50 (consecutive) moves with no pawn moves or captures, I believe.
FINALLY! http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/50moves.html
http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Fifty-move+Rule
PS: ALL exceptions to the rule were abolished by FIDE in 1992.
I know this is somewhat irrelevant to the topic, but on move 110 you could hae played Ne5. White has to either capture your knight, leading to an automatic draw by insufficient material, or move his king away, after which you would capture his knight, which leads to the same result.
if you time runs out in knight vs knight endgame, is it still draw or lost???
It is a loss, because technically both sides still have winning chances (helpmate).
Here are some suggestions to avoid a draw, any type of draw
(...)[play gambits, "chaotic" moves, etc.]Yeah.
Giving your queen at move 3 also usually prevent draws. Depending on your opponent's level, you might have to give more material sometimes.
Here are some suggestions to avoid a draw, any type of draw
(...)[play gambits, "chaotic" moves, etc.]Yeah.
Giving your queen at move 3 also usually prevent draws. Depending on your opponent's level, you might have to give more material sometimes.
No, as long as you give up your queen and your opponent doesn't give up his queen in the next 2 moves, you are forced to resign.
50 (consecutive) moves with no pawn moves or captures, I believe.
FINALLY! http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/50moves.html
http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Fifty-move+Rule
PS: ALL exceptions to the rule were abolished by FIDE in 1992.
The mnemotechnic way to remember the rule is : 50 reversible moves. (you cannot recreate a piece that was taken, nor make a pawn go backwards)
This gives the maximum number of moves for any game of chess : (2x8x6 pawn moves + 2x15 pieces to take) x 50 moves = 6300 moves.
why wasn't this an auto-draw via insufficient material?
why wasn't this an auto-draw via insufficient material?
Because there is the possibility of a helpmate.
macer75,
I don't see how a player can legally fall into a helpmate with just a knight on the board. Can you eleborate on this proposal of yours?
Can you also provide a game which a player gambits his queen on the third move?
Thanks!
barefoot_player
PS -
He just got his advanced review copy of Rapid Chess Improvement 2.0
by De La Maza where you take it to the next level and do the knight vision drills in your actual games.
macer75,
I don't see how a player can legally fall into a helpmate with just a knight on the board. Can you eleborate on this proposal of yours?
Can you also provide a game which a player gambits his queen on the third move?
Thanks!
barefoot_player
PS -
Both question answered.
(for the first, there are two knights on the board of course, just like in the OP's game)
You're right NimzoRoy. My bad. 50 consecutive moves for each side without captures nor pawn moves.
NimzoRoy wrote:
papagar wrote:
I think 50 moves rule is only when one side have nothing but the king. Anyway, it's incredible how this fellow didn't want to accept the draw.
Next time try looking the rule up instead of making up your own rule. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=50+move+chess+rule
xwarriour you can block other members which will keep you from being paired vs them at least in open seeks.
http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/38/0/how-can-i-block-another-user
50 (consecutive) moves with no pawn moves or captures, I believe.
FINALLY! http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/50moves.html
http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Fifty-move+Rule
PS: ALL exceptions to the rule were abolished by FIDE in 1992.
The mnemotechnic way to remember the rule is : 50 reversible moves. (you cannot recreate a piece that was taken, nor make a pawn go backwards)
This gives the maximum number of moves for any game of chess : (2x8x6 pawn moves + 2x15 pieces to take) x 50 moves = 6300 moves.
Its actually infinite.
This gives the maximum number of moves for any game of chess : (2x8x6 pawn moves + 2x15 pieces to take) x 50 moves = 6300 moves.
Its actually infinite.
How that ?
Promoting a pawn does not create a piece (as it makes a pawn vanish).
So unless no player claims the 50 move rule... It has to be a finite number.
You're both wrong, the 6300 move conclusion is really awful, I'm not exactly a math whiz so I don't want to insult anyone (for a rare change) so I suggest whoever came up with 6300 read the linked articles below BUT at least whoever said its actually infinite is at least way closer to the correct answer here. (It's behind curtain #1, 2 or 3 - once you choose one is it to your advantage to change your mind?)
Shannon also estimated the number of possible positions, "of the general order of 
, or roughly 1043". This includes some illegal positions (e.g., pawns on the first rank, both kings in check) and excludes legal positions following captures and promotions. (WHY?) Taking these into account, (Dutch computer Scientist) Victor Allis calculated an upper bound of 5×1052 for the number of positions, and estimated the true number to be about 1050.[3] Recent results[4] improve that estimate, by proving an upper bound of only 2155, which is less than 1046.7.
Allis also estimated the game-tree complexity to be at least 10123, "based on an average branching factor of 35 and an average game length of 80". As a comparison, the number of atoms in the observable universe, to which it is often compared, is estimated to be between 4×1079 and 1081.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/chess1.htm
You're both wrong, the 6300 move conclusion is really awful, I'm not exactly a math whiz so I don't want to insult anyone (for a rare change) so I suggest whoever came up with 6300 read the linked articles below BUT at least whoever said its actually infinite is at least way closer to the correct answer here. (It's behind curtain #1, 2 or 3 - once you choose one is it to your advantage to change your mind?)
Shannon also estimated the number of possible positions, "of the general order of , or roughly 1043". This includes some illegal positions (e.g., pawns on the first rank, both kings in check) and excludes legal positions following captures and promotions. (WHY?) Taking these into account, (Dutch computer Scientist) Victor Allis calculated an upper bound of 5×1052 for the number of positions, and estimated the true number to be about 1050.[3] Recent results[4] improve that estimate, by proving an upper bound of only 2155, which is less than 1046.7.
Allis also estimated the game-tree complexity to be at least 10123, "based on an average branching factor of 35 and an average game length of 80". As a comparison, the number of atoms in the observable universe, to which it is often compared, is estimated to be between 4×1079 and 1081.
You are talking about the number of positions, which is of course finite.
But number of moves is not, since 3 move draw repitition and 50 move draw has to be claimed.
I did not talk of the number of possible positions, but of the maximal total length in moves of a game. (with your words : the depth of the tree, not its width)
Obviously there are many, many more than 6300 possible positions.
Thanks Irontiger
I didnt see how a person can selfmate himself with only a knight.
But I asked for a game to answer my gambit question, not a series of moves. Only to demonstrate no one would seriouly ever play such moves - such a gambit violates opening principles, tactical considerations, long-term planning and self-preservation.
barefoot_player
if you time runs out in knight vs knight endgame, is it still draw or lost???