In the position shown in the original post, it would be an immediate draw under FIDE rules, no need for anyone to run out of time. No series of legal moves could lead to checkmate therefore the game would be over immediately.
However on chess.com one side could win if the other side flags since both sides still have "sufficient material", USCF also uses these rules.
A dead position is a draw under US Chess regulations.
Hey there, we see that there was a huge Controversy in the game between Carlsen and Alireza, Alireza was three pawns up and had a completely winning position but sadly he ran out of time. Carlsen only had a bishop and so Alireza claimed that it should be a draw, however but Alexander Grishchuk said that a mate is possible if Alireza helps him by promoting to a knight and taking his king to the corner.
But my question is the if there is a position where mate is NOT POSSIBLE even if one side helps the other and runs out of time, it should be a draw. But still White is considered as winner, why is it like that? SEE THE POSITION BELOW :
There should be a new rule that such positions where checkmate is never possible even if 1 side helps should be considered a draw if 1 side runs out of time.
Actually it is possible for either side to win on time, upon a condition. Let me show you...
Something like this could arise. I'm pretty sure it's a win on time for either side in this instance if the flag of one of the players falls.
I presume your post was intended to not include this possibility. In that case, it would be a draw as per the FIDE rules of inability to launch a checkmate in any possible combination.
Maybe this position would fit your description better (for your reference).
Well the positions which you mentioned are win ofcourse if 1 side runs of time but my question is different, ITS WHAT ID THE POSITION IS DEAD.
Ok, I have updated my Original Post, just see the position, I mean it has happened many many times with everyone, I am sure. So if any sides run out of time it should be a draw.
Hey there, we see that there was a huge Controversy in the game between Carlsen and Alireza, Alireza was three pawns up and had a completely winning position but sadly he ran out of time. Carlsen only had a bishop and so Alireza claimed that it should be a draw, however but Alexander Grishchuk said that a mate is possible if Alireza helps him by promoting to a knight and taking his king to the corner.
But my question is the if there is a position where mate is NOT POSSIBLE even if one side helps the other and runs out of time, it should be a draw. But still White is considered as winner, why is it like that? SEE THE POSITION BELOW :
There should be a new rule that such positions where checkmate is never possible even if 1 side helps should be considered a draw if 1 side runs out of time.
Actually it is possible for either side to win on time, upon a condition. Let me show you...
Something like this could arise. I'm pretty sure it's a win on time for either side in this instance if the flag of one of the players falls.
I presume your post was intended to not include this possibility. In that case, it would be a draw as per the FIDE rules of inability to launch a checkmate in any possible combination.
Maybe this position would fit your description better (for your reference).
Well the positions which you mentioned are win ofcourse if 1 side runs of time but my question is different, ITS WHAT ID THE POSITION IS DEAD.
Dead positions will be a draw as long as no win in any combination can be attained by the side with the time.
But on this site, it is hard to say.
Some time back then (either last year or two years ago), one player observed that a king and two same colour-squared bishops (forgot it was two light-squared or two dark-squared) won against a lone king when the side having the lone king ran out of time. It was mentioned somewhere in the forums but it is too daunting for me to find that post now (too many for me to find). Not sure if this issue has been corrected as of now.
Hey there, we see that there was a huge Controversy in the game between Carlsen and Alireza, Alireza was three pawns up and had a completely winning position but sadly he ran out of time. Carlsen only had a bishop and so Alireza claimed that it should be a draw, however but Alexander Grishchuk said that a mate is possible if Alireza helps him by promoting to a knight and taking his king to the corner.
But my question is the if there is a position where mate is NOT POSSIBLE even if one side helps the other and runs out of time, it should be a draw. But still White is considered as winner, why is it like that? SEE THE POSITION BELOW :
There should be a new rule that such positions where checkmate is never possible even if 1 side helps should be considered a draw if 1 side runs out of time.
Actually it is possible for either side to win on time, upon a condition. Let me show you...
Something like this could arise. I'm pretty sure it's a win on time for either side in this instance if the flag of one of the players falls.
I presume your post was intended to not include this possibility. In that case, it would be a draw as per the FIDE rules of inability to launch a checkmate in any possible combination.
Maybe this position would fit your description better (for your reference).
Well the positions which you mentioned are win ofcourse if 1 side runs of time but my question is different, ITS WHAT ID THE POSITION IS DEAD.
Dead positions will be a draw as long as no win in any combination can be attained by the side with the time.
But on this site, it is hard to say.
Some time back then (either last year or two years ago), one player observed that a king and two same colour-squared bishops (forgot it was two light-squared or two dark-squared) won against a lone king when the side having the lone king ran out of time. It was mentioned somewhere in the forums but it is too daunting for me to find that post now (too many for me to find). Not sure if this issue has been corrected as of now.
