Why did I lose on time with 3 pawns vs Knight. Shouldn't it be a draw?Why is stalemate a draw?Is it poor form to win a drawn position on time?Why isn't this threefold repetition, forcing a draw?Is this endgame a draw? 2 Bishops + 4 Pawns vs Queen + 1 PawnWhy do some players never accept a draw offer?Does an out of turn draw offer constitute an actionable distraction / time penalty?Checkmate with King and Knight vs King and KnightWhy have more than one time control per game?How does black ensure a draw in this R+3P vs. r+2p endgame with all pawns on the same side?
Does anyone know a basepoint-free construction of universal covers?
Shoe shine shop model in Rust
Is this a pure function?
What does TWRP "Fix Contexts" do?
Impact wrench on spark plugs?
In probabilistic questions with "real life" context, why can we ignore defining the sample space?
Was there a clearly identifiable "first computer" to use or demonstrate the use of virtual memory?
Tring to find a comic strip about "What your clothes say about you"
Why rounding odd font sizes to even?
What is my volume?
Create virtual block device which writes to /dev/null
Paying to leave without notice in at-will employment state
Doubt on pronunciation of verbs (stressing)
how to make a twisted wrapper
Will an administrator exceed the 401K limit?
Can a professor do an internship?
How to determine the degree to which diminished seventh chords and half-diminished seventh chords belong in major scales?
How to communicate faster than the system clock
Why do EU members have single or multiple parliamentary constituencies?
Is there any point in adding more than 6 months' runway in savings instead of investing everything after that?
Should I report a security vulnerability?
How does sudo handle $HOME differently since 19.10?
Invalid time zone 'UTC'
Does milk make your bones stronger?
Why did I lose on time with 3 pawns vs Knight. Shouldn't it be a draw?
Why is stalemate a draw?Is it poor form to win a drawn position on time?Why isn't this threefold repetition, forcing a draw?Is this endgame a draw? 2 Bishops + 4 Pawns vs Queen + 1 PawnWhy do some players never accept a draw offer?Does an out of turn draw offer constitute an actionable distraction / time penalty?Checkmate with King and Knight vs King and KnightWhy have more than one time control per game?How does black ensure a draw in this R+3P vs. r+2p endgame with all pawns on the same side?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
I've just lost an online game on time (lichess.com).
I had 3 pawns and my opponent had just a knight.
I don't understand why it's not a draw.
draw time-control
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
add a comment
|
I've just lost an online game on time (lichess.com).
I had 3 pawns and my opponent had just a knight.
I don't understand why it's not a draw.
draw time-control
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
15
It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
– Qudit
Jul 28 at 20:15
8
Aside from the fact that you could theoretically lose such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously win with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
– leftaroundabout
Jul 29 at 8:47
10
@leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:42
3
Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:45
5
@leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
– Apollys supports Monica
Jul 31 at 1:43
add a comment
|
I've just lost an online game on time (lichess.com).
I had 3 pawns and my opponent had just a knight.
I don't understand why it's not a draw.
draw time-control
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
I've just lost an online game on time (lichess.com).
I had 3 pawns and my opponent had just a knight.
I don't understand why it's not a draw.
draw time-control
draw time-control
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
asked Jul 28 at 20:07
Dominik KunickiDominik Kunicki
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
1881 gold badge1 silver badge6 bronze badges
15
It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
– Qudit
Jul 28 at 20:15
8
Aside from the fact that you could theoretically lose such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously win with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
– leftaroundabout
Jul 29 at 8:47
10
@leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:42
3
Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:45
5
@leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
– Apollys supports Monica
Jul 31 at 1:43
add a comment
|
15
It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
– Qudit
Jul 28 at 20:15
8
Aside from the fact that you could theoretically lose such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously win with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
– leftaroundabout
Jul 29 at 8:47
10
@leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:42
3
Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:45
5
@leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
– Apollys supports Monica
Jul 31 at 1:43
15
15
It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
– Qudit
Jul 28 at 20:15
It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
– Qudit
Jul 28 at 20:15
8
8
Aside from the fact that you could theoretically lose such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously win with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
– leftaroundabout
Jul 29 at 8:47
Aside from the fact that you could theoretically lose such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously win with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
– leftaroundabout
Jul 29 at 8:47
10
10
@leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:42
@leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:42
3
3
Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:45
Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:45
5
5
@leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
– Apollys supports Monica
Jul 31 at 1:43
@leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
– Apollys supports Monica
Jul 31 at 1:43
add a comment
|
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:
The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.
With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
2
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
4
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
2
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
1
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
3
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
|
show 1 more comment
Worst-case scenario:
Upgraded all your pawns to knights
Your king is at
Ka8Your knights surround your king, so at
Nb8,Na7andNb7Opposition knight is at
Nc7#- checkmate!
So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
4
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
2
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
add a comment
|
From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):
6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
(The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)
So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.
I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
5
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
2
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
add a comment
|
As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated.
In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:
You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
3
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
2
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
add a comment
|
From the lichess.org FAQ:
In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.
I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)
Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted.
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
add a comment
|
By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).
14E: Insufficient material to win on time:
The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:
14E1: Lone king
14E2: King and bishop or king and knight
The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
1
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
1
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
1
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
1
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
2
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "435"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24996%2fwhy-did-i-lose-on-time-with-3-pawns-vs-knight-shouldnt-it-be-a-draw%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:
The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.
