Response to Irina’s Open Letter
By Tom Braunlich
June 2, 2008
2008 Frank K. Berry U.S. Women’s Championship To Irina Krush, Anna Zatonskih, and all Championship Participants, This is a response to the Open Letter published in Chess Life Online a few days ago from Irina Krush which protested the outcome of the final playoff game of the 2008 FKB U.S. Women’s Championship in which a wild time scramble occurred and Anna Zatonskih was declared the winner on time by a mere one second margin. I am writing this on behalf of the Championship Organizing Committee, whom I consulted about the issues raised. (The organizing committee consisted of Frank K. Berry, Jim Berry, and me. Bill Goichberg and John Donaldson also contributed to this reply.) Although I wasn’t in the room myself, I have consulted with several witnesses who were there, and others, and I had a long discussion about it with Irina on the phone.
I think it is clear that the committee, and most people who have seen the video, sympathize with Irina’s grievance. A playoff that ends in a time scramble like this is never going to have a satisfying result. This experience calls out for the USCF to determine and create guidelines for an optimum system of playoffs for important titles — identifying the best available playoff option to use in certain circumstances (i.e., depending how much time is available for the playoffs, etc.). Guidelines for when to use playoffs as opposed to mathematical tiebreaks or declaring co-champions would also be nice. I am writing the article on the Championships for Chess Life, and plan to detail this issue there as well as to cover this controversy.
The playoff system used in this tournament was similar to ones that have been used before for other important events. It should be noted that the intended playoff methods were communicated to the players long in advance and there were no objections.
First, let’s discuss the technical aspects of the protest itself before discussing its “fairness” beyond the technicalities. Irina’s basic complaint was that the final game was not decided on the board but instead was a clock-punching race in which Anna can be seen on the video starting to make her move before Irina punches the clock on several occasions. Irina calls this both illegal and unfair. (See the addendum after this letter for some interesting discussion on the legalities of this. It is a separate controversy by itself that has been sparked by this event.)
The bottom line for IA Frank Berry and Jim Berry, who were the directors present, is that no protest of the outcome was made at the time when something might have been done about it. Instead the protest came many days later.
Frank stated, “I’d have to say that by not raising an objection at the time Irina essentially agreed to the result by quickly walking out and not protesting immediately. Once agreed to it is next to impossible to over-rule… even in the face of video evidence that might show questionable bending of the rules. I was there to rule in case of an objection raised by one of the players. I’d have to say at this point the result stands as posted that night. It was wild… but who expected otherwise?”
Also, neither TD believed it was their responsibility to step in and stop the game during the time scramble. Here is what Frank noted about what discretion the director has in such situations:
“A few areas of the USCF rule book ( # 5 ) are appropriate:
11D1 Illegal move in sudden death time pressure: A director should not call attention to illegal moves in sudden death time pressure.
(Both players could be seen making questionable moves in the video)
21D Intervening in games. The director’s intervention in a chess game shall generally be limited to the following:
21D2 Correcting illegal moves observed. Correcting any illegal moves observed, unless time pressure exists…
21F. Player requests for rulings. A player has the right to stop both clocks to ask the director to rule upon a point of law, procedure or conduct. (This was not done by either player).
Since this was not a FIDE qualifier event we were going by USCF rules. … “
Frank also has said (along with Larry Kaufman and Bill Goichberg, among others) that this experience makes it clear that if an armageddon playoff game is used is should include a short increment or delay, such as 1 or 2 seconds, to lessen the awkward effects of a possible mutual time scramble. Of course, if you did that you would have to greatly alter the relative starting times of white and black to re-balance the draw-odds equation. Heretofore this has normally not been done for armageddon play, but perhaps it should be.
Another appeal Irina made was to fairness or justice, regardless of the protest being late. She implies in her letter that Anna’s play was unfair, that even though technically it was allowed to stand with no objection, and even though Anna may not intentionally have been trying to be unfair, nevertheless it caused a situation not worthy of a sporting result. This is sticky territory, and I hesitate to discuss it since both Irina and Anna are my friends and I’d like to keep it that way.
Irina’s protest is understandable, but two counter-arguments need to be mentioned in response. First, it is unclear if what Anna did on these moves is actually illegal (see addendum below, in which experienced TDs argue it is not). But even if it is, it also has to be said that it can be seen from the video that both players made technically questionable moves during this wild scramble. At one point Irina knocks over a rook and does not pick it up, which is illegal, and a few more moves occur after that.
