< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 46 OF 95 ·
|Sep-07-11|| ||twinlark: Navara did whatever he felt he needed to do to live with himself. There's no need to blame him for his sportsmanship. Nor Moiseenko.|
This is much ado about not much at all, especially as Navara made it through quite easily. In fact, hasn't he won the next four games straight with a spectacular display of on-board ruthlessness?
Way to go, David! Be daring and be yourself.
|Sep-07-11|| ||twinlark: <hasn't he won the next four games straight>|
Sorry, that should be five out of the next six.
|Sep-08-11|| ||vsaluki: "From what Navara explained as to what really happened. He was about to pick up the bishop, when he accidentally grazed(rub lightly) the king in the process."|
Did anyone actually see this on a video, or do we only have Navara's explanation?
|Sep-08-11|| ||vsaluki: Mr. Slim: "I mean, the players would be hard pressed to make the time control during the actual play to pay attention to the happening of such a scenario."|
True. And Judit's sweater probably made him hallucinate.
|Sep-08-11|| ||bigatin: < And Judit's sweater probably made him hallucinate.>|
Maybe, he is seeing this evaluation:
|Sep-08-11|| ||bigatin: <Did anyone actually see this on a video, or do we only have Navara's explanation?>|
Well, maybe because the game continued, we can assume that it was referred to the arbiter and the latter made a decision in favor of Navara. The arbiter was privy to the incident and he saw the whole thing.
On the other hand, Judit's arbiter may be suffering from hallucinations too.
|Sep-08-11|| ||HeMateMe: I think I like the pawns best. But, thats just me.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Skakalec: To all those who think that 3-fold repetition should be "automatic" <bigatin> or that it should be "allowed to claim after the game" <Mr.Smith>|
Firstly, you can not <change the result of the game after the game has beeen finished>, otherwise everyone could return to the point when he/she stand better and claim the victory , acoording to FI computer analysis(tablebase winn etc.)
Claim that result of the game should be "automatic" is the reflextion of the "automatic times" we live in, which no praktising chess player will ever agree with. It's a typical computer geek thinking. Everything should be "automatic".
Well, I have a good news for you: the draw is "automatic" when there only kings on the board :-)
(BTW, if Domiguez <was not sure> that the position arose 3 times, he might not wanted to risk precious time on the clock, as the fals claim lead to time punishment)
p.s. OK , you <can change the result of the game after the game has been finished>, but it's mostly seen in team chess, as a punishment, when it turns out that the player is not the person as claimed, or if some player is not the age as claimed or if the player is not of the same gender as claimed :-))
|Sep-08-11|| ||Valmy: When you play online, the 3 fold repetition draw is automatic. I don't see any problem with this. It should be the same OTB as long as the game is computer monitored.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||bigatin: <skakalec>
But there was a well-paid arbiter sitting besides them.
Shouldn't his job include monitoring for a 3 move repetition?
The rule that a player needs to submit a claim for a draw by virtue of the 3 move repetition rule is technical in nature and does not reflect the ability and skill of a player. Why should he then be made accountable for a failure to call the arbiter's attention for the commission?
It should like be in boxing when a referee suspends a boxer for hitting below the belt without the offended party calling the refs' attention before he declares foul.
|Sep-08-11|| ||frogbert: <When you play online, the 3 fold repetition draw is automatic. >|
only on badly implemented chess servers.
|Sep-08-11|| ||Valmy: I played in PLAYCHESS, ICC, Europe echecs, Echecs online, yahoo chess all automatic.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||SamAtoms1980: The ending of the Gashimov-Nielsen game..... wow.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Winsome Knight: On FICS, draw is not automatic. One has to press DRAW button when he thinks it is 3 fold repetition.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Beholder: Seems like it'll take Svidler to stop Polgar now.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Mr. Slim: judit wins tie break game no. 1. On to the second...|
|Sep-08-11|| ||zluria: What happens in a chess game (I assume this might happen in bullet chess or in scholastic tournaments) if one player checkmates the other, neither player notices, and the game continues until eventually the second player wins? |
Because I know that "checkmate on the board" is supposed to trump all other considerations. There are rules for ilegal moves and things like that (basically, you have to claim to get the win), but does the same hold for checkmate?
|Sep-08-11|| ||Winsome Knight: <zluria> When Checkmate happens how can you continue the game? Where do you move the King (which is under check) to continue the game? :)|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Skakalec: I also play on FICS where 3-fold repetition draw is not automatic (which is normal) and I doubt that ICC is different. Can't speak for other sites.
Could be that you can set up your client to claim the draw automatically (like you can set up "auto-flag" and similar).|
The role of a chess arbiter is not to interfere with the ongoing game, but to ensure everything is by the book.
What if referee makes a mistake and claims 3-fold repetition and it turns out not to be the case?
That's why the arbiter neither claims "touched piece" and other things. (S)he must not interfere with the game. Must not be the major player, so to speak :-).
As for unnoticed check-mate. The rule applies as for other unnoticed illegal moves - the play continues - no regrets.
Now, playing online THAT possibility is not an option anymore.
|Sep-08-11|| ||Skakalec: This can happen!
Many years ago, playing at the local bar (?! yes, didn't have club facilities then :-)) against a player equaly strong,the game attended much attention from the around flying kibitzers. There were at least 10 people kibitzing.
The game was played without time control.
I won a piece.
After few more moves I noticed that we have same number of pieces.
"What a ...?" I said.
I tried to recollect the events, <where> I lost the piece, but with no success.
Then, I noticed that I'm missin' whitesquared bishop from f1 while pawns on g2 and e2 still were there!.
Nobody noticed that I played the game without that bishop!
We discontinued the game and started all over.
|Sep-08-11|| ||whiteshark: Bu took the lift downstairs in the 2nd rapid, too|
|Sep-08-11|| ||kellmano: There seems to be some needling between the commentators on the video.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Beholder: And the first Quarterfinals pair is... (*drumroll*)...|
Ivanchuk - Radjabov!
|Sep-08-11|| ||Skakalec: Chuky looks very strong.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||Winsome Knight: <Then, I noticed that I'm missin' whitesquared bishop from f1 while pawns on g2 and e2 still were there!> May be it fell down and you kept it aside thinking it was a captured piece!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 46 OF 95 ·