Message to webmaster and general public

LittleGolem,WEBMASTER 18 April 2004

Tournament table [chess.ch.4.1.1] Enclosures: Chess Rules/jlv/16:00hrs

THE COORDINATOR(BOARD GAMES STAFF SECTION)

Rio Malaschitz (solutions)

Little Golem administrators.

Re: Request for an Appear to an Unfounded Draw

Dear Mr. Administrator

I Josef Louis Villafan, request an appear or a retro-investigation to MSGID: #368637 From: SYSTEM To: Yayael'zumzum Date: 2004-04-21 Title: Game #83848 is finished. Dave vs. Yayael'zumzum 1:1 Message: Game #83848 is finished. Dave vs. Yayael'zumzum 1:1 Dave old rating: 2106 new rating: 2106. Yayael'zumzum old rating: 2100 new rating: 2100. Tournament: chess.ch.4.1.1 with, 240 HOURS LEFT ON my CLOCK, was declared a draw without any substantiated evidences to be demonstrated at least [the last?]Fifty( 50) consecutive moves have been made by each side without the capture of any piece and without the movement of any pawn. FOR THE RECORD: Any number of 50 moves can be increased for certain positions, provided that this increase in number and these positions have been clearly announced by the organizers before the event starts. One possibility is a stalemate or draw, meaning that with the given pieces left on the board, neither player can win. If the pieces remaining on the board make check mate impossible, for example one cannot checkmate an opponent with only a king and a bishop a draw would also result. A draw also results when the only two pieces on the board are Kings, regardless of their position. The third possibility is a draw, even though a checkmate is possible.

The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations, which are discussed in the Laws. The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors. I request your webmaster@littlegolem.net. The agencies to provide me with an email memo, which will confirm that you received this Notification APPEAR; I want to be clear-up to me and the general public to all player's concerned this unclear DRAW SITUATION matter. Please investigate this(these) matter(s) and (delete or correct) the error item/entries as soon as possible. \PLEASE REFER TO FIDE INTERNATIONAL RULES:

Article 10: The Completed Game

10.1 The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent's king. This immediately ends the game.

10.2 The game is won by the player whose opponent declares he resigns. This immediately ends the game.

10.3 The game is drawn when the king of the player who has the move is not in check, and this player cannot make any legal move. The player's king is then said to be "stalemated.” This immediately ends the game. [If the stalemating move was actually legal!] .

10.4 The game is drawn when one of the following endings arises:

(a) king against king; (b) king against king with only bishop or knight; (c)king and bishop against king and bishop, with both bishops on diagonals of the same color. This immediately ends the game.

10.5 A player having a bare king cannot win the game. A draw shall be declared if the opponent of a player with a bare king oversteps the time limit (Articles 10.13 and 10.14) or seals an illegal move (Articles 10.16).

10.6 The game is drawn upon agreement between the two players. This immediately ends the game.

10.7 A proposal of a draw under the provisions of Article 10.6 may be made by a player only at the moment when he has just moved a piece. On then proposing a draw, he starts the clock of his opponent. The latter may accept the proposal, which is always to be taken as unconditional, or he may reject it either orally or by completing a move. A draw offer is valid until the opponent has accepted or rejected it.

[The gamesmanship question "Are you playing for a win?" can be considered as an offer of a draw] .

10.8 If a player proposes a draw while his opponent's clock is running and his opponent is contemplating his move, the opponent may still agree to the draw or reject the offer. A player who offers a draw in this manner may be penalised by the arbiter.

10.9 If a player proposes a draw while his own clock is running or after his move has been sealed, the opponent may postpone his decision until after he has seen the first player's move.

10.10 The game is drawn, upon a claim by the player having the move, when the same position, for the third time:

(a) is about to appear, if he first writes the move on his scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his intention of making this move; or

(b) has just appeared, the same player having the move each time. The position is considered the same if pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares, and if all the possible moves of all the pieces are the same, including the rights to castle [at some future time] or to capture a pawn "en passant".

10.11 If a player executes a move without having claimed a draw for one of the reasons stated in Article 10.10, he loses the right to claim a draw. This right is restored to him, however, if the same position [later] appears again, the same player having the move.

