I guess the 50 move format is more than enough........
Good Luck
Would a 75 Move Rule be better than a 50 Move Rule?
BonTheCat wrote:
No, I'm not saying that, only that you can do as you like in friendly games, because they're not FIDE-rated. Personally I'm all in favour of sticking to FIDE's competition rules also in friendly games. Makes it easier.
But getting hold of the clocks can be difficult sometimes if you're on the train. I usually prefer basic rules.
MARattigan schreef:
BonTheCat wrote:
MARattigan: 'Fide chess tournaments' are all tournaments which are officially registered for rating purposes. As for the rest of your argument, they've just separated Basic Rules and Competitions Rules because there was considerable overlap between them. Over the course of many years (coinciding with the introduction of increment play and online forums discussing the rules) the rules were updated virtually every two years or even more frequently, and this lead to inconsistences and redundancies.
OK, but I don't follow how having two sets of rules would lead to fewer inconsistencies than a single set.
Are you saying FIDE rules should be ignored in friendly games, at the chess club say, and if so would the 50 move rule be in force or not? FIDE should publicise the fact, because there is a widespread feeling among the general public, in Europe at least, that FIDE is the ultimate authority governing these.
The problems discussed earlier regarding the 50 move rule of course apply whether it's in force or not, regardless of who is accepted as the authority.
The FIDE rules are completely irrelevant in chess games outside of FIDE tournaments and it doesn't matter what rules FIDE considers 'basic' rules. What matters is what the chess players think or the chess club thinks. The basic rules of chess are not decided by FIDE. I am pretty sure that the large majority includes the 50 move rule in the basic rules unless they don't care to cover all cases within the rules. You need some rule in case no progress is made and the 50 move rule is the most used rule. In friendly games players may not bother to count the moves though, but most people aren't that stubborn when the position is clearly a draw. People either use rules to cover all cases or they decide what should happen when such a situation occurs on the board. The 50 move rule is rarely used anyway.
MARattigan wrote:
@Numquam
Of course the 50 move rule is rarely used. If that means you're not interested in the subject then why talk about it?
If you go to a chess club and there is an argument over the rules in a friendly game I think the argument would be resolved by consulting the FIDE handbook. The chess club won't give you a set of rules specific to the chess club in advance. I think that would be understood in friendly games in other environments.
You say that FIDE doesn't decide the basic rules of chess, but on my reading of Chapter 1 art. 1.4 of the handbook FIDE thinks it does. I think so do most other people.
I agree that you need some rule in case of no progress. I regret its disappearance from the basic rules. You say it's the most used rule, but as of now I don't think the majority of games should be using it. No doubt they are, because there was precious little publicity about the change. I never saw anything in the daily papers about it.
But in any case the problem with the 50 move rule is it's a century out of date. It's no longer adequate for players theoretical knowledge. That can only be more true as time goes on because players can now practice endgames that have received little analysis in the past against EGTBs.
MARattigan schreef:
MARattigan wrote:
@Numquam
Of course the 50 move rule is rarely used. If that means you're not interested in the subject then why talk about it?
If you go to a chess club and there is an argument over the rules in a friendly game I think the argument would be resolved by consulting the FIDE handbook. The chess club won't give you a set of rules specific to the chess club in advance. I think that would be understood in friendly games in other environments.
You say that FIDE doesn't decide the basic rules of chess, but on my reading of Chapter 1 art. 1.4 of the handbook FIDE thinks it does. I think so do most other people.
I agree that you need some rule in case of no progress. I regret its disappearance from the basic rules. You say it's the most used rule, but as of now I don't think the majority of games should be using it. No doubt they are, because there was precious little publicity about the change. I never saw anything in the daily papers about it.
But in any case the problem with the 50 move rule is it's a century out of date. It's no longer adequate for players theoretical knowledge. That can only be more true as time goes on because players can now practice endgames that have received little analysis in the past against EGTBs.
In principle FIDE does not decide the basic rules of chess. FIDE is just some organisation and one of their goals is to standardize rules for chess. That doesn't mean everyone necessarily has to agree with them. Whatever they write in their handbook, it just doesn't matter. People can decide for themselves if they use FIDE rules or not. FIDE rules only apply on FIDE tournaments etc. The fact that most people use FIDE rules, doesn't mean that FIDE decides the rules. Nobody would follow them if they would change the way pieces move. Using the rules which FIDE supplies is simply the easiest way for chess clubs. They usually say in their regulations that they follow the FIDE rules supplied by KNSB in dutch in the Netherlands unless otherwise specified. These rules of course include the 50 move rule. They use all rules, no set of rules which doesn't include 50 move rule.
@Numquam
Interesting. Are the FIDE rules supplied by KNSB different from the published FIDE rules? The published rules do include a 50 move rule but not for informal games.
People in Holland outside chess clubs would probably use the published rules. You can find opportunities for such games quite easily in Holland.
I think this thread should probably have a 50 move rule
wollyhood wrote:
I think this thread should probably have a 50 move rule
I think it would be better terminated under my "no progress" rule.
👍
In fact, the 50 move rule could actually deter quicker mates. Take this example:
Let's say that in this position, 49 moves have been played without a capture or pawn move. White achieved this position, and has a mate in 2 (Ra8+..etc) but after Nb8, it would be move 50 = Draw. White wold have to go for the capture on d7, despite it being a mate in 2, just to "get a capture in" and re-set the move count. The game will actually take longer if white wants to avoid a 50 move claim, when he could have just mated in 2. So...White would be given the win for a weaker move and a draw for the stronger move.
EndgameStudier wrote:
In fact, the 50 move rule could actually deter quicker mates. Take this example:
For a more extreme example, if the following position were arrived at with two moves of the 50 move rule already gone, then if both players played perfectly the 50 move rule would add 43 moves to the game.
Of course the chances of getting two human opponents who could play it accurately with the 50 move rule in effect is nil, but that's just a reason to reserve the rule for computer v computer.
The 50 move rule also fails to take into account other means of "progress", such as castling, double checks, and triangulation. The same way 3 fold repetition doesn't count triangulation as a repeated position, why should the 50 move rule count it? Also, a pawn move and capture at the same time, should allow 100 more moves because that is DOUBLE progress! What's funny is that some of the same people who agree with the 50 move rule also think 3 fold repetition should be a win for the perpetual checker LMAO!
No, I'm not saying that, only that you can do as you like in friendly games, because they're not FIDE-rated. Personally I'm all in favour of sticking to FIDE's competition rules also in friendly games. Makes it easier.