50 moves rule
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:19 pm
Why is this forum getting more and more contaminated by this stupid 50-moves-rule??
This rule has absolutely nothing to do with chess. It´s only there to keep human over-the-board-players alive in some cases. It´s just an aid like the chess clock. Without the clock a single game could take a whole week. And the 50-moves-rule has the same use as the clock, but it´s a worse invention. Why 50 moves?? Or why n moves? This makes no sense. Another rule is needed for practiacal play. But at least in theoretical play (for example endgame books) or tablebases research it makes ABSOLUTELY no sense to use a 50-move-rule or a n-move-rule. This destroys the game of chess!
For human over-the-board-play the 50-moves-tablebases doesn´t have any use. It´s not allowed to use them and in preparation or training endgames it´s absurde and useless to try to understand when a special endgame is won in 49 or 51 moves. Remind that a move can be stronger than another even if it takes a few more moves to the win, but leaves the opponent without any chance! For correspondence chess the rule is useless also.
For training, analysis and theoretical research (these 3 are the main fields for the tabelbases I think !!!) to use the rule makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. When I am training the endgame KRP-KBP with blocked rook pawns or KNN-KP, I like using tablebases. And I try to understand the endgame. A mistake of the defender could loose, but I´m not interested how many moves it would take to mate. I want to understand WHY it looses. This is impossible with the 50-rule. For research I like useing the tablebases. I want understand the winning method in cases like KBwBb-KN and I´m not interested whaeater it would be possible in 48 or 57 moves.
Remains only computer/ engine chess. Why should one use a n-move rule and not the real tablebases ?? I really don´t understand this. By the way it destroys the real truth and beauty in chess!
I would prefer to have one single interesting 7-man DTM or DTC than the whole set 7-man-50, even if the filesize would be 1000 times the one of the 50-case !!!!
I´m really disappointed about this deployment. I thik, it´s definitely a step in the wrong direction and wastage of resources!
If you disagree further: Think about the endgame KBN-K with a 14-move-rule. Do you really think this is interesting and of any use ??
This rule has absolutely nothing to do with chess. It´s only there to keep human over-the-board-players alive in some cases. It´s just an aid like the chess clock. Without the clock a single game could take a whole week. And the 50-moves-rule has the same use as the clock, but it´s a worse invention. Why 50 moves?? Or why n moves? This makes no sense. Another rule is needed for practiacal play. But at least in theoretical play (for example endgame books) or tablebases research it makes ABSOLUTELY no sense to use a 50-move-rule or a n-move-rule. This destroys the game of chess!
For human over-the-board-play the 50-moves-tablebases doesn´t have any use. It´s not allowed to use them and in preparation or training endgames it´s absurde and useless to try to understand when a special endgame is won in 49 or 51 moves. Remind that a move can be stronger than another even if it takes a few more moves to the win, but leaves the opponent without any chance! For correspondence chess the rule is useless also.
For training, analysis and theoretical research (these 3 are the main fields for the tabelbases I think !!!) to use the rule makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. When I am training the endgame KRP-KBP with blocked rook pawns or KNN-KP, I like using tablebases. And I try to understand the endgame. A mistake of the defender could loose, but I´m not interested how many moves it would take to mate. I want to understand WHY it looses. This is impossible with the 50-rule. For research I like useing the tablebases. I want understand the winning method in cases like KBwBb-KN and I´m not interested whaeater it would be possible in 48 or 57 moves.
Remains only computer/ engine chess. Why should one use a n-move rule and not the real tablebases ?? I really don´t understand this. By the way it destroys the real truth and beauty in chess!
I would prefer to have one single interesting 7-man DTM or DTC than the whole set 7-man-50, even if the filesize would be 1000 times the one of the 50-case !!!!
I´m really disappointed about this deployment. I thik, it´s definitely a step in the wrong direction and wastage of resources!
If you disagree further: Think about the endgame KBN-K with a 14-move-rule. Do you really think this is interesting and of any use ??