On this issue, none of the eyewitnesses I’ve talked to said that they witnessed anything they considered inherently unfair.
“I did not witness anything that would have led me to think the result of the game should not stand at the time, had a complaint been lodged in a timely fashion,” said one 2600-rated witness.
“The biggest thing is neither side played fairly, as Krush knocked a rook off the board and didn’t fix it as well as Zatonskih’s moving before Krush hit the clock,” said another player who was a witness.
So — how can one say this — perhaps one might say that the “unfairness” existed on both sides? But, let’s face it, this kind of thing is what commonly happens in a mutual time scramble with no increment in the cases that both players go “down to the wire” like this.
Pieces start flying, hands move in a blur, etc. It is to be expected, which is why it is to be avoided. To illustrate this, imagine this thought experiment: Suppose everything happened just as it did except that Anna was the one who lost by one second. Later on when she sees the video she might then have protested that the result was unfair because Irina made an illegal move when she didn’t replace a knocked-over piece. I think people would have been sympathetic with her as well in such a case.
A better word than unfair perhaps is just plain “unsatisfactory.” The “blame” for the unsatisfactory result, if it goes anywhere, should perhaps mainly go to the format for the playoff, which allowed this possibility to occur. Again, this can perhaps be fixed in the future but is difficult to try to adjust after-the-fact.
I have three short “addenda” to add on related issues, which I will put following the end of this letter, including:
(1) Sportsmanship
(2) Correction — The Time Status
(3) Making a Move — Is it illegal to start your move before the opponent punches the clock?
With deepest respect and regards,
Tom Braunlich
On Behalf of the Championship Organizing Committee.
Click here to read the Addenda.
Source: CLO
How should this matter be decided? Click here to vote!
1. Too late. Anna keeps the title.
2. Both players share the title.
3. The Armageddon game should be played again.
4. 2-game match in regular time control to decide.
Should the USCF continue to handle the US and US Women’s Championship? Click here to vote.
1. Yes, the USCF is doing a great job.
2. No, the USCF just simply can’t handle the US/US Women’s Championship.
Irina is clearly wrong on this matter. She knocked her rook off the board and never fixed it. She lost on time because she was slower than Anna. Plain and simple. It’s sad to see a champion behave this way. I can understand her emotion right after the game. But to publish this letter more than a week later shows poor sportsmanship. She should also get rid of her second for giving her bad advice.
shame on u people.
knocking a rook off doesnt influence the outcome of the game, it is simply a lame EXCUSE. Moving before your opponent punches the clock clearly DID influence the result of the game GREATLY. how can anyone even compare it?
shame on anna for not answering the letter or offer Irina her support and understanding.
and shame on the organizers for being such cowards and not stand up to this unfare outcome.
That’s tellin’ her, Tom!
Q&A:
How should this matter be decided?
4. 2-game match in regular time control to decide!!
Should the USCF continue to handle the US and US Women’s Championship?
1. Yes, the USCF is doing a great job!!
shame on the uscf for not handling this championship better. bill goichberg caused the uscf to lose af4c. now he’s making mockery of the us championship with his stupid armageddon system. berry doesn’t sneeze without goichberg giving him the ok.
Irina is absolutely correct in her letter. She is rightfully the co-champion. She has every right to protest and the USCF could call for an official review and declare Irina co-champion. They most certainly have the power to do so. The USCF President could issue an official proclamation along with the Executive Board.
There is nothing plain and simple except that the entire concept of Armageddon chess to decide a national championship is completely silly.
Irina was undefeated with 7.5 points. Anna had the same number of points.
Irina most certainly deserves to be co-champion and her there was nothing in her letter that was untrue. What is sad is that Anna doesn’t have the courtesy to write a letter apologizing for making illegal moves. Yes…shame on Anna. I thought she was a better sport than this. She should offer Irina her support.
Nobody is saying that Anna give up her title. The most ethical thing to do is declare Irina co-champion.
Irina was treated quite unfairly.
Anna is the champion very simple. They both know the rules of the Playoff beforehand and had agreed to it.
Dropping a rook of the board and then continuing is worse in my book than playing fast. Having played gazillion blitz games and tournaments what Anna did was just what blitz players do…survival of the fittest.
