Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort) (Read 2957 times)
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 860
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #16 - 02/14/18 at 07:18:01
Post Tools
gwnn wrote on 02/14/18 at 06:49:18:
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 02/14/18 at 03:15:30:
If my opponent restarts the clock, which is highly likely, stop it again and move it out of his reach.

Really? I wouldn't consider this at all likely. Do people really restart the clock when their opponents stop it?

Unfortunately I also witnessed such behavior. To avoid those conflicts I prefer to play tournaments with an increment.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Karpfenkopf
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 12
Joined: 01/23/18
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #15 - 02/14/18 at 06:59:58
Post Tools
ReneDescartes wrote about blitz chess.

We have Guidlines III.2.2 in the 2018 rules (just the same as appendix G3 in the old 2014 rules):
Quote:
This Appendix shall only apply to standard play and rapidplay games without increment and not to blitz games.


So the "normal" arbiter would very likely not accept any claims based on III.4 / III.5.


But one could try anyway. The worst thing could happen is that the opponent gets two extra minutes. And as always the draw claim is also a draw offer. The  arbiter should ask and the opponent could accept that.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gwnn
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 460
Joined: 03/21/11
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #14 - 02/14/18 at 06:49:18
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 02/14/18 at 03:15:30:
If my opponent restarts the clock, which is highly likely, stop it again and move it out of his reach.

Really? I wouldn't consider this at all likely. Do people really restart the clock when their opponents stop it?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 860
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #13 - 02/14/18 at 05:59:37
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 02/13/18 at 18:57:54:
@brabo - Why would you question the moves?

Just read the article and more specific the statement: "Therefore I propose a reasoned conclusion: if there is no evidence of Fritz 6a making any attempt to maneuver into a winning position by move 70 (Fritz need not reach a won position, merely maneuver toward it), the game will be adjudicated as drawn. This is in accordance with the purposes set forth for this match. After all, even a weak chess player operating the chess engine would see by move 70 whether or not any progress is being made toward victory. If not, it is reasonable to conclude that a draw would be accepted."
That is completely contradicting the end of the game which lasts longer than move 70.

It has been almost 2 decades that this game was played. I still remember very well many of the details but I don't see this as relevant in this discussion.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 315
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #12 - 02/14/18 at 03:15:30
Post Tools
Sorry, ReneDescartes, I should have put a smiley after my previous answer. Smiley

ReneDescartes wrote on 02/13/18 at 16:31:22:
What should I do if my opponent tries to do this to me and the arbiter isn't looking?

Under 6.12b you have the right to stop the clock in order to summon the arbiter. What I would do is:
  • Note the time remaining on my clock. If this is in dispute, I want to be convincing as to the correct number (see next point about the clock being restarted).
  • Stop the clock. If my opponent restarts the clock, which is highly likely, stop it again and move it out of his reach.
  • Say to my opponent, “I am stopping the clock in order to summon the arbiter.”
  • Find a way to summon the arbiter without leaving my opponent alone with the clock, e.g. by waving, by having a spectator fetch the arbiter, by having my opponent accompany me. The reason for this is that my claim will surely be denied if I have no time left, so I need to make sure the clock is not restarted in my absence.
  • Refrain from looking at the position while the arbiter is being summoned.
  • When the arbiter arrives, make my claim under G.4 or G.5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2384
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #11 - 02/14/18 at 01:39:56
Post Tools
ReneDescartes wrote on 02/14/18 at 01:30:13:
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 02/13/18 at 17:34:45:
@ReneDescartes - I could not find "normal arbiter" in the glossary.

And I can't find a normal answer above. Whether or not there is a de facto consensus among arbiters about this, what do the other members recommend doing in the situation I asked about?


I would try to claim a draw; what's the worst that could happen?  You lose when you were going to lose on time anyway?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ReneDescartes
God Member
*****
Offline


Qu'est-ce donc que je
suis? Une chose qui pense.

Posts: 954
Joined: 05/18/10
Gender: Male
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #10 - 02/14/18 at 01:30:13
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 02/13/18 at 17:34:45:
@ReneDescartes - I could not find "normal arbiter" in the glossary.

And I can't find a normal answer above. Whether or not there is a de facto consensus among arbiters about this, what do the other members recommend doing in the situation I asked about?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 315
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #9 - 02/13/18 at 18:57:54
Post Tools
@brabo - Why would you question the moves? Ham makes the same point as you:
Quote:
As such, it is proof of a "bug" in Fritz 6a.

