Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

I would say White lost on time - whatever the merits of the draw claim it was made illegally (White had already moved and therefore would not be able to claim at that point).

Question: what was the time control? And was an arbiter present at the end of the game?

BTW, insufficient losing chances is a U.S. concept, it doesn't exist under FIDE (and thus Canadian) rules.

The time control was game in 90 minutes sudden death. The three players who are playing the tournament were present. Technically there was no arbiter but we are all reasonable people who are friends and play each other a lot.

I was pretty sure that it was a win for me based on the rules (at about 95% certainty) and the non player thought it was probably a win for me but he too was not certain. My opponent was not certain though when I pointed out one theoretical mate he suggested we look it up on the CFC website which happened to be unavailable for the moment. If two experienced NMs and a 2200 player and even world championship arbiters aren't 100% certain of these rules then maybe they need to do a clarification of the rules.

[Denton Cockburn]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

I quote Vlad from a previous post: "he made his move claimed draw and his flag fell before he pressed the clock." White made a move, then claimed the draw, then his flag fell. According to Article 10.2 the draw can only be claimed when the player has the move, but in this case White had already made his move. Thus he cannot legitimately claim the draw until it his move again, but the flag fall has already ended the game.

Guys, there is a more specific rule 10 when the arbiter is not there (this case).

D. Quickplay finishes where no arbiter is present in the venue
D.1 Where games are played as in Article 10, a player may claim a draw when he has less than
two minutes left on his clock and before his flag falls. This concludes the game.
He may claim on the basis:
a. that his opponent cannot win by normal means, and/or
b. that his opponent has been making no effort to win by normal means.


Note that:
1) It doesn't say the clock has to be stopped.
2) It doesn't say it has to be his move.

[Denton Cockburn]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

Basically, we have a situation where white could no longer win in the remaining time BUT if there were more time there was enough material for him to blunder into a mate and there is enough white mating material to continue the game if black had claimed a draw.

Ask and OTB IA for an opinion.

By the way, if white had claimed a draw with a full minute and a half remaining would he have received the draw without black agreeing?

Yes. That is Rule 10 in a nutshell. If this isn't so, then rule 10 is 100% pointless.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

Basically, we have a situation where white could no longer win in the remaining time BUT if there were more time there was enough material for him to blunder into a mate and there is enough white mating material to continue the game if black had claimed a draw.

Ask and OTB IA for an opinion.

By the way, if white had claimed a draw with a full minute and a half remaining would he have received the draw without black agreeing?

The thing was that with about nine seconds left on his clock he could have forced a perpetual check by keeping queens on and I would have agreed to the draw as the alternative would have been to walk into a mate or fork. Instead he decided to try to remove all my material except for the bishop leading to the current curiosity about FIDE and CFC rules.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

Guys, there is a more specific rule 10 when the arbiter is not there (this case).

D. Quickplay finishes where no arbiter is present in the venue
D.1 Where games are played as in Article 10, a player may claim a draw when he has less than
two minutes left on his clock and before his flag falls. This concludes the game.
He may claim on the basis:
a. that his opponent cannot win by normal means, and/or
b. that his opponent has been making no effort to win by normal means.


Note that:
1) It doesn't say the clock has to be stopped.
2) It doesn't say it has to be his move.

Article 9 clearly applies to draw offers or claims under 10.2. You have to look at all the rules and not consider single articles out of context.

Article 9: The drawn game

9.1
a.
The rules of a competition may specify that players cannot agree to a draw, whether in less than a specified number of moves or at all, without the consent of the arbiter.

b.
If the rules of a competition allow a draw agreement the following apply:
1.A player wishing to offer a draw shall do so after having made a move on the chessboard and before stopping his clock and starting the opponent’s clock. An offer at any other time during play is still valid but Article 12.6 must be considered. No conditions can be attached to the offer. In both cases the offer cannot be withdrawn and remains valid until the opponent accepts it, rejects it orally, rejects it by touching a piece with the intention of moving or capturing it, or the game is concluded in some other way.
2.The offer of a draw shall be noted by each player on his scoresheet with a symbol. (See Appendix C.13)
3.A claim of a draw under Article 9.2, 9.3 or 10.2 shall be considered to be an offer of a draw.

and

9.4
If the player touches a piece as in Article 4.3 without having claimed the draw he loses the right to claim, as in Article 9.2 or 9.3, on that move.

9.6
The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing this position was legal.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

Basically, we have a situation where white could no longer win in the remaining time BUT if there were more time there was enough material for him to blunder into a mate and there is enough white mating material to continue the game if black had claimed a draw.

Ask and OTB IA for an opinion.

By the way, if white had claimed a draw with a full minute and a half remaining would he have received the draw without black agreeing?