Some ideas for Irina:
1. Maybe it’s a good idea not to wear a jacket on which you must spend 1 second each move correcting the sleeve WHILE you are a playing an armageddon blitz match for the US Championship
2. You started with 6:00 vs 4:30 …take better care of your time.
3. Quite frankly WHAT did you expect in the timetrouble? Have you never played a blitz game? Knocking over the rook and still making a move was worse in my book (like I already said)than what she is accusing Anna of.
So I think basically -> stop whining … use this to motivate yourself to come back stronger next year. Maybe a better “blitz outfit” or maybe just finish the championship in 9 rounds like you had every chance to do this time around!
What Irina was wearing has absolutely nothing to do with the FACT that Anna was making illegal moves! I don’t think this is a time for fashion statements.
It’s just plain nuts for anyone to say that the USCF “cannot” do anything about this mess. Fundamentally, it’s the fault of the folks on the ground in Oklahoma.
However, Irina has every reason to protest. Anna simply broke the rules and still gets the title.
I know she didn’t mean to due to the style of chess (Armageddon). Yet, she did make illegal moves. Hence, the USCF certainly has the authority and power to make Irina co-champion.
The USCF is so incompetant that they can’t even run the women’s national championship. Nevertheless, they have the power to declare, as they should, Irina the 2008 co-champion. This way both Anna and Irina would be champions.
And this mess would end.
I think the most important point is not to let such dirty tactics win. Nothing to do with Irina, all to do with the way Anna moved at the end. You can’t let be rewarded for that.
2 seconds against 6 and in a losing position, then spend 1 second against 6 with both going full speed! Come one there is no sense in this being a result of fair play.
Mr Anonymous (which btw I find pathetic if you can’t post under your own name)
If you look at the video Anna places here pieces on SQUARES every single time. Yes she does it fast but this is blitz. She moves after Irina moves but she is just faster on the clock. Looking at Irina however you see that see intends a rook to go somewhere to b5 but it’s almost laying down…she knocks over a rook etc.
It’s clear to me that Anna is simply a better blitz player.
True the jacket has nothing to do with Anna making illegal moves (your oppinion, in mine she always placed pieces on squares)…..it was STUPID because it cost her time.
Anna is the champion…France isn’t co-world champion in soccer just because the lost by “ONLY” one penalty kick are they?
Why are people still talking about illegal moves? Officials have made clear that starting your move before your opponent has hit the clock is *not* illegal.
WHAT dirty tactics?
WHAT illegal moves?
Anna places here pieces on squares EVERY SINGLE move.
Irina DIDN’T
Anna was simply FASTER…that’s what blitz is about isn’t it?
6:00 vs 4:30 and whine about getting flagged…COMMON
The use of ICC software would resolve many of the issues in fast play.
Frank says he was not in the room and did not watch the game and later says he was there to make a ruling.
The biggest problem I see is that there is no mention of an arbitrator sitting at the table watching everything very closely to keep the game honest and the rules followed.
Claiming you are there but in a different room is lame and shows total disregard for the image and reputation of chess.
This is all about the prestige of chess in America. All the officials were absent at the critical game. What a disgrace. Total Amateur. We need Professional Chess and it will never happen when those in charge ignore the games and their outcomes.
Next time get 2 computers hooked up to the internet and play on ICC. That will solve many problems.
Of course USCF will not want to admit they have to go to a different company to get the solution to their problem that the USCF is unable to solve. Another disgrace that USCF does not have blitz software similar to ICC.
It was just a NORMAL blitz game.
Everybody that actually plays blitz (NOT on the computer, but live) knows that thats just the way blitz is.
All grandmasters that commented this video (or were present) say that they saw nothing unusual or unfair.
So why is that not enough for some people???
I bet those complainers never played blitz before.
I have to admit that it did seem to me that Anna was the better blitz player. She just had the moves. She was practiced at keeping time on the clock. She was very fast. Irina did not seem used to the high speed as well as Anna did.
I support they be co champions. It is totally stupid to determine a slow game championship by fast armagedon games of this type. I do not like their use in the World Championships either. One of these days the world championship will have a problem similar to this problem.
Obviously in fast games of this type FIDE has the arbitor interfer in the game. It is simply necessary. It is crazy to expect a player to make a protest under such mental stress of the game. A good referee is the one who should be responsible that all rules are followed. These rules need to be tighten up if they are going to be used in such important games.
