View Full Version : Ok 2 queries for you guys

17-04-2008, 08:14 PM
Now I'm not sure on all the rules of playing chess, I don't think anyone knows them all!

But today I played in a Junior chess tournament in Sydney and there were 2 incidents that occurred.

Time limit: 15 mins (no incriments)

Ok first, I was playing a game against some, had a winning postion, got in time trouble, lost a bishop and it got right down to my rook vs his rook and knight, no pawns!
We played some moves and I had about 7 seconds left while he had 15 or something.
I stopped the clock and wanted to claim a draw, no arbiter was around when I wanted the game to be looked at so the guy thought I was claiming it there and then and shook my hand, set up the peices then when we went to give our scores in, he said that I had claimed the draw without raising my hand or trying to find an arbitor.
Now i didn't put my hand up, because there was a huge crowd, but I had a look around and there was no-one.

But with that out the way, heres my question
1. If I asked an arbitor that I wanted to claim a draw, would he accept the claim with the time limit? Because my opponent was trying to win on time.

ok, next thing....

this was my sisters game, last round and everyone was tired, ecspecially her!
Her game was like the last 1 to finish and the guy who she was playing checkmated her and his flag fell (his clock ran out of time)
They asked an arbitor is it a draw or win (and for who?)
He said it was a win for the other guy because my sister never claimed the time, bu how can she when the guy is picking up his peice and moving it when ot hit zero?
I was watching and it hit zero before he placed his rook on the board signifying mate.

Now personally I think it should be a draw, and my sister was quite upset by the last result.

So my second question
2. What should have the outcome have been?

Kevin Bonham
17-04-2008, 08:33 PM
First case:

I'm very impressed that you know enough to know you can claim a draw when the opponent is just trying to win on time if there are no increments!

To claim a draw you have to do it in your last 2 minutes (which you did).

You have to stop the clock.
You have to say you are claiming a draw.
You have to get the arbiter.

If you don't do all three things then there is no draw claim and the game keeps going.

With a rook against a rook and knight, if you claim a draw the arbiter will probably make the game continue to see if the other guy is trying to beat you or just trying to win on time. After all, in some positions the rook and knight can win.

If you claim a draw with only seven seconds left, you have a problem, because you won't get enough moves played in time for the arbiter to see if the other player is trying or not.

So probably even if you stopped the clocks with seven seconds left and got the arbiter, it wouldn't have been a draw. The best time to claim the draw was as soon as he had only rook and knight left, provided you had less than 2 minutes.

The draw-claim rule (rule 10.2) is rather hard to understand. Most adults don't understand it.

Second case:

The arbiter is right. The player who plays the checkmate wins the game unless the other player claims flagfall before they do so. To claim a win on time you have to stop the clocks and say flagfall. She has to reach out and stop his clock the instant that it falls before he can get the piece down. A spectator seeing that the flag was down is not enough.

I'll move this thread to the Arbiter's Corner section soon - that is where we put all questions about the rules.

17-04-2008, 08:40 PM
Ok first thing to note is the time-limit. You are playing G15 which falls into the classification of Rapidplay. This means Appendix B of the FIDE applies and in some cases overrides the laws of classical chess.

In the first case, stopping the clock and calling for the arbiter is seeking a claim for a draw by vitue of your opponent not trying to win is a claim under Rule 10.2 which says...

10.2 If the player, having the move, has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may claim a draw before his flag falls. He shall stop the clocks and summon the arbiter.

1. If the arbiter agrees the opponent is making no effort to win the game by normal means, or that it is not possible to win by normal means, then he shall declare the game drawn. Otherwise he shall postpone his decision or reject the claim.
2. If the arbiter postpones his decision, the opponent may be awarded two extra minutes and the game shall continue in the presence of an arbiter, if possible. The arbiter shall declare the final result later in the game or after a flag has fallen. He shall declare the game drawn if he agrees that the final position cannot be won by normal means, or that the opponent was not making sufficient attempts to win by normal means.
3. If the arbiter has rejected the claim, the opponent shall be awarded two extra minutes time.
4. The decision of the arbiter shall be final relating to 10.2 a, b, c.

So in your case, stopping the clock with so little time you are not really giving the arbiter the option of using 2. As Kevin says above a rook versus knight position is probably not going to be given immediately and the arbiter will want to see that the guy really is playing for a draw. My advice, in the future make sure you have a good minute or more on your clock before trying a 10.2 claim in that sort of position.

Regarding the case with your sister - I assume this was the same time control of G15. If so then the rules specific to Rapid play are...

