Draw by insufficient material rule

"Actually in this instance Chess.com rules govern  To keep things simple, our insufficient material rule only considers material. There are no edge cases wherein forced mate could conceivably happen from the final position."

Thanks for the explanation kirkwood though this still leaves this question remained unanswered--

Can a forced mate conceivably happen from this final position?

 Obviously loss.

By that logic, in every game ever where one side missed a forced mate in X and lost on time should be winning.

Flip to white running out of time--draw or loss?

Next:

Look, Ne7.

Let's try explaining this, again:
1. If the opposing side has enough material to mate, then it's a loss for the side running out of time.
1.a; even if that means possible, 'potential material', like a pawn that has the possibility to promote by legal moves

2. If the opposing side only has material with which only helpmates are possible (one kight, two knights, one bishop, etc.), then it's a draw.

Ta-daaa.

"Let's try explaining this, again:

1. If the opposing side has enough material to mate, then it's a loss for the side running out of time.
1.a; even if that means possible, 'potential material', like a pawn that has the possibility to promote by legal moves

2. If the opposing side only has material with which only helpmates are possible (one kight, two knights, one bishop, etc.), then it's a draw."

Still leaves questions un-explained. No forced mate exists in the position as in #31. Stay on topic and answer the question that is being asked--is there a forced mate in the position for #31? Is there a conceivable forced mate? If only if a blunder-fest occurs than likewise so with help mates must said rule be considered. That is all I am saying. I am doing my best to keep this civilised but if I see fundamentalism showing up rather than honest consideration of the arguments I am making, I will resort to blocking as I would prefer discussion rather than flat-out "this is right, this is wrong". Etc.

When I see such fundamentalism, it leaves me to wonder that such positions as in number 31 should actually be draws rather than losses.

Discussion, not fundamentalism please! If fundamentalism, go some where else!

From now on, if someone says, "no forced mate can occur in the final position of my game but a forced mate can occur in such positions as 31" they will be blocked as they are completely ignoring the question and argument I am trying to make here and are showing that they have no interest in discussion whatsoever.

Just leave it here.

"Let's try explaining this, again:

1. If the opposing side has enough material to mate, then it's a loss for the side running out of time.
1.a; even if that means possible, 'potential material', like a pawn that has the possibility to promote by legal moves

2. If the opposing side only has material with which only helpmates are possible (one kight, two knights, one bishop, etc.), then it's a draw."

Maybe I'm not being clear? Let's try explaining this again--

HELP-MATES exist and ONLY can exist in both final positions where one side has two rooks and a king vs a king and a pawn (etc.) and HELP-MATES exist and ONLY exist in K+N vs K+N HOWEVER, there is no existent forced mate. IFF the pawn is going to promote, a blunder-fest or HELP-MATE must occur. This does not mean a position cannot arise from either positions where a forced mating situation cannot occur though.

This is what I am saying. Engage with what I am saying or insist you have it all figured out and join my blocked list. I want discussion and engagement with what I am saying but if you're simply going to say "this is so and this is so" you are not demonstrating honest engagement and you might find it happier some where else so I will block.

"Just leave it here."

As another mentioned--FIDE rules are ambiguous on this as it only mentions possible mates and not forced mates or help-mates. As I have also asked--what is MEANT by "forced mates" and what-not? Why is one situation where the only way for one side to maintain a mate (positions such as in #31) considered a win for the side with only king and pawn even though the only way for such side to mate in that context is via receiving aid from the side with much more significant material and said position in my game where no forced mate for either side exists a draw?

So the questions regard what defines a forced mate? This question has been left unanswered. As kirkwood has also mentioned, the draw by insufficient material rule here on chess.com consider only material that one side has. Some websites though are different. I mean not to compare but I am aware that shredderchess.net would declare said final position in this game a win.

You're confusing your own definitions.
Helpmates =/= blunderfests.

In the case of a lone knight or bishop, the opposing side can forever avoid defeat.

There is not a single possible line that can result in a checkmate (except helpmates), therefore it is a draw.

In the case of a lone pawn, though, however improbable and unlikely, there are lines that can result in a checkmate.
Therefore these positions are not considered draws.

The second option still require a blunderfest, yes, but not a helpmate.
I can't explain this any clearer, buddy, block me if you see fit.

Under USCF rules the forced mate provision is only applies when the player has a lone king, a king and bishop or knight, or a king and two knights. I believe it would also apply if the player had a king and multiple bishops of the same colour.

With any other combination of material, such as in #31 with a king and pawn, it is always a win. 

The position in #19 with no time on the clock for White and with Black to move is possible over the board. White would have had to have played Nb1 after he ran out of time.

Actually, you are wrong!

By FIDE rules, it has to be "possible" to mate the opponent.  Helpmate counts.

So, for example, If each side has a King and a Bishop, and the Bishops are the same color, it's a draw because mate is physically impossible.  If the Bishops are of opposite color, then the side that ran out of time loses!  For example, BKh8, BBa2, WBg1, WKg6.  Black to move.  He runs out of time.  White can claim a win because Black "could play" 1...Bg8, after which 2.Bd4 is checkmate!

USCF Rules are DIFFERENT!  USCF Rules state that if the player with time has Just a King, A King and One Bishop, A King and One Knight, or A King and Two Knights AND the Opponent has NO PAWNS, then it is a draw unless you can demonstrate forced mate!