10.12 The game is drawn when a player having the move claims a draw and demonstrates that at least [the last?] 50 consecutive moves have been made by each side without the capture of any piece and without the movement of any pawn. This number of 50 moves can be increased for certain positions, provided that this increase in number and these positions have been clearly announced by the organizers before the event starts. [The claim then proceeds according to 10.13. The most extreme case yet known of a position which might take more than 50 moves to win is king, rook and bishop against king and two knights, which can run for 223 moves between captures!]

10.13 If a player claims a draw under the provisions of Articles 10.10 and/or 10.12, the arbiter must be first stops the clocks while the claim is being investigated. In the absence of the arbiter, a player may stop both clocks to seek the arbiter's assistance.

(a) If the claim is found to be correct, the game is drawn. (b) If the claim is found to be incorrect, the arbiter shall then add five minutes to the claimant's used time. If this means that the claimant has [now] overstepped the time limit, his game will be declared lost. Otherwise, the game will be continued, and a player who has indicated a move according to Article 10.10(a) is obliged to execute this move on the chessboard. (c) A player who has made a claim under these Articles cannot withdraw the claim.

10.14 The game is lost by a player who has not completed the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, unless his opponent has only the king remaining, in which case the game is drawn. (See Articles 6.5 and 10.5.) [Situations when Articles 10.1-10.4 or 10.6 apply are the only other exceptions.]

10.15 The game is lost by a player who arrives at the chessboard more than one hour late, for the beginning of the game or for the resumption of an adjourned game. The time of delay is counted from the [scheduled] start of the playing session. However, in the case of an adjourned game, if the player who made the sealed move is the late player, the game is decided otherwise if: (a) the absent player has won the game by virtue of the fact that the sealed move is checkmate; or (b) the absent player has produced a drawn game by virtue of the fact that the sealed move is stalemate, or if one of the positions in Article 10.4 has arisen as a consequence of the sealed move; or (c) the player present at the chessboard has lost the game according to Article 10.14 by exceeding his time limit.

Records and Reports:

All transmissions from the opponent concerning the game and a record of the moves and dates shall be kept until the end of the tournament and sent to the Tournament Director upon request. If a player does not answer enquiries from the Tournament Director, that player may be deemed to have withdrawn from the tournament.Changes of a permanent address will be notified to the Tournament Director and opponents.The Tournament Director must be notified immediately of any disagreement between competitors about the game. The Tournament Director and opponents must be notified immediately if any substantial failure of hardware or software occurs.

Adjudication:

If no result has been agreeing by the date set for close of play, both competitors shall submit to the Tournament Director within 30 days, a record of the moves played the position reached and a statement claiming either a win or a draw which may be supported by analysis. Competitors not wishing to submit analysis forfeit the right to appeal. The Tournament Director shall notify the adjudicator's decision to both competitors indicating whether or not it is subject to appeal.

Article 16: The Arbiter

An arbiter should be designated to control the competition. His duties are: 16.1 to see that the Laws are strictly observed; 16.2 to supervise the progress of the competition, to establish that the prescribed time-limit has not been exceeded by the players, to arrange the order of resumption of play of adjourned games, to see that the arrangements contained in Article 13 are observed (i.e. to see that the information on the envelope is correct), to keep the sealed-move envelope until the resumption of the adjourned game, etc; 16.3 to enforce the decisions he may make in disputes that have arisen during the course of the competition; 16.4 to act in the best interests of the competition to ensure that a good playing environment is maintained and that the players are not disturbed by each other or by the audience; 16.5 to impose penalties on the players for any fault or infraction of the Laws. These penalties may include a warning, a time penalty (by adding to the player's used time or to his opponent's unused time) or even the loss of the game.

However, this appear do not reflect in any form, OR OR SUBSTANCE TO INTENT TO DISCREDIT ANY WAY all tournaments THAT are been conducting in highly professional manner littleGolem our tournaments). These are only with the intention to clarify any doubt that, that I personally raise to LittleGolem Web distinguish/successful agencies

Cordially

JOSE L. VILLAFAN(Yayael'zumzum)

Chess Player

I think what you are saying is: your game was ruled a draw after 40 moves with no capture or pawn-move when it should have been 50. Is this a fair summary?

Yes, SIR. It is one element of that circumstances.

Not 40 but 21 moves with no capture. Last pawn move was 73.g3 and the game was declared draw at move 94.

I think there is an error in the script.