Obviously Anna plays more blitz and it paid off. She has worked on her technique.
I refuse to play these fast games on ICC because I hate to lose a won game on time and I hate it when my opponent plays the clock instead of the board. Playing the clock instead of the board is not chess.
I wonder what people think- you couldn’t do this brutal clock bashing with the old analogue clocks (which I am more used to) as the button there is very small so you would end up knocking the clock to the floor ore something!
People were agressive pressing those clocks- but they had to slow down not just be on auto like Anna or they would miss the button. (it was like a needle to press, whereas now it is the area of a hand that you can’t miss).
I have played in rapid tournaments where several opponents have done anything to win- including playing in your time, and even denying repetition draw when it has repeated 6 times and despite being a queen down just to win on time!
Some players would go into a losing position to avoid a draw and win on time- it is so stupid- but this happens on internet chess too. However increment or delay does stop the most ridiculous of dirty tactics such as mentioned.
By the way it is indisputable that Anna broke the rules- she even had her hand over pieces before Irina let go- which breaks even the lenient rule that allows it once let go.
If I were in charge I would always err to the side of never rewarding such methods. It gives the wrong message.
Anna did not do anything wrong or illegal. She did just what all good blitz players do as far as I can tell from watching the video on youtube. Anna was simply faster. Congratulations to her!
First, for the “anon” who is apparently a “fashion expert,” you are are wrong. Irina can wear any jacket she desires and for some nobody like you to comment on the plahy of a famous Internation Master regarding her jacket…is simply stupid.
All I’m saying is that Irina and Anna shoud be co-champions. It is as clear as day and the sun rising in the morning that Anna made illegal moves (though, I don’t by any means think she did so on purpose….no…the problem is the format).
Bottom line: Irina finished undefeated with 7.5 points and so did Anna. Irina has a grievance and it is warranted.
Irina is both rightfully the co-champion due to the illegal moves of Anna and the world be damned. This is not right. Irina was NOT treated fairly, has an undefeated score equal to that of Anna. Thus, the USCF should (and could) declare co-champions.
This is a disgrace. The USCF is most to blame for allowing such a silly version of chess known as “armageddon” to decide a championship???!!!!
Irina was right in her letter. How dare people fault her for the jacket she wore????!!!!! I knew this world was full of idiots but to chastise IM Krush over the jacket she wore is a clear sign of an simple and illogical mind.
So, I’m answering to a person with a child’s mentality. So be it.
Irina did nothing wrong, nor illegal. Anna violated the rules. That IS what is plain and simple. And she is the rightful co-champion.
Anna has yet to release a resposne. Irina did. For Anna, whom I did respect a great deal, to not even respon to Irina is a disgrace. She violated the rules and does not deserve the title. this year, we have a “paper” champ.
Irina deserves better. She did nothing wrong. Yet there are complete idiots out there who want to say she lost because of her jacket????
I’ve heard lunatics speak more logical than this.
Irina has every right to protest. And, I don’t think she cares what the simple minded fools on this blog thinks.
You’ll never achieve what she has.
A line must be drawn in the sand….she has been dealt a terrible grievance and injustice. She has a right to stand up for what is ethical.
And to the naysayers…be damned.
Irina did nothing, nothing wrong.
she is the rightful co-champion and the logic used to argue against this cannot even be considered “logic.”
Where is Anna’s letter? Anna doesn’t have the courage to speak up and even defend herself?
Coward.
She can take her paper trophy and run. Irina is the rightful co-champion and that is just the way it is.
Only a foolish knave could argue otherwise.
Irina seems to have been poorly served by her second, whoever that was. In the heat of the moment the player can’t be expected to think clearly–that’s what seconds are for. If a complaint had been lodged at the time, who knows?
Probably the result would stand (as it seems is the organizer/grandmaster consensus) but by publishing the letter a week later doesn’t make Irina look good.
I hope there can be a solution which is good for chess, as the playoff/armegeddon system is pretty ugly.
If they had been declared co-champions, then in 6 months there could be a match, which would not be that hard to organize and could generate nice publicity and be exciting.
They did that in Norway- Carlsen had to win a proper match some time later against Adgestein. It had to be arranged for some time in the future.
If they can do that in Norawy, why not America? Surely a date could be found to suit them both. Why even resort to blitz?
