Well, if you are about to win on time, why would you accept a draw from your opponent?
defect in chess rules?
Sort:
what's the flag?
If the player does not respond to the draw then it is onsidered "ignored" and play continues normally. So if the flag does drop then the win is set normally with the offer not considered. That is my opinion on the matter.
Mar 4, 2009
0
#5
einstein2191 wrote:
If the player does not respond to the draw then it is onsidered "ignored" and play continues normally. So if the flag does drop then the win is set normally with the offer not considered. That is my opinion on the matter.
Right. This applies if I make a draw offer, and your flag falls before you accept it, decline it, or move.
TrainingForNM wrote:
Personally I think the only defect in chess rules is the lack of humilation for the loser. Loser has to setup the next game only using his butt!
Hmm, I'm not sure I'd want to use those pieces...
That rule would create a whole new industry overnight - "chess gloves". 
my my. is it a full moon?
normajeanyates wrote:
I think there is one defect in the rules of chess as they stand, (fide and all other that I know of).
Let me put it this way: the defect is that the following rule is missing:
If a player's flag falls while opponent's draw offer is pending, the game is drawn.
What do you all think?
Yeah, yeah, I read your pearls before swine speech, but I'm still going to voice my opinion.
I wouldn't support this proposed rule change as it would make no sense if you tried to apply it to the other types of draws.
e.g. If you're in the middle of a threefold repition and your flag falls, that shouldn't be a draw. Or if you're nearing 50 moves without a capture or pawn move, and someone runs out of time, that shouldn't be a draw either. Same with perpetual check and stalemate.
I don't believe a draw offer constitutes enough to declare the game a draw, much the same as 49 moves without capture or pawn move doesn't constitute a draw.
RyanMK wrote:
normajeanyates wrote:
I think there is one defect in the rules of chess as they stand, (fide and all other that I know of).
Let me put it this way: the defect is that the following rule is missing:
If a player's flag falls while opponent's draw offer is pending, the game is drawn.
What do you all think?
Yeah, yeah, I read your pearls before swine speech, but I'm still going to voice my opinion.
I wouldn't support this proposed rule change as it would make no sense if you tried to apply it to the other types of draws.
e.g. If you're in the middle of a threefold repition and your flag falls, that shouldn't be a draw. Or if you're nearing 50 moves without a capture or pawn move, and someone runs out of time, that shouldn't be a draw either. Same with perpetual check and stalemate.
I don't believe a draw offer constitutes enough to declare the game a draw, much the same as 49 moves without capture or pawn move doesn't constitute a draw.
The 'pearls before swine' speech wasn't directed at sensiible responses like yours. You have a point there. (Though I dont think the 49-move analogy is so good; but the two-fold repetition analogy is good...) More important, you are not merely reiterating existing rules or being insulting.
Sources that don't wish to be named informed me that fide did recently (meaning within the last 10 years) consider this and decided, after discussion, not to introduce it. I floated this as a test of the psychological profile of the audience here.
Neither you nor me are going to have the vote on this: it is countries' chess associations which are fide-members, not individuals...
My purpose having been accomplished, I was about to delete this thread. Used to happen the starter of a thread could delete it by deleting the starting post. Doesnt happen now it seems...
Interesting. I wouldn't agree, but I don't a strong views why.