Should an arbiter claim draw at a K+R vs K+R endgame?Delay clock with delay not setRules: en passant and draw by triple repetitionValid claim for a draw in a blitz game?What should the penalty be for a player leaving the playing venue?Can a win be claimed on the second illegal move if the first wasn't raised?
PL/SQL function to receive a number and return its binary format
How to retract the pitched idea from employer?
Select items in a list that contain criteria
Why is the relationship between frequency and pitch exponential?
What is the purpose of building foundations?
Can an Eldritch Knight use Action Surge and thus Arcane Charge even when surprised?
Traffic law UK, pedestrians
Pushout commutative diagram
What is the advantage of carrying a tripod and ND-filters when you could use image stacking instead?
What's the right way to purge recurrently with apt?
Is it recommended against to open-source the code of a webapp?
Why don't B747s start takeoffs with full throttle?
Should an arbiter claim draw at a K+R vs K+R endgame?
Payment instructions from HomeAway look fishy to me
Question about JavaScript Math.random() and basic logic
When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
Deformation of rectangular plot
How to make a setting relevant?
Version 2 - print new even-length arrays from two arrays
How is it possible that Gollum speaks Westron?
How can drunken, homicidal elves successfully conduct a wild hunt?
How to translate “Me doing X” like in online posts?
Secure offsite backup, even in the case of hacker root access
Where does this pattern of naming products come from?
Should an arbiter claim draw at a K+R vs K+R endgame?
Delay clock with delay not setRules: en passant and draw by triple repetitionValid claim for a draw in a blitz game?What should the penalty be for a player leaving the playing venue?Can a win be claimed on the second illegal move if the first wasn't raised?
I was asked for first time to help at a non federated tournament for kids to arbitre their games, played at 30 minutes with no increment time.
It was a scholar tournament and they made mistakes as leaving checkmates in one, let the queen to be captured etc.
At one game both kids arrived to a K+R K+R endgame. There was not a way to quickly gain the rook and win the game and both kids had time.
One kid claimed it was a draw. We were two arbiters (not experts, just two 1900 helping a bit at the club).
We claimed draw.
Was it a correct decission or we should have left the kids play?
rules tournament tournament-directors
add a comment |
I was asked for first time to help at a non federated tournament for kids to arbitre their games, played at 30 minutes with no increment time.
It was a scholar tournament and they made mistakes as leaving checkmates in one, let the queen to be captured etc.
At one game both kids arrived to a K+R K+R endgame. There was not a way to quickly gain the rook and win the game and both kids had time.
One kid claimed it was a draw. We were two arbiters (not experts, just two 1900 helping a bit at the club).
We claimed draw.
Was it a correct decission or we should have left the kids play?
rules tournament tournament-directors
Now the question is: Why on Earth don't you give time per move?
– David
4 hours ago
There was no increment at the tourney @David they both have 25 minutes on his clock anyhow so I guess I should have asked the kid that had not offered draw if he wanted to play the 50 moves
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Finish games are a source of trouble when players reach "zeitnot". It is also hard to keep track of the 50-move rule when players are not writing the moves. If all big tournaments have moves away from no-time-per-move games, that may be for a good reason
– David
4 hours ago
Yes I was wondering myself it would have been a task to count the 50 moves with no notation.
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
add a comment |
I was asked for first time to help at a non federated tournament for kids to arbitre their games, played at 30 minutes with no increment time.
It was a scholar tournament and they made mistakes as leaving checkmates in one, let the queen to be captured etc.
At one game both kids arrived to a K+R K+R endgame. There was not a way to quickly gain the rook and win the game and both kids had time.
One kid claimed it was a draw. We were two arbiters (not experts, just two 1900 helping a bit at the club).
We claimed draw.
Was it a correct decission or we should have left the kids play?
rules tournament tournament-directors
I was asked for first time to help at a non federated tournament for kids to arbitre their games, played at 30 minutes with no increment time.
It was a scholar tournament and they made mistakes as leaving checkmates in one, let the queen to be captured etc.
