Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Wrong insufficient material rule


  • 14 months ago · Quote · #41

    crtexxx

    cross out forced.

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #42

    jonnin

    crtexxx wrote:

    2 knights vs king and 2 knights vs king + other pieces could also be a forced mate...the opponent simply has to play badly.

    Good point, 2 N can win if the opponent is trying to lose.  So take that one out. 

  • 12 months ago · Quote · #43

    Remi1771

    Alexander_Donchenko wrote:

    I just played a bullet game which reached the following position:

     

     I played as white and here my opponent "lost" on time. The game was declared a draw in view of insufficient material. But obviosly there is a way to win for white:

    For example black loses his queen and four pawns and promotes a knight. Then he places Ka1 and Na2 and white Kc2 and Bb2 mate. So why was it a draw?

    What are you, playing your 3 year old sister? that's like saying having only two horses it's not insufficient material, like, seriously. I might be 1100 of rating (or less) but even i know that...

  • 12 months ago · Quote · #44

    Remi1771

    jonnin wrote:

    insufficient material should be very simple:

    -no pawns left and the following:

    - 2 knights vs king (or king & 2 knights or king & one minor)

    - 1 minor vs king (etc.. as above)

    - king vs king

    there are other draws, but anythign else on the board *could* be won if the other side played to lose and therefore is not a forced draw.

    Or, conversely,  any game can be won against someone who plays to lose if there is 1 pawn on the board, or 1 rook/queen on the board, or knight & bishop on the board, or more than any of those.

    Actually you can win with two knights

     




Back to Top

Post your reply: