What an eccentric fellow Mr Johny Bolens is......
In the Lightning tournament at the Parramatta RSL club Johny wanted to claim a win on time as his opponent had two pawns on the side of the board (eg h and g files) with the K in front of the pawns. Bolens had just a King and Knight. Bolens argued that he had mating material as there could be the possibility that his opponent could give up the g pawn and end up mated with K and N with his opponents pawn blocking the escape square.
So What is deemed to Be mating Material? If there is the possibility that the opponent will make made a blunder should just the sole knight be deemed as mating material?
I'd like to hear the arguements.
For the Record the Arbiter determined the result as a draw. Of course Bolens Complained......
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
i saw this game. it was a bit of joke. a draw was fair result.
On the information provided Bolens is correct and the arbiter is clearly in error. You can win on time if it is still mathematically possible *by any series of moves*, even totally stupid or deliberately losing ones, for checkmate to later occur. Bolens should have appealled, and if he did so, any competent appeals committee would have thrown out the decision and declared Bolens to have won the game.
In a longer (guillotine finish) game the opponent could stop Bolens winning this way by claiming a 10.2 draw, which any competent arbiter would uphold. In blitz, losing on time when your opponent has a lone knight is an occupational hazard.
I once won a blitz game with K+N vs K+R+N+2P - my opponent left himself in check!
Some would say that this is all silly, but blitz chess is like that, and the rules are the rules and the arbiter should uphold them.
Post a Comment