At one game both kids arrived to a K+R K+R endgame. There was not a way to quickly gain the rook and win the game and both kids had time.
One kid claimed it was a draw. We were two arbiters (not experts, just two 1900 helping a bit at the club).
We claimed draw.
Was it a correct decission or we should have left the kids play?
rules tournament tournament-directors
rules tournament tournament-directors
edited 8 hours ago
Universal_learner
asked 8 hours ago
Universal_learnerUniversal_learner
2398
2398
Now the question is: Why on Earth don't you give time per move?
– David
4 hours ago
There was no increment at the tourney @David they both have 25 minutes on his clock anyhow so I guess I should have asked the kid that had not offered draw if he wanted to play the 50 moves
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Finish games are a source of trouble when players reach "zeitnot". It is also hard to keep track of the 50-move rule when players are not writing the moves. If all big tournaments have moves away from no-time-per-move games, that may be for a good reason
– David
4 hours ago
Yes I was wondering myself it would have been a task to count the 50 moves with no notation.
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Now the question is: Why on Earth don't you give time per move?
– David
4 hours ago
There was no increment at the tourney @David they both have 25 minutes on his clock anyhow so I guess I should have asked the kid that had not offered draw if he wanted to play the 50 moves
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Finish games are a source of trouble when players reach "zeitnot". It is also hard to keep track of the 50-move rule when players are not writing the moves. If all big tournaments have moves away from no-time-per-move games, that may be for a good reason
– David
4 hours ago
Yes I was wondering myself it would have been a task to count the 50 moves with no notation.
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Now the question is: Why on Earth don't you give time per move?
– David
4 hours ago
Now the question is: Why on Earth don't you give time per move?
– David
4 hours ago
There was no increment at the tourney @David they both have 25 minutes on his clock anyhow so I guess I should have asked the kid that had not offered draw if he wanted to play the 50 moves
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
There was no increment at the tourney @David they both have 25 minutes on his clock anyhow so I guess I should have asked the kid that had not offered draw if he wanted to play the 50 moves
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Finish games are a source of trouble when players reach "zeitnot". It is also hard to keep track of the 50-move rule when players are not writing the moves. If all big tournaments have moves away from no-time-per-move games, that may be for a good reason
– David
4 hours ago
Finish games are a source of trouble when players reach "zeitnot". It is also hard to keep track of the 50-move rule when players are not writing the moves. If all big tournaments have moves away from no-time-per-move games, that may be for a good reason
– David
4 hours ago
Yes I was wondering myself it would have been a task to count the 50 moves with no notation.
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Yes I was wondering myself it would have been a task to count the 50 moves with no notation.
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
It is difficult to say what the exact rules should be if you aren't affiliated with a group that publishes rules for such situations. But I think your actions in this case were reasonable.
USCF rule 14H used to state that a player with less than two minutes on the clock (with no delay or increment being used) could make a claim of insufficient losing chances. Officially, that rule is no longer in effect, although a tournament is still allowed to use it as a variation without announcing it in advance.
If this variation is used, then rule 14I4 specifically states that rook vs rook should be a draw unless it is a position where there is a quick win. In general, if a class C player with ample time would not reasonably lose the position against a master, then the draw claim would be upheld, under this variation. This is regardless of the actual strengths of the players involved or how little time is on the clock.
Since there were more than 2 minutes on the clock ("both kids had time") technically this variation could not have been invoked. However, an attempted draw claim also constitutes a draw offer, which the other player may accept even if the claim is not upheld. According to your comment on another answer, you asked the other player if they agreed with the draw, and they seemed happy with it. That would be good enough for me. If neither player wanted to play on, there would be little point in forcing them to shuffle the pieces around for 50 moves. It's possible that novice players would not even be aware of the possibility of simply offering a draw.
The part of the USCF Official Rules of Chess book which contains the rules is now available online, by the way. I found it here.
add a comment |
It is not a drawn position according to the rules, since there is sufficient mating material. It may be a draw from the point of view of endgame theory, but given players who make lots of mistakes, it wouldn't be all that surprising for one to lose to a tactic.
