Hey, Brooksy was in this one!
Draw on Time?
rkorebrits wrote:
Wow, more than 10 years later I arrive at this topic :-) I find it quite ridiculous that if you win on time, you don't win. When playing live games with a time limit, running out of time should mean that you lose the game imo. That's the whole point behind having a time limit. https://www.chess.com/live/game/4226860090 - I played bad, but managed to keep pressure and slow the opponent down. Not sure how that warrants a draw
Wow....someone else who wants to play chess according to their own rules.
It's quite frightening that people want to change the rules to make it a different game.
Next they'll be wanting to place the pieces randomly at the outset!
Optimissed wrote:
It's quite frightening that people want to change the rules to make it a different game.
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
Next they'll be wanting to place the pieces randomly at the outset!
Some people just like to make up their own stories and spin other's words
[on topic]
I suppose a draw makes sense if you look at the scenario where e.g. all pieces were lost, but there is still time on the clock and it's just King vs. King. That also ends in an (insufficient pieces) draw
Martin_Stahl wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Heinkel111 wrote:
I also lost a rating point to the insufficient material rule last year (oh the pain!)
Seems odd when you first see it and are not expecting it but only fair when you think about it.
I wonder what is the maximum amount of material that will still trigger the chess.com 'insufficient material - draw' result?
Like for example if you have a king and a knight or a king and a bishop (can't remember if the bishop is insufficient or not) is that also 'insufficient material - draw' ?
I think it depends on which pieces and also which pieces the other side has. Also, I think the rules are different for different chess organizations. For example a king and bishop against a king and bishop is a draw, but a king and bishop against a king and opposite colored bishop could be a win.
Here, the material the side with time has is not counted.
https://support.chess.com/article/128-what-does-insufficient-mating-material-mean
Thanks Martin, champion!
Martin_Stahl wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Heinkel111 wrote:
I also lost a rating point to the insufficient material rule last year (oh the pain!)
Seems odd when you first see it and are not expecting it but only fair when you think about it.
I wonder what is the maximum amount of material that will still trigger the chess.com 'insufficient material - draw' result?
Like for example if you have a king and a knight or a king and a bishop (can't remember if the bishop is insufficient or not) is that also 'insufficient material - draw' ?
I think it depends on which pieces and also which pieces the other side has. Also, I think the rules are different for different chess organizations. For example a king and bishop against a king and bishop is a draw, but a king and bishop against a king and opposite colored bishop could be a win.
Here, the material the side with time has is not counted.
https://support.chess.com/article/128-what-does-insufficient-mating-material-mean
According to that article, king and bishop vs. king and bishop is a draw. It's blacks turn, is this considered a draw or does the clock have to run out?
hmmm.......
is not bad
good luck for other posts
it's interesting what you did
Wow, more than 10 years later I arrive at this topic :-) I find it quite ridiculous that if you win on time, you don't win. When playing live games with a time limit, running out of time should mean that you lose the game imo. That's the whole point behind having a time limit. https://www.chess.com/live/game/4226860090 - I played bad, but managed to keep pressure and slow the opponent down. Not sure how that warrants a draw
But you haven't won on time if you don't have the means to win. You can only draw. Perhaps you set out to win on the clock. No disrespect but the idea is to beat your opponent by getting a winning position.