I am puzzled by Irina’s claim that only Anna making moves before Irina punching the clock, while the video clearly shows they both were doing the same extact thing – moved the piece as soon as the opponent released her piece! The only difference was Irina’s right hand had to travel 3x the distance from across the board to the clock, which was on her left (she had white). That’s what caused her 4 secs and the title in the end lol. (Hey this a good blitz tip – choose black so you have the right to decide which side of the board to place the clock! Another tip a GM gave me is to trade your R for your opponent’s N, cause it’s harder to see what a N can do in blitz.)
I don’t think this way to decide the title is unfair or silly. They had 9 long games, 2 15-min, and 2 5-min games with delay to show their chess ability before getting to the tiebreaker Armageddon. Every chess player knows there are chess skills involved even at 1-min lighting. Don’t believe it – join a blitz side event next time,and play against Hikaru or other masters and see if you can win.
If your opponent can start their move before you finished yours (bizarre) coyuld you then start your next before completing your earlier to save time? Then both players would ened up not pressing the clock!
This is why it should be illegal even if it isn’t, as the second player has a huaranteed win on time if they both have only seconds left simply by playing in opponent’s time- it can never be reversed to the other playing in his opponent’s time- it is like a stranglehold on the clock. Ridiculous!
Were penalty kicks in 2006 FIFA World Cup to take Italy as world champion over France unfair and silly? Why do people discount the excitemnet of Armageddon game, it needs more skills than free kicks?
frankly, I see no difference between the ways they were making moves.
Krush should learn to play with her left hand 🙂
organizers should use Bronstein’s clock – 1-2s delay (unlike Fischer’s clock, they dont accumulate the increment, so no reason to make your move before the opponent finishes his/her)
USCF handled the situation just fine. It’s sport. By they can make adjustments for the future
**it needs more skills than free kicks?**
how many penalty kicks out of 10 would you agains any goalkeeper from English second league? 😛
BTW, penalty kicks dont have such a long history. Before, FIFA and UEFA ordered a replay in playoffs, if not, a coin decided the outcome. Similarly, Smyslov won his match against Hubner in 1983 in roulette “playoff”. anybody thinks it’s better?
Anna’s Armageddon win is not less value than Italy’s free kick win of the World Cup. If we cannot get a winner in regulation (and the extra quicks in this case), we should have an Armageddon. Fair and square!
“First, for the “anon” who is apparently a “fashion expert,” you are are wrong. Irina can wear any jacket she desires and for some nobody like you to comment on the plahy of a famous Internation Master regarding her jacket…is simply stupid.”
What are you…the offical Irina Krush SUCK-UP?
What do players wearing a suit do when they reach time trouble? They fkn take it off you imbecile. She lost precious seconds correcting her sleave 4-5 times. I don’t care how the jacket looks or whatever it just cost her…wow grow a brain.
Second, sorry I wasn’t aware that you had to “be somebody” to comment on a chess game. I didn’t comment on her play as I didn’t see the game. She just wasn’t practical and that’s obvious if you have ever played a blitz game in your life.
I’m no fashion expert and I’m no “suck up” to IM Krush….exactly where would that get me???
I just watch the vido clip and made my own judgement as so many have.
The primary thesis of my argument is that Irina should be co-champion and the USCF has the power to declare her so. That is all I’m saying.
and, by the way, if you can find anywhere in the laws, by-laws, rules or anything in the USCF that states that they CANNOT do this (say, by a proclamation from the USCF President and/or Executive Board) please let me know.
I can find no rule that specifically states that the USCF CANNOT grant Irina the title of co-champion. I’m not talking about tournament rules…I’m talking about the power of the USCF.
If the USCF does not specifically state that they DON’T have the power to grant someone the title of co-champion after an opponent broke the rules and it was caught on film….please, enlighten me.
One more thing…if the rules, laws, by-laws of the USCF are silent on this issue, then this implicitly infers that they DO have the power, if they choose to do so, to declare Irina co-champion.
WHY should they declare Irina co-champion?
The rules set before were to have a playoff and she lost the playoff, therefore she came 2nd. So WHY should she be declared co-champion?
“If the USCF does not specifically state that they DON’T have the power to grant someone the title of co-champion after an opponent broke the rules and it was caught on film….please, enlighten me.”