Yeah, just look at the position EVEN IF ONE SIDE HELPS THE OTHER SIDE TO WIN HE CANT WIN AS ITS A DEAD POSITION WHERE KINGS AND PAWNS ARE LOCKED in their territories.
Ok, I have updated my Original Post, just see the position, I mean it has happened many many times with everyone, I am sure. So if any sides run out of time it should be a draw.
In that situation, since the pawns are blocked and each king can't even pass the line of defence by the opponent's pawns, there is no way either side can progress to a win even with the cooperation of both sides.
Well again, this assumes that the "magic pawn move" is ruled out in such positions.
Well the positions which you mentioned are win ofcourse if 1 side runs of time but my question is different, ITS WHAT ID THE POSITION IS DEAD.
Any position where mate is impossible by any series of legal moves is a draw under FIDE regulation 5.2.2
Here it is a different story and would rely on 50 moves or triple repetition.
Well the positions which you mentioned are win ofcourse if 1 side runs of time but my question is different, ITS WHAT ID THE POSITION IS DEAD.
Any position where mate is impossible by any series of legal moves is a draw under FIDE regulation 5.2.2
Here it is a different story and would rely on 50 moves or triple repetition.
Yes thats what I am asking, why is it so? As we lose 0.1 seconds after each move, the side with less time would ofcourse lose.. {Time Pressure}
thank Caissa for en passent and knight sacrifices as no way should two chess pawn walls end up like this
Well the positions which you mentioned are win ofcourse if 1 side runs of time but my question is different, ITS WHAT ID THE POSITION IS DEAD.
Any position where mate is impossible by any series of legal moves is a draw under FIDE regulation 5.2.2
Here it is a different story and would rely on 50 moves or triple repetition.
Yes thats what I am asking, why is it so? As we lose 0.1 seconds after each move, the side with less time would ofcourse lose.. {Time Pressure}
It is non-trivial to code for dead positions. Add to that, that it is very likely very few games end in a dead position in time scrambles, as a percentage of games, that spending coding resources on fixing it is likely not cost effective.
Yes, but losing on time in a dead position is a unfair loss as the in blitz games at the last the one having more time will always win as we lose 0.1 seconds, it happened with me too !! My opponent had a pawn on 5th rank and I had a queen, in classical, i kept my queen for his pawn to capture it so i make it a Draw as I had only 0.5 sec, he didnt capture and coz of losing those 0.1 seconds I lost on time. Well, it wasnt a dead position but still, atleast one of them should be fixed.
The rules are the rules, they were made for a reason...
If you run out of time, you should lose. Why even have the clocks? In chess, white has an advantage by having the first move. We don't just give white the win because they have a clear advantage! Why is it different in this case that black had an advantage with no time and FIDE wants to call it a draw? Is time management not a factor?
Read first what I said , I said that in a DEAD Position there is no way for a side to win by any continuation so it should be called a draw, but generally 1 side wins as you lose 0.1 seconds for the premoves.
Plus, there is zugzwang. If a player has a move that puts them at a disadvantage, they still must make it regardless if the position looks to be drawn or 'dead.'
Plus, there is zugzwang. If a player has a move that puts them at a disadvantage, they still must make regardless if the position looks to be drawn.
What?? How can there be a Zugzwang in a dead position?
The pawns are locked and the kings are locked in their territories, so its impossible to achive mate even if one side helps the other. I would recommend you to read the whole thread. And the Orignal Post.
The pawns are locked and the kings are locked in their territories, so its impossible to achive mate even if one side helps the other. I would recommend you to read the whole thread. And the Orignal Post.
In the board you posted, black has 8 legal moves. How do you call that dead?
Hey there, we see that there was a huge Controversy in the game between Carlsen and Alireza, Alireza was three pawns up and had a completely winning position but sadly he ran out of time. Carlsen only had a bishop and so Alireza claimed that it should be a draw, however but Alexander Grishchuk said that a mate is possible if Alireza helps him by promoting to a knight and taking his king to the corner.
But my question is the if there is a position where mate is NOT POSSIBLE even if one side helps the other and runs out of time, it should be a draw. But still White is considered as winner, why is it like that? SEE THE POSITION BELOW :
There should be a new rule that such positions where checkmate is never possible even if 1 side helps should be considered a draw if 1 side runs out of time.
Actually it is possible for either side to win on time, upon a condition. Let me show you...
Something like this could arise. I'm pretty sure it's a win on time for either side in this instance if the flag of one of the players falls.
I presume your post was intended to not include this possibility. In that case, it would be a draw as per the FIDE rules of inability to launch a checkmate in any possible combination.
Maybe this position would fit your description better (for your reference).