another suggestion draw offertimeout


Back to forum

Normajean Yates    (2009-06-04)
another suggestion: draw offer+timeout

another suggestion: suppose *I* make a draw offer and then *opponent* runs out of time; in such a case *my* draw offer is automatically deemed accepted by *opponent*: the result is recorded as a draw.

Or maybe this: giving a disadavtage only to repeated-draw-offerers:

Above rule, but only applied if it is *not* my *first* draw-offer in the game: i.e.:

In a game between player A and player B; if player A make a draw offer and in response player B runs out of time; and further, if there have been two draw offers in the game by player A such that player B has *not* made a draw offer between the said two draw offers by player B; then the draw offer of player A is automatically deemed accepted by player B: the result is recorded as a draw (instead of player B losing on time).

Garvin Gray    (2009-06-04 10:27:27)

This seems odd and if the server does automatically award the draw in this situation you describe, then it goes against the fide laws of chess.

The player has to agree to the draw for the game to be concluded as such. If the player runs out of time before agreeing to a draw, then they have lost.

It seems pretty cut and dried to me.

Normajean Yates    (2009-06-05 03:07:37)
oh then minor technical change...

instead of the game having been drawn automatically, referee *adjudicates* it as a draw.

This ensures that fide rules are not violated, because a game result *can* be changed by adjudication: for example:

Suppose OTB, immediately after a game is over, the winning player is found to have a hidden transciever with a *log* showing that moves *were* transmitted and move-suggestions *were* recieved. And the player breaks down in tears and admits to cheating: pleading for leniency - not in re that particular game, but for a shorter ban-from-tournaments than s/he expects to get. In this case, at the very least the game would be readjudicated as a loss for said player, no?

Also, on ficgs the 50-move rule is not implemented; so a game won here which would otherwise be drawn under the 50-move rule - wouldn't *that* violate fide rules? For corr chess, it is more iecc/iccf than fide - fide will come around :)

Thibault de Vassal    (2009-06-05 14:02:03)
draw offer+timeout

There's no problem with violating FIDE rules as long as it is the best choice for correspondence chess (ie. 50 moves rule), on this suggestion for these rare cases, the player should accept the draw himself in my opinion to deserve the result but well, if most players think that's a good idea, I may change that.

Normajean Yates    (2009-06-05 14:17:11)
no no 50-move rule shouldnt be there..

in correspondence chess - Thib. you were right not to implement the 50-move rule - please don't!

Hey people, don't you want to announce tablebase-mate in 132 with distance-to-conversion 98? If the 50-move rule is implemented, you'll never get that chance!