Insuficient material?

He doesn't understand his own contradictory argument. He thinks black should win because black has a queen, but doesn't understand that white can't win on time here because white doesn't have any effing pieces. He's actually confused several times here and at the game itself who has time and who has material.

BLACK HAS NO TIME. CANNOT WIN.

WHITE HAS NO MATERIAL. CANNOT WIN.

Don't bother. Argumentative troll.

I understand the ruling and the disparity seems to be that we who play on other sites, like FICS, playchess, lichess etc are used to playing games with a time forfeit, but time being relative, it perhaps means something different to other sites. Now if it means what you say it means and I quote,' it merely means that the player that timed out can no longer win', not that they have actually lost, then as a logical consequence, no one here ever loses on time, they simply can no longer win.  Is that really the case? does no one here ever lose on time? and contrary to what others have said i am not merely being contentious, I really think that it would be much simpler and consistent to impose the time forfeit.

resorting to ad hominem is not very clever and not very helpful, you have said what you have numerous times, i thank you for your contribution, now if you dont mind I'd like to discuss it without recourse to pettiness, there are other threads which abound in pettiness, perhaps this is not the thread for you?

OMFG. What don't you understand?

Fact: White has time left in this game.

Fact: Black has run out of time.

Ask yourself: Can white win? Even: should white win?

If we go with your misinterpretation of the rules, then:

Since white still has time and black has run out of time, WHITE WINS. Is that what you're actually rooting for? You want white to win WITH NO PIECES just because he has time? How do you checkmate with no pieces? Just like how do you checkmate with no time?

NOTE as WELL that NEITHER player LOSES here. IT'S a DRAW. As it SHOULD be, since NEITHER player can WIN.

Faceeffingpalm. Who gives birth to these penis holes?

If that's truly the way other sites have programmed it, then they're wrong.  I doubt that, though.  More likely is that you simply haven't run into this situation on them.

People do lose on time here... all the time.  They lose on time if it is still possible that the other player can win (i.e., they have what this site considers to be mating material).  It's only a draw if neither player can win.

And don't give me that superlatively fancy crap about ad hominem, Mr. "Dresses." Nothing is ad hominem about the reasonable assertion that you are being clearly obstinately argumentative for no cause. Maybe it's you who should stop posting for a second and just think about the case you're making first.

To win, you must both have time remaining and mating material.

Yes this anticipated my above post.  I think i will simply have to accept the fact that a time forfeit is not strictly applied in all cases and there are dynamics which have a bearing although i really think that simply applying a time forfeit in its strictest sense would be simpler but of course i dont make the rules.

yawn

You just wish and insist you did. Don't bother ringing the doorbell when you get to hell.

I found a guy who thinks you can win with no pieces. Wow.

Do Not Play.

You mean, you'll have to accept that the rule isn't what you thought it was?

You clearly don't understand the rules thatt have been explained to you , or you wouldnt make the statement about no-one on here losing on time.

Take a deep breath, re-read the rule, and think about it.

you still profess belief in hell, wow, legal measurements in cups and now hell, that's hilarious, anyone that knows anything about it knows that its a pre-Christian extra biblical Hellenistic teaching borrowed from the ancient pagan Greeks, but hey ill remember that when i get there, i will ring the bell loudly and ask to be admitted, i can see you there now, prodding people with a trident to make sure they are still writhing in agony.

This one dared to question the ruling on time and draws, burn em! burn em!

ok, yes i think I have never reached this kind of position and always win or lose by time forfiet when it happens and have assumed that it was so.  I stand corrected and thank you for it.

for the last time, i understand the ruling, i will not repeat this again.

What he's really looking for (like most people who insist they don't understand this rule) is official cover to justify the tactic of just playing for time. In his world, white wins the posted chess game even though white has no pieces. This is how he beats Bobby Fischer - with a clock.

essentially yes.

Do Not Play.

No what people like me and apparently many others have misunderstood is why the game is not instantly forfeited on time when a time forfeit is enforced under certain circumstances, it has nothing to do with playing for time or Bobby Fischer. But hey feel free to promulgate whatever propaganda you deem necessary to project your bias, don't let reality creep in whatever you do.

Argumentative and presumptive. Using a figure of speech is not an endorsement. Just plain argumentative. Not worthy.