For the last time…SHE DIDNT BRAKE ANY RULES….and if she did a similar claim can be made that Irina broke the rules.
I know neither of these ladies and have nothing to gain from eather of them winning but I just don’t understand all this whining that Irina should be co-champion. Anna is the champion, deservedly so as she won fair and square.
I think the term ‘fair and square’ is misplaced, given that the way she played at the end (and it was breaking the rules) was unfair. She even had her hand over her piece before Irina had even LET GO- no-one is claiming that is legal.
2 rights don’t make a wrong, so claiming that Irina also did something wrong does not justify it.
She did not win fair and square.
‘2 rights don’t make a wrong’
Sorry- I obviously got that backwards- I meant
‘2 wrongs don’t make a right’
I’m talking to complete idiots. Irina is the rightful co-champion because A) she wad undefeated with 7.5 points…and don’t forget this and B) Anna broke the rules in the final game.
The only ethical thing to do is to allow them to share the title. As it stands, Anna is a “paper champ” and everyone knows that she did violate the rules in the final game…the one that really mattered.
Why is it so hard for people to accept Irina as a co-champ?
Just a few weeks ago Irina was being praised on this site and now she’s being demonized by a bunch of knaves and fools that have never, NEVER, sat in the place that she did nor had to have a title stripped from her from an opponent that broke the rules.
Cry and whine all you wish. Irina is the co-champ and that’ all I have to say.
You probably meant:
“I’m talking like complete idiot.”
Once again quoting mr. Imbecile
“I’m talking to complete idiots. Irina is the rightful co-champion because A) she wad undefeated with 7.5 points…and don’t forget this and B) Anna broke the rules in the final game.”
Being undefeated doesn’t make anybody a co-champion…if somebody drew all their games should they be co-champion? Ok that’s not an argument really more of a joke but here is the argument so that you understand: EVERYBODY knew before the tournament that if two people would be equal on points after 9 rounds they would play a playoff match for the title. HOW AND WHY should anybody that loses that playoff be considered co-champion?
And once again you haven’t demonstrated or shown what rule Anna is to have broken in the blitz game. She just played fast and good blitz and if you can find ONE strong player, say over 2300 that thinks that Anna didnt just play normal blitz then you are in a mental assylum.
So once again congratulations to the rightful 2008 US Womens Chess Champion….Anna Zatonskih!
yes, I agree with everyone who says that Krush is out of her mind with this letter. most were being nice enough to forgive her for her 3 year old behavior after she lost despite how completely unprofessional and unsporting it was, but then throw this ridiculous whining on top when by all indications (all competent people like M Atkins who have a clue what they are talking about and not people like Brenan Niernan etc. who are probably in love with Irina for goodness knows what reason) have definitively shown the only person to break the rules was her. so she’s the only one who breaks the rules (i.e. the only cheater there if there was one), STILL loses, and then has the gall to complain that her opponent cheated her and demand a share of the title?? now that’s what some people might call humorous. to everyone saying, “i don’t see what’s wrong with declaring them co-champions”, there is a very simple reason why that’s wrong: all the players agreed to that playoff format before the tourney, and it took place as stated. if you lose the playoff, accept it, and move on; you have no right to demand a share of the title since you feel the playoff format was a bad way to decide it. if you think that then bring it up before the tournament, or refuse to play in the tournament. you don’t whine that it was an unfair format after you lose at it, and demand a change after the fact, this isn’t elementary school. get it changed next year if you think it’s dumb, but again trying to degrade someone else’s well earned title by saying that the playoff format sucks (which of course is an opinion mostly created from the fact that you lost with it) is a completely unsporting gesture.
This is not the U.S. slow chess championship. It is the U.S. chess championship. Blitz skill is part of chess. Anna was faster. Some of these “This is not chess” people would doubtless say that soccer matches should not be decided by penalty kicks. These are doubtless the same people who forced us to use increment clocks. They focus only on one aspect of chess skill- long term thinking without taking into account intuitive lightning mental reflexes. They would argue that soccer should be one by whoever is better at ball control, endurance, dribbling skill, without regard to accuracy. Blitz skill is part of overall chess skill. Perhaps we should end a contest and declare a winner with whoever fritz prefers on move 50 because the endgame is so much different than the opening and middlegame. The point is that chess excellence requires many different skills, one of these is lightning fast thinking, another is clock management.