Is chess.com not executing FIDE Laws of Chess(6.9)?

Leole
 
 In this position, I (the black player) ran out of time. And the game was drawn. This is incredible. According to article 6.9 this is definitely a win for white. Even without the two black pawn this should be a 1-0. So is chess.com using FIDE laws of chess?
 
"6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves. "

 

pwbxy

This is a very interesting situation, the computer may be a judge so I like Harmonia lattice, two soldiers also win. But your time is gone, a very strange judgment

pwbxy

happy.pngthumbup.png

 

Lagomorph

This site uses a hybrid USCF rule  to determine the result in this situation. If a win cannot be forced, the result is a draw. K+B cannot force a mate.

Leole

So what does be forced mean?

Leole

 

RCMorea
Leole wrote:

So what does be forced mean?

 

"Forced" is a bit harder to define than you might expect.  After all, the opening position may be a forced win and we just don't know it.  Also, we don't insist that a (particular) king and pawn ending be drawn just because theoretically it should be.

 

It is entirely possible that this is just a programming error.  Whoever programmed it might have believed all king and opposite colored bishop endings are drawn once the pawns come off.

 

The other possibility is that some combinations of pieces can only mate with the active assistance of the opponent and so are considered draws by chess.com even if this is not IAW FIDE rules.

Optimissed
Leole wrote:
 
 In this position, I (the black player) ran out of time. And the game was drawn. This is incredible. According to article 6.9 this is definitely a win for white. Even without the two black pawn this should be a 1-0. So is chess.com using FIDE laws of chess?
 
"6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves. ">>>>

FIDE laws of chess are idiotic and so wrong they bring the game of chess into disrepute. Sooner or later, this ridiculous interpretation will be probably be thrown out.
  The E.C.F. (BCF) interpretation was always that it's a draw if a draw would be the normal result after normal play, which excludes self-mates. FIDE seems pathetic but perhaps it's a strategy to increase wins and decrease draws. You know .... audience excitement factor!

 

 

Leole
RCMorea wrote:
Leole wrote:

So what does be forced mean?

 

"Forced" is a bit harder to define than you might expect.  After all, the opening position may be a forced win and we just don't know it.  Also, we don't insist that a (particular) king and pawn ending be drawn just because theoretically it should be.

 

It is entirely possible that this is just a programming error.  Whoever programmed it might have believed all king and opposite colored bishop endings are drawn once the pawns come off.

 

The other possibility is that some combinations of pieces can only mate with the active assistance of the opponent and so are considered draws by chess.com even if this is not IAW FIDE rules.

But the problem is that in the game I mentioned above I have two pawns!

hairhorn

Note that "forced" does not appear in the rule (nor in FIDE's definition of checkmate). Checkmate is certainly possible here, even if it can't be forced. 

That does make the rule seem overly broad though. 

 

 

Leole

"Finally, note that in cases where the opponent has insufficient material to mate (lone King, King + Knight, King + Bishop, King + 2 Knights) a draw will be automatically declared where there is a time-out."

Finally I found the chess.com laws of chess! King + 2 Knight is an automatic draw? Sounds illogical!

Leole

 

Leole

This is definitely a draw according to FIDE rules, but chess.com rule may consider it a win for white/black?!

Covfefito

This is the game in question:

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2459983860?username=leole

 

Very interesting. I would like to understand how the adjudication rules work here. In my opinion, it should have been adjudicated as a win for white. Could it be a bug? Have you contacted support to let them know of this? Or maybe there is some other criteria involved which I am unaware of. If it is not a bug, it would be useful to understand what is the criteria used.

Lagomorph
Leole wrote:

So what does be forced mean?

It means checkmate would be possible without the help of black. ie no helpmate.

 

In your diagram white can only mate with K+B if black boxes himself into the corner

 

Lagomorph
RCMorea wrote:

 

 

It is entirely possible that this is just a programming error.  Whoever programmed it might have believed all king and opposite colored bishop endings are drawn once the pawns come off.

 

The other possibility is that some combinations of pieces can only mate with the active assistance of the opponent and so are considered draws by chess.com even if this is not IAW FIDE rules.

 

Chess.com does not follow FIDE rules in this situation.

 

It uses a simple piece count and does not look at the board position at all.

Lagomorph
Leole wrote:

This is definitely a draw according to FIDE rules, but chess.com rule may consider it a win for white/black?!

 

That is exactly what Chess.com would make the result.

 

Yes it is wrong, but online chess does not have the luxury of an arbiter.

Lagomorph

Here is a demonstration that FIDE rule is also illogical. Black is in check, but before he can capture the checking piece his time runs out. Logically one can argue that a player who fails to defend a check in his allotted time should lose, but under FIDE rules this would be a draw.

 

We can all find "edge" cases that prove either rule does not work well, but the rules (both FIDE and here) are what they are.

 

Black to move times out

 

Leole
Lagomorph wrote:

Here is a demonstration that FIDE rule is also illogical. Black is in check, but before he can capture the checking piece his time runs out. Logically one can argue that a player who fails to defend a check in his allotted time should lose, but under FIDE rules this would be a draw.

 

We can all find "edge" cases that prove either rule does not work well, but the rules (both FIDE and here) are what they are.

 

Black to move times out

Wow, this is great example! I think you can tell FIDE about this, and help them make the rule better.

Also, I am starting to understand the chess.com rules. It is the best rule for the computer arbiter.

ThrillerFan

Chess.com does not use FIDE rules.  It uses USCF rules with 1 exception.  The lone exception is that if you have "Insufficient Mating Material", which in USCF is K, K+N, K+B, or K+N+N and the opponent has no pawns, in USCF, if you can demonstrate FORCED checkmate, you still win, here, you don't.

 

Example:

 

 

Here it is White to move.  He goes 1.Bh6.  Under "normal" circumstances, K+B is Insufficient mating material, but here, the mate is forced (1...Kh8 - only legal move, then 2.Kf7 and after either 2...e6 or 2...e5, the move 3.Bg7 is forced mate.

 

In USCF, if Black lets his clock run out, White still wins.  Here, he doesn't.  The people that wrote the code for chess.com left this important factor out.

 

Other than that, it follows USCF rules, not FIDE rules.