Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 121 to 130 of 130
  1. #121
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout
    Wasn't Ian Rogers involved in one of the famous cases of this ending (K+2N v K+P)?
    Yes, it was against Gurevich at an interzonal. They had adjournments back then, I heard Gurevich just adjourned and checked his computer to see exactly how to do it.

  2. #122
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Coffs Harbour
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by garethbcharles

    I think the arbiter has to allow the game to continue. My understanding of "making an effort to win by normal means" is basically that you're trying to genuinely win over the board, not on the clock, and are making some kind of "progress". This can be tricky to judge, and can I think be quite difficult depending on the arbiter's understanding of chess.
    Yes, this is what actually happened, they played on for a few minutes with no time on one clock and eventually a draw was agreed by the players

  3. #123
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,073
    Hello Bill,

    what was the time control of the game that you ask about 10.2 ?

  4. #124
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Coffs Harbour
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Hello Bill,

    what was the time control of the game that you ask about 10.2 ?
    6o min guillotine finish

  5. #125
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,073
    Quote Originally Posted by billross
    6o min guillotine finish
    ok so game played under normal/rapid rules with guillotine finish

  6. #126
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,569
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    ok so game played under normal/rapid rules with guillotine finish
    It is an interesting point as to whether Appendix B applies to the G60 time control. I would say according to the current wording it does. However, if scoring the games was a requirement of the tournament then I would say that according to the arbiter it didn't.

    In either case, the applicability of 10.2 is the same.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  7. #127
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,598
    billross - you are quoting the section of the rules that applies to an instance where no arbiter is present in the venue. If there is an arbiter there the relevant section is 10.2.

    "Normal means" means that a position might be won in the course of normal chess play, where you assume that the players will make mistakes but will not (for instance) senselessly throw pieces away or make no attempt at all to stop opposing pawns promoting. KR vs KR cannot be won by normal means because although a checkmate is possible someone would need to throw their rook away. Ditto for KNN vs K because although a mate is possible no-one who has a clue would fall for it.

    However if KP vs KNN is the basis for a draw claim the arbiter should definitely ask the players to play on until the player with KP has their flag fall. Then the arbiter can make a decision. There is no way an arbiter just looking at the position could tell whether that position was one of the KNN vs KP endings that is a forced draw or not. In general the player with KP should be declared lost if their flag falls because the ending can be lost by imperfect play without making gross blunders - and therefore it is winnable by "normal means".

    Quote Originally Posted by garethbcharles
    My understanding of "making an effort to win by normal means" is basically that you're trying to genuinely win over the board, not on the clock, and are making some kind of "progress". This can be tricky to judge, and can I think be quite difficult depending on the arbiter's understanding of chess.
    My interpretation is that progress is irrelevant unless the 50-move rule is looming and that all that matters is that you are trying to win rather than mindlessly piece-shuffling to get the game on the clock. However I suspect that if one player had shown they clearly had no clue how to win the position then I would probably award the draw after flagfall.

  8. #128
    CC Grandmaster Denis_Jessop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    3,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout
    Wasn't Ian Rogers involved in one of the famous cases of this ending (K+2N v K+P)?
    So was Lilienthal against Smyslov in the final section of the Match Tournament for the Absolute Chess Championship of the USSR 1941. Lilienthal with the Knights couldn't win though it was apparently a theoretical win. Oddly enough, according to Botvinnik, that was the third time Lilienthal had had such a position and hadn't managed to win any of them. B blames it on Troitsky's confusing exposition of his analysis of the KNN v KP ending.

    DJ
    ...I don't want to go among mad people Alice remarked, "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: we're all mad here. I am mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice. "You must be," said the Cat ,"or you wouldn't have come here."

  9. #129
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Coffs Harbour
    Posts
    180
    Thanks everyone for answering my query - looks like a tricky one with no consensus view so far.

  10. #130
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,598
    Quote Originally Posted by billross
    Thanks everyone for answering my query - looks like a tricky one with no consensus view so far.
    I haven't seen anyone say it should have been called a draw yet. The only differences have been about exactly how to handle it after play on is called if the player with the two knights doesn't seem to be making an effective attempt to win.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Stinginess of Chess Players
    By Paul S in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 24-04-2008, 09:48 PM
  2. A little history from the Mexicans
    By firegoat7 in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 389
    Last Post: 30-11-2005, 01:58 PM
  3. How to increase chess participation.
    By ursogr8 in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 22-04-2005, 05:02 PM
  4. Mt Buller - Chess World letter to ACF
    By ChessGuru in forum Mt Buller Chess
    Replies: 210
    Last Post: 17-07-2004, 11:58 AM
  5. Australian chess wheel reinvented again!
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 20-02-2004, 04:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •