rule infringement. And there must be dozens ways that games have ended in an unusual way (one player dying, table collapses, both players defaulted for playing a silly game, ... OK, perhaps not dozens).

Jon D'Souza-Eva wrote:I suppose there's also the case where one player is forfeited for rule infringement. And there must be dozens ways that games have ended in an unusual way (one player dying, table collapses, both players defaulted for playing a silly game, ... OK, perhaps not dozens).

Board confiscated

The BBC's answer was 3: checkmate, resignation or a draw. How you're supposed to guess that the methods of obtaining a decisive result must be itemised but not the methods of drawing I'm not sure.

The answer pointed out the possibility of death by mobile phone in competitive games, but didn't add that you can also lose on time.

win by checkmate (5.1a), loss by resignation (5.1b), draw by stalemate (5.2a), draw as position reached which cannot be won by checkmate (5.2b), draw by agreement (5.2c), draw by repetition (5.2d), draw by 50 move rule (5.2e), loss by failure to complete required number of moves within specified time or by overstepping available time in final time control (6.9), or drawn if the opponent has insufficient mating material (6.9), drawn as both players flags fallen in final time control (6.11b), draw by claim in the final two minutes of a player's thinking time in quick play finish that opponent cannot win by normal means or is not trying to win by normal means (10.2), loss by default caused by failure to start game by specified time (6.6) or by mobile phone or other electronic equipment making a noise (12.3b), or by making third illegal move (7.4b) or drawn if the opponent has insufficient material (7.4b), or as a result of an infraction or series of infractions that caused arbiter to penalise (12.8, 13.4b), game cancelled as board initially set up incorrectly (7.1a) or with reversed colours and arbiters determines that the game should not continue (7.2), lost by failure to seal an unambiguous (A.8.a) move whose significance can be clearly established (A.8.b) and legal (A.8.b), lost by failure to resume within specified period (A10)

At various periods there have many other ways to finish a game of chess, such as draw by perpetual check, draw by insufficient material, win, loss or draw by adjudication, baring the king, loss (!) by stalemate, greater mate, lesser mate, ....

I am very disappointed there are so few ways in which a chess game can be concluded. I must be more inventive next time in 2012.
Another not mentioned. If a game is adjourned, the envelope is lost and it is impossible to re-establish the position, the game is annulled.
Stewart Reuben

Stewart Reuben wrote:I am very disappointed there are so few ways in which a chess game can be concluded. I must be more inventive next time in 2012.
Another not mentioned. If a game is adjourned, the envelope is lost and it is impossible to re-establish the position, the game is annulled.
Stewart Reuben

Unless it's an arbiterless situation, which would include a league scenario. The person who is to reply to the sealed move does endorses the envelope, so if he loses it, it makes sense for him to lose the game by default. This would seem logical, even if there's no concrete rule to say that that happens.

In the Thames Valley League, the player who seals the move keeps the envelope. Does anyone know of any other league or competition where this happens?

Getting kicked out of the building because they're about to lock it - I've known two occasions when that's happened.

Two or three weeks ago, I got up in the middle of the night (hiatus hernia playing up) and switched on the television to be greeted by "How to win at Chess". There were interviews with David Howell, Nigel Short, Harriet Hunt and some bloke who played lots of correspondence chess and also an actual game. One of the players (who won) I recognised as Danny King but the other player, clearly some sort of chess elder statesman isn't in the ECF grading list or even in the ECF inactive list. Anyone know who he was??

So much for the notoriety of England's second GM. He retired in the 80's didn't he?

Richard James wrote:In the Thames Valley League, the player who seals the move keeps the envelope. Does anyone know of any other league or competition where this happens?

There was a player in the London League twenty or so years ago who got a reputation for sealing a move, leaving it on the table for his opponent to keep and then sneaking it into his pocket when no-one was looking. He won several games in this way when his unsuspecting opponent admitted that he had lost the envelope.