Debatable blitz rule

Traditional chess games and chess topics in general

Moderators: fern, Dan Honeycutt, Sam Hull

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
Jack Lad
Posts: 8536
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:01 pm
Location: UK

Debatable blitz rule

Post by Jack Lad » Sat Jan 11, 2020 9:54 am

Should the rules be revised or perhaps the use of time increments of say 12 secs be used to ensure that people cannot win on time simply by moving their pieces around quickly? :?
https://chess24.com/en/read/news/what-h ... s-firouzja

I once had a drawn R+B v R endgame which was simply lost on time. I agree that time is part of the game but aiming to simply win on time is against the ethos of chess.
Progress is rewriting your own story.

User avatar
Nordlandia
Posts: 2526
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 7:38 pm
Location: Sortland, Norway

Re: Debatable blitz rule

Post by Nordlandia » Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:42 am

I agree that the superior side shouldn't necessarily be penalized for having more material. There are opinions in both directions but renewal of this rule is something i hope FIDE may look upon. In my view i think FIDE should draw the line at k + minor piece. Simply add clause if possible mate is reachable with normal play.

* Sole minor piece can't mate on it's own. Claiming that the opposing army turn into "zombies" if time run out is literally nonsense.
* Time is crucial part of blitz. Again it's ethically wrong step to punish the side with more material because if helpmate sequence than never happend in real play.

Jack Lad
Posts: 8536
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:01 pm
Location: UK

Re: Debatable blitz rule

Post by Jack Lad » Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:34 am

Nordlandia wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:42 am
I agree that the superior side shouldn't necessarily be penalized for having more material. There are opinions in both directions but renewal of this rule is something i hope FIDE may look upon. In my view i think FIDE should draw the line at k + minor piece. Simply add clause if possible mate is reachable with normal play.

* Sole minor piece can't mate on it's own. Claiming that the opposing army turn into "zombies" if time run out is literally nonsense.
* Time is crucial part of blitz. Again it's ethically wrong step to punish the side with more material because if helpmate sequence than never happend in real play.
[d] qqq3bk/1q6/7K/8/8/4B3/qqq5/1q3q2 b
Here black can win immediately with Qg6++ but he is in time trouble and plays Qb2-c3? instead and then his flag falls.
[d] qqq3bk/1q6/7K/8/8/1q2B3/q1q5/1q3q2 w
White in this position now has a mate in 4 starting with Bd4+. So the arbiter could claim that this is a win for white since "mate is reachable with normal play."
Progress is rewriting your own story.

User avatar
Nordlandia
Posts: 2526
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 7:38 pm
Location: Sortland, Norway

Re: Debatable blitz rule

Post by Nordlandia » Thu Jan 23, 2020 1:42 pm

In the past you can simply wait and run out of time. But not anymore. USCF added clause for cases like this.

I think FIDE should add "clause"


Post Reply