Noch ein letzter Kommentar: Ich finde, die Regel sollte wirklich konkretisiert werden in Remis in zwei aufeinander folgenden Spielen ("draw in two consecuitive matches).
Glaub ich nicht, es heißt ja dass nur für das erste remis ein punkt vergeben wird. Andernfalls müssten ja die Punkte des zweiten/dritten Remis nachträglich aberkannt werden.
<Comment deleted by user>
Komisch eigendlich ab 10 zug zählt Remis bei beserk bis 5
Aber auf der Stellung waren es ja ungewer ja 23
Aber auf der Stellung waren es ja ungewer ja 23
I agree that the result conforms to arena rules.
But I also agree that this rule makes no sense in this case. The rule is probably designed to avoid players trying to make many points quickly by offering draw in every game after 11 moves. But the case described is completely different.
Losses, esp. after many moves should break the streak. Draws by stalemate or insufficient material should break the streak. Draws by perpetual check should breakt the streak. The rule only makes sense in my eyes for draws by agreement.
But I also agree that this rule makes no sense in this case. The rule is probably designed to avoid players trying to make many points quickly by offering draw in every game after 11 moves. But the case described is completely different.
Losses, esp. after many moves should break the streak. Draws by stalemate or insufficient material should break the streak. Draws by perpetual check should breakt the streak. The rule only makes sense in my eyes for draws by agreement.
I completely agree to the previous comments, I see the intention of the rule (avoiding "fake" draws), but I had just two very "normal" draws in a row, and the second one was not counted (i.e. no point given). I don´t want to complain ("rumweinen" as someone said". I simply question the rule as it seems to be.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.