View Poll Results: Sofia rules or no draws before move 30?

Voters
2. You may not vote on this poll
  • No draws before move 30

    0 0%
  • Sofia rules

    2 100.00%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308

    Sofia rules or no draws before move 30?

    Following on from the current 'debate' in the Doeberl, thought I would start a poll on which rule this board thinks is superior for trying to stop short draws.

    My opinion is that Sofia rules are superior in this aspect.

    The reason for this is two-fold. Having a 30 move limit places an artificial barrier on the game. This means the rule says it is ok to agree a draw on move 31, but to do it on move 29 needs the arbiters permission.

    Also, with the 30 move rule, the rule is usually written that it requires the arbiters permission. I think this is a poor way to have a rule as it places the arbiter in a very awkward position when a claim is made for a draw before move 30.

    If this occurs in a tournament with a few arbiters (like Doeberl), then different interpretations can be applied and confusion can reign. One board gets the soft draw, the next board is forced to play on, from possibly similar positions.

  2. #2
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Damn, was creating poll and was highlighting the title to add for the poll question and clicked on it accidently, meaning the thread was started without the poll.

    Can a mod please add the poll with the following answers-

    No draws before move 30
    Sofia rules

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Garrett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    the City
    Posts
    3,210
    I vote for no poll.

  4. #4
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    493
    I think an arbiter should hand out short draws like he/she would hand out byes, only one per tournament.

  5. #5
    CC International Master Kaitlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Inventor of the Surströmming opening
    Posts
    1,416

    Cool Rule 3.

    Rule 3. (How about)... you only get a point if you win and nothing otherwise. And a draw is not half a win... (that would fix it)

    Previously stated (my) rules:

    Rule 1: Read the rules
    Rule 2: Make sure you go to the tiolet 'before' your game starts.. (even if you think you dont need to)
    .. this Caketin is full of little spiders and watermelon seeds.....

    ..Chess is all about fear and psychology

    ..Chess is like an exam..... you havent studied for

    ..If you're good at Chess it means you are very intelligent and could potentialy do great things
    ..... but that you might have wasted that playing way too much chess

  6. #6
    Account Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    928
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitlin
    Rule 3. (How about)... you only get a point if you win and nothing otherwise. And a draw is not half a win... (that would fix it)
    The problem is that at that level, the natural result of games are a draw. Its the big problem in chess. The best I can think of is 1/3 of a point for draws.

    I've won games against people over 800 points above me just by playing for a draw by move 1, offer a draw around 15 and then my opponent does something stupid out of desperation to create winning chances which ends up costing them the match.

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,122
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronD
    The problem is that at that level, the natural result of games are a draw. Its the big problem in chess. The best I can think of is 1/3 of a point for draws.
    But that would penalize genuine draws, so it would be a bad idea.

    There is no option on the poll to vote for FIDE Laws.

    See also The draw problem — a simple solution by John Nunn

    The main point is that it is largely a non-problem when put into perspective. The fraction of short draws is quite low, and measures to try to circumvent them could do more harm than good by altering the fundamental structure of the game. And he argues:

    There is a difference between the top grandmasters and those lower down the rating list. Top GMs (say the top ten in the world) make a comfortable living from chess and will normally be paid an appearance fee (or guarantee) to play in a tournament. In this situation it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to display their skill to the best of their ability, which is after all why they are being paid an appearance fee.

    The situation is different lower down. In the current austere chess climate, even quite highly-rated GMs struggle to make a living, and if a quick draw guarantees next month’s mortgage payment and thereby a roof over their family’s head, it is perhaps understandable that they should give way to temptation. Most of those who criticise quick draws have a regular salary and find it hard to appreciate how uncertain the life of a professional player can be. Chess journalists who are lucky enough to receive a regular income from their column(s) are especially prone to this.

    In the case of participants in Open tournaments who have not been paid an appearance fee, I don’t think there is any real reason to criticise short draws. If the players think it is in their best interests to agree one then they should just go ahead. These players are taking their chances on an equal basis to everyone else and there is no more reason to complain about two GMs agreeing a quick draw than two 1700 players at the other end of the hall.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  8. #8
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    There is no option on the poll to vote for FIDE Laws.
    There is now.
    The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
    Mos Eisley spaceport The toolbox. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    There is now.
    my thread, my poll and I gave options. I deliberately chose not to include the third option, which was included without asking the thread starter. Please remove it as I do not want it included.

  10. #10
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,058
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    my thread, my poll and I gave options. I deliberately chose not to include the third option, which was included without asking the thread starter. Please remove it as I do not want it included.
    Done.
    The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
    Mos Eisley spaceport The toolbox. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Of course if someone wants to start a second thread and poll that is their choice

  12. #12
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,342
    I agree with the point Garvin is making in #1 but I am so sceptical about the merit of using such rules (other than the existing disrepute rule) to discourage grandmaster draws that I see no point in voting on the poll. Actually what has gone on with the Doeberl this time around has made me more sceptical not less.

    I agree with Jono and John Nunn - for the great majority of [EDIT: GM-level] events, if a player agrees too many short draws, just don't invite them back again. Ever.
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 24-03-2008 at 10:56 PM.

  13. #13
    Account Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    928
    After this occurance where the players were playing near best moves by fritz at the time of repetition. I say throw the sofia rule out.

  14. #14
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronD
    After this occurance where the players were playing near best moves by fritz at the time of repetition. I say throw the sofia rule out.
    Cam, The Sofia rules are different to what is being discussed in the Doeberl thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sofia rule
    "The players should not offer draws directly to their opponents. Draw-offers will be allowed only through the Chief-Arbiter in three cases: a triple-repetition of the position, a perpetual check and in theoretically drawn positions."
    From www.chessdom.com.

  15. #15
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    I agree with the point Garvin is making in #1 but I am so sceptical about the merit of using such rules (other than the existing disrepute rule) to discourage grandmaster draws that I see no point in voting on the poll. Actually what has gone on with the Doeberl this time around has made me more sceptical not less.
    Chess seems to have been disrepute by the silly rule. A player who assures himself of a championship or first prize with a short draw has not brought disrepute into the game, but is usually congratulated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    I agree with Jono and John Nunn - for the great majority of events, if a player agrees too many short draws, just don't invite them back again. Ever.
    To clarify, this applied only to players to whom organizers were paying an appearance fee.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Arbiter's Corner: Notes & Queries
    By arosar in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 397
    Last Post: 08-03-2019, 08:03 PM
  2. What constitutes an illegal move in blitz?
    By Bereaved in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-12-2009, 10:43 PM
  3. Calling/Announcing Check
    By Phil Bourke in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 26-07-2007, 09:03 PM
  4. Dandenong Chess Club Calendar 2007
    By Bereaved in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-01-2007, 02:23 PM
  5. New Laws of Chess as of 1st July 2005
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 02-11-2005, 09:45 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
  •