when is a draw not a draw?

The custom of checking facts normally applies when those facts are not provided (such as the OP's actual final position). But when the OP gave a name, I naturally took him at his word. I shouldn't have to hunt down every iota of information provided to verify its accuracy; at some point I should be able to trust the OP to actually know what he's talking about. If you were trying to embarrass me for not checking my facts, you failed, because that was not my fact to check. If any embarrassment is to be had, it is by the OP, who apparently took a random guess at his opponent's real name and got it wrong!

You'll also notice that I still haven't checked to see what his opponent's real name is, whether anybody got the name right, or even if it's listed on his/her profile. This is because I don't have to and don't care to. This is not my responsibility.

But getting back to the actual subject at hand, the clock is part of the game. In the OP's game, the position is locked and neither King can make any progress, which is puzzling indeed. I think OP should take this up with the support staff, as they may be able to change the result, if it should indeed be a draw (and that certainly appears to be the case).

But using the clock to one's advantage, particularly when it becomes a liability for the other player, is rarely (if ever) unacceptable. In this situation, the player with more time generally starts moving much faster, voluntarily taking upon himself a risk of making a game-losing blunder. That risk offsets any alleged unsportsmanlike conduct.

I know that time is a part of the game, and I have won games by flagging people myself.

But the case in this thread is the clearest drawn position imaginable. The position is even so much of a draw that there is no imaginable theoretical possibility for any moves to be played which do not lead to the result of a draw on the board.

There is a technical solution that would have solved the problem in the game with which the thread was started:

Implement the possibility to cleanly input multiple premoves (i.e. a sequence of moves I will be playing no matter what the moves of my opponent will be). Then it will be no problem to enter 50 moves consuming 0 seconds in such a position. Removing any incentive for an opponent to try to win by flagging.

Pianist, I didn't mean to embarrass you, I just wanted to point out that OP did not use the real name of his opponent(so no harm is done) , well he even missed the user name and the country as well.

Ilmago, good point, that was something that crossed my mind when I looked at the position, I was wondering couldn't you get over 50 moves by using premoves in that particular position (and time limits).

There is the ability to enter multiple pre-moves!

Beyond that, though, I'm shocked that so many people are giving this guy sympathy when the fact is he lost as sure as if he was checkmated! If you'll look back a few moves in the game, he knowingly put the position into a deadlock when he was down to a few seconds on the clock. It's absolutely ludicrous for him to now expect to be given half a point for his clock having fallen.

quiote88pianist "...we on this website generally follow a custom of not disclosing our opponent's name whenever we talk about a game. This applies especially if said opponent lost, or behaved in an unsportsmanlike, rude, childish, etc. manner; this is to avoid potentially embarrassing the opponent, whose identity is exposed to the whole membership."

We do? Really?

Ummm... some people redact opponent's names... I for one find the practice fey and overly sensitive.  It's rude to gloat of course but that's a different matter... giving an opponen'ts name is not imho rude in any way, why would it be?

The question of unsportsmanlike behavior is a different one IMO... if the player was rude enough mention it to admins, it doesn't accomplish much to mention it on the forums IMO.

SensFan33, are you sure that one is able to enter a sequence of premoves? Which Live Chess system exactly are you talking about? Would you claim that one could do so cleanly and easily enough to be able to enter the sequence faster than the internet lag?

Another point: FIDE rules:

9.6

The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing this position was legal.

The FIDE rules of chess state that the game is a draw even when the flag falls (because the position is reached before the flag falls), if there is no possible sequence of legal moves that can lead to a mate. This condition is fulfilled here.

I am aware that it it not easy for an automated system to recognize this here, but chess.com cannot award a win on time here if they want to follow FIDE rules.

If a computer does not see that this is a draw according to FIDE rules, then humans must decide this. Therefore, reasonable players should just agree to a draw here, removing the need of bothering Live Chess admins/chess.com staff with having to make an arbiter decision about the outcome of a game for which the computer system does not manage to give the correct result according to FIDE rules.

Gambitking, please no witchhunts here, of course.

Ummm...he did use punctuation.  You really couldn't understand the post? 

You can't tell what he means from context just because he writes you're rather than your?  Come on, man.

I think this is a clear case when OP should get his draw( I hope he will pursue it with the staff), and this might be a starting point where common sense will prevail over bureaucracy and shortcomings of computers.

Please look at another Article from Laws of chess, this time it is from 1.st Article which defines the basics:

BASIC RULES OF PLAY

Article 1: The nature and objectives of the game of chess

1.2        The objective of each player is to place the opponent’s king ‘under attack’ in such a way that the opponent has no legal move. The player who achieves this goal is said to have ‘checkmated’ the opponent’s king and to have won the game. Leaving one’s own king under attack, exposing one’s own king to attack and also ’capturing’ the opponent’s king are not allowed. The opponent whose king has been checkmated has lost the game.

1.3     If the position is such that neither player can possibly checkmate, the game is drawn.

And if anyone would still find it questionable(even though IMO everything is clear as it can be), then I invite them to read the Preface of Laws of chess:

Preface

The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations which are discussed in the Laws. The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding the solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors.

im terribly sorry about my grammar or lack of it.so heres a message written(in broad glaswegian)for all the snobs out there geezabrekyabamye awaeyegoyamugye whitahamshankyeurr.hope you know some decent chessplayer who can translate for you.awright?

The spirit of brotherhood is making me all goose-pimply.

(To avoid any confusion, my last post was not a translation of the Glaswegian.)

(Probably.)

i promise next time ill just resign

 +2

I fairly certain Mr. Bsrasmus was simply supplementing my post as almost all of his punctuation "quips" had to do with the errors in redhand's original post. It was late so I also made a small error (I apologize?), but I almost always re-read my posts for coherency (which I do believe my post had). I personally hate grammar Nazis; if its readable and understandable then I don't care about its grammar.

But thanks for "you're" support bigpoisen. =P

Oh, sorry Patches.  I didn't have any trouble understanding the OP's post either. 

Your welcome for the support.

wish i could spell