27 Nov 03
Originally posted by davyLOL if someone had told him 'yes' (which is wrong of course) you would both be in for 50 wasted moves until it would automatically be called a draw anyway. 🙂
doesn't really matter ,we decided on the draw ,just wondered if he had got a different reply to his question ,would he have took the draw
27 Nov 03
Originally posted by davyyes davy that is true what if he asked the question and someone said "do this" and he beat you in 49 moves it just will not work cheating is cheating and that is that i think this should be monitered the same way as people who are out of order.ðŸ˜
if thats your thinking ,whats wrong with anyone asking for help on every move
27 Nov 03
Well if you guys want to keep the fact that a King and a knight versus a king is ALWAYS a draw then that's up to you.. I for one think it should be common knowledge - saves an awful lot of time.
By the way... I suppose by your twisted logic that all the people who ask how to castle or how en passant works are also cheating 😉
Rhymester
27 Nov 03
Originally posted by Rhymesteryes now you are acting your age silly boy....😛
Well if you guys want to keep the fact that a King and a knight versus a king is ALWAYS a draw then that's up to you.. I for one think it should be common knowledge - saves an awful lot of time.
By the way... I suppose by your twisted logic that all the people who ask how to castle or how en passant works are also cheating 😉
Rhymester
27 Nov 03
Originally posted by Rhymesteryes if they ask during a game and the move they are asking about relates to the game they are playing,why dont you
Well if you guys want to keep the fact that a King and a knight versus a king is ALWAYS a draw then that's up to you.. I for one think it should be common knowledge - saves an awful lot of time.
By the way... I suppose by your twisted logic that all the people who ask how to castle or how en passant works are also cheating 😉
Rhymester
01 Dec 03
Originally posted by flexmorethank you flexmore, sanity at last
i think this instance of advice was unfair -
it might have related to king and rook versus king and knight. the knight could capture the rook guaranteeing a draw - or should he keep the pieces on and go for a win with just the knight!?😕
01 Dec 03
2 edits
The question he asked wasn't specific. For instance, if I were to ask in what circumstances would a queen be more powerful than two rooks, as I had an opportunity in one of my games to arrange it, I wouldn't consider myself cheating. I could buy a book on chess strategy and get the same information. If, on the other hand, I begin asking questions directly relating to the position of the game (e.g "What if he has two bishops to my knights, control over the open g file and his king is out in the open?" ) then I'm obviously going against the rules.
P.S. A standard chess book or a quick search over google would tell him a knight can't mate on its own anyway. Unless you're suggesting both of those are cheating then I don't see the harm in asking here. It undoubtedly saved some other people the trouble of finding out.
01 Dec 03
Originally posted by flexmoreWell, even if his new found knowledge changed his entire game strategy, the fact remains it's a basic chess rule which could be found in any number of sources. So if studying chess through books and the internet is allowed then questions not devulging specific piece placement aren't really a problem I don't think.
i think this instance of advice was unfair -
it might have related to king and rook versus king and knight. the knight could capture the rook guaranteeing a draw - or should he keep the pieces on and go for a win with just the knight!?😕
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
01 Dec 03
Originally posted by dylI disagree. Asking people for advice about a game which is in progress, whether specific or not, is breaking the rules. You gave an example of someone wanting to know circumstances in which a queen was more powerful than 2 rooks. The rules permit you to consult a book, but not to ask a friend, who might very well know the answer because he's seen such a position in a book! If you asked him "Is a queen better than 2 rooks?” that's technically cheating. But it would be ok to borrow an endgame book from him, which might be full of such positions…
The question he asked wasn't specific. For instance, if I were to ask in what circumstances would a queen be more powerful than two rooks, as I had an opportunity in one of my games to arrange it, I wouldn't consider myself cheating. I could buy a book on chess strategy and get the same information. If, on the other hand, I begin asking questions directly rela ...[text shortened]... see the harm in asking here. It undoubtedly saved some other people the trouble of finding out.
Let's look at a simpler example. Someone plays 1.e4 (P-K4) and his/her opponent replies with the Sicilian, 1..c5 (P-QB4). The first player then either asks a friend or posts on the forums (it makes no difference) "What is the best line against the Sicilian?" That's breaking the rules. It doesn't matter that it's standard opening knowledge that can be easily found in books, databases or the internet. He/she should have waited until the game was over, before asking the question.
The real problem occurs when someone is playing so many games at the same time, that they always have a game in progress that is relevant to their questions. Can such a person, ever ask anyone for advice? The only answer is no. If someone wishes to play so many games, then he/she must either think for themselves, or have a lot of chess books!
Dave
01 Dec 03
Originally posted by David TebbI think that this question is a bit ambiguos - for example, in the scenario you presented, since internet sources on chess positions are also allowed, the friend could point him to a site that deals with the 2 rooks vs. a queen question. In other words, if the friend told him in his own words, that would be cheating, but if he pointed him to a site that told the exact same thing written by someone else, that would be technically within the rules.
...If you asked him "Is a queen better than 2 rooks?” that's technically cheating. But it would be ok to borrow an endgame book from him, which might be full of such positions…
Or should there be a limit as to how specific one can be when pointing people to sources on chess questions? Maybe pointing someone to the exact URL within a chess site that would deal with the question in hand would be equivalent to telling the answer directly, and one should only be allowed a hint such as "you should research it at www.insertsitenamehere.com"?
I think it's hard to draw unambiquous lines where directing to a source for research ends and cheating begins, and that we should just use common sense there - try to abide by the spirit of the rule to the best of our ability.
-Jarno