Draw by repetition

I had a look - you didn't "whoop" anybody "up" - you lost on time after 14 moves in a game of fifteen second chess.

@m-n0, I appreciate your time, interest and thorough investigation!

 

You are right, I stand corrected and edited that rash comment.

 

So what actually happened was I played the world's number 2 in ultra-bullet (his specialty, my weakness).   My opponent (one of the best players in the history of mankind) played inferior moves, which I took advantage of.  In the end I lost on time.  I thought to myself...cool!  -I just whooped the world's number 2 in respect to quality of moves played.

 

Note this is similar to my games versus BeepBeepImAJeep where I played versus the worlds No 1 player in speed chess.  In that game (number 2) I achieved a equal or better position.

 

In both cases I was surprised at the relative ease at whichI could hang in there and even get a winning position against the worlds best number 1 and number 2 players in their special categories.  

 

In the end anyone can see I lost these games, but it brings to surface, with examples the clear truth that being the best in speed chess has much less to do with getting the better position and much much more to do with the finding ways to run your opponents clock down.

 

This gives me an important angle on the requirements to be an excellent ultra-bullet player:

• Predict & Premove
• Predict & Premove
• Predict & Premove

Lol.  Anyway, now this thread is seriously off topic!

Cheers!

You don't understand what 15 second chess is. You make random moves and try to flag the other guy. Quality of moves is almost entirely irrelevant. It's like racing in a 100 metre dash, losing horribly, and then saying "yeah, but I was running more efficiently, if this were a marathon you'd run out of energy I'd have won". He was trying to flag, with no respect for move quality, and suceeded. You were trying to make good moves with no respect for the clock (with fifteen seconds on it!).

m_n0, 

I agree with most of what you said.  But one small part:

 

"You don't understand what 15 second chess is.  You make random moves and try to flag the other guy."

 

 In the post before the quoted above I wrote a more correct and detailed explanation of 15 and 30 second chess (like in the two games mentioned).

• my previous reply:  "being the best in speed chess has much less to do with getting the better position and much much more to do with the finding ways to run your opponents clock down"

Anyway, its small fries.  I appreciate all your time and insight.

 

 

 

I don't even know what it means to be flagged can somebody help me with this?

Flagged = lost on time.

Blueemu has already answered this of course, but I thought you might want to know that the origin of the phrase comes from the old analog clocks we used to use.  When a player ran out of time, a little flag attached to a clock hand would actually fall.

Ok I've been flagged a few times.

When playing the computer I have accidentally drawn the game by the ‘Three Fold Repetition ‘ even though I am aware of the rule. Unlike OTB games the computer gives you no choice as to when the draw is agreed too. I move the same pieces but to a different square before the exact position is repeated three times in a row. It seems like the computer draws before the exact position is repeated. Does moving a combination of pieces three times make a draw or is a draw reached only when two pieces make the exact same moves three times. The computer seems to draw the game after I repeat the position twice and it is the computers move and does not give me my move at which time I was going to move my piece to a different square.
Thanks in advance for any comments

A draw can be claimed after a position repeats for a third time.  It does not matter if it was a different sequence of moves that leads to the repetition.

Actually, OTB, you can claim the draw immediately before making the move that leads to the repetition.

The computer always claims the draw.  If the computer did not want a draw, it would not have allowed the repetition.

The inaccuracies and mistakes are measured by an imperfect tool so there may still be inaccuracies/mistakes.  I only point this out because you mentioned standard chess start position as draw (based on measurements by, I assume, imperfect tools).  In theory (just on the surface as it seems to me) it cannot be a draw because white moves first.

 

 

 

White moves first, which is an advantage, but not a sufficient advantage to force a win.  As computers and human players get stronger and stronger, the draw percentage at the very top levels has gone up considerably.

The context was perfect play, where a small advantage (if there is one; i.e. in my post, I didn't claim white has an advantage, I mentioned it isn't balanced) is enough to win.  Currently, we aren't capable of perfect play.

In the context of perfect play, much of what we consider a small advantage would prove to be no advantage at all.

What makes you think that a small advantage is enough to win against perfect defense?