Forums

Why wasn't this a draw?

Sort:
kossbu

I was white. It was my move. At move 65, this was the position:

null

I captured the pawn with my king.

This game was played here at chess.com. Here's a link from my archive:

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2021539487

Why didn't the program declare the game to be a draw with only the kings and knights on the board?

We agreed to a draw a couple moves later.

We all know that a king and knight are not sufficient to force checkmate.

Does the presence of the enemy knight somehow make a checkmate possible?

The endgame tablebase that I have consulted determines this position to be a draw.

Why didn't chess.com recognize this as a draw??

 

BMK

GodsPawn2016

You have to press the draw button.

Arisktotle
 
 
For the rules it doesn't matter that a draw can be forced, only that it is possible!
 
 
kossbu

@Arisktotle:

Okay, I see that a checkmate can be arranged on the board with the pieces in question. But can this checkmate actually be forced in a finite sequence of moves?

 

A checkmate can also be arranged on the board with a king and two knights vs. a lone king. But this particular combination is known to be a draw, as there is no way to actually force the mate in actual play on the board.

 

Is this checkmate possible in actual play on the board?

 

BMK

Arisktotle

Obviously not, but such is irrelevant. If chess.com were to assign a draw to any position where mate can't be forced, then it probably wouldn't even allow you to play the first move in a game! After all, 'chess' is a draw Wink

kossbu

@Aristktotle:

Then why does chess.com consider king + 2 knights vs. king to be a draw?

 

BMK

Arisktotle
kossbu wrote:

@Aristktotle:

Then why does chess.com consider king + 2 knights vs. king to be a draw? 

BMK

If it does, it definitely breaks the FIDE rules!

kossbu

@morphysrevenges

Are you saying that in the position I posted, checkmate can actually be achieved in a finite number of moves? Assume for the sake of argument that time is not a factor.

BMK

kossbu

@Aristktotle

The relevant FIDE rule is 5.2b, which says:

The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves.

But the FIDE rules do not provide a list of positions which meet this definition.

Just because you can set up a checkmate position on the board does not mean that the checkmate position can be achieved with a series of legal moves.

My question about the position I posted is not whether a checkmate position is possible, but rather whether it is possible to actually reach a checkmate through a series of moves.

BMK

Rasta_Jay

I think you have to claim draw.. Your opponent can't reject when there's insufficient material to checkmate

rgzsmi

Not saying anyone would actually let you do it.  But it is possible.

67. Kf4 Nf3 68. Ne4 Kf1 69. Ke3 Kg2 70. Ke2 Kh2 71. Kf2 Kh1 72. Ke2 Ne5 73. Ke1 Nf3+ 74. Kf2 Nh2 75. Ng3#

JPWagner

It's a question of possibility over probability.

It will probably be a draw, but a # is possible - thus no "auto draw".

MGleason

If it's possible for your opponent to achieve help-mate, it's not a draw.

Martin_Stahl
MGleason wrote:

If it's possible for your opponent to achieve help-mate, it's not a draw.

 

At least until the game times out. grin.png (quoted just to put my post in context.... I know  you know that)

 

Here, on timeout, that would be a draw (after the pawn was taken).

kossbu

Martin_Stahl wrote:

"on timeout, that would be a draw (after the pawn was taken)."

 

Are you saying it would be draw on timeout under the rules used here at chess.com?

Or the official FIDE rules? Or both?

 

BMK

Martin_Stahl

Chess.com.

 

FIDE it would be a time loss because mate is possible.

 

USCF, it would be a draw if there wasn't a forced mate on the board.

kossbu
Martin_Stahl wrote:

Chess.com.

 

FIDE it would be a time loss because mate is possible.

 

USCF, it would be a draw if there wasn't a forced mate on the board.

So, under FIDE rules, if both players have a lot of time left, it could still be drawn after 50 moves, or by repetition?

 

BMK

wanmokewan

Correct.

kossbu

 @Martin_Stahl:

 

Thank you for explaining this. I did not know that there were such substantive differences in the rules between FIDE and USCF. I also did not realize that "helpmate" was possible in this type of position.

 

Can you cite the text of the applicable USCF rule?

 

I am not doubting the accuracy of your explanation. I'm just curious how the USCF rule is worded. And I don't have a copy of the USCF rules. I don't play competitive chess. I play for entertainment. And apparently the USCF rules are not available on the web. It looks like you have to buy a hardcopy. And I'm curious how the relevant rule is expressed.

 

BMK

Martin_Stahl

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

...

14E2. King and bishop or king and knight. Opponent has only king and bishop or king and knight, and does not have a forced win.