"First-move advantage in chess"

[JustinHorton]

I happened to see this morning that this is today's Wikipedia "featured article".

[Keith Arkell]

Looks like I got Julian in good honest low calorie fat free zuggy

[John Upham]

Is today's date of significance to this article?

[Mick Norris]

Surely not?

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5320

[Sean Hewitt]

Surely not?

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5320

It is April 1st!

[Roger de Coverly]

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5320

I thought when I read it that this proposal (resigns not allowed) was dated 1st April

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5060

It turns out this guy is serious and even got Karpov to play a match under these rules

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5195

In case it isn't obvious, there are at least two ways of declining to continue a lost game

(1) just let your time run out
(2) set your phone to "ring" and wave it under the arbiter's nose.

If you want a sporting analogy, boxers "resign" frequently to avoid further punishment - as do motor racing drivers.

[Matthew Turner]

Unfortunately, I seem unable to access these chessbase reports, but I think there might be a serious point here. Chess players tend to take there lead from the top players (in terms of choice of opening etc - this is often completely illogical!) However, if weaker players don't see Anand, or Topalov, or Aronian winning a won game it leads to gaps in chess knowledge. I think it would be nice to see the top players playing to the bitter end, but this sets up an inconsistency. Obviously, it is within Anand's personal interest to resign a lost game, so that he can conserve energy and focus on the next game, but this is not in the wider interests of chess. I don't think that you can do a lot about this, but it is an interesting point.

[Mick Norris]

Surely not?

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5320

It is April 1st!

It was just before midnight when I read it!