Stallilng a Drawn Game for a minute to win on Time

So, I just played a game against someone, who will remain anonymous for their own sake, where we eventually simplified into a bishop of opposite colors endgame.  I traded off my last bissop for his last pawn, thus the game was obviously drawn, as only I had a pawn, and he only had a king and bishop.  However, at this point I had a minute left on my clock, while he had 2 minuntes on his clock.  Instead of taking my last pawn and thus drawing because of insufficient material, he simply blockaded my pawn with his king, and dance his bishop around untill my timer would run out (which would obviously be before his, seeing as he had another minute than me) thus, "earning" himself a win.

Now I don't so much care for my rating, as it is pretty low and I gladly admit to being a chess noob, but in my mind, chess is a game with manners.  To delay capturing the last piece and admitting a draw and simply drawing out the clock just because you can seems despicable.  Granted there ARE rules supposed to prevent this, like the 50 move rule, which my game would clearly have led to given another minute, but even in the context where I will not be able to make it to the 50 move rule, it seems indecent that someone would amount to using such tactics.  Do low rated (<1500) players feel the need to lack manners?  I certainly don't.

Bishop versus pawn is not insufficient material to checkmate, and even if the pawn is not an a or h pawn it can always be promoted to a knight or bishop and checkmate is again possible. The rules don't state you have to be able to force the checkmate.

it should be a draw. we need to fix that.

1) Yes, as Erik said it should have been a draw.

2) Yes, that is extremely bad etiquette. 

3) Premoves are good! Could have just shuffled your king between two white squares far away from the pawn until he captures or 50 moves past without wasting any time at all. 

You are wrong, a timeout for the side with the pawn means a loss since the rules assume worst defense for the timed out side.

are you telling me that you are too slow with the mouse to keep from getting 50 move rule or a 3 move repetition draw? I believe that it takes about .3 seconds to shuffle a king back and forth between two squares. So unless he gets creative with the places he is putting his bishop it should eventually end up with the same position three times (i dont believe that it needs to be in a row), or if all else fails the 50 move rule.

With the timer at 1 min and 2 min, wouldn't that be a tournament game, not online game? After each move, your time resets... Or this could be Live chess game.

you could have just used premove to make him lose on time too

I believe sconsc is correct.  Your pawn cost you the game.  You should enable premoves.  1 minute would be long enough to make the 50 moves if you had premoves enabled. 

i have personally stalled in a game i was losing in the endgame just so i could win on time. is that wrong?

Well, I'm no expert on chess manners, but it does seem to me that if he has forced a draw and still has two full minutes to your one he deserves the win.  After all, isn't that the point of timed games??

You have lost on technicality and I emphatize with you, but a timed game is just that. I have lost on time in several of my games, even when I am ahead in material or position. I believe that we all be a good sport and enjoy winning as much as losing. It's the challenge that counts. C'mon, mate!

what's a premove?

There is nothing to fix.   You mismanaged your time and lost.

go into your settings and turn premove on, which allows you to make a preemptive move before it is your turn, and shuffle back and forth along with him. It really uses up only a tiny fraction of a second, im sure you could get 50 moves in. Its a very valuable tool if you can use it right and can get you a nice edge in blitz.

My take on this is, is it's a painfully difficult grey area.  

On the one hand, I usually offer my opponents a draw in such a position, even though I can easily win on time. 

But, I've been beat  many times by even master or above level strength who used this technique to get wins.  And I've even seen it on GM level on icc. 

So it would be nice if we'd all just come to an agreement :)

Oh, and if you want to prevent this, you just give yourself a 1 or 2 second increment and you'll never run out of time and eventually hte 50 move rule will be reached. 

But this can happen in many positions, opposite colored bishops, rook vs rook , etc.  I've never seen it solved satisfactory anywhere, so if eric solves it I say yay to them.

There is such a rule to prevent this in OTB chess,i don't about on this site.

14 H1. In a sudden death time control, a player with two minutes or less of remaining time may stop the clock and ask the director to declare the game a draw on the grounds that the player has insufficient losing chances.

The draw shall be awarded if the director believes that a Class C player would have little chance to lose the position against a Master with both having ample time. The exact losing chances of any position cannot be calculated, but a director wishing a more precise standard may consider "little" to mean l ess than 10 percent.

Note that under the "insufficient losing chances" rule, the players' actual ratings are irrelevant, as is the amount of time remaining on the players' clocks. However, the player making the claim must have two minutes or less remaining — otherwise the game continues.

Also, there is a subtle but distinct difference between insufficient losing chances and actual winning chances. A player may be winning the game but still have significant chances of losing.

Directors have several choices under the insufficient losing chances rule. The director may decide:

1. The claim is clearly correct, and award a draw.
2. The claim is clearly incorrect, and deny the claim and subtract one minute from the claimant's remaining time.
3. The claim is too close to call, and ask the players to resume the game. One, the director places a properly set delay clock on the game making sure the claimant's time is cut in half. The standard procedures for winning, losing or drawing now apply. Two, the director may watch the game with the intent of upholding the claim if the opponent is making no progress. A director who is watching a game after an insufficient losing chances claim may declare the game drawn even if the original claimant's flag falls.
4. The claim is too close to call, and instruct the claimant to make a later re-claim if the opponent is making no progress.

yep..it should be a draw

 No, it isn't wrong. You can be heavily losing a game but your opponent could run out of time. It's absolutely fine to keep on playing if you think your opponent could run out of time. Part of the argument here is that your opponent may be winning because they have used more time than you where you may have moved more quickly. Management of time is part of the game of chess. This only really applies though in live games (especially those that are very time-limited, blitz, for example where games are often won on time) or in OTB chess where the 40-move limit is being approached, for example.

If it is a game where it is 1 day per move (for example) and the position is totally lost then I think it is good etiquette to resign. That said, some people prefer to play on even then because they may want to learn how to finish a game and really all the winning player can do then is win the game as quickly as possible.

The problem described in this thread though (that started this thread) is something else I think. It looks as though the opponent did not have material to win. In this case it should have been a draw. However, we would need to see the position to be sure.

Steve