Chess rules that should have not existed!
Sort:
long_quach wrote:
VerifiedChessYarshe wrote:
As i just said on top, chess isnt the best game, so please do not treat it like a tool of metaphor for human affairs.
If chess isn't the best game, the best metaphor for life.
What is?
You're not saying anything.
If you vote for something. One candidate shows up, if there's no 2nd candidate, the only candidate wins.
Hey, I'm not saying chess is bad.
To point out clearer chess or any kind of chess u are seeing and can start play right now is just an invention of the past, because at that time life was not modern and really boring. So how do we solved bordom? Simply invent things.
What u seeing is chess is the best metaphor for life. While breaking it up, let see how far can u go.
1st: Chess is just a lesson or an object to represent a thing called "lessons". It's like if u lose u lost a game that decide ur life. If u compare life and chess, life is more complicated, instead of a 1v1, sometimes in life there is more than 1 competitor. U can say chess is the best..... But yourself play chess tournaments has uncountable opponents, including unfair referees. Chess only simple it by merging all opponents as 1. It is reasonable that chess didn't give u lessons other than copying and showing it to you, u can't use chess in a lawsuit, who use that?
As a meaning of metaphor, chess is a different game than now. We do use chess as a metaphor but I totally see intros as chess just like a strategy for something. It barely gives us a sense of real karma or lessons being to heart, other than the copied version of x,y like e4,....
I cooked and no one are which is amazing to me 💀
Dec 14, 2023
0
#6
1. Offering Draw
Disagree. What else do you suggest the players do here?
2. Stalemate
Agree (given the current FIDE laws), but for a different reason.
The rule
5.2.1 The game is drawn when the player to move has no legal move and his king is not in check. The game is said to end in ‘stalemate’. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the stalemate position was in accordance with Article 3 and Articles 4.2 – 4.7.
has absolutely no function.
It's a special case of the dead position rule
5.2.2 The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to end in a ‘dead position’. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was in accordance with Article 3 and Articles 4.2 – 4.7.
Removing the stalemate rule would have zero effect on the game.
3. The dead position rule (see above)
Now there is a silly rule.
Nobody, least of all FIDE, has come up with a practicable algorithm to determine if the rule applies. How is that for stupid?
FIDE have made this oversight more acute since 2017 by introducing extra mandatory game termination rules (75M/5R).
I posted this question on a different thread. Only two answers, both from strong players, both wrong.
Is this position dead under FIDE competition rules?
White to play, ply count under the 75 move rule = 142
An arbiter has to check such questions for all moves on all his boards to determine if the games have ended (and they don't always get it right).
I think dead positions should be resolved by 1. Offering Draw. Save the arbiters a lot of hassle.
Of course, dropping the rule would the render the stalemate rule non-redundant, in which case I would disagree also on 2. Stalemate.
Some dude couldn't checkmate the opponent up a queen, so wrote a long rant about it.
The question: why is the topic still running 3 months later?
The answer: the most notorious spammer resurrected the topic for no reason.
MARattigan wrote:
1. Offering Draw
Disagree. What else do you suggest the players do here?
2. Stalemate
Agree (given the current FIDE laws), but for a different reason.
The rule
5.2.1 The game is drawn when the player to move has no legal move and his king is not in check. The game is said to end in ‘stalemate’. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the stalemate position was in accordance with Article 3 and Articles 4.2 – 4.7.
has absolutely no function.
It's a special case of the dead position rule
5.2.2 The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to end in a ‘dead position’. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was in accordance with Article 3 and Articles 4.2 – 4.7.
Removing the stalemate rule would have zero effect on the game.
3. The dead position rule (see above)
Now there is a silly rule.
Nobody, least of all FIDE, has come up with a practicable algorithm to determine if the rule applies. How is that for stupid?
FIDE have made this oversight more acute since 2017 by introducing extra mandatory game termination rules (75M/5R).
I posted this question on a different thread. Only two answers, both from strong players, both wrong.
Is this position dead under FIDE competition rules?
White to play, ply count under the 75 move rule = 142
An arbiter has to check such questions for all moves on all his boards to determine if the games have ended (and they don't always get it right).
I think dead positions should be resolved by 1. Offering Draw. Save the arbiters a lot of hassle.
Of course, dropping the rule would the render the stalemate rule non-redundant, in which case I would disagree also on 2. Stalemate.
1. Offering draw (debatable)
Whatever ur opinion might be, the position is a draw but to the 50 move rule it does make a possible choice on playing continues.