I am not so sure it's a bug. It could just be a programmer's design decision that seems unnatural to a competitive player.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* Final position, after 73...Kb7-c8 (1/2-1/2)

It's one thing for a computer to recognize a three-fold repetition, it's another thing to avoid it. For a human, allowing a three-fold repetition here would be an error. For a program, it's complicated, because rejecting the top candidate involves a delta parameter over the second candidate, and another floor parameter on the second candidate. What parameters should be used? And if you keep iterating over the second-best candidate, you could "accidentally" find a win. More likely you will just get a 50-move draw instead. Worst case, you could even spiral into a loss. It just seems very complicated to program the draw avoidance.

In my opinion, only the programmer could say whether this was a bug. Even if the programmer made a change to later versions, to avoid the draw, it still might not be a bug in this version.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 315
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #8 - 02/13/18 at 18:20:41
Post Tools
I am trying to formulate a coherent answer to gwnn's question about "normal means", but I want to sleep on it. For now I will point out the significance of the word "or" in the glossary definition:
  • A position where a player has no realistic chance of winning, but is playing in a positive manner to try to win, meets the definition of normal means.
  • A position where a player has a realistic chance of winning, but is not playing in a positive manner to try to win, meets the definition of normal means.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 860
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #7 - 02/13/18 at 18:20:28
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 02/13/18 at 15:56:53:
@brabo - I am not sure what "wrong ruling" you refer to. The game Fritz - Ham was drawn by 3-fold repetition which seems entirely correct to me.
http://jfcampbell.us/CampbellReport/ham/fr_hambl.htm

I wasn't aware about a 3-fold repetition. I only remember that there was at that time quite some discussion on the rec.chess forums about the sudden draw. Anyway if the moves were really played as given in the article then it is a very strange bug of the engine to allow a 3-fold repetition with a winning evaluation.

Another silly arbitrage happened in the TCEC superfinal season 9 which I described in my article http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2016/12/raise-of-machines-part-2.html
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 315
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #6 - 02/13/18 at 17:34:45
Post Tools
@ReneDescartes - I could not find "normal arbiter" in the glossary.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ReneDescartes
God Member
*****
Offline


Qu'est-ce donc que je
suis? Une chose qui pense.

Posts: 954
Joined: 05/18/10
Gender: Male
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #5 - 02/13/18 at 16:31:22
Post Tools
One question I have  is whether a normal arbiter will cut short a game where, in blitz with no increment, one side tries to win, e.g., K+R vs. K+R on time. What should I do if my opponent tries to do this to me and the arbiter isn't looking? Can I stop the clock to try to make a claim even though I have 10 seconds left? Should I try to call the arbiter while playing? Or am I just lost?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 315
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #4 - 02/13/18 at 15:56:53
Post Tools
@brabo - I am not sure what "wrong ruling" you refer to. The game Fritz - Ham was drawn by 3-fold repetition which seems entirely correct to me.
http://jfcampbell.us/CampbellReport/ham/fr_hambl.htm
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 315
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #3 - 02/13/18 at 15:36:43
Post Tools
Karpenkopf and brabo both gave sensible replies.

gwnn wrote on 02/13/18 at 10:13:36:
I'm just wondering here, what does "win by normal means" mean in Q vs R, or similar positions?

In the online FIDE Handbook, https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article , there is a glossary:

Quote:
normal means: G.5. Playing in a positive manner to try to win; or, having a position such that there is a realistic chance of winning the game other than just flag-fall.

Not sure if this actually answers your question, though. I think the intent of these fuzzy rules is that the arbiter gets to use his/her discretion. The effect is that players don't understand the rules, and many decisions are appealed.

Aside: Why does the glossary say "G.5"? G.6 also uses the term "normal means", does the glossary definition not apply to G.6? This is hardly pedantry, when we are talking about the Laws of Chess. One-move blunders like this do not inspire confidence.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 860
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: "Cannot win by normal means" (or no effort)
Reply #2 - 02/13/18 at 10:39:34
Post Tools
A quick check at the Lomonosov tablebases tells us that white mates in 24 moves.
Anyway that is not the point of course here. As long you are not stalling the game and there is sufficient mating material on the board then the game should go on. Bad technique is not stalling a game. Stalling in that type of position would be e.g. to play only king moves so your opponent runs out of time. Giving checks can be stalling but doesn't necessary need to be. A general rule is that if you are not sure somebody is stalling then the game should be continued. I remember one famous example of a wrong ruling about it: http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=9494 especially as stalling was never a reality because of correspondence play.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo