game drawn without logic

Dearest plz note that I played today a game againaist airminas of jordan and his score is 1307. But I come to wonder that he losted his game due to he was discconected by his end or by the game server and I awaited that he might be reconnected but after wainting for a minute or too the game server declared that our game has drawn due to insufficient material. What is this I am unable to understnad. Can anybody share with me.

Thanks!

Dear Ahmedage10, I reviewed your game against Airminas and found that the server decision was entirely correct. Please not that at the final position you had only one Knight and absolutely a King, this means that you can't win  at all due to lack of material. Moreover, only one Knight was not able to construct a checkmate network at that position and this means that the position was draw (like the 50 moves rule). you can find more information at this address: http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/40/13/how-do-i-claim-a-draw

Regards

Omid

I looked at your game.

 The Insufficient material rule has two aspects depending on whether one player has run out of time or not.

In normal play (both players within time) the insufficient material rule would not apply as black has plenty of pieces.

In your game however, black ran out of time which under FIDE rules means white wins unless rule 6.9 applies:  "if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by the 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."

Now , although the FIDE rules do not expressly say so, it appears that the rule is interpteted to read that theoretical checkmate has be "forced". As Estragon pointed out it is possible for a checkmate position to arrise, but would require poor play on black's part.

I have tried finding a definative answer but failed, so would welcome others views on this.

Dear Estragon

I have a question, How can only a one knight create such checkmate network? the position you showed is only theroretical. Practically, such position can only achived when a lot of other pieces existed to force the black King to go to h8 (for example via sacrificing themselves). In fact that Knight is the last ring of with's attack while previously some other pieces have been existed for that attack to get completed. If you don't agree please tell us how one knight can lonely force your opponent king to go to a corner?

I remember I had a USCF game like this where in a drawn opposite colored bishops ending I had a bishop and he had a bishop and 2 pawns. When he ran out of time I thought I had won because it is technically possible for me to win. Only later did I find out under USCF rules you need mating material that disregards what your opponent has (preventing helpmates). Under FIDE rules however such a game would be winning.

There is no requirement that the moves played be good moves for either side. The rule requires only that some sequence of legal moves will result in mate. That includes helpmates. 

'Any possible series of legal moves' definitely cannot be correctly interpreted as forced moves only.

I agree. The interpretation i am refering to is chess.com's interpretation, as this site called the game a draw. The rules themselves as written would seem to support a win for white. I would like to hear from a chess tournament official, as I would love to know the correct answer myself.

There is another situation, besides FIDE 6.9, which applies here.

I don't remember exactly where it is (I'm thinking somewhere in article 10), but there is an allowance where a player can call the arbiter and request a draw before their time runs out if their opponent "isn't trying ... or can not win the game by normal means."  In other words, if your opponent is just trying to win on time and isn't trying to make progress towards checkmating you (or can't), then you can call the arbiter and have the game declared drawn.

Now, obviously, we can't have a real life arbiter watching over every game that's played on Live Chess for just this sort of situation, so chess.com has created a kind of compromise (and also simplified their coding a bit, I'm sure) by expanding the insufficient material clause to include all situations where the side not running out of time has no more than a K&N, K&B, or K&N&N.  Essentially, the server acts as arbiter and declares the "not trying to win by normal means" draw for the player as time runs out for them.

http://blog.chess.com/webmaster/live-chess-gets-some-love

Yeah I think that's the intention, kind of an automatic 'insufficient winning chances' arbiter.

The Arbiter's notebook column on ChessCafe is a good place to find answers to all kinds of questions. See page 4 in  http://www.chesscafe.com/text/geurt143.pdf. In brief: According to the FIDE rules, any series of legal moves leading to mate is sufficient; according to the USCF rules, KB or KN is a win only if a forced mate can be shown.

Thank you Jaquero for that link.

That seems to support the argument for a win for white if the game is under FIDE rules, and a draw if under USCF rules.

Given that this was an internet game, I also recognise the idea of an automatic arbiter.

Good thread, i have learned something today.

To add more confusion, we have our own set of rules for blitz in Finland, where the insufficient material rule is as in USCF rules. In normal chess, we use the FIDE rules. I never remember the correct rule when playing skittles with friends.

This is a lost position. Any FIDE or USCF rules cited should not apply. Opponent did not run out of time, he was disconnected. You will never go to a live tournament director and say, "I don't know. My opponent was sitting there and then he just vanished. Do I win?" Take the draw and be happy.

There was a huge discussion about it when it was implemented. Some people felt like it was deviating from the (FIDE) rules by ALWAYS adjudicating for a draw but I think most people agreed that, to most closely match a tournament setting where you'd have a TD, it was best to adjudicate rather than let people screw around to get the other person to lose on time.

Thanks to all for your valuable sharing.

I did not have the record saved but I do remember that some time I've a number of pieces against my opponent while he/she have only one or two but when I was disconnected by the server or due to electricity I have losted my game(s) although I was throughout upper hand but I never had a objection. Similarly in this case if I was disconnected then who will win the game. The answer is "my oppoenent" airminas of jordan.

Can anybody share on this also.

Thanks again!

Dear All

Look my today's another game against my opponent airminas of jordan that we discussed last week. How I restricted him throughout this game and if he never disconnected in his last one game he might be losted but he discconected himself (which I assumed) and game was drawn by chees.com server. That's why I wanted to know chess.com server policy.

Thanks.