2. Stalemate
-Imagine a king literally has no air to breathe and still manages to survive at the end, just because he is surrounded and is gonna die whatever he moves. Feels legal to draw? Maybe wars like this is just no sense.
3. Dead position.
We can resolve it by 50 move rule which I never debated
magipi wrote:
Some dude couldn't checkmate the opponent up a queen, so wrote a long rant about it.
The question: why is the topic still running 3 months later?
The answer: the most notorious spammer resurrected the topic for no reason.
I do checkmate with a queen.
Why this forum running now?
- I do keep my priorities straight, that's just an opinion and of course my opinion barely changes whenever u say.
How I'm notorious spammer 💀💀💀
We do want ur answer
Dec 14, 2023
0
#10
VerifiedChessYarshe wrote:
MARattigan wrote:
...
1. Offering draw (debatable)
Whatever ur opinion might be, the position is a draw but to the 50 move rule it does make a possible choice on playing continues.
Not necessarily to the 50 move rule, but that, the 3R rule, the 75M rule or the 5R rule.
But what's the point of playing on to any of those?
2. Stalemate
-Imagine a king literally has no air to breathe and still manages to survive at the end, just because he is surrounded and is gonna die whatever he moves. Feels legal to draw? Maybe wars like this is just no sense.
OK I imagined it. If it's stalemate it's a draw under the dead position rule, regardless of whether it bears any resemblance to your visions.
3. Dead position.
We can resolve it by 50 move rule which I never debated
Not always. This can never reach a claim under the 50 move rule.
Ply count under 50 move rule = 0.
But it begs two questions. Firstly what on Earth would be the point of playing on in a position which is clearly dead? Secondly, how do you resolve it by 50 move rule if you're playing under post 2017 FIDE basic rules, which don't contain a 50 move rule?
Dec 14, 2023
0
#11
saderfewpro_SHB wrote:
thats are draw 50 moves rule
Can you elaborate?
This is the final position in SF15.1's top analysis line at depth 30. Ply count 0 under the 50 move rule.
No 50 move rule draw so far in that. What makes you think there will be?
What makes you think it's drawn at all?
MARattigan wrote:
VerifiedChessYarshe wrote:
MARattigan wrote:
...
1. Offering draw (debatable)
Whatever ur opinion might be, the position is a draw but to the 50 move rule it does make a possible choice on playing continues.
Not necessarily to the 50 move rule, but that, the 3R rule, the 75M rule or the 5R rule.
But what's the point of playing on to any of those
-First the longest match ever can't reach to that level, so there is a low possibility on playing to those levels u accounted. What if 3 times repetition rule? I have never debated these rules because if I did I'm a psycho. But for whatever the position might be the 50 move rules just ends all. And a match isn't at the stage of "draw" if there is pawns, so there isn't a reason putting pawns in the board and saying me is nonsense, no the 50 move rule only counts that there isn't a pawn move or any capture.
2. Stalemate
-Imagine a king literally has no air to breathe and still manages to survive at the end, just because he is surrounded and is gonna die whatever he moves. Feels legal to draw? Maybe wars like this is just no sense.
OK I imagined it. If it's stalemate it's a draw under the dead position rule, regardless of whether it bears any resemblance to your visions.
If we use the meaning stalemate just like dead position rule which I named it it that not necessarily a draw and who said I debated it?
2nd: Because I mentioned 2. Stalemate is means just like a queen corner a king (according to the chess rules) where the king has no moves but isn't in check which is a stalemate which I just explained to you why it's not okay.
3. Dead position.
We can resolve it by 50 move rule which I never debated
Not always. This can never reach a claim under the 50 move rule.
Ply count under 50 move rule = 0.
But it begs two questions. Firstly what on Earth would be the point of playing on in a position which is clearly dead? Secondly, how do you resolve it by 50 move rule if you're playing under post 2017 FIDE basic rules, which don't contain a 50 move rule?
-I'm talking about the overview of chess, doesn't matter if FIDE allowed it or not it still exists, if we have no 50 move rule it will be a endless loop of suffering, that we will draw by time. So your point of FIDE 2017 basic rules doesn't matter. U still play chess with the 50 move rule hiding in the corner in all chess websites that are popular.
According to the "50 move rule" as long as there isn't a capture or any pawn move it will be linked with the 50 move rule. Just like a position where no one has pawns but only rooks, as long as there isn't any capture or a pawn move.
Ur position doesn't relates to any draw (the last board) so u don't visualize any of the things u visualize about.
(Reply to the latest message by you)
MARattigan wrote:
saderfewpro_SHB wrote:
thats are draw 50 moves rule
Can you elaborate?
This is the final position in SF15.1's top analysis line at depth 30. Ply count 0 under the 50 move rule.
No 50 move rule draw so far in that. What makes you think there will be?
What makes you think it's drawn at all?
Please get rid of the pawns so we can get the real meaning of 50 move rule
Dec 15, 2023
0
#14
MARattigan rašė:
saderfewpro_SHB wrote:
thats are draw 50 moves rule
Can you elaborate?
This is the final position in SF15.1's top analysis line at depth 30. Ply count 0 under the 50 move rule.
No 50 move rule draw so far in that. What makes you think there will be?
What makes you think it's drawn at all?
maiby
Dec 15, 2023
0
#15
VerifiedChessYarshe wrote:
MARattigan wrote:
VerifiedChessYarshe wrote:
MARattigan wrote:
...
1. Offering draw (debatable)
Whatever ur opinion might be, the position is a draw but to the 50 move rule it does make a possible choice on playing continues.
Not necessarily to the 50 move rule, but that, the 3R rule, the 75M rule or the 5R rule.
But what's the point of playing on to any of those
-First the longest match ever can't reach to that level, so there is a low possibility on playing to those levels u accounted. What if 3 times repetition rule? I have never debated these rules because if I did I'm a psycho. But for whatever the position might be the 50 move rules just ends all. And a match isn't at the stage of "draw" if there is pawns, so there isn't a reason putting pawns in the board and saying me is nonsense, no the 50 move rule only counts that there isn't a pawn move or any capture.
2. Stalemate
-Imagine a king literally has no air to breathe and still manages to survive at the end, just because he is surrounded and is gonna die whatever he moves. Feels legal to draw? Maybe wars like this is just no sense.
OK I imagined it. If it's stalemate it's a draw under the dead position rule, regardless of whether it bears any resemblance to your visions.
If we use the meaning stalemate just like dead position rule which I named it it that not necessarily a draw and who said I debated it?
2nd: Because I mentioned 2. Stalemate is means just like a queen corner a king (according to the chess rules) where the king has no moves but isn't in check which is a stalemate which I just explained to you why it's not okay.
3. Dead position.
We can resolve it by 50 move rule which I never debated
Not always. This can never reach a claim under the 50 move rule.
Ply count under 50 move rule = 0.
But it begs two questions. Firstly what on Earth would be the point of playing on in a position which is clearly dead? Secondly, how do you resolve it by 50 move rule if you're playing under post 2017 FIDE basic rules, which don't contain a 50 move rule?
-I'm talking about the overview of chess, doesn't matter if FIDE allowed it or not it still exists, if we have no 50 move rule it will be a endless loop of suffering, that we will draw by time. So your point of FIDE 2017 basic rules doesn't matter. U still play chess with the 50 move rule hiding in the corner in all chess websites that are popular.
According to the "50 move rule" as long as there isn't a capture or any pawn move it will be linked with the 50 move rule. Just like a position where no one has pawns but only rooks, as long as there isn't any capture or a pawn move.
Ur position doesn't relates to any draw (the last board) so u don't visualize any of the things u visualize about.
(Reply to the latest message by you)
If you're talking about the position in the post viz.
then it is a draw under current FIDE rules (dead position) whether basic or competition rules.
I posted the position in the context of your comments
3. Dead position.
We can resolve it by 50 move rule which I never debated
as an illustration of a dead position that couldn't be so resolved in the absence of the dead position rule. It would necessarily be resolved by a claim under the 3R rule, the 5R rule or stalemate before the 50M rule could have any effect.
Being lamentably prosaic, I was not visualising fierce ladies with lances on elephants fighting off invading Burmese hordes or anything of that sort when I made the post, so I think all of your comments are misguided.
Dec 15, 2023
0
#16
VerifiedChessYarshe wrote:
MARattigan wrote:
saderfewpro_SHB wrote:
thats are draw 50 moves rule
Can you elaborate?
This is the final position in SF15.1's top analysis line at depth 30. Ply count 0 under the 50 move rule.
No 50 move rule draw so far in that. What makes you think there will be?
What makes you think it's drawn at all?
Please get rid of the pawns so we can get the real meaning of 50 move rule
The 50 move rule applies whether or not there are pawns on the board.
I ran SF 15.1 (no NNUE) against itself from the initial position in question in Arena with 5 mins for all moves each (repeating).
SF15.1 didn't draw under the 50 move rule, indeed didn't draw at all.
SF15.1 doesn't necessarily get the right result, but it's a strong player, so I think you still need to answer my question, "What makes you think it's drawn at all?".