After 76...Kf8, 78...Kf8 and 94.Kh3 the same position is on the board. I think this is the reason the game was declared draw.

However the rule about 3 times repetion of the position requires that it is the same player to move all 3 times. After 76...Kf8 and 78...Kf8 it is white to move but after 94.Kh3 it is black to move!

Therefore this is not a 3 times repition according to the rules and therefore it is not a draw.

My guess is that the script checks for the same position to happen for the 3rd time but forgets to check that it is the same player to move in all 3 cases. So the script mistakenly declared the game a draw.

Not 40 but 21 moves with no capture. Last pawn move was 73.g3 and the game was declared draw at move 94.

You are right Karsten. And the exact rule is that the same position arises 3 times, it is the same person to move and he or she makes the same move and he or she asks for a draw. If he doesn't ask it shouldn't be declared draw by the referee.

Richard Malaschitz:

One of the great advantages of chess technique is that when you begin to see it, you can begin to apply more of your effort toward analyzing and preparing for situations realistically. Do I not know the rules or do we here, has an error in the program? The game is drawn upon agreement between the two players. This immediately ends the game. This does not apply to this argument. However, you can tell by mine consist icy behavior about rejected a draw requested from my opponent during the period of the tournament,. [Do we have any problem with time?]... that, which . . . , the reader should notice that in some position will have appreciated that all that technique offers is the information that there is a possibility. The script checks for the same position to happen for the 3rd time but forgets to check that it is the same player to move in all three cases. So the script mistakenly declared the game a draw. That is correct; this is a bug in the LG software for chess. White should not have been allowed to Draw in that position, which action just favors white, when my turn in move# 94 . . . Ng5 check. Was not allowed? However, it is not strictly correct to say that you may not draw when one of the fields between your King and queen is threatened. I refer you to this rules page: Karsten Fyhn , is totally right, The game is drawn, upon a claim by the player having the move, when the same position, for the third time: or has just appeared, the same player having the move each time. The position is considered the same if pieces of the same kind and color occupy the same squares, and if all the possible moves of all the pieces are the same, including the rights to castle [at some future time] or to capture a pawn "en passant.” This is not the case here. Therefore this is not a 3-time repetition according to the rules and therefore it is not a draw. I am positively, absolutely, totally, that there are many errors in the script. Last pawn moves were 73.g3 and the game was declared draws at move 94, that’s only 21 move, and my 94 moves will it is NG5 Check, with an approximation of a checkmate. Erroneously, my game was ruled a draw after 21 moves with no capture or pawn-move when it should have been 50. Is this a fair summary? The Tournament WEBMaster shall notify the adjudicator's decision to both competitors indicating whether or not it is subject to appeal. The Tournament Director and opponents must be notified immediately if any substantial failure of hardware or software occurs. The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations, which are discussed in the Laws. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors. I request your webmaster@littlegolem.net. The agencies to provide me with an email memo, which will confirm that you received this Notification APPEAR; I want to be clear-up to me and the general public to all player's concerned this unclear DRAW SITUATION matter. Please investigate this(these) matter(s) and (delete or correct) the error item/entries as soon as possible. \PLEASE REFER TO FIDE INTERNATIONAL RULES:

Please I request a RETR0-Investigation of circumstances that force this outcome, and/or explain "WHY" the 21 moves were applied to this time event. Games do not win or draw themselves.

References: http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/forum/topic.jsp?forum=10&topic=4

Josef Louis Villafan

Chess Player

??????????

1. There was a software bug in jusgement of 3-fold-repetition rule (software does not recognize white and black side)

2. On this server after 3-fold-repetition is automatically draw. I agree this is not according to FIDE rules but similar rules have other chess sites too. For example ICCF (International Corresposence Chess Federation) has rules, where tournament director can suddenly finish tournament (when winner is known) and all games are stopped and result is estimated by strong chess player (including world championship tournament). (BTW it is good idea for LG championship)

On Chessclub.com (which is the gold standard) you do have to ask for the draw after three fold repitition. I would personally like it better if it were automatic. But that is not in accordance with FIDE.

“Ultimately, in WWW. LittleGolem. Net/Email, moves or things that must be together for checkmated your suggest opponent, usually cannot be shipped or Email together to work.”

Richard Malaschitz:

1. You said that there was a software bug in judgement of 3-fold-repetition rule (software does not recognize white and black side) The software did not recognized due that there is not a 3-fold repetition rule in this game.

