Well is this a blitz game? If so your oponit can make a draw in blitz becuse you can't mate him. Dose that work?
Why is this a draw - i won on time
Sort:
Jul 20, 2014
0
#3
When a player runs out of time, it is not automatically a loss for them, it just means that they can't win. If the other player has insufficient material to create a mate (such as having only a king), then they can't win, either. Since neither player can win, the result is a draw.
Jul 20, 2014
0
#4
When time runs out for a player one of two things happen the first and the most common one is that the player that runs out of time loses, but sometimes when you don't have enough material the game is drawn because no one can win
Jul 20, 2014
0
#5
It was a blitz game. 3 minute. Thanks for the explanation, I wonder what else I don't know.
At least gk took it well, unlike some others.
kaynight wrote:
What is going on here on Chess.com? Nobody seems to know the fecking rules!
Jul 20, 2014
0
#8
gkilmain wrote:
It was a blitz game. 3 minute. Thanks for the explanation, I wonder what else I don't know.
Other common unknown or misunderstood rules:
En Passant - a special type of capture allowed by pawns when an opponent's pawn tries to jump past a capture square by moving two spaces.
5. d4-d5 e7-e5
6. d5xe6 e.p. f7xe6
Threefold Repetition - Where a player may claim a draw (it isn't automatic) if the position is the same (it isn't a repetition of moves, but of the board state) three times in the same game.
50-Move Rule - Where a player may claim a draw (also not automatic) if 50 moves have been made (by each player, so 50 full moves) without any pawn moves or any captures.
kaynight wrote:
What is going on here on Chess.com? Nobody seems to know the fecking rules!
That's fecking hilarious K, given your defense of Blackenne's total misunderstanding of the same rule in yesterday's thread. Oh, I get it now; you were going for irony. In that case, well done!
Except very special circumstances, the guys who don't resign in a completely lost position are poor guys. You seem to be one.
#3 (and #4) answers the question, and the OP is happy in #5.
Now, who thinks this will reach the 500 post mark due to various nonsense?
_
/ \
|Qiut |
|Zone|
\ /
_
Feb 4, 2015
0
#14
"Except very special circumstances, the guys who don't resign in a completely lost position are poor guys. You seem to be one."
A position is completely lost when its actually lost..Im sick of seeing amature/intermediate players resign after losing a piece- this is an incorrect approach because 1. playing while down makes you better, 2. stalemate tactics are real and 3. this quitting mentality is why so many intermediate player's endgames are ABYSMAL.
Just play it out. Make your opponent earn it.
BeerNchessRbest wrote:
A position is completely lost when its actually lost..Im sick of seeing amature/intermediate players resign after losing a piece- this is an incorrect approach because 1. playing while down makes you better, 2. stalemate tactics are real and 3. this quitting mentality is why so many intermediate player's endgames are ABYSMAL.
Neither of those is true, except maybe 1, and it is in the very strict sense that "getting beaten in positions where you are clearly worse teaches you how to win such positions". Stalemate tricks do not work with decent players (>1600, or >1800 in time trouble).
As for the "quitting mentality" in endgames, playing endgames one piece down will not help you. Of course, abandoning down a pawn in a roughly balanced rook endgame is not the way to progress but that's not what we are discussing here.
Irontiger wrote:
BeerNchessRbest wrote:
A position is completely lost when its actually lost..Im sick of seeing amature/intermediate players resign after losing a piece- this is an incorrect approach because 1. playing while down makes you better, 2. stalemate tactics are real and 3. this quitting mentality is why so many intermediate player's endgames are ABYSMAL.
Neither of those is true, except maybe 1, and it is in the very strict sense that "getting beaten in positions where you are clearly worse teaches you how to win such positions". Stalemate tricks do not work with decent players (>1600, or >1800 in time trouble).
As for the "quitting mentality" in endgames, playing endgames one piece down will not help you. Of course, abandoning down a pawn in a roughly balanced rook endgame is not the way to progress but that's not what we are discussing here.
Lol.
Stalemate tricks don't work against decent players? How about Sibilio vs GM Mariotti 1982, stalemate in 27 moves.
Could someone please explain why this speed game i just played ended in a draw? I won on time, then the popup says 'draw' - insufficient material. http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=865454980