I conjecture that if the 3-fold repetition rule:
9.2 The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by a player having the move,
when the same position for at least the third time
9.2.1 is about to appear, if he/she first indicates his/her move, which cannot be changed, by writing it on the paper scoresheet or entering it on the electronic scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his/her intention to make this move, or
9.2.2 has just appeared, and the player claiming the draw has the move.
9.2.3 Positions are considered the same if and only if the same player has the move, pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares and the possible moves of all the pieces of both players are the same. Thus positions are not the same if:
9.2.3.1 at the start of the sequence a pawn could have been captured en passant.
9.2.3.2 a king had castling rights with a rook that has not been moved, but forfeited these after moving. The castling rights are lost only after the king or rook is moved.
were replaced by:
9.2hypothetical The game is lost by the player who repeats the same position.
like in Go or Stratego, that Chess would then be a white win instead of a draw.
Dec 15, 2023
0
#18
An interesting conjecture, but flawed by the final words, "instead of a draw".
The question I posed in my previous post applies equally well to the starting position (with which it has many similarities).
@21
68 games, 68 draws at 5 days/move average
and with a more decisive set of rules
https://www.iccf.com/event?id=100104
"Proud to be indian!".
To start, i wanna say that its not meant for politics, for entertainment purposes only.
Many of 'veterans' has different type, could be a ww2 veteran, football veteran, etc... But welcome to chess.com! Is chess veterans! And almost all of thess 'chess veterans' surely knows what is Chaturanga, especially Indians. Well we are not talking about history, u surely know what is this forum's topic.
Though chess is not the best sport, these 'chess nationalists' just making it the best. Some sort of a "metaphor for human affairs". Can a chess board/piece really suffer? Well obviously not but u wouldnt put a remorse if someone purposely break ur chess board which any chess nationalism would do. And its not like chess is gonna be relevance on this 21st century world where wars and strategies will be much different than chess itself.
As i just said on top, chess isnt the best game, so please do not treat it like a tool of metaphor for human affairs.
And because i said "chess isnt the best game" there are a few rules i didnt like and my guts say it shouldnt have existed.
1. Offering draw
Now this may get alot of hate but i think offering a draw is dumb. Why? Obviously the creator of chess made the objective on "checkmate the opponent's king". Though offering a draw on high levels are used when the position is a dead draw. Lets see the difference here from other sports! Football basically has drawish rules but u cant offer a draw in the middle of the match. Play till end i mean. So why its called war and strategy sport? Sport is competing and u need to compete to win! Magnus arent playing for a draw, but if its forced he still gonna play untill there is nothing left. What kind of sport is this if u can split prizes? Maybe it will sounded too greedy but hey its competing not team match! And why football i still called an sport that is 1v1? For example Argentina's football team is an. I dont think i ever see a player the team ever keeps the UCL trophy at their house, only the team's trophy cabinet is used.
2nd why i think it shouldnt exists, well think about it. Ur leader commanded you to attack. (Chess is a strategy and war board game). Suddenly he offers a draw during mid fight. U would not be happy as ur determinded to sacrifice urself to win something for your contry! However the defending team would get more benefits as they got peace and stopped being tortured. So who has the best feelings? Obviously the defending country as they are determinded to defend their country with their lives, and if successful it would be a honour to them. Maybe if ur leader think twice that his enemy has the similar strenght and thus is a dead draw he should have done that defensively. You have to gone to rough terrains and accept any commands from ur leader while the defending country is simple: Do whatever it takes to defend the country. And if drew they successfuly completed their plans and the survivours are happy and high morale!
So yeah. There is still more!
2. Stalemate (With exceptions)
Many of you experienced this now, the memest ones are this:
Now well lets first define stalemate. What is stalemate?
In wars today like Russo-Ukraine with Russians cant make any progress nor the Ukrainians. Here is an example of that kind of stalemate which i rather call "No progress draw".
Chess, however stalemate is defined is when ur opponent has no legal move but not in check is called Stalemate.
Now i think is dunb because if ur trapped u have no air, why u want to survive? If i am the chess creator then the person who got stalemated will lose as he techniquelly doesnt have legal moves and of course u need to make new plans in a war. Stalemate like the fact that the king didnt get checked but have no legal moves is so dumb. Xiangqi doesnt make that a draw, that kind of stalemate in chess, will be a win for the person who staged the stalemate.
Thats all i have to say.
This forum does not meant to hate chess, but to prove that chess isnt the same as 21st century war tools and strategies, its not that greatest and not always a strategy game.
Leave ur opinions!