Best Disputes

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Dewi Jones
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:55 am

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Dewi Jones » Fri May 17, 2013 5:30 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Geoff Chandler wrote: And I am not cluttering up my grading system with mythical beasts.

I have worked out I'm an alligator, what are you?
A stem cell (then I can be whatever I want). Aren't dragons mythical beasts?
They're reptiles, obviously..... or amphibians

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat May 18, 2013 3:19 pm

"Aren't dragons mythical beasts?"

They exist alright, I married a non-chess playing one. A Nagging Dragon.

If you qualify for the candidates you become a Silver Dragon
and any World Champion is a Golden Dragon.

(actually this banding into coloured groups instead of numbers, obviously borrowed from Judo,
would cut out all these board order squabbles. You can never play above someone in a higher band
than you, but if you had say a team full of Crocodiles then they could sit anywhere.)

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4228
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Stewart Reuben » Sat May 18, 2013 11:49 pm

A truly highjacked thread.

Roger asked when this thread still had a measure of sanity
Question for arbiters though. In the event of a player making a 10.2 claim, is it legitimate to draw the arbiter's attention to the number of moves played since last capture or pawn move? There may have to be a presumption that one or both players had an up-to-date score-sheet. It's an advice to players point, whilst you don't have to score from minus 5, should you score to minus 2 if a 50 move draw is possible or probable, given the game position?

Of course it is correct to draw to the attention of the arbiter how many moves have been made since there was last a pawn move or capture. One excellent example was in Hastings summer 1995. K, R, N v K, R. David Welch and I oberved the game throughout. In due course Black claimed a draw and was told to play on. Eventually his flag fell after 46 moves.
David and I went into a huddle. We decided it was most unlikely he would have lost in just 4 more moves. The opponent was not at all perturbed.

If you are very short of time and likely to have to rely on the 50 move rule for a draw, you should ask the arbiter to count off the moves BEFORE you reach the point where you cease to keep score. In top level events this should not be necessary. There are electrosensitive boards, or enough arbiters to cope with such rare shortage of time.
Of course, even more so, an increment eliminates such problems.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sun May 19, 2013 2:14 pm

Jezzy Peeps! I thought I'd seen and heard everything about this game.

"David and I went into a huddle. We decided it was most unlikely he
would have lost in just 4 more moves. The opponent was not at all perturbed."

If the lad was not perturbed why was he playing on?

You cannot go around having 'huddles' after a player's flag has fallen and split the point.

It's simple. Flag dropped, game over. Dropped flag losses unless the the undropped
flag player is down to a bare King. then drawn.

If the controllers want to have a huddle then they should do so in the privacy of their
own homes, they should not be snebbing into a game just because they can.

Just What is going on here?

"....it was most unlikely he would have lost in just 4 more moves."

Post the position and I'll show you 150 ways to lose it and win it in 4 moves.

Where is this going?
We all stop our clocks after move 25, David and Stewart will have a huddle
around each board and decide who wins and who losses.

Strewth.

And this adding on seconds to prolong a game is nonsense.

You could not win in the allocated time, so have more time.
That's the Alex Ferguson Rule.

You are going to lose on time in a lost position have more time to drag to out the game
in the hope your opponent blunders or the controllers have a huddle and save you ½ a point.

If you are ahead on material but time is a factor against you then
chop wood leaving him with a bare King. Else you stalemate him.

If your flag drops and he has just one pawn on the board you lose.
The End.

Stone the Crows, give you lot another few months and you will
find a way for a player to wriggle out of checkmate.

And as for slithering up to a controller to get him to count the moves for you.
It's a joke!
What are you doing to the game?

How many more people are going to get involved in this one game of Chess?

So far we have two players playing, one bod counting the moves and two contollers a huddling.

If I was a controller and someone asked me to count their moves for them...

...I'd put down my Sun Crossword, give them a look of disdain and tell them to go away.

User avatar
Rob Thompson
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: Behind you

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Rob Thompson » Sun May 19, 2013 2:24 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote:If I was a controller and someone asked me to count their moves for them...

...I'd put down my Sun Crossword, give them a look of disdain and tell them to go away.
And thus we have encapsulated the perfect reason why you would be a terrible controller.
True glory lies in doing what deserves to be written; in writing what deserves to be read.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sun May 19, 2013 2:52 pm

Hi Rob.

