Sure. Black must have run out of time, but since white doesn't have anything but a K, it's a draw. If white had a pawn left, he would have won. Judging by previous threads, this is not always the way blitz is handled in Europe, but chess.com follows USCF protocols. I'm just the messenger. 
Insuficient material?
Sort:
ok I understand, if black gets flagged on time and white has insufficient material to mate its a draw although it still makes no sense because a draw is not dependent upon one side having insufficient material its dependent upon both sides having insufficient material. If black got flagged on time than the result should be white won on time because black has plenty of material to mate. I realise that you are the messenger and i promise not to shoot you in case i don't like the message.
A very popular topic in the forums! Here's a search showing 50 or so previous threads:
http://www.chess.com/forum/search?keyword=insufficient+material
Huh. Interesting.
robbie_1969 wrote:
ok I understand, if black gets flagged on time and white has insufficient material to mate its a draw
That is all you need to remember.
You may not like the rule, but it is what it is. To win at chess when your opponent runs out of time you need to have at least a pawn or a Queen or a rook or two bishops.
when ones opponent runs out of time, the game is usually over irrespective of what material is left on the board for time is considered paramount. I thank you all for your comments I was certainly unaware of this rule which seems to me to be somewhat peculiar.
Dec 8, 2014
0
#8
Peculiar? It makes perfect sense to me.
If one does not have any time left, they can not win.
If one does not have mating material, they can not win.
If neither player can win, then the result must be a draw.
If someone does not have anytime left, they have lost. Please tell me what it is about that statmemnt that you fail to understand? because once you understand that statement then what material remains upon the board is of no consequence. The game is not drawn, it is lost.
Re-read what I posted above. In order to win a chess game on time, you must have sufficient mating material left on the board when your opponents flag falls.
Those are the rules.
You may think that the time control is paramount, but it is not.
I don't have any problem understanding your reasoning, what i don't understand is why the game was not forfeited on time and as yet neither you nor anyone else has attempted to explain why it was not forfeited on time when blacks flag fell. If there is a time control, why is it not enforced?
Dec 9, 2014
0
#12
robbie_1969 wrote:
If someone does not have anytime left, they have lost. Please tell me what it is about that statmemnt that you fail to understand? because once you understand that statement then what material remains upon the board is of no consequence. The game is not drawn, it is lost.
Running out of time does not mean the game is lost, it merely means that the player that timed out can no longer win. It's easy to misunderstand this point because most times that means the other player wins, and I presume that most people learn the shorter version of "if you run out of time, you lose" from unofficial sources. But it isn't fully correct. According to the official rules, in order to win on time, you must be able to win on the board. Otherwise, the game is ruled a draw.
Facepalm. Don't bother. He thinks the clock is everything. He could have beat Bobby Fischer with the right clock. He's just argumentative.
wu1010 wrote:
Facepalm. Don't bother. He thinks the clock is everything. He could have beat Bobby Fischer with the right clock. He's just argumentative.
try boohoo.com, buy yourself a dress.
Because a lone king can never win--ever.
FIDE rule 6.9:
Except where one of Articles 5.1.a, 5.1.b, 5.2.a, 5.2.b, 5.2.c applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by thatplayer. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
omnipaul wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
If someone does not have anytime left, they have lost. Please tell me what it is about that statmemnt that you fail to understand? because once you understand that statement then what material remains upon the board is of no consequence. The game is not drawn, it is lost.
Running out of time does not mean the game is lost, it merely means that the player that timed out can no longer win. It's easy to misunderstand this point because most times that means the other player wins, and I presume that most people learn the shorter version of "if you run out of time, you lose" from unofficial sources. But it isn't fully correct. According to the official rules, in order to win on time, you must be able to win on the board. Otherwise, the game is ruled a draw.
Ok this is getting weird, why have a time control if its not enforced? when one plays on FICS for example, when the flag falls you are lost, same with ICC as far as i can discern.
dashkee94 wrote:
Because a lone king can never win--ever.
you dont say.
robbie_1969 wrote:
I don't have any problem understanding your reasoning, what i don't understand is why the game was not forfeited on time and as yet neither you nor anyone else has attempted to explain why it was not forfeited on time when blacks flag fell. If there is a time control, why is it not enforced?
I have posted the relevant section of FIDE rules. What bit of that do you not understand ?
Dec 9, 2014
0
#20
robbie_1969 wrote:
omnipaul wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
If someone does not have anytime left, they have lost. Please tell me what it is about that statmemnt that you fail to understand? because once you understand that statement then what material remains upon the board is of no consequence. The game is not drawn, it is lost.
Running out of time does not mean the game is lost, it merely means that the player that timed out can no longer win. It's easy to misunderstand this point because most times that means the other player wins, and I presume that most people learn the shorter version of "if you run out of time, you lose" from unofficial sources. But it isn't fully correct. According to the official rules, in order to win on time, you must be able to win on the board. Otherwise, the game is ruled a draw.
Ok this is getting weird, why have a time control if its not enforced? when one plays on FICS for example, when the flag falls you are lost, same with ICC as far as i can discern.
It is being enforced. Just not in the way that you think it is. To win, you must both have time remaining and mating material. If you have time, but no mating material, the best you can get is a draw. If you have mating material, but no time left, the best you can get is a draw.
Read the post by Lagomorph above (#16). That is the official rule on the situation.
Can someone explain why this game is drawn on the basis of having insufficient material
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=992268568