N+K vs N+K - Wrongly classified as a draw by insufficient material!?

Sort:
Avatar of Prophylaxis86
Hi All,
In one of my games, this position got declared as an immediate draw due to insufficient material.
As per FIDE rules, this should get played and eventually a draw should be based on 50 move rule (or 75 moves) and the reason is as below.
It is possible for one of the sides with one Knight and a King to checkmate opponent provided opponent also mandatorily has one Knight and a King (note that N + K vs only a King would be a draw as no checkmate can be constructed). The constructed position given below is similar to a helpmate how 2 Knights + King can checkmate a King if the weaker side cooperates.
May I request any experts on chess rules to clarify this please. If appropriate, this should get changed in chess.com game rules as well.
Position from actual game that got declared (due to insufficient material) as draw immediately:
Position that was declared as draw automatically
Possible checkmate position using same pieces:
Avatar of Magician

You would rather play out 50 moves in a N vs N endgame? Even in fide rules I'm pretty sure you can call an arbiter and claim the draw in that endgame.

Avatar of Prophylaxis86

Of course this would be a draw even if we play it out a million times :); I am just remarking from a technical aspect that this shouldn't be called out as a draw "due to insufficient material" as per rules.

Avatar of Martin_Stahl

The site does not use the FIDE rules of mate possible by any series of legal moves implementation

Something more similar to the US Chess rule is used instead.

Avatar of badger_song

You can get a mate with that material, but to do so it would be a help-mate by your opponent, where the losing side repeatedly chose the only sequence of moves, none of which are forced, that would lead to mate. I prefer this sites method of dealing with draw aby repetition and insufficient material as great time savers as well as enhancing the play-experience. Plus, FIDE does have an arbiter rule which is probably one reason there is no need for an explicit rule concerning insufficient material for mate. Given that the above position of K+N vs. K+N is a help-mate, it would likely be seen as no different than a "grandmaster draw" situation.

Avatar of Hartsville54

As pointed out by Martin, this site is not ruled or goven by FIDE, if FIDE insist or implementing this rule this rule should be changes to the more realistic USCF rules. Another example of an unrealistic FIDE rule is that if you promote a pawn you must replace it with exactly the piece you promote to a Queen Knight etc, even if that new piece is unavailable, totally unrealistic in time trouble or playing in a normal weekend tournament that does not provide extra pieces.

Avatar of Alexander29114

The same thing happened when I had a KNB vs K. This mate is possible in under 50 moves, but when I reach these pieces, the game ends with insufficient material. Also, I get it if some say that this a draw as it is pretty hard to win in this situation.

Avatar of Hartsville54
Alexander29114 wrote:

The same thing happened when I had a KNB vs K. This mate is possible in under 50 moves, but when I reach these pieces, the game ends with insufficient material. Also, I get it if some say that this a draw as it is pretty hard to win in this situation.

Can you reference a specific game because this should not of happen (i.e. did you run out of time etc.). Twice in over 27k games I found myself with the same situation and play continued.

Avatar of badger_song

I have gotten a K+N+B vs K on rare occasions, here at chess.com. I don't believe I ever tried to play the position; I just offered a draw and my opponent accepted.

Avatar of Fet
I have never got a K+B+N vs. K position, but I know how to do it.
Avatar of Guest4025295743
Please Sign Up to comment.

If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.