B7. The flag is considered to have fallen when a player has made a valid claim to that effect. The arbiter shall refrain from signalling a flag fall.

B8. To claim a win on time, the claimant must stop both clocks and notify the arbiter. For the claim to be successful the claimant`s flag must remain up and his opponent`s flag down after the clocks have been stopped.

As it doesn't sound like this was done then therefore there doesn't appear to have been a time claim before the checkmate. Regardless of what happened with the clock, the flag is not considered to have fallen until a PLAYER has made a claim to that effect. In rapidplay the arbiter should refrain from signalling flagfalls and in all chess, spectators and players of other games should always do so.

I hope this helps.

17-04-2008, 09:43 PM
That kind of cleared things up.

I understand now, I should have stopped the clock a fewmoves earlier, I can't remember how many moves earlier I captured the last remaining pawn.

And for the second 1, it really sucked, cause the flag fell while the mate was happening, which I got told once it was a draw.

thx for the feedback

Bill Gletsos
17-04-2008, 11:47 PM
It is generally considered by the FIDE Rules Committee that what occurs on the board is the most important.

Lets look at the following situations:
a) Player A picks up a piece to deliver mate, releases the piece on the square but prior to pressing his clock his opponent player B claims flag fall. In this circumstance player A wins as the mate immediately ended the game and stopping the clock is irrelevant.

b) Player A picks up a piece to deliver mate but prior to releasing the piece on the square, his opponent player B claims flag fall. In this circumstance the flag fall is valid as player A has not completed his move.

c) Player A picks up a piece to deliver mate and at vitually the same instant as he releases the piece on the square, his opponent player B claims flag fall. If the arbiter is observing the game he can determine the result based on what he witnessed. However if he is not observing it or is unsure which occurred first then he should rule in favour of the mate.

Note in a) and b) above I assumed there is no disagreement between the players as to what happened. If in both cases player A claims to to have released the piece prior to player B claiming flag fall then the arbiter is essentially in case c).

18-04-2008, 11:47 AM
Yea, there was no arbitor though, so I think even if the flag fall was claimed before the peice was placed to deliver mate, the arbitor would have had to go with the person who delivered mate

18-04-2008, 12:16 PM
Yea, there was no arbitor though, so I think even if the flag fall was claimed before the peice was placed to deliver mate, the arbitor would have had to go with the person who delivered mate

Perhaps if there were a number of reliable witnesses the arbiter would be swayed. One witness who happened to be a sibling of the claimant doesn't build a strong case. Nothing personal.

In this actual case though it doesn't sound like a valid claim was made before mate was delivered anyhow. I understand from your original post that you just saw the flag fall the instant before mate was delivered. In that case according to rule B7 the flag is not considered to have fallen. So for the purposes of the checkmate it was delivered before the flag fall, despite the physical reality of what you witnessed on the clock.

18-04-2008, 10:46 PM
yea I wasn't sure if you had to claim the flag fall, but no it wasn't claimed.

19-04-2008, 03:28 AM
Sorry mate, but I would also not have granted a draw to you with R v R+N. The attacking side can try a lot of things to make the defender slip up, even aside from your time pressure even including one of the world's best players in Judit Polgar vs Garry Kasparov, 1996 (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070866).

Kevin Bonham
19-04-2008, 03:42 PM
Yes, the player with R+N should definitely keep playing and keep trying to win in this situation. So long as they keep playing and keep trying for the win (even if their tries are not succeeding) it is very hard for the defender to convince the arbiter that they know how to hold it, and therefore a win on time for the player with R+N is very likely. The defender's best hope is to try to bash out 50 moves (or close to it) while the arbiter is watching. Of course if you only claim with seven seconds left this is not possible.

Unfortunately I did hear of a club tournament case some years ago where one of these was incorrectly ruled drawn under 10.2. The reality is that about a third of KRN v KR positions are forced wins and the rest are often not straightforward holds. The game linked to by Jono is an example - Polgar is holding until move 79, at which point Ra1 loses according to tablebases while Rf1 is still a draw.

The case of KRN v KR is discussed by Reuben in his first volume Arbiter's Handbook. He recommends the arbiter make this ruling:

Play on. You should count the number of moves made. If White [the side with KR in his example -KB] makes something like 46 moves before his flag falls, then you can award the draw if Black has no forced mate.

19-04-2008, 06:44 PM
hehe so I'm lucky he didnt wan to call the arbitors over :D

Kevin Bonham
19-04-2008, 06:45 PM
hehe so I'm lucky he didnt wan to call the arbitors over :D

What was the end result of the game? Was it recorded as a win for him or a draw?