Draw?

Because a king and Bishop can't checkmaye a king with no other material on the board. In a timeout situation, that material can't do it either, if thats all the side that times out has. In that latter case, that's true here and US Chess rules, for FIDE it's different.

Did you know that your clock can't time out with your diagram position on the board? This is due to the relatively new paragraph 5.2.2. in the FIDE laws. This article declares your position dead in the very instance it appears and ends the game immediately in a draw state. That of course includes stopping the clock!.

It's different when one of the sides still has mating potential. The game continues and when the clock times out, article 6.9 is invoked. The result then depends on which side does or does not have mating potential!

Btw, I have no clue how your human arbiter or your online game interface act in these situations. You cannot trust them to know and apply the actual game rules whatever certificates they flashed before your eyes.

Of course, game rules are dependent on venue as well.

Hi.

Because it is impossible to construct a checkmate from that position.

In chess, basically you need to deliver checkmate to win (ok, you can win on time, or the opponent might get disqualified; or simply the opponent can resign).

If somebody is "winning" and can not deliver checkmate (be it because it is not possible, or because does not know how to), then it is a draw.

And that is what I like about chess. In Xiang Qi (chinese chess) and Shogi (japanese chess) there are other ways to win... I do not like that.

Greetings.

That is to some degree true! Interestingly, in the world of compositions we are very dependent on the unambiguous understanding of the rules which is why we take great care of zooming in on the proper understanding of the texts. Since we operate globally on almost anything, we can't allow entries based on local flavors of the chess or composition rules. Then again, we are mavericks with regard to the standard rule set, permitting - even requiring - different rules for different types of competitions. The critical point is that anyone solving them should be informed of the precise rules and rule changes of the challenge. That habit permits us to create countless fairy and stipulation variations. And that is what is often missing in rule presentations outside our community. 

An interesting example is that we recently disabled the dead position rule in standard problem types and endgames except when they are retrograde problems as well. Which leads to unclarity with regard to chess.com's puzzles. Do composition conventions apply? If you say no to that you get into all all kinds of trouble filling in the information holes in many diagrams. How do you know castling rights exist or e.p. rights? Are you supposed to access the FEN for everything? Many posted puzzles are taken from the composition domain which cares nothing about FENs. All unknowns are replaced by defaults delivered by the composition conventions.

What is needed in puzzling is a small series of articles elaborating on the different issues in sorting out puzzle rules and advises on how to present them in puzzles. That in addition to Rocky64's great article on compositions which treats them just from blue skies rules.