PDA

View Full Version : what is the standing of 50 move claims in the absence of a score sheet?



Bereaved
19-12-2006, 08:31 PM
Hi everyone,

I was curious as to whether a claim of 50 moves is ever applicable in a rapid time control? I know that it is not permitted in long time controls with an incomplete score sheet ( not that this happens virtually ever now with increments ) but what about where neither player is required to record at all?

Happy for any feedback in this matter,

Take care and God bless, Macavity

Kevin Bonham
19-12-2006, 09:49 PM
The only requirement with relation to the scoresheet is that the move producing the 50-move rule must be written down by the player, in the case that the player is about to make that move. Whether the claim is accepted, if the scoresheet is lacking other moves, is up to the referee's discretion - although at normal time controls even if the player has not scored the move, the opponent or the arbiter (or an assistant) should.

Interesting you ask this question because I was discussing it yesterday with my opponent who had just had KBN v K against me, but agreed a draw after only seven moves of it. In this case once KBN v K was reached I gestured to indicate I had seen the clock's move counter showing 65.

If the arbiter is not satisfied a 50 move claim is correct for whatever reason (including absence of scoresheet) they should reject the claim.

AlexDavies
20-12-2006, 04:41 PM
Hi everyone,

I was curious as to whether a claim of 50 moves is ever applicable in a rapid time control? I know that it is not permitted in long time controls with an incomplete score sheet ( not that this happens virtually ever now with increments ) but what about where neither player is required to record at all?

Happy for any feedback in this matter,

Take care and God bless, Macavity

In the following G/100 encounter, DOP Ken Holt counted the moves in a pawnless single rook endgame until the game was drawn.

Event: Victorian Under 18 Championship
Site: Melbourne Chess Club, AUS
Date: 1992.07.13
Round: 1
White: Davies, Alexander
Black: Ghobrial, Karim
Result: 1/2-1/2
ECO: B46

1. e4 c5
{The time control was all moves in 100 minutes.}
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 a6
5. Nc3 e6
6. Be2 Bb4
7. O-O Bxc3
8. bxc3 h6
9. Nxc6 bxc6
10. e5 Qa5
11. Qd4 Ne7
12. f4 Nf5
13. Qb4 Qxb4
14. cxb4 Nd4
15. Bd3 Rb8
16. Be3 Nb5
17. Bc5 f5
18. c4 Nc7
19. Bd6 Rb7
20. Be2 Kf7
21. g4 g6
22. gxf5 gxf5
23. Bxc7 Rg8+
24. Kf2 Rxc7
25. c5 Bb7
26. Rg1 Rcc8
27. Bh5+ Ke7
28. Ke3 Ra8
29. Kd4 Raf8
30. Kc3 {White had 13 minutes remaining.} Kd8
31. Kb3 Kc7
32. Rad1 Bc8
33. Bf3 Kb7
34. Kc3 Kc7
35. Kd3 Kd8
36. Ke3 Ke7
37. Kf2 Kd8
38. Bxc6 Rg4
39. Rxg4 fxg4
40. Kg3 {White had 6 minutes remaining.} h5
41. Be4 Kc7
42. Rf1 {White had 5 minutes remaining.} Bb7
43. Bxb7 Kxb7
44. h3 gxh3
45. Kxh3 Kc6
46. Kh4 {and after throwing away a won game on about move 55, White scrambled to move 110 or so when the game was declared drawn by the 50 move rule (K + R versus K + R).} 1/2-1/2

You may recall that this event was dominated by Simon Rutherford, apart from an accident in the final round. He rectified this by defeating me 2.5-0.5 in the play-off (which was in the Bourke Street Myer display window).

Although the above game doesn't really answer the original question, I thought it might be of sentimental interest. However, after reviewing the game below, I suppose it might bring back unpleasant memories for some ...

Event: Victorian Under 18 Championship
Site: Melbourne AUS
Date: 1992.07.17
Round: 8
White: Davies, Alexander
Black: Pyke, Malcolm
Result: 1-0
WhiteElo: 1681
BlackElo: 1277
ECO: B04

1. e4 Nf6
2. e5 Nd5
3. d4 d6
4. Nf3 g6
5. Ng5 Bg7
6. Qf3 Be6
7. c4 dxe5
8. Nxe6 fxe6
9. cxd5 Qxd5
10. Qxd5 exd5
11. dxe5 Bxe5
12. f4 Bd6
13. Nc3 e6
14. Nb5 O-O
15. Nxd6 cxd6
16. g3 Nc6
17. Bg2 Nb4
18. O-O Rac8
19. Bd2 Nd3
20. Bc3 Nc5
21. Rfe1 Rfe8
22. Bd4 b6
23. Rac1 Rcd8
24. Re3 Kf7
25. b4 h5
26. bxc5 dxc5
27. Bxc5 bxc5
28. Rxc5 Rc8
29. Rec3 Rxc5
30. Rxc5 d4
31. Kf2 Rd8
32. Ke2
1-0

While on the topic of unpleasant Vic Junior memories, I'd also like to apologise for recommending ...Nc6 to gain a tempo against David Cordover's Orangutang (1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5). I may have neglected to mention that ...Nf6 has to be played first :)

Cheers,
Alex D.

Kevin Bonham
20-12-2006, 05:21 PM
In the following G/100 encounter, DOP Ken Holt counted the moves in a pawnless single rook endgame until the game was drawn.

I was going to mention 10.2 as a neater way of resolving that at that time limit but in 1992 that rule did not exist. I am not sure whether the disrepute rule did either. These days if KR v KR is on the board and one player is refusing draw offers I will warn them that they are required to accept the draw or else they are behaving in an unsporting fashion. With very weak juniors I will simply step in and rule the game drawn.

Speaking of ancient junior history, does this look in any way familiar? (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=134894#post134894)