From: sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Tournament Report from Berkeley Quads last Saturday, 11/14...
Date: 19 Nov 92 02:25:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: cis.1992Nov19.022558.11746
Distribution: usa
Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham

In article <1992Nov19.004603.23878@pony.Ingres.COM> jrb@Ingres.COM (John Black) writes:
>
>...I was the lowest rated player at 1673...
>...  This meant I would get 2 black's and a white (great). 

This doesn't follow - te TD should have (and probably did) toss for
colors in the last round of a quad.


>... In the final 
>position I had a R+NP vs. R position, with my pawn on the 3rd rank.  This was
>definitely drawn... my king was behind the pawn and his was in front; draw.
>... his strategy was to
>*win* this ending by doing nothing; if he had succeeded, would it mean he was
>a better chess player than I?  If not, then why does he get the full point?

Because he got to a drawn position while using less time?

>Are there adjudications for completely drawn positions like this?  

No adjudications - but "clearly drawn" positions allow you to claim the
draw.  Alas, this position (KRPKR) doesn't quite meet the criteria.

>What if we
>had traded off all the material and just started moving bare kings around the
>board until my flag fell?
>  Would I still lose?  Help me out with the rules here.

Now, KK *is* "clearly drawn, even by the baroque SD rules.  So in this
case, you draw.  This points to your correct strategy (if you wanted the
draw): try to sac the P to force the trade of R's.  Once his R is gone,
it's a draw.

>...I offered a draw (it was a draw probably; if anything, I had the
>advantage with an outside passer to my opponent's central passer).  So the
>guy goes and looks at the tournament charts to see where he stands, and I say,
>"a draw means we tie for first"--so he accepts.

Your first big mistake!  Offer the draw.  If your opponent wants to
consider the tournament situation, that's his business.  As soon as you
start to *discuss* the reasons why he ought to accept, you have started
to cross the thin line or propriety.

>
>But then it turned out it was wrong!  A draw meant I was the outright winner!
>Of course, the gentlemanly thing to do was to let him out of his draw accept-
>ance (which he wanted out of now).  I thought about the fact that I had to
>meet someone in an hour and I thought about how tired I was; "I'd be happy
>to split the prize money with you anyway," I offered.  How could the guy 
>refuse?  The position was drawn and if he made me prove the draw then I
>certainly wasn't going to give him any of the money!

Given that you were the one who offerred up te (incorrect) information
about the consequences of a draw, I'd say that everything worked out OK.
But...this is starting to get just a shade sleazy.  Not that it is
uncommon, mind you.  As a general rule, it' best not to make *explicit*
agreements abot the result of a game based on anything other than the
position on the board.  If you want to consider other factors - do so
silently.  In effect, you ended up offering your opponent $$ in exchange
for the 1/2 point.  Tell us - who would have gotten the money had he
won, and you lost?

>... Maybe I'll try it again sometime.

For sure.  It usually takes about 3 tournaments to get rid of the
nervousness, and get used to details such as the time controls, etc.

-- 
Kenneth Sloan                   Computer and Information Sciences
sloan@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station 
(205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170