I reckon I'd be a good controller, I mean how hard can it be?

One announcement before the start of every round.

"Right guys, play the game with the respect the game deserves.

Any disputes then quietly sort it out amongst yourselves with a smile and a handshake.

Start White's clock and....smoke if you got 'em."

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4228
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Stewart Reuben » Sun May 19, 2013 4:20 pm

Geoff It's simple. Flag dropped, game over. Dropped flag losses unless the the undropped
flag player is down to a bare King. then drawn.

Try reading the Laws, in this case 10.2, before you pontificate.

Virtually all the work of the arbiter should be done before play starts. Thus you would fail right there. Then there is some to be done after the game. Very little during it.

Put any K, R, N against K,R on a board and you will almost never find one where there are 150 ways to force checkmate in 4 moves.

We try to make the Laws user-friendly. The objective is not to pander to your prejudices.

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2680
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Ian Thompson » Sun May 19, 2013 4:33 pm

Stewart Reuben wrote:Virtually all the work of the arbiter should be done before play starts. Thus you would fail right there. Then there is some to be done after the game. Very little during it.
I don't see how an arbiter could fulfil his responsibilities under Article 13.1 ("The arbiter shall see that the Laws of Chess are strictly observed") without being constantly at work while the game is in progress.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sun May 19, 2013 6:54 pm

Hi Stewart.

I said:

"Post the position and I'll show you 150 ways to lose it and win it in 4 moves."

Not 'force' a checkmate in 4 moves.

I just don't think it is right to adjudicate with best play any game after the flag has gone.
You know and I know anything can happen in a game of chess.

But I reckon I can squeeze well over 150 different forced mates in 3 moves (even less!) for the lone Rook player from here.


I can do it the 3 ways from that position, move the WR up then down the b-file
and do it again. That is 13 different positions.
Move the BR up one square and do it again, up one square do it again.
Shift the WR & BR one file right etc etc.
Stick the WK on g6 and do the whole thing again.

Spin the board 45,90 and 180 degress.....there are hundreds of forced mates in 3.
And that is just with the lone Rook!

So if you are deciding..."it was most unlikely he would have lost in just 4 more moves"
Why not decide he may have won in 3 moves and given him the whole point.
I've just given you well over 500 examples of what could have happened.

If The R & N player wanted to play on and win the game that way then it is his choice.
Maybe he thought he could do it. After all he is playing a player who is short of time,
there is a chance he may blunder.

Yes his opponent was short of time...and whose fault is that?
(apparently not his opponents if there are arbiters lurking and huddling in the shadows.)

Personally, and I'm no saint, I would just offer a draw and have done in that set up.
I don't know the position, if the lone Rook's King was stuck on the back rank then give it a go.

I (we) don't know the history maybe the roles were reversed from a previous game involving
these players and the other lad won on time.

If the player wanted to win that way then so be it.
Sounds as if the lad knew it was going to be declared a draw so played on....just in case.

He could have been going for a Kotov v Nadjorf in the '53 Candidates and having a laugh.

Arbiters should be seen and not heard.
Infact I am getting of the opinion if there were no arbiters we would not need them.
The players would sort it out themselves.
All the players I know respect the game and their opponents but they are not getting the chance.

And if I was the lone Rook player and it was happening to me.
I'd accept it, I'd be fed up, but that's chess.
And if some arbiter interefered I would refuse the ½ point.
I got myself into that position, I lost on time.

And I am well aware of law 10.2.
So is every player who pushes a pawn. It's common sense.
You cannot win on time if you cannot demonstrate a mate.

We don't need an arbiter to tell us that.

Why not just sit back, enjoy the peace and do the Sun Crossword.

13 Down: It's not checkmate, there is a rare bit in play.
Last edited by Geoff Chandler on Sun May 19, 2013 7:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun May 19, 2013 7:00 pm

Stewart Reuben wrote: If you are very short of time and likely to have to rely on the 50 move rule for a draw, you should ask the arbiter to count off the moves BEFORE you reach the point where you cease to keep score.
That an interesting suggestion which implies that you can announce your probable intention to make a 10.2 claim with five minutes remaining. So you detect that the only way your opponent can win is on time or if you make a gross blunder and deploy the arbiter defence ahead of schedule.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sun May 19, 2013 7:26 pm

To be fair Roger, Stewart does say "...very short of time."