I would let them play until the player who wanted a draw can claim it based on the 50-move rule or threefold repetition, or someone runs out of time or the game ends some other way. (Were they keeping notation? If not making a proper claim could be difficult, although an arbiter who witnesses the game could rule it a draw after 75 moves or fivefold repetition. Also note that USCF rules allow the arbiter or a deputy to count moves, if requested, for a 50-move claim under sudden death.)
That said, for a "non federated kids tournament", I suppose you may have some leeway, so I wouldn't really fault you for ruling it a draw.
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
add a comment |
You can declare a draw and in fact you are required to declare a draw but only after you have counted 75 moves by each side without a capture or a pawn move. This is according to the FIDE Laws of Chess article 9.6.2:
9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last
move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence
Of course the players are also free to agree a draw between them.
add a comment |
It's better to let them play it out a bit and ideally only draw once reaching 50 moves. But if one of them is low on time (and their opponent is clearly just trying to flag them) then you should claim the draw.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "435"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24632%2fshould-an-arbiter-claim-draw-at-a-kr-vs-kr-endgame%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It is difficult to say what the exact rules should be if you aren't affiliated with a group that publishes rules for such situations. But I think your actions in this case were reasonable.
USCF rule 14H used to state that a player with less than two minutes on the clock (with no delay or increment being used) could make a claim of insufficient losing chances. Officially, that rule is no longer in effect, although a tournament is still allowed to use it as a variation without announcing it in advance.
If this variation is used, then rule 14I4 specifically states that rook vs rook should be a draw unless it is a position where there is a quick win. In general, if a class C player with ample time would not reasonably lose the position against a master, then the draw claim would be upheld, under this variation. This is regardless of the actual strengths of the players involved or how little time is on the clock.
Since there were more than 2 minutes on the clock ("both kids had time") technically this variation could not have been invoked. However, an attempted draw claim also constitutes a draw offer, which the other player may accept even if the claim is not upheld. According to your comment on another answer, you asked the other player if they agreed with the draw, and they seemed happy with it. That would be good enough for me. If neither player wanted to play on, there would be little point in forcing them to shuffle the pieces around for 50 moves. It's possible that novice players would not even be aware of the possibility of simply offering a draw.
The part of the USCF Official Rules of Chess book which contains the rules is now available online, by the way. I found it here.
add a comment |
It is difficult to say what the exact rules should be if you aren't affiliated with a group that publishes rules for such situations. But I think your actions in this case were reasonable.
USCF rule 14H used to state that a player with less than two minutes on the clock (with no delay or increment being used) could make a claim of insufficient losing chances. Officially, that rule is no longer in effect, although a tournament is still allowed to use it as a variation without announcing it in advance.
If this variation is used, then rule 14I4 specifically states that rook vs rook should be a draw unless it is a position where there is a quick win. In general, if a class C player with ample time would not reasonably lose the position against a master, then the draw claim would be upheld, under this variation. This is regardless of the actual strengths of the players involved or how little time is on the clock.
Since there were more than 2 minutes on the clock ("both kids had time") technically this variation could not have been invoked. However, an attempted draw claim also constitutes a draw offer, which the other player may accept even if the claim is not upheld. According to your comment on another answer, you asked the other player if they agreed with the draw, and they seemed happy with it. That would be good enough for me. If neither player wanted to play on, there would be little point in forcing them to shuffle the pieces around for 50 moves. It's possible that novice players would not even be aware of the possibility of simply offering a draw.
The part of the USCF Official Rules of Chess book which contains the rules is now available online, by the way. I found it here.
add a comment |
It is difficult to say what the exact rules should be if you aren't affiliated with a group that publishes rules for such situations. But I think your actions in this case were reasonable.
USCF rule 14H used to state that a player with less than two minutes on the clock (with no delay or increment being used) could make a claim of insufficient losing chances. Officially, that rule is no longer in effect, although a tournament is still allowed to use it as a variation without announcing it in advance.
