draws - Chess Forums

nhbrown

Mar 29, 2024

0

#1

Why does insufficient material to check-mate result in a draw when an opponent runs out of time? When I pick a 5 minute game, I’m playing to either checkmate, force a resignation, or bleed the opponent out of clock. Shouldn’t whether I can checkmate or not be irrelevant if my opponent selected a 5 minute game also?

Can you think of any other timed event in which a person who runs out of time gets a draw?

Martin_Stahl

Mar 29, 2024

0

#2

nhbrown wrote:

Why does insufficient material to check-mate result in a draw when an opponent runs out of time? When I pick a 5 minute game, I’m playing to either checkmate, force a resignation, or bleed the opponent out of clock. Shouldn’t whether I can checkmate or not be irrelevant if my opponent selected a 5 minute game also?
Can you think of any other timed event in which a person who runs out of time gets a draw?

If it's impossible to mate the opponent, a player should not get a win, regardless of their opponent running out of time.

How that is implemented, depends on the organization. In the case of chess.com, only the material the side with time has is looked at, with one exception, to determine if there sufficient material

nhbrown

Mar 29, 2024

0

#3

Is that just a regular chess rule?

In basketball if there’s a shot clock violation, the other team gets the ball.

In football, play clock runs down and it’s a penalty.

I guess my hang up is that there are so many different timed games to play - why isn’t an opponent running out of time a reason for a loss? (S)he selected that specific timed game. I kind of view a rapid game as a way to create enough chaos to make up for my chess skill; but they don’t get a loss if they run out of time because they can’t figure out how to checkmate me in time (assuming I don’t have adequate materials to checkmate my opponent)

nhbrown

Mar 29, 2024

0

#4

*LACK of chess skill, and editing before posting skill

Martin_Stahl

Mar 30, 2024

0

#5

nhbrown wrote:

Is that just a regular chess rule?
In basketball if there’s a shot clock violation, the other team gets the ball.
In football, play clock runs down and it’s a penalty.
I guess my hang up is that there are so many different timed games to play - why isn’t an opponent running out of time a reason for a loss? (S)he selected that specific timed game. I kind of view a rapid game as a way to create enough chaos to make up for my chess skill; but they don’t get a loss if they run out of time because they can’t figure out how to checkmate me in time (assuming I don’t have adequate materials to checkmate my opponent)

Yes, it's a regular official Chess rule.

FIDE rules are that if one player runs out of time, the opponent gets the win if mate is possible by any series of legal moves (mate by the player with time) otherwise it's a draw.

US Chess has a simpler material check and doesn't use the FIDE help-mate ruling and is closest to what the site uses

Basically, if it's impossible for the player with time to mate, given infinite time, then it would be a draw on timeout under all regulations. Chess.com and US Chess limit it to not only being possible, but possible without the opponent walking into it in some cases.

mynameisyo_mynameishi

Apr 5, 2024

0

#6

Rock plus king vs rock plus king is a theorical draw, how come the one with nore time and faster fingers gets the win despite claiming a draw?

magipi

Apr 5, 2024

0

#7

mynameisyo_mynameishi wrote:

Rock plus king vs rock plus king is a theorical draw, how come the one with nore time and faster fingers gets the win despite claiming a draw?

There is a big difference between "theoretical draw" and "draw no matter whatever happens". In your example, either side can blunder the rook and lose.

Read what Martin Stahl wrote in #5.

mynameisyo_mynameishi

Apr 13, 2024

0

#8

Looks like we haven't played the same Fide rules, maybe I'm just old school or maybe it's fine to continue a draw game to win by the clock