FIDE 2023 rules says, that 50 move rule needs player claim, but 75 moves rule is automatic!? See here:
9.3 The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by a player having the move, if:
9.3.1 he/she indicates his/her move, which cannot be changed, by writing it on the paper scoresheet or entering it on the electronic scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his/her intention to make this move which will result in the last 50 moves by each player having been made without the movement of any pawn and without any capture, or
9.3.2 the last 50 moves by each player have been completed without the movement of any pawn and without any capture.
9.6 If one or both of the following occur(s) then the game is drawn:
9.6.1 the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 at least five times.
9.6.2 any series of at least 75 moves have been made by each player without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. If the last move resulted in checkmate, that shall take precedence.
Is FIDE 75 moves rule implemented in chess GUIs/engines?
Moderator: Ras
-
Jouni
- Posts: 3618
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:15 pm
- Full name: Jouni Uski
-
jkominek
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:33 am
- Full name: John Kominek
Re: Is FIDE 75 moves rule implemented in chess GUIs/engines?
Yes, the 50 move rule requires player claim, while the 75 move rule is applied by the arbiter to non-discretionarily terminate the game. Viewing chess as a mathematical entity, the 75 rule guarantees that chess is a terminating system.
When it was introduced, the wording that had me puzzled was at least 75 moves as stated in section 9.6.2. Why at least, why not exactly? Because the practical utility of the 75 move rule is found in scholastic tournaments. Arbiters need a way to terminate games in which players will not claim a draw because they are beginners and do not know it, or are just too stubborn to make a claim, or are shooting for a loss on time. It is an annoyance when the next round of a Swiss, say, or the awards ceremony, is held up because one table refuses to quit. The at least 75 moves wording is another concession to practicality. Typically a small number of arbiters are spread around many tables and cannot be monitoring every move of every games at every moment. Arbiters are sporadic observers. If the games are monitored by software then the 75 move rule can be applied at the exact moment and no later.
And no, as far as I am aware, no engines under any chess interface plays according to the rules of chess, TCEC included to pick one example. Being conformant would mean modifying the GUI/CLI to apply the N move rule as N=75, rather than N=50, enabling a protocol that allows engines to make a draw claim (if not already programmed), and for engine authors to write and debug some draw offer logic. Engine authors to say nothing of chess interface programmers are not exactly rushing the gate to update their implementation of FIDE Article 9.
And I think there is no appetite for it from the chess audience either. There are often howls of dismay from fans - cries of audience anguish! - when two engines drag out a game for another cycle of 50 minus 1 moves. Imagine if the cycle length were bumped up to 75.
When it was introduced, the wording that had me puzzled was at least 75 moves as stated in section 9.6.2. Why at least, why not exactly? Because the practical utility of the 75 move rule is found in scholastic tournaments. Arbiters need a way to terminate games in which players will not claim a draw because they are beginners and do not know it, or are just too stubborn to make a claim, or are shooting for a loss on time. It is an annoyance when the next round of a Swiss, say, or the awards ceremony, is held up because one table refuses to quit. The at least 75 moves wording is another concession to practicality. Typically a small number of arbiters are spread around many tables and cannot be monitoring every move of every games at every moment. Arbiters are sporadic observers. If the games are monitored by software then the 75 move rule can be applied at the exact moment and no later.
And no, as far as I am aware, no engines under any chess interface plays according to the rules of chess, TCEC included to pick one example. Being conformant would mean modifying the GUI/CLI to apply the N move rule as N=75, rather than N=50, enabling a protocol that allows engines to make a draw claim (if not already programmed), and for engine authors to write and debug some draw offer logic. Engine authors to say nothing of chess interface programmers are not exactly rushing the gate to update their implementation of FIDE Article 9.
And I think there is no appetite for it from the chess audience either. There are often howls of dismay from fans - cries of audience anguish! - when two engines drag out a game for another cycle of 50 minus 1 moves. Imagine if the cycle length were bumped up to 75.