Short on time...

There was an article on Chessbase.com recently (about 1-2 weeks ago), and it concerned a rapid game (25 min. time control?) between a young German GM and GM Nigel Short. The story was that Short's opponent showed up 24 minutes late for the match, but went on to win the match, - if I understood the article - with only one minute on his clock, to 25 minutes on Short's clock...?!?!

Did I understand this correctly?

Can someone correct me, or confirm this?

Thanks.

not possible.

Most fide rapidplay events would have a 10 or even 20 second increment for each move made. Therefore, if he bashed out the opening fast (which would be a trivial task for a grand) then he would make himself several minutes of extra thinking time - plus I think short tried playing fast too in order to keep his time advantage, but this backfired.

Originally posted by ImGonnaQuit
There was an article on Chessbase.com recently (about 1-2 weeks ago), and it concerned a rapid game (25 min. time control?) between a young German GM and GM Nigel Short. The story was that Short's opponent showed up 24 minutes late for the match, but went on to win the match, - if I understood the article - with only one minute on his clock, to 25 minut ...[text shortened]... ?!

Did I understand this correctly?

Can someone correct me, or confirm this?

Thanks.

Short's opponent - I can't remember his name either - turned up 24 minutes late for the second game of a two game match. He was already 1-0 ahead so only needed to draw.

As mentioned by an earlier poster, there was a time increment per move so after he made a bunch of quick moves he gained some time back on the clock.

He drew the game and so did indeed win the match.

Originally posted by chessisvanity
not possible.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4290

Originally posted by JonathanB of London
Short's opponent - I can't remember his name either - turned up 24 minutes late for the second game of a two game match. He was already 1-0 ahead so only needed to draw.

As mentioned by an earlier poster, there was a time increment per move so after he made a bunch of quick moves he gained some time back on the clock.

He drew the game and so did indeed win the match.

Amazingly, the Chessbase report seems to indicate that Nigel's decisive tiebreak game (meaning the one he lost) was the game in which Baramidze arrived late. So Baramidze actually won that game with a huge time disadvantage!