What are your parameters? And can you show me where did you see the 3-fold-repetition rule and point them to me. However, I thought it would be interesting to hear some peoples' thoughts here. I know it brought up many interesting discussions at the tournament Chess 4.1.Tournament today. I thought they were interesting little gray areas that the rulebook does not go into, and I think you are contradicting yourself with that statement.

2. You mentioned that on this server after 3-fold-repetition is automatically draw. “This information comes from FIDE Laws of Chess at www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp under section E.I. The USCF rules are published in a book (US Chess Federation's Official Rules of Chess), and I don't believe they are online. You also said that you agree this is not according to FIDE rules but similar rules have other chess sites too. These may or may not apply to your chess federation. Didn't you read it?"* Since you cannot claim a draw by threefold repetition of the position or a draw by the 50-move rule without a reasonably complete scores sheet. Further, you cannot claim a win on time in a non-sudden death time control if you have an incomplete scores sheet (you can claim a win on time in a sudden-death time control without a complete scores sheet, 94..Ng5 though). So the answer to you issue #2 statements depends on whether or not the players were under a sudden death or non-sudden death time control. Please can you show me or demonstrate where did you see the 3-fold-repetition rule and point them to me. What are your parameters? I really do not understand what you are taking about here. If it was a sudden-death time control, player 2 wins on time.

3. You also comment in you statement #2; that For example ICCF (International Correspondence Chess Federation) has rules, where tournament director can suddenly finish tournament (when winner is known) and all games are stopped and result is estimated by strong chess player (including world championship tournament). Very exciting battle! I think you are missing the point. I am a Grandmaster 2400. "That sounds suspiciously like something MightyKing might say." or "You certainly remind me of MightyKing." In terms of that remarks, they would like to order (BTW it is good idea for LG championship) them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough Draw call per se, as it were. Q.E.D." Let me put it this way. Which leads me to a weird situation I've always wondered about: However, he was not able to prevent white from harassing him and the game ended in perpetual check.

4. I will said, adding that his play was "of a very high level and I'm satisfied with that. "I'm not especially satisfied with the result even though I had more chances to win than the my opponent.” I disagree with those who supports dumping the stalemate ... without the concept of stalemate endings like this wouldn't exist. So that everyone who thinks/feels that this and this is fault of or caused by ELO rating or the new rating calculations were misused by someone, could check before posting his/her own doubts... It might lower confusion and make this site more interesting for new players. Could someone perhaps create a FAQ from these?

5. How can there be luck in chess, you ask. There are no dice to roll no cards to shuffle no gusts of wind to blow your pawn storm away, how can there be luck? Most players know that to claim a draw on three-fold repetition of position you have to notify the arbiter of your intent to repeat the position for the third time and claim a draw. You do this before you make the move. WHY? I was not allowed to execute it? The move no: 94. ...Ng5, was my move with no intention on my part of repeat the position, in which I keep a close monitor log score sheet records of it. I'm sure you have your own dictionaries at home so I won't include any more definitions, but the key comes down to the distinction between "extraordinarily improbable" and "chance". There is no "chance" on the chessboard, the pieces don't move by themselves.

6. "The game of chess has definite rules on what constitutes a win or draw. These rules are identical for both players, in the interest of fairness, in a human contest where mistakes occur. Richard Malaschitz, correct me if I wrong seems to want to rewrite the rules in favor of the player who happens to have a theoretically won game, so that he need not bother winning it by taking time 240 hours from my clock! One thing that was universally agreed upon: A proper Grandmaster Committee had to be put in place to resolve these questions for professional players, and the sooner the better.

P.S. However, this appear do not reflect in any form, OR SUBSTANCE TO INTENT TO DISCREDIT ANY WAY all tournaments THAT are been conducting in highly professional manner littleGolem our tournaments). These are only with the intention to clarify any doubt that, which I personally raise to LittleGolem Web distinguish/successful agencies.