If this variation is used, then rule 14I4 specifically states that rook vs rook should be a draw unless it is a position where there is a quick win. In general, if a class C player with ample time would not reasonably lose the position against a master, then the draw claim would be upheld, under this variation. This is regardless of the actual strengths of the players involved or how little time is on the clock.
Since there were more than 2 minutes on the clock ("both kids had time") technically this variation could not have been invoked. However, an attempted draw claim also constitutes a draw offer, which the other player may accept even if the claim is not upheld. According to your comment on another answer, you asked the other player if they agreed with the draw, and they seemed happy with it. That would be good enough for me. If neither player wanted to play on, there would be little point in forcing them to shuffle the pieces around for 50 moves. It's possible that novice players would not even be aware of the possibility of simply offering a draw.
The part of the USCF Official Rules of Chess book which contains the rules is now available online, by the way. I found it here.
It is difficult to say what the exact rules should be if you aren't affiliated with a group that publishes rules for such situations. But I think your actions in this case were reasonable.
USCF rule 14H used to state that a player with less than two minutes on the clock (with no delay or increment being used) could make a claim of insufficient losing chances. Officially, that rule is no longer in effect, although a tournament is still allowed to use it as a variation without announcing it in advance.
If this variation is used, then rule 14I4 specifically states that rook vs rook should be a draw unless it is a position where there is a quick win. In general, if a class C player with ample time would not reasonably lose the position against a master, then the draw claim would be upheld, under this variation. This is regardless of the actual strengths of the players involved or how little time is on the clock.
Since there were more than 2 minutes on the clock ("both kids had time") technically this variation could not have been invoked. However, an attempted draw claim also constitutes a draw offer, which the other player may accept even if the claim is not upheld. According to your comment on another answer, you asked the other player if they agreed with the draw, and they seemed happy with it. That would be good enough for me. If neither player wanted to play on, there would be little point in forcing them to shuffle the pieces around for 50 moves. It's possible that novice players would not even be aware of the possibility of simply offering a draw.
The part of the USCF Official Rules of Chess book which contains the rules is now available online, by the way. I found it here.
answered 6 hours ago
D MD M
5,0371132
5,0371132
add a comment |
add a comment |
It is not a drawn position according to the rules, since there is sufficient mating material. It may be a draw from the point of view of endgame theory, but given players who make lots of mistakes, it wouldn't be all that surprising for one to lose to a tactic.
I would let them play until the player who wanted a draw can claim it based on the 50-move rule or threefold repetition, or someone runs out of time or the game ends some other way. (Were they keeping notation? If not making a proper claim could be difficult, although an arbiter who witnesses the game could rule it a draw after 75 moves or fivefold repetition. Also note that USCF rules allow the arbiter or a deputy to count moves, if requested, for a 50-move claim under sudden death.)
That said, for a "non federated kids tournament", I suppose you may have some leeway, so I wouldn't really fault you for ruling it a draw.
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
add a comment |
It is not a drawn position according to the rules, since there is sufficient mating material. It may be a draw from the point of view of endgame theory, but given players who make lots of mistakes, it wouldn't be all that surprising for one to lose to a tactic.
I would let them play until the player who wanted a draw can claim it based on the 50-move rule or threefold repetition, or someone runs out of time or the game ends some other way. (Were they keeping notation? If not making a proper claim could be difficult, although an arbiter who witnesses the game could rule it a draw after 75 moves or fivefold repetition. Also note that USCF rules allow the arbiter or a deputy to count moves, if requested, for a 50-move claim under sudden death.)
That said, for a "non federated kids tournament", I suppose you may have some leeway, so I wouldn't really fault you for ruling it a draw.
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
add a comment |
It is not a drawn position according to the rules, since there is sufficient mating material. It may be a draw from the point of view of endgame theory, but given players who make lots of mistakes, it wouldn't be all that surprising for one to lose to a tactic.
I would let them play until the player who wanted a draw can claim it based on the 50-move rule or threefold repetition, or someone runs out of time or the game ends some other way. (Were they keeping notation? If not making a proper claim could be difficult, although an arbiter who witnesses the game could rule it a draw after 75 moves or fivefold repetition. Also note that USCF rules allow the arbiter or a deputy to count moves, if requested, for a 50-move claim under sudden death.)
