Right, but according to the rules if your flag falls it is assumed you will make the worst possible moves from then on. As for the 3-fold repetition, it does work, but you have to claim it by clicking the draw button. Again this is perfectly consistent with the rules of chess.
Stallilng a Drawn Game for a minute to win on Time
Sort:
Dec 4, 2008
0
#43
There are some good points here. :) And a helpmate is possible with just a bishop and king vs pawn and king. The rules probably figure it is usually easy to avoid the helpmates. :) I'm not sure if the rules assume that the side that times out will make the worst moves because there can be some cases where the worst moves can lead to a draw or a win. :)
that cant be compared. black can easily make a mistake and lose the bishop in the diagram with a rook and a bishop. how does a player accidentally underpromotes to knight and put it on g1 and his king to h1?
haha yeah, you're right with the worst moves thing, but I was just searching for an easy way to put it because it seemed every previous description had failed. The rules don't phrase it that way. They say something like if a player's flag falls he will lose on time unless it is impossible for his opponent to achieve checkmate by any possible series of legal moves. I would be pretty disappointed if I was white in your example. 
erik wrote:
it should be a draw. we need to fix that.
Good call Erik. It should be no different than a OTB tournament, where you call the judge over and a ruling is made. I've won games on time before, but my opponents had plenty of material left, had plenty of time to make their move, and although I may not have offered a rematch in every case, I would certainly give that opportunity to anyone who asked.
I play quite a few rapid play tournaments (mostly in France) and the rule employed seems to be that the position is drawn because "the position cannot be won by normal means". This is a fairly easy thing for a human arbiter to assess, but a devilish thing for a machine to determine.
Yes, it is frustrating alright when you know you can draw or win and then, wham! Lost by technicality.Winning is everything maybe true but sometimes it ain't! Especially when honor is at stake.
However, we go out there to win and employ every ruling in the rule book to our advantage. And games or matches were won or lost by defaults, injuries, bad officiating in basketball, referee stopped contest (RSC) in boxing, etc. In Philippine politics, no one loses, everyone is cheated when they are defeated.
Therefore, there are rules to obey and we must abide by it until such time that it is changed. Then, we find its loopholes and flaws to exploit again, especially by unscrupulous persons (lol). There is a sign in a jai-alai fronton that says, "El fallo del juez es inapelable" which roughly translates to "that the decision of the umpire is final or cannot be appealed." That's part of the game. That's life! C'est la vie!
Anyway, let us wait for Erik and possibly the chess.com staff to fix it. As Esteneos suggested, the lack of mating material, 3 move repetition rule, 50 move rule, 10 second increment, and a notice of all applicable rules in the blitz page and other stuff that can improve the beta live chess.
Meanwhile, let's blitzkrieg and have some fun !
Ok so, as far as I read it winning on time is ok right? So if I have that position that I pasted earlier in page 2 of this thread, it's not 'dishonerable' of me to just moving my bishop back and forth until I get a win on time with 1 extra second on my clock? (of course both sides are premoving their bishops back and forth).
I hope you guys all know about premove...=) It's how I win games against people that don't use it =) You can even chain premoves on chess.com, in other words, I could literally make 10 moves at once and then just sit back and watch them play out...while my helpless opponent runs out of time.
Ok Ok...I don't feel good about winning games on time and with premove, I just wanted everyone to be aware of these things - it's not an easy call in any case.
Yes, chess IS a game with manners, and when you play with time, you play with time. You lost on time. In fact, there is a way to prevent this, this is called the draw rule. Repeating the same position 3 times, or making 50 moves withous a pawn move or a capture. Can't do this before you lose on time ? then you lost on time, kid. So yes, chess is a game with manners, and i think you should get manners before you play, this way you will not look like a cry-baby because you lose at the game wich is supposed to be fun.....
pm me if you want to reply, or talk in my back here.. cause i dont track this.. all i had to say is said, and im right, like it or not.. bad sport..
Thanks everyone for posting, there is obviously a mixed bag of oppinions. Yes I lost, and if someone asked me if I lost or not, I would simply reply "yes" and be on with it. Rules are rules, and since I lost due to those rules I graciously admit defeat. However, I am trying to address the topic of honorable play, not winning or losing.
It has been said before in this thread that there are in fact rules at blitz tournaments to prevent these types of loses. However, it seems that as this is much too dificult to regulate on an online chess, as using a computer to check for these positions is too tough of a challenge, and having an online "arbiter" is completely out of the question.
Thus, it is left in the hands of the live chess players to make a decision: whether they want a win so much so that they would take advantage of the fact that this type of preventative rule is impossible online, and thus would do what my opponent did, or to show decency, and accept the position was drawn and that in a true blitz match it would be ruled as so.
Out of all this I have learned this, obviously the internet is not a place where I should expect decency and cortousey from my opponents, as I am not face to face with them and there is no human interaction more than pieces moving across a chess board. However, I do think of myself as a person who respects the process of winning rather than the winning itself.
Someone said before that in Philline politics noone loses, rather they are cheated. Are those winners respected? I suppose I have a moral code pushing me towards being a respectable human being, and living and acting honorably. I realize that not everyone has that internal nudging, and it was too idealistic for me to imagine that they would. Such is life, those who abuse the system can come out on top. I however will continue to act in a manner in which I can view myself as having acted in a courteous and honorable way.
You are wrong mokechoke. It has to be very clear among all chess players whether or not you should be giving your opponent a draw in these kinds of positions or not. If not, those who have no 'honor' will have higher ratings than others. Flagging gives you a lot of points.
Really, this whole problem is solved with just a 1 second increment so I suggest people stop playing 3 0 games and similar time controls.
Tunatin, even with the pawn on the f file such a helpmate should be posible.
All this just a theory! Practically such mates are very very rear and you must be absolutely stupid to bring your self in such situation. Theoretically two knights is also sufficient material to make a mate. But practically you can't make it if your opponent just playes right.