So, for example, WKe6, WBc1, BKg8, BPe7, BPh7, Black has just played ...Kxg8 and his flag fell.

White can claim a win because after 1.Bh6, Black has no legal move other than 1...Kh8, then 2.Kf7, Black has 2 legal moves, 2...e6 and 2...e5, both of which allow 3.Bg7 MATE by force!  Therefore, White Wins!

Chess.com is even worse!  Chess.com doesn't recognize FIDE Rules, but it also doesn't recognize USCF Rules.  The lazy programmers basically have it programmed so that if it's Lone K for player with time, it's a draw.  If it's K+N, it's a draw.  If it's K+B, it's a draw.  If it's K+N+N and no pawns for player without time, it's a draw.

Doesn't matter that you have a forced mate.  So in that USCF example, there is the flaw where if that happened on Chess.com, Black could just stall after 1.Bh6 and take a draw, Time vs Insufficient Mating Material.

You are seriously becoming confused, NE7. FIDE rules are FIDE rules. So...

FIDE Rules: You can win a game which you won on time if by any series of legal moves it is possible for you to give a checkmate to your opponent. No garbage about forced moves-- that is completely false!

USCF Rules: You may not win a game on time if you only have a lone knight, lone bishop, or lone two knights. If you have a pawn or greater material than those stated, you may win the game.

Most chess servers use the USCF rules or variant of USCF rules because it is much simpler to implement.

EDIT: Thrillerfan beat me to it. 

"You're confusing your own definitions.

Helpmates =/= blunderfests."

=/= helpful.

= find another board to discuss on.

"There is not a single possible line that can result in a checkmate (except helpmates),therefore it is a draw."

And white cannot blunder in my game into a position where a checkmate can result?

"In the case of a lone pawn, though, however improbable and unlikely, there are lines that can result in a checkmate.

Therefore these positions are not considered draws."

Which would require aid from the colour with more material, no? Hence, helping the other guy to checkmate him? Blunder-fest for me is no different than a help-mate. Find another thread to post on. You're certainly not helping this mate.

"Under USCF rules the forced mate provision is only applies when the player has a long king, a king and bishop or knight, or a king and two knights. I believe it would also apply if the player had a king and multiple bishops of the same colour.

With any other combination of material, such as in #31 with a king and pawn, it is always a win. 

The position in #19 with no time on the clock for White and with Black to move is possible over the board. White would have had to have played Nb1 after he ran out of time."

= helpful

= Continue to contribute to the discussion.

Let's all learn from CaptainHorrible here!

So if I am understanding CaptainHorrible correctly--the forced mate provision only is to apply for the circumstances that happened in THIS game and THIS situation where there is lone king and knight vs. lone king and knight (etc.--other ones he mentioned as well). Meaning that in such position as I have posted on in #19, this would be a win for black as there is forced mate in one (at least in USCF OTB rules and correspondence rules) but if the position is such as was in the game, it is a draw.

See? If someone could have just stated that there is an EXCEPTION with such positions regarding bishops and knights and kings in an end-game as such, that would have answered my questions right then and there.

Two kisses for CaptainHorrible (more like CaptainWonderful)!

"FIDE Rules: You can win a game which you won on time if by any series of legal moves it is possible for you to give a checkmate to your opponent. No garbage about forced moves-- that is completely false!

USCF Rules: You may not win a game on time if you only have a lone knight, lone bishop, or lone two knights. If you have a pawn or greater material than those stated, you may win the game."

Also very helpful chesskingdreamer! I think the one site I mentioned--shredder--uses FIDE rules as the creator is a German and so probably is unfamiliar with USCF rules.

Well, you are also missing the "Forced Mate" part for USCF that Chess.com doesn't recognize, so Chess.com "Does Not Equal" USCF!

FIDE Rules apply here: https://www.chess.com/article/view/do-chess-arbiters-know-the-rules-of-chess K+N vs K+N wins under fide rules.

USCF Rules: White cannot win with K+N vs K+N.

See--now we are actually having a discussion--it appears to be a difficulty over USCF and FIDE rules.

Lets not make this complicated.  KNIGHT AND KING CANNOT REPEAT CANNOT FORCE MATE.  Therefore, insufficient material.

Fucking hell, Ne7, you're really grumpy today.

Actually, FIDE vs USCF vs Chess.com.  All 3 are different because Chess.com doesn't recognize the "Forced Mate" part that the USCF does.

Speaking as a United States player, I have always said that the head board of the USCF that makes these corny rules are all a bunch of morons and that the USCF should follow FIDE regulations!  Period!

But apparently the USCF board feels like they have to have some power over FIDE and so they put in their own little corny rules.  I'm just waiting for the day that they do something stupid like the following:

• You only have 1 minute to make a pawn move.  If you spend more than 1 minute, pawn moves are not allowed.
• You only have 3 minutes to make a knight move.  If you spend more than 3 minutes, knight moves are not allowed.
• You only have 3 minutes to make a bishop move.  If you spend more than 3 minutes, bishop moves are not allowed.
• You only have 5 minutes to make a rook move.  If you spend more than 5 mintues, rook moves are not allowed.
• You only have 9 minutes to make a queen move.  If you spend more than 9 minutes, queen moves are not allowed.
• Kings have no value, and so you can spend as long as you want to make a king move.

I wouldn't push it past the USCF doing something as stupid as this.