Geurt Gijssen would probably say no draw. Maybe I should have taken one of the two opportunities to do the FIDE arbiter's seminar that I have had in the last two years. :o

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

Actually I didn't know that you had to note draw offers on the scoresheet until this discussion and reading it in article 9.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

IMHO: a normal play is not a total cooperative, thus the arbiter might declare the game drawn ("or that it is not possible to win by normal means, then he shall declare the game drawn. "), or ask the opponent to show what a plan he has to win a game, as "The arbiter shall declare the final result later in the game or as soon as possible after a flag has fallen."

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

My main question is if it was a CFC rated game why are people talking about USCF and FIDE rules?

Also, what was the time control? I see lots of people talking about rapidplay rules but unless I missed it nobody actually stated the time control?

[Stephen Wright]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

Ah, so there's a discrepancy in wording between 10.2 and D1. I would assume that the omission of the words "having the move" was an oversight on FIDE's part, given that the intent of D1 is to reproduce 10.2 but have the arbiter make an adjudication later rather than at the time of the claim. Also, any other draw offer or claim in the Laws of Chess is supposed to be done when the player has the move, so I don't see why D1 would be any different. Would be nice to have that clarified though.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

My main question is if it was a CFC rated game why are people talking about USCF and FIDE rules?

I think there was a motion a long time ago that CFC adopts FIDE chess rules.

[Denton Cockburn]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

My main question is if it was a CFC rated game why are people talking about USCF and FIDE rules?

Also, what was the time control? I see lots of people talking about rapidplay rules but unless I missed it nobody actually stated the time control?

It wasn't rapidplay, the game was G/90.

I thought the CFC followed all the FIDE rules, with the addition of more. Does the CFC ignore some FIDE rules?
Section 4 in the CFC handbook links directly to the FIDE Laws.

Denton

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

My main question is if it was a CFC rated game why are people talking about USCF and FIDE rules?

Also, what was the time control? I see lots of people talking about rapidplay rules but unless I missed it nobody actually stated the time control?

It was buried in one of my answers. Game in 90 minutes sudden death.

USCF rules are clearly different. My understanding is that FIDE rules and CFC rules are supposed to be the same.

My impression in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s was that some USCF TDs had a lot more leeway in applying the rules than Canadian TDs and seemed to like to exercise it. Irritation with some perceived favouratism observed at some small USCF rated events was one part of the reason that I gave up chess for a decade or so ending in 2007. Thankfully it doesn't seem to exist anymore in the USCF tournaments that I have played in since 2007.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

The other player has stated that the decision is Vlad's. Therefore Vlad decides whether it's a win or draw and I'll record it as he decides.

I will probably try to consult a few experienced TDs/IAs and if one tells me that it is a draw then I will call it a draw. If they all say it is a win on time, I will probably go that way. I will see my opponent again on Monday and we'll talk about it then. For me it is a win/win since I gain 3 points for a draw or 19 rating points for a win.

The rest of this thread is then to clarify for future reference.
I think the "normal means" statement leaves the arbiter significant leeway. Thus in the future, whatever the arbiter decides, either way, is correct :)

Denton

I don't think that is a correct or acceptable way to determine the result. It means that the arbiter can influence the result of a game based on a whim. One day the result is one thing and the next day it is another. The result of the appeal in the 2008 women's world championship should be considered some kind of a precedent as far as I'm concerned.

If you are correct in your interpretation then de facto by the back door we have the same insufficient losing chances rule as the USCF.

The other question is what claim someone has to make. The actual claim made was insufficient mating material as the flag fell and after a move was made. If my reading of the rules is correct, the standard for that type of draw claim is mate is impossible by any sequence of legal moves. Impossible is a much higher burden of proof than improbable. The 2008 FIDE women's championship appeal ruling seems to indicate that impossible is the burden required in this case.

It also seems that invoking 10.2 requires that the player intending to do so does it with at least a few seconds still on his clock. There also seem to be some preconditions in the requirement that for the side with the time lead has to be making no attempt to win except on time. In this case I was desperately trying to win as was my opponent.

[Denton Cockburn]

Re: Sudden death draw claim CFC rules??????

I think what we need is complete clarification on Rule 10.2

Based on this discussion and other times this thing has come up, there is a lot of debate as to what it means.

As you point out, how does an arbiter get to decide that a player isn't trying to swindle his opponent into a mate in time trouble.

For some IAs, I'd like an explanation of what 10.2 means to them, preferably with an example or two.

As I said as well, I've had this happen to me personally on 3 occasions. I learned of 10.2 after the second one, thinking it means the position shouldn't be an "easy draw" for the win to be claimed. I'm OK with going back to playing for the clock, that would be some vindication for what happened last year.

Denton