In my experience, the software should recognize a draw situation (position repeating 3 times, etc) but it can be slow to do so.
The software does recognise 3-fold rep. But just as OTB it is not an automatic draw. It must be claimed
So, after so many games that I lost because of that, I'm pretty annoyed.
For example, in my last blitz game I had an ending with R+P vs. R, but I was low in time.
In actual chess, you can claim a draw and then the referee will decide probably for a draw.
In my game, I offered a draw, and the opponent rejected. After all, I lost on time.
First of all, I think that this is not the idea of chess, so I can't believe how chess players can do this. It's just honourless and such players don't deserve to play chess.
But my actual question is if there is any way to claim a draw on chess so such things do not happen.
If it's R+P vs R, the side with the P still has winning chances and unless the player without the P can demonstrate that he can achieve the Philidor Position or R+P vs R , then the director should NOT award a draw. If the R+P player can get a Lucena Position, the game is winnable. R+P vs R games generally end up either the Philidor or the Lucena Positions.
Obviously, my opponent was just waiting for my time to be over.
I know a lot of chess arbiters (my father is one) and in real life chess, it is possible to claim a draw in such positions. I actually happened to my once in a rapid tournament where I claimed a draw successfully.
In fact, it is drawn when the opponent obviously doesn't try to win by checkmating.
In final position of your game black delivers checkmate in 17 moves with best play. So your opponent was not playing just for time - he was playing for either time or your blunder whatever comes first. And you did blunder - first a pawn, then a rook.
FIDE rules III.4 and III.5 don't apply here because:
III.2.1 The Guidelines below concerning the final period of the game including Quickplay Finishes, shall only be used at an event if their use has been announced beforehand.
III.2.2 These Guidelines shall apply only to standard chess and rapid chess games without increment and not to blitz games.
For someone whoes father is a chess arbiter your understanding of rules is just pathetic. And you attitude is even worse.
For this phrase from post #1 - "It's just honourless and such players don't deserve to play chess" - you should apologise in front of your opponent. I think doing it right in this thread would be appropriate.
I was just kinda in rage mode, so I apologize for that words.
However, a sportman shouldn't try to win just because of time. As MickinMD said, it can either end in Lucena or Philidor position. Both of them are not lost for the side with a pawn. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get to these positions within 5 seconds.
Also, this rule was just recently changed, as far as I know, and my game was before that.
I was just kinda in rage mode, so I apologize for that words.
However, a sportman shouldn't try to win just because of time. As MickinMD said, it can either end in Lucena or Philidor position. Both of them are not lost for the side with a pawn. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get to these positions within 5 seconds.
Also, this rule was just recently changed, as far as I know, and my game was before that.
I truly appreciate your apology.
Your game was played on Jun 6, 2017. These rules apply "Laws of Chess: For competitions starting from 1 July 2014 till 1 July 2017" https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article It says:
Appendix G. Quickplay Finishes
G.1 A ‘quickplay finish’ is the phase of a game when all the remaining moves must be completed in a finite time.
G.2 Before the start of an event it shall be announced whether this Appendix shall apply or not.
G.3 This Appendix shall only apply to standard play and rapidplay games without increment and not to blitz games.
So again - there is no way arbiter would intervene if it was an OTB event.
Reagrding sportsmanship - a sportsman should try his best to win within the rules - that's what your opponent did.
In chess you compete both over the board and over the clock. Rules are there to decide in various situations that can happen. "The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves" - this is not your case.
I was just kinda in rage mode, so I apologize for that words.
However, a sportman shouldn't try to win just because of time. As MickinMD said, it can either end in Lucena or Philidor position. Both of them are not lost for the side with a pawn. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get to these positions within 5 seconds.
Also, this rule was just recently changed, as far as I know, and my game was before that.
I truly appreciate your apology.
Your game was played on Jun 6, 2017. These rules apply "Laws of Chess: For competitions starting from 1 July 2014 till 1 July 2017" https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article It says:
Appendix G. Quickplay Finishes
G.1 A ‘quickplay finish’ is the phase of a game when all the remaining moves must be completed in a finite time.
G.2 Before the start of an event it shall be announced whether this Appendix shall apply or not.
G.3 This Appendix shall only apply to standard play and rapidplay games without increment and not to blitz games.
So again - there is no way arbiter would intervene if it was an OTB event.
Reagrding sportsmanship - a sportsman should try his best to win within the rules - that's what your opponent did.
In chess you compete both over the board and over the clock. Rules are there to decide in various situations that can happen. "The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves" - this is not your case.
Ok, I didn't know that this is different in blitz, cause I mostly play "long" games and sometimes some rapid tournaments. I almost only play blitz in the internet.
Apologies for the false things I've said.
Both sides can win:
Help mate!
OP, you stated an incorrect premise. You can not claim a draw with R+P vs. R if you are low on time. You apparently ran off too much time getting there. There is a lot of literature about this complex ending and several famous positions (Lucena, Philidor, etc.) you can try to reach, depending on your objective and whether you're the side with the pawn. Good luck doing it under time pressure.
oregonpatzer I could have tried to win that in 5 seconds or so, which is nearly impossible. I decided to give up the pawn, so that the system would possibly recognize it as unsufficent material, but that didn't work out. I know Lucena and Philidor pretty well, and I'm going to watch a DVD about rook endings by Karsten Müller soon 
Anyway, my point is that it is just wrong saying that my opponent was playing for blunders. As I said, you can even blunder this bishop ending with no pawns, so he was just playing for time, WHICH IS ALLOWED, as uri told me.
However, I wonder if it's technically possible to claim such a draw in rapid chess. when Quickplay Finish rules apply.
In my experience, the software should recognize a draw situation (position repeating 3 times, etc) but it can be slow to do so.