That said, for a "non federated kids tournament", I suppose you may have some leeway, so I wouldn't really fault you for ruling it a draw.
It is not a drawn position according to the rules, since there is sufficient mating material. It may be a draw from the point of view of endgame theory, but given players who make lots of mistakes, it wouldn't be all that surprising for one to lose to a tactic.
I would let them play until the player who wanted a draw can claim it based on the 50-move rule or threefold repetition, or someone runs out of time or the game ends some other way. (Were they keeping notation? If not making a proper claim could be difficult, although an arbiter who witnesses the game could rule it a draw after 75 moves or fivefold repetition. Also note that USCF rules allow the arbiter or a deputy to count moves, if requested, for a 50-move claim under sudden death.)
That said, for a "non federated kids tournament", I suppose you may have some leeway, so I wouldn't really fault you for ruling it a draw.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
itubitub
4,52311229
4,52311229
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
add a comment |
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
No notation they played very basic after some lessons at school. Made illegal moves etc. Well we may have asked the other kid if he agreed with the draw or wanted to play 50 moves. They get a cup as first and second with 3,5 point. They looked happy with the cup so I guess we were almost correct as the second kid was loosing before he loosed his two pawns and looked happy too :) he didn't claim for continue playing and both were happy :)
– Universal_learner
7 hours ago
add a comment |
You can declare a draw and in fact you are required to declare a draw but only after you have counted 75 moves by each side without a capture or a pawn move. This is according to the FIDE Laws of Chess article 9.6.2:
9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last
move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence
Of course the players are also free to agree a draw between them.
add a comment |
You can declare a draw and in fact you are required to declare a draw but only after you have counted 75 moves by each side without a capture or a pawn move. This is according to the FIDE Laws of Chess article 9.6.2:
9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last
move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence
Of course the players are also free to agree a draw between them.
add a comment |
You can declare a draw and in fact you are required to declare a draw but only after you have counted 75 moves by each side without a capture or a pawn move. This is according to the FIDE Laws of Chess article 9.6.2:
9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last
move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence
Of course the players are also free to agree a draw between them.
You can declare a draw and in fact you are required to declare a draw but only after you have counted 75 moves by each side without a capture or a pawn move. This is according to the FIDE Laws of Chess article 9.6.2:
9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last
move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence
Of course the players are also free to agree a draw between them.
answered 6 hours ago
Brian TowersBrian Towers
18k33179
18k33179
add a comment |
add a comment |
It's better to let them play it out a bit and ideally only draw once reaching 50 moves. But if one of them is low on time (and their opponent is clearly just trying to flag them) then you should claim the draw.
add a comment |
It's better to let them play it out a bit and ideally only draw once reaching 50 moves. But if one of them is low on time (and their opponent is clearly just trying to flag them) then you should claim the draw.
add a comment |
It's better to let them play it out a bit and ideally only draw once reaching 50 moves. But if one of them is low on time (and their opponent is clearly just trying to flag them) then you should claim the draw.
It's better to let them play it out a bit and ideally only draw once reaching 50 moves. But if one of them is low on time (and their opponent is clearly just trying to flag them) then you should claim the draw.
answered 4 hours ago
Inertial IgnoranceInertial Ignorance
5,911513
5,911513
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24632%2fshould-an-arbiter-claim-draw-at-a-kr-vs-kr-endgame%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Now the question is: Why on Earth don't you give time per move?
– David
4 hours ago
There was no increment at the tourney @David they both have 25 minutes on his clock anyhow so I guess I should have asked the kid that had not offered draw if he wanted to play the 50 moves
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago
Finish games are a source of trouble when players reach "zeitnot". It is also hard to keep track of the 50-move rule when players are not writing the moves. If all big tournaments have moves away from no-time-per-move games, that may be for a good reason
– David
4 hours ago
Yes I was wondering myself it would have been a task to count the 50 moves with no notation.
– Universal_learner
4 hours ago