Lucien_Quest wrote:
Would someone please be willing to explain why this game was a draw due to insufficient material?
White ran out of time and Black lacks material to checkmate.
Stupid idiots who don't know when to resign?
Sort:
Oct 14, 2015
0
#43
Maybe, but I don't think I was out time, don't know how to confirm that.
Oct 14, 2015
0
#44
The game was a couple of days ago...pretty sure there was still plenty of time left on the clock.
Oct 14, 2015
0
#45
For the first time in my life i won a game with k,b,n vs. k, I have done it before against my tablet computer but never in a live game. This was about a week ago. On the subject of resigning since there is such a thing as stallmate the player who is behind in material (even grossly behind) has a perfect right to play to the end. It is their choice. But the other player its good practice.
Ziryab wrote:
It's been my experience that most players under 1600 in blitz don't know how to checkmate efficiently, if at all. Should my egregious blunders put me on the losing side of such a game, I will play to the bitter end. I've drawns and even won many hopelessly lost games in this manner."
It isn't just 1600 players and it's not just at fast time controls. I've had titled opponents (FM/IM) in OTB tournaments make just awful moves in easily winning positions and let me draw. I had a NM drop his queen in a completely winning game. One of my coach's rules is "Never resign" and it has been worth many rating points.
I remember such a game once.
Opponent had a bishop + two knights + 1 pawns and I had a pawn and a knight.
I ended up trading a pawn and a knight for his pawn and a knight. It became a K vs K+B+N end-game and he didn't know how to checkmate me.
Perhaps his earlier opponents failed him by resigning too quickly. Or else he would have learned how to checkmate with B+N.
I hate to break it to you but there is no rule that says a player has to resign. One time, a guy once asked me why I wasn't resigning and I said "am I supposed to?" and he said, "when the game is over, you resign". And I said, "resigning ends the game and so does checkmate and so does stalemate."
Maybe the "stupid idiot" is the one who resigns too soon?
well he had to go to the bar, so he wasnt such a thicko after all.
thank god for the rule that we must eat, otherwise chessplayers would surely die of starvation.
Ziryab a écrit :
Lucien_Quest wrote:
Would someone please be willing to explain why this game was a draw due to insufficient material?
White ran out of time and Black lacks material to checkmate.
I'm not sure to understand : if white ran out of time, that's a lost, not a draw !?
White has no time so can't checkmate. Black has no material so can't checkmate either. No one can win, so it's a draw.
I've always thought the first who runs out of time has lost, isn't it the rule in real life chess ?
aln67 escribió:
I've always thought the first who runs out of time has lost, isn't it the rule in real life chess ?
No, take a look at 9.6 here: http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article
Actually it makes sense, the clock is only one more element of the game. The fact of a player winning a game when only his/her bare king remains on the board seems unnatural.
Oct 16, 2015
0
#56
I didn't run out of time, there was like 10 minutes left on my clock, I think, but I don't know how to prove that.
Oct 16, 2015
0
#57
It must have been one of those computer hacks people keep complaining about.
Or a bug. But still is useful to know the rule we were spotting, especially when playing OTB.
Would someone please be willing to explain why this game was a draw due to insufficient material?
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1308519651