http://www.seattlepi.com/othersports/207552_unwrittenrules12.html
Claim Draws in Drawn Endgame
Sort:
steelers1fanoh11 wrote:
ah...none of these are what i was referring to. i never said there's no unwritten rules in any game or sport. i said i don't know of any which refer to a specific factor of a game which matters all the time except in specific circumstances. please read all of my comment before you respond. otherwise we're just wasting each other's time.
first of all you asked for me to find specific situations in which rules are disregarded which i did. If you want something different now i am open to what you may need from me but stop saying im wasting your time when im merely answering you questions. the fact is "winning" by time in chess in a situation where a person has no other way of winning isnt a situation unless people make it a situation. i find this disrespectful and unsportsmanlike. im saying the chess clock was designed to make people move faster, not to introduce a second way for victory. chess is a game of dignity and is exciting because its your mind vs mine. if we tie in a game then we tie. if i have more time than you and we are at what would always be a draw in chess without a clock then it is a draw with the clock. Im not saying winning on time isnt a part of the game but if you cant win in any other way during a game then your bad play should not be baled out on a technicality.
It wasn't, but it's become one.
TheGrobe wrote:
It wasn't, but it's become one.
apparently noone who has posted anything recently knows anything about the topic and it has become a passive-aggressive attack fest. time controls obviously have a small part of the game Schachgeek but this post has nothing to with personal time management skills. i would say ask TheGrobe but he doesnt actually play chess. Maybe best would be to read a few posts preceding the post you are responding to. i apologize for being so direct but if you were being personally and unjustifiably attacked im sure you might be a little upset.
this is an example of why its "unfair" "unsportsmanlike" to finish a 50 move rule;
(cc game)
trigs wrote:
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
I can explain to you how I think about it, I can't explain how you should think about it.
In a 1 0 game, I think anything goes. If you get into a R v R endgame, then you better have enough time to reach 50 moves, or maybe the opponent will be nice and offer a draw. Heck, if you've got 5 secs left to his 30 secs, just resign.
In a 5 min blitz game, let's say one side has 1 min and the other side has 2 min, and the last capture just happened. If I were the side with the 1 min and the other guy started blitzing off his moves, I would consider that unsportsmanlike. Yes he's up 2 min to 1 min, but I should be able to easily reach 50 moves in a minute. Is he really going to try for the win? If you extend it further, maybe I have 1.5 min to his 4 min. Dude, give up, it's a draw.
I have similar logic in an OTB game. If I reach some drawn endgame, let's say R + P v R, with the opponent's king well placed, and I'm rated about 2250 and I'm playing a 2390-rated FM, and he's got 1 min left to make all his moves to my 20 min, I'll play for the win. Look, we don't have a 50 move problem, I can make pawn moves for awhile, and I don't mind trying to win this. Heck, maybe the guy has to go the the bathroom at some point. But if he's got 5 min left, I offer a draw.
perhaps i don't understand what you are saying exactly, but it seems like you just have arbitrary time restrictions or cutoffs in which draws should or should not be mandatory.
maybe you/opponent can make 50 moves in a minute, maybe you/opponent can't. isn't the time limit exactly for this reason - to limit the time of the game under certain restrictions? you pretty much just stated that it's unsportsmanlike to do so in a 5 minute game when someone has 1 minute left, but did not mention a reason as to why other than "I would consider that unsportsmanlike" and "is he really going to try for the win?"
simply assuming that one could make the required number of moves or that in your opinion it is absurd that he/she is trying to go for the win does not really explain why the time limit restriction should simply be overlooked only in drawn situations since they are "special" situations (allegedly according to you and some others in this thread - i still don't get why).
i guess what i'm trying to say is other than you just saying that it is of your personal opinion in specific time situations there should just be a draw announced doesn't really answer my question. that opinion does not suggest why this should be so compared to non-drawn positions. furthermore, it does not explain why the time restriction should not be a legitimate factor in the game simply because the position is drawn. why have a time limit at all then if there are situations in which using the time to win is "unfair" or "unsportsmanlike" and other times it is legitimate?
all i'm saying is where does the time restriction legitimacy start and end? and are there any issues or implications with the notion of time restriction being legitimate in one situation and not legitimate in another? obviously you know my answer to that one.
Wow. I can't believe that this got so many new comments so quickly. I'd just like to point out a couple of things:
I posted this after getting flagged in a stupidly simple drawn endgame.
I was premoving in the ending to conserve time, but there was still a significant premove lag (unlike some other live chess sites where it's only about .1 seconds).
I no longer place open seeks for sudden death time controls because of this.
I think it's silly to try and flag in a clearly drawn position (not press for a win because there's still winning chances, but trying to flag somebody when you have a rook pawn and their king is in the corner). Under no tournament circumstances would this work - everything has a delay or allows claims of insufficient losing chances if you have an analog clock.
Obviously this rating doesn't matter, so I think it's nice to show your opponent some courtesy when they've reached a dead-drawn position where you can't make progress. I think the one exception is when two players are trying to blitz out so fast that neither can offer/accept a draw without losing on time.
These are just some thoughts. In the grand scheme of things, none of this really matters since blitz never really matters.
Funny situation in real life:
A drawn position with opposite colour bishops and my 2 pawns vs my 2200 opponent's 1 pawn and he was trying to flag me.
In the end, he got flagged but the game was decided as a draw...
steelers1fanoh11 wrote:
i would say ask TheGrobe but he doesnt actually play chess.
i would say ask TheGrobe but he doesnt actually play chess.
What!? What is it that I've been playing? Do my opponent's know?
*shrugs* My feeling has always been that if it wouldn't be kosher in an OTB tournament then don't do it online either. This applies to everything from trying to win a dead-drawn position on time, to kibitzing on someone else's in-game chat. Bad manners are bad mkay?
TheGrobe wrote:
steelers1fanoh11 wrote:
i would say ask TheGrobe but he doesnt actually play chess.
i would say ask TheGrobe but he doesnt actually play chess.
What!? What is it that I've been playing? Do my opponent's know?
i was actually referring to your lack of live chess played or at least thats what it showed on your account info. i shouldnt have attacked you personally but i didnt appreciate your personal and ignorant comments. like i said it didnt need to get personal and i hope it doesnt anymore its really un-called-for and beyond the point. however, your reaction was priceless and literally made me lol.
I'm a wise-ass -- it's not personal at all, I just happen to disagree with you.
(It's probably because you're wrong.)
TheGrobe wrote:
I'm a wise-ass -- it's not personal at all, I just happen to disagree with you.
(It's probably because you're wrong.)
its prob because you r from calgary- it seems the flames fans are always obnixious :P
Ooh, now that's personal. It's OK to slag a guy a little, but to go after his religion like that?
steelers1fanoh11 wrote:
first of all you asked for me to find specific situations in which rules are disregarded which i did. If you want something different now i am open to what you may need from me but stop saying im wasting your time when im merely answering you questions. the fact is "winning" by time in chess in a situation where a person has no other way of winning isnt a situation unless people make it a situation. i find this disrespectful and unsportsmanlike. im saying the chess clock was designed to make people move faster, not to introduce a second way for victory. chess is a game of dignity and is exciting because its your mind vs mine. if we tie in a game then we tie. if i have more time than you and we are at what would always be a draw in chess without a clock then it is a draw with the clock. Im not saying winning on time isnt a part of the game but if you cant win in any other way during a game then your bad play should not be baled out on a technicality.
again, learn to read posts before commenting on them and it'll save us both some time. really, you should consider it in the future.
here's the first time i said it:
"i honestly can't think of any other game (or sport) that one of the factors of the game is just completely disregarded simply because using it as an advantage is considered unsportsmanlike only under certain conditions."
and here's the second time i said it:
"please list all of the unwritten rules which stipulate when and how a specific factor of the game should be disregarded. like i mentioned, i don't know of any in any other game where that happens. apparently, according to you, there are some in chess. i'd like to know them for future reference for sure."
nowhere did i just ask for unwritten rules to be stated.
steelers1fanoh11 wrote:
the fact is "winning" by time in chess in a situation where a person has no other way of winning isnt a situation unless people make it a situation.
and furthermore, this is exactly what is NOT a fact. if this was a fact, then time would not be a factor in the game. if you don't want it to be a factor, then (as i already mentioned) don't play timed games or play with time increments. otherwise, time is always part of the situation, and one can't just deem it unsportsmanlike or unnecessary all of a sudden.
i dont know what u want. these unwritten rules are exactly rules which completely disregard factors of their games. these rules if u read them stipulate specific situations in which factors of a game are disregarded. i honestly have no idea what u want. i read and responded to your posts and u keep telling me im not giving u what u want.
also it is in my opinion that people who win a position that is drawn or lost because of time are completely missing out on the point of the game. Note that i am referring to positions which can only be a draw or better. if there is any play left whatsoever (such as a rook v bishop w/ a few pawns for each) and a person runs out of time i see that as their fault and they deserve to lose. i am not condoning poor time management skills. i agree with the concept that manners are manners and if you wouldnt do it over the board dont do it online.
However, in situations which literally have no chance of winning and you repeat checks or play a position such as rook v rook just to win on time, it is my opinion that u are missing the point of the game entirely and being unsportsmanlike.
You can't list them or they'll cease to be unwritten. It's an unwritten rule.
Or at least it was.
they should probably be unspoken also.
how creative do u want to get and which sport. if u want you could probably google it and save me the typing pain...