With what that just took place in the Armageddon game in Nalchik, Russia between IM Socko and WGM Foisor during the Women’s World Championship, should the Armageddon system be abolished?
Should K + N vs. K + N, or K +B vs. K +B, or K + 2 Ns vs. K be considered a win (on time) in World Championship competition? What if this would have been the final game of the World Championship?
What should FIDE do about this rule? Should this rule be changed immediately?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Sure! It simply makes NO sense… it’s a nonsense!
And if even I can see it…
Rui leprechaun
(…then such rules are unfit! :))
Absolutely not. There is nothing wrong with this rule.
And this rule is in effect for at least 10 years.
What do you do if the position on the board is that white can mate next move, black see’s this and deliberatly runs oout of time. If you change this rule, black will get rewarded for running out of time.
There is nothing wrong with this rule. People (titled players included) just have to learn the rules.
P.S.: It doesn’t matter if it’s the World Championship or the game in the backyard.
The rule is correct as it is: one side can mate the other if ‘the other’ is dumb enough.
We cannot start assuming what the players’ moves are going to be. That’s ‘outside assistance’.
What brings chess into disrepute are sprint games as deciders, and timeschemes with no increment per move to account for the physical act of moving and hitting the clock.
The real question is whether people who don’t know the rules should be arbiters.
They cearly didn’t know the rules for blitz as they made the wrong decision first. After they looked up the FIDE handbook they saw that Socko is right and changed the rulling. they needed almost 3 hours for that.
THIS should be changed, not the rules. An arbiter on that level should know the rules inside out.
So an earlier comment was that this is a perfectly good rule that makes an allowance “the most unskilled play” at a world championship event? And further, to make no distinction between this World Championship event and backyard play…hummm. I’m seeing a not very bright light.
Where does it stop?
What if the ending K and R vs. K and N ending is reached where both king and knight are in the center of the board. Should this be declared drawn too because it is imposible to force mate???
What about R vs. R and N position that are theoretically draw (most of them). Should the player be prevented to test their opponentas if they can really hold the draw?
The current rules are just fine and are really simple:
Only if mate is theoretically impossible, should the game be declared drawn.
“The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.”
I don’t know why you are obssesed with that unskilled play. The last part is totally unneccesary.
It’s enough to say:
“”The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by ANY possible series of legal moves.”
The word “any” is the key word here.
Please shows us a game between 1500+ players in which black or white wins with mate having K + N vs. K + N, or K +B vs. K +B, or K + 2 Ns vs. K on the board 🙂
So you would declare this position as drawn?
8/8/8/8/4N3/2N5/3n4/4k1K1 w – – 0 1
8/8/8/8/4N3/2N5/3n4/4k1K1 w – – 0 1
How about that. You learn something every day.
It’s very easy to say that those rules are stupid, but can you make a better ones?
And those rules must be
1) Simple
2) have to take in account all possibilities (even the ones you can’t forsee.
I say that the current rules are very simple and just fine.
This absurdity shoud be removed immediately… and would never have appeared if FIDE would still be a little serious.
It is occasions like this that make chess equal to parcheesee, jacks, or snakes and ladders.
NO one will take it seriously until the federations governing chess takes chess seriously.
Chess is run by introverts and egomaniacs. I say throw out the bad apples and get serious about making chess a sport that can be taken seriously.
Play with a delay! Or better an increment! And – no armagegon, please!
In my opinion it’s ok with these rules! I agree with anon 3:51 and 4:04!
The rules also allow a player who is two or less minutes left to ask the referee for a draw, when a position of theorical draw is reached.
Just need not play armageedon- like the US women final controversy- anything goes if you allow this format. It is not proper chess once you enter blitz even, and has no place in a classical world championship.
The rules are correct- in ‘normal’ games you call the arbiter before you run out of time- mating material is mating material once your time is out. But in blitz where anything goes hard to call arbiter- it might not apply even if opponent playing for win on time- particularly armaggedon. Rules are correct- but foramt ridiculous for classical championship.
It’s clear that the only stupid thing there was the Chief Arbiter.
(1) I don’t like Armageddon. (2) I think Black should have called the arbiter and said that White is not trying to win by normal means, therefore the game is a draw and Black wins. The fault may be more with the player not knowing this rule.
Whoops, some of the other stuff says that Foisor did claim a draw before her flag fell.
Do I have to repeat myself??
It’s clear that the only stupid thing there was the Chief Arbiter!
The Arbiter should be sued by the player immediately. Enough is enough! Fake arbiters who got their titles by no tknowing the rules, but being cousins with top officials in SMD.
jud mccranie,
as has been mentioned before – you can’t do that in blitz. Blitz is time play from move 1.
anonymous said:
“The rule is correct as it is: one side can mate the other if ‘the other’ is dumb enough”.
Dumb enough?! It’s WWCC!!! After 5 minutes or 5 years, K+N versus K+N goes to 1/2-1/2
Susan your question is:
“Should K + N vs. K + N, or K +B vs. K +B, or K + 2 Ns vs. K be considered a win (on time) in World Championship competition?”
First there are some exceptions in such endings – see:
8/8/8/8/4N3/2N5/3n4/4k1K1 w – – 0 1
and secondly; why stop there? We can ask if a K+P vs. K (where the weak side has the opposition) should be considered a win (on time)? Or how about R+N (or B) vs. R (when tablebases say it’s drawn)? And why stop there, there are more an more complex positions that are theoretically drawn.
Thats why those rules can not be changed, because it would make things complicated as hell. Some positions are just unclear and can’t be called either way and we just can’t assume that both opponents will play perfect chess (otherwise we can declare the game drawn even in the starting position!)
There just can’t be a better rule than the current one.
And here is a little test for all of you.
It’s white to move, but he ran out of time before he could make it.
1r4k1/5ppp/7b/p4P2/2p1P3/2P5/P1P4Q/RK4R1 w – – 0 0
How would you call this game?
Deciding classical games with Blitz or Armageddon is just stupid! This is, of course, just my opinion. In any case, if they want to do it, then they should videotape EVERY game, in order to be able to properly deal with situations like this one.
Bruno
Blitz is a “sudden death” finish, so Article 10.2 applies. If the arbiter agrees that the opponent is making no effort to win by normal means, or it is not possible to win by normal means, the game is a drawn.
Not true jmac.
Read the FIDE handbook again.