Here's what I found on the Chess.com criteria for insufficient material:
i think we're going to do:
K vs ANYTHING
K+N vs ANYTHING
K+B vs ANYTHING
K+N+N vs K
i think it's a good balance.
So by that rule, then post 19 should be draw, no? K+B vs. Anything ?!
I think it's even harder to lose on time if the game is not timed.
And your opponent didn't just sit back and did nothing. He took all of your pieces (except the knight), too!
I understand it. But too hard for my princess head to get with it. Like for example, I have only a knight and a king in the middle of the game and opponent has 3 or 4 other powerful pieces. While, he knows he can win, considering the presence of his pieces and the fact that I can't get anything more than a draw, I, on the other had, have to motivate myself to play for a draw, where also a loss is possible for me. The opponent here is with a clear psychological advantage than I am. While the opponent can either win or draw, I can only draw or lose. Chess is a logical game, maybe too much logical for humans. I think chess should be played only between computers or Artificial Intelligence, since they need no motivation to win, draw or lose a game. Or may be timer should be shut-off in such a position, where one player has only a knight and a King. Because What is the point of me using my head quicker and still ending up with a draw. They might as well shut-off the time. It is annoying to know that I used my head more effective than my opponent and still end up with a draw.
You are confusing things a bit.Your opponent played much better than you and you reached a position where he had secured the draw(half point) and was most likely to win.Do we agree?I think yes.
In a chess game you can get either half a point or one point or nothing.Once you have played so badly and you lost the half point , why you need motivation to save the other half ?You are in a situation where it's either zero or not zero for you.Isn't that motivating enough?If not , you are playing the wrong game.
That makes more sense thanks! So I think it is almost like, in Chess, If you begin a game wrong, then there is no way you can turn that around, given both players are equally skilled. I guess I could rather play football (soccer) as miracles are possible there!
No. The position is K+B+pawns vs K+B+pawns.
But theoretically, upon continuing the play, If I use my pawns, then at the end my opponent might end up with a K+B and me with K+B+pawn. So that would be draw even on timed game isn't it?
If you were to run out of time or your opponent, then it wouldn't be a draw. According to FIDE rules, if you run out of time, then if it is possible for your opponent to have a possible line that leads to checkmate, no matter how long and how stupid, then it is not a draw.
The Chess.com criteria are applied to the position that exists when the flag falls.
The first game you posted would indeed be a win for you in real, if Black ran out of time. Had the pawn been on any other file, it would be impossible though.
I think it's even harder to lose on time if the game is not timed.
And your opponent didn't just sit back and did nothing. He took all of your pieces (except the knight), too!
I understand it. But too hard for my princess head to get with it. Like for example, I have only a knight and a king in the middle of the game and opponent has 3 or 4 other powerful pieces. While, he knows he can win, considering the presence of his pieces and the fact that I can't get anything more than a draw, I, on the other had, have to motivate myself to play for a draw, where also a loss is possible for me. The opponent here is with a clear psychological advantage than I am. While the opponent can either win or draw, I can only draw or lose. Chess is a logical game, maybe too much logical for humans. I think chess should be played only between computers or Artificial Intelligence, since they need no motivation to win, draw or lose a game. Or may be timer should be shut-off in such a position, where one player has only a knight and a King. Because What is the point of me using my head quicker and still ending up with a draw. They might as well shut-off the time. It is annoying to know that I used my head more effective than my opponent and still end up with a draw.
You are confusing things a bit.Your opponent played much better than you and you reached a position where he had secured the draw(half point) and was most likely to win.Do we agree?I think yes.
In a chess game you can get either half a point or one point or nothing.Once you have played so badly and you lost the half point , why you need motivation to save the other half ?You are in a situation where it's either zero or not zero for you.Isn't that motivating enough?If not , you are playing the wrong game.
That makes more sense thanks! So I think it is almost like, in Chess, If you begin a game wrong, then there is no way you can turn that around, given both players are equally skilled. I guess I could rather play football (soccer) as miracles are possible there!
In soccer it would be more difficult.It's like losing 3-0, it's 10 minutes before the end and you are 2 players down.Tie would be a dream.
hahaha, you are not a football watcher are you? There are many games, where one team comes from behind to draw, if not win, despite 1 or 2 players down.
I think it's even harder to lose on time if the game is not timed.
And your opponent didn't just sit back and did nothing. He took all of your pieces (except the knight), too!
I understand it. But too hard for my princess head to get with it. Like for example, I have only a knight and a king in the middle of the game and opponent has 3 or 4 other powerful pieces. While, he knows he can win, considering the presence of his pieces and the fact that I can't get anything more than a draw, I, on the other had, have to motivate myself to play for a draw, where also a loss is possible for me. The opponent here is with a clear psychological advantage than I am. While the opponent can either win or draw, I can only draw or lose. Chess is a logical game, maybe too much logical for humans. I think chess should be played only between computers or Artificial Intelligence, since they need no motivation to win, draw or lose a game. Or may be timer should be shut-off in such a position, where one player has only a knight and a King. Because What is the point of me using my head quicker and still ending up with a draw. They might as well shut-off the time. It is annoying to know that I used my head more effective than my opponent and still end up with a draw.
A draw is a respectable result in chess. Or as Jonathan Rowson put it: Playing for a draw is like trying to save a penalty kick. No doubt, you cannot score, but if you manage to do it, it still feels like a win.
Here's what I found on the Chess.com criteria for insufficient material:
i think we're going to do:
K vs ANYTHING
K+N vs ANYTHING
K+B vs ANYTHING
K+N+N vs K
i think it's a good balance.
Strange how chess servers and USCF have rules that differ from the FIDE rules.
I have seen a 3-0 become 3-3 and 3-4 , even a 4-0 become 4-4.But never the last 10 minutes and with 2 players down.
have you ever watched the liverpool vs inter milan game? Have you ever saw the man utd bayern game? Have you ever watched the dortmund vs malaga game? They were miracles happening in injury time, literally at the end. The thing is humans have control over football, so they can do the impossible when they can. But chess, is too logical, you can't expect a miracle in chess. Once you do a mistake, you can never come back. There will be a day where a computer would beat human. Even of the human is really good, he can only draw.
It does seem stupid but it would also be