YYZZ

Dear Richard Malaschitz:

The chess analogy is a good one; I am not convinced by your arguments. It is very simple, admittedly, but it contains the pared down fundamentals. It is possible to comment on this idea but add caveats showing how it would not be applicable, but to say it is just too simple is missing the point. Previously you own me 240 hours from the Draw argument, you never set-up the clock to the time before the bug declared a draw, instead you set-up to 24 hour, check you records. WHY? You did penalized me, only for it.. Based on that I will refute to make a move until you set the clock right, and re-set the time to the original time prior or the draw or/and set the pieces to the appropriate designated squares void the game that continually possess script and time errors. Richard can you explain the coincidences that move 20 in Gary Kaspik is Qe2? Please let's make a legal!! Request for you to CLEAR-THE-BOARD with a After Action Chess Report.

Apparently and legally The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Since no central authority controls the Internet and network providers are too busy to police everything their customers do, online courtesy is arrived at by general consensus. Where an Article of the Laws does not precisely regulate cases, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations, which are discussed in the Laws. The first thing to remember is that no one can obtain information about you that you don't put on the Internet. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors. A secure site means that all the information sent from your computer to the company's server will be encrypted. (See Privacy Online in this guide for more information on encryption.) The Internet is by its nature uncensored, unfettered and wide open. Anyone with a computer and a modem has access both to Mr. Chess Rogers' neighborhood and to the steamiest red-light district, with few barriers in between. One solution is content filtering software. "From this deliberately unpromising position emerged moves of extraordinary power. Games do not win or draw themselves. I think there is an error in the script. As Robert Hynlan once said, "The only thing accomplished by privacy laws is to make the bugs smaller and to make richer those who have access to them." Do I not know the rules or do we here, have an error in the program?

I agree this is not according to FIDE rules but similar rules have other chess sites too. For example ICCF (International Corresposence Chess Federation) has rules, where tournament director can suddenly finish tournament (when winner is known) and all games are stopped and strong chess player (including world championship tournament) estimates result. (BTW it is good idea for LG championship}. That is correct; this is a bug in the LG software for chess. I have this problem before in this board. Please clear the board, because I will not move on an illegal/unclear chess that’s my right. All the pieces must be in the right square before I move...My queen is located in 113.Qe7; not in 113....Qe2. That's the history of chess. We may not like him, but he's there. As far as history goes, I don't think it's a question of correcting history. What I would recommend that we do today is refer this to two committees with grandmaster members for fairly quick opinion. And I would also concur with expressing our concerns about this both to the USCF and to FIDE for the areas that fall within their jurisdiction.

1. Previously, there was a software bug in judgement of 3-fold-repetition rule (software does not recognize white and black side) And I think certainly that's an area that we don't need to do in this case. We don't need to put in a big glamorous display showcasing him and building him up as something that could be idolized. Ref: Another confused Draw.

We'll spend all of our time trying to determine the authenticity of the voice and so forth. I don’t think that that's necessary. We don't want to make this another Watergate where we have video tapes, photos and WEB Pages (Dates) Historical missing gaps and so forth and so on. Any program that denies network services or breaks into off-limits systems brings on chess legal troubles and ruins the whole experience for the rest of us chess law-abiding folks. NO OFFENSE TO MANY FINE CHESS PLAYERS, WE SUPPORT CHESS A LOT, THIS GOES OUT ONLY TO THOSE WITHOUT ANY RESPECT FOR THIS GAME AND HOW TO GOVERN AROUND IT !!! The Internet isn't just about information or entertainment; it's about knowledge. Welcome to the future. Just a matter of when you get an e-mail response, how do you keep a record of that, just for the record and so that it is -- people other than yourself, other boards can access it if necessary; what is your procedure? We can have our chess cake and eat it, too. We are living in this room as proof of a people that cannot only have chess cake, eat it, and expand the chess cake, and invite other players to the chess table. I call this <<"the devil's dichotomy,">> “the Chess Ghost” because it Creates a dichotomy that is false. It says that there is a dichotomy, a choice that must be made between efficiency and freedom. And it turns out this is exactly opposite to the truth.

Again, I don't by any way shape or mean want to hurt the LittleGolem. I want it to prosper. I think it is good. I’m not trying to interfere. But under the circumstances I think something should be done. Two wrongs don’t make one right.

YYZZ

P.S. However, this appear do not reflect in any form, OR SUBSTANCE TO INTENT TO DISCREDIT ANY WAY all tournaments THAT are been conducting in highly professional manner littleGolem our tournaments). These are only with the intention to clarify any doubt that, which I personally raise to LittleGolem Web distinguish/successful agencies.

bump