bsrasmus wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
But, from what I heard from Erik earlier in the thread, the site also doesn't really enforce it, so isn't lack of enforcement equivalent to tacitly allowing it?
The site enforces it, but they are very conservative in their enforcement. He said that they likely have adjudicated fewer than 20 games in the past few years, though reading between the lines I don't think they keep statistics on this one. As I read it, they will take action when extreme cases occur but you don't have anything to worry about if you are trying to obey the rules.
So enforcement and game results are at the whims of the staff instead of the play (or nonplay) of the game?
Somebody didn't do their research and somebody else did.
Here's a definition of Lost Position: Any Chess game position from which a player must lose with accurate play. Many complex lost positions may still offer winning or drawing chances with alert play. (From http://www.chess-poster.com/english/glossary)
In my opinion, the staff has acted very reasonably to adjucate certain games in very specific circumstances. And as far as I can tell, there has not been a change in policy.
And if players always played accurately the result would always be a draw and it wouldn't have arrived at a lost position in the first place. The definition presumes the player with the advantage would not make a mistake. Once I get a winning advantage and my opponent goes on vacation can I claim a win since I must be presumed to be incapable of further error in my play?