With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
2
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
4
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
2
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
1
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
3
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
|
show 1 more comment
Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:
The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.
With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
2
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
4
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
2
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
1
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
3
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
|
show 1 more comment
Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:
The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.
With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:
The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.
With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
answered Jul 28 at 20:16
user58697user58697
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
1,1767 silver badges10 bronze badges
2
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
4
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
2
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
1
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
3
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
|
show 1 more comment
2
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
4
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
2
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
1
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
3
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
2
2
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
– konsolas
Jul 29 at 7:42
4
4
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
– David
Jul 29 at 10:12
2
2
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
– leonbloy
Jul 30 at 13:02
1
1
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
@konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere. White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
– Cort Ammon
Jul 30 at 14:54
3
3
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
@CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
– justhalf
Jul 31 at 16:59
|
show 1 more comment
Worst-case scenario:
Upgraded all your pawns to knights
Your king is at
Ka8Your knights surround your king, so at
Nb8,Na7andNb7Opposition knight is at
Nc7#- checkmate!
So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
4
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
2
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
add a comment
|
Worst-case scenario:
Upgraded all your pawns to knights
Your king is at
Ka8Your knights surround your king, so at
Nb8,Na7andNb7Opposition knight is at
Nc7#- checkmate!
So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
4
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
2
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
add a comment
|
Worst-case scenario:
Upgraded all your pawns to knights
Your king is at
Ka8Your knights surround your king, so at
Nb8,Na7andNb7Opposition knight is at
Nc7#- checkmate!
So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
Worst-case scenario:
Upgraded all your pawns to knights
Your king is at
Ka8Your knights surround your king, so at
Nb8,Na7andNb7Opposition knight is at
Nc7#- checkmate!
So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 8:05
TheSimpliFireTheSimpliFire
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
3311 silver badge4 bronze badges
4
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
2
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
add a comment
|
4
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
2
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
4
4
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
– Hagen von Eitzen
Jul 31 at 6:22
2
2
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
– Lan
Aug 1 at 14:20
add a comment
|
From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):
6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
(The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)
So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.
I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
5
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
2
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
add a comment
|
From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):
6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
(The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)
So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.
I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
5
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
2
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
add a comment
|
From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):
6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
(The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)
So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.
I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):
6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
(The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)
So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.
I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 9:29
ArthurArthur
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
2611 silver badge6 bronze badges
5
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
2
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
add a comment
|
5
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
2
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
5
5
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
2
2
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
– supercat
Jul 29 at 17:21
add a comment
|
As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated.
In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:
You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
3
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
2
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
add a comment
|
As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated.
In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:
You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
3
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
2
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
add a comment
|
As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated.
In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:
You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated.
In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:
You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
edited Jul 30 at 10:52
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
answered Jul 29 at 13:33
Dennis JaheruddinDennis Jaheruddin
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
4651 silver badge6 bronze badges
3
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
2
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
add a comment
|
3
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
2
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
3
3
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
– Dennis Jaheruddin
Jul 30 at 10:54
2
2
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
– John Coleman
Jul 31 at 14:32
add a comment
|
From the lichess.org FAQ:
In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.
I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)
Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted.
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
add a comment
|
From the lichess.org FAQ:
In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.
I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)
Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted.
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
add a comment
|
From the lichess.org FAQ:
In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.
I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)
Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted.
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
From the lichess.org FAQ:
In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.
I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)
Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted.
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
edited Jul 31 at 16:56
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
answered Jul 31 at 16:50
sdenhamsdenham
1512 bronze badges
1512 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).
14E: Insufficient material to win on time:
The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:
14E1: Lone king
14E2: King and bishop or king and knight
The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
1
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
1
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
1
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
1
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
2
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
add a comment
|
By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).
14E: Insufficient material to win on time:
The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:
14E1: Lone king
14E2: King and bishop or king and knight
The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
1
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
1
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
1
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
1
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
2
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
add a comment
|
By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).
14E: Insufficient material to win on time:
The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:
14E1: Lone king
14E2: King and bishop or king and knight
The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).
14E: Insufficient material to win on time:
The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:
14E1: Lone king
14E2: King and bishop or king and knight
The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
answered Jul 30 at 15:20
eyeballfrogeyeballfrog
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
4713 silver badges14 bronze badges
1
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
1
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
1
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
1
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
2
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
add a comment
|
1
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
1
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
1
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
1
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
2
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
1
1
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:15
1
1
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
@scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:24
1
1
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
– scatter
Jul 31 at 19:26
1
1
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
@scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
– eyeballfrog
Jul 31 at 19:35
2
2
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
– user3445853
Jul 31 at 19:50
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24996%2fwhy-did-i-lose-on-time-with-3-pawns-vs-knight-shouldnt-it-be-a-draw%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
15
It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
– Qudit
Jul 28 at 20:15
8
Aside from the fact that you could theoretically lose such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously win with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
– leftaroundabout
Jul 29 at 8:47
10
@leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:42
3
Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
– Acccumulation
Jul 29 at 16:45
5
@leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
– Apollys supports Monica
Jul 31 at 1:43