Fwd: Re: [pbmserv] Interesting ethical issue: perpetual check

["R. Gordon Aickin" <rgordona@gmx.co.uk>]

> > That is not right.  Perpetual check is a part of chess. It ends the game
> > as a tie.
> 
> Not so.  According to Wikipedia:
> 
> Either player may claim a draw by indicating that one of the following 
> conditions exists:
>
>      * Fifty moves have been played by each player without a piece being 
> captured or a pawn moved.
> 
>      * The same board position has been repeated three times, with the 
> same player to move and all pieces having the same rights to move, 
> including the right to castle or capture en passant.

I can see no situation where a perpetual check would not also fulfil one or
both of the above criteria, (since it is perpetual and the number of bord
positions is not infinite it must at least result in repetition eventually) 

Thus I would say the rules do include perpetual check, at least that,
perpetual check must result in a stalemate, can be dedudced from the above
two rules, so stating it explicitly would just lengthen the rules.

I suppose there is the case where the repetition will take a long time to
achieve and one player is short on time, so the other forces play to
continue in order to get a timed win. (Personaly I would consider such an
action unsporting, but then I don't play timed chess, and I knwo that the
rules would permit it.)

     gordon

-- 
10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++

-- 
Lust, ein paar Euro nebenbei zu verdienen? Ohne Kosten, ohne Risiko!
Satte Provisionen für GMX Partner: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/partner