Five minutes is not very short of time, one minute left is.

Then as the player with the extra time you would sportingly keep the score.
Give him a running score every 10th move if you wish.
I've never been involved with the 50 move rule. Have you?
I mean did the game actually go on to move 50.

I wonder out of all the millions and millions or Chess games
that have been played the game was drawn by the 50 move rule.
I'm not talking about games being agreed drawn by the players
(before an srbiter can launch himself at the board) but actually
go the full 50 moves.

I'd put money on 1% (it will be less than that, I've rounded it up).

So we have all these rules and meetings in exotic places at memberhip
payers expense to discuss what may happen in in less than 1% of Chess games.

It's a farce.
Last edited by Geoff Chandler on Mon May 20, 2013 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun May 19, 2013 7:44 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote: I've never been involved with the 50 move rule. Have you?
Yes in round 1 of the 4NCL this season. Actually I misplayed it. I realised with around ten minutes left that my opponent had more time than me and would be likely to try to win either by forcing a blunder or sitting it out on time. In practice I scored about 30 moves into the 50, but stopped scoring with around three minutes left. This was an error as I should have continued to score until I reached two minutes remaining. The other error was that I should have drawn the arbiter's attention to my score-sheet and the implied number of moves I had to survive.

In the event I was awarded a draw when my flag eventually fell. I don't know what happened to my opponent's score-sheet but the one in the 4NCL download is based on my copy spurious repetition added. It's all very well going on about 1% of games, but these extra half points do matter in some competitions.

PeterFarr
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:20 pm
Location: Horsham, Sussex

Re: Best Disputes

Post by PeterFarr » Sun May 19, 2013 8:46 pm

With respect to the erudition of Stewart and Roger, I think people are missing Geoff's key point, which is that chess players should work it out between themselves what is fair and reasonable without recourse to outside help, whether from Arbiters or Captains. Also that there's a lot of debate about very obscure possibilities which don't happen much in practice.

Also, anyone like me who didn't get Geoff's Kotov v Najdorf reference should look it up - great game from round 27 - in the days that men were men and played 28 rounds including adjournment sessions.

P.s. - love the reptile idea too, I'd be a Hungarian Horntail dragon (has a fiery reputation but mis-fires more often than not)

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1224
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Joey Stewart » Mon May 20, 2013 9:11 am

I like the derivation from the "belt" system best.
This could be taken a step forward, perhaps creating a variant of chess boxing, so that everybody was able to at least wear their belt with a measure of confidence that they could back up an argument with the use of force as well as chess skills..

I once thought of a great variant called Fighting chess; a team game, with two players on each team (a player and a "fighter). The fighters stand behind their opposing players and attempt to wrestle the piece down onto a bad square while it is in the process of being moved, wherever it lands is where it must stay.

The best part is, in the case of disputes, the fighters are required to physically subdue their opposition thus alleviating the need for "rules" as it would be a simple case of might makes right!
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Best Disputes

Post by Geoff Chandler » Mon May 20, 2013 12:56 pm

Hi Peter.

I thought it was a fairly well know piece of chess trivia but there again
perhaps not as the game has got oh so serious in the last few decades.

Kotov has KNN v Najdorf's K and makes a move explaining to a shocked Najdorf
that recent Russian analysis has found a forced win for the two Knights v bare King.
After a few moments a smiling Kotov then accepted the draw.

God knows how many of the new rules these two broke that day and never mind a huddle.
Today there would have been an actual scrum of arbiters ready to descend on the
board the moment the position appeared.

(I think the new rules state in this position that the player with the two Knights must give one
of them to his opponent, though I'm not up to date as these rules are changing daily.)

"I think people are missing Geoff's key point"

I have a key point?

Good.

I was just having a pleasant Sunday afternoon rant in a thread titled 'Best Disputes'.

But yes. I'm sure that 90% of the squabbles that blow up into full bloodied life threatening
disputes would never have happened had someone else not butted in waving a rule book.

I think the Sun Crossword approach is the best method and only get involved when the fists start flying.
And even then it will only be to call the police and capture what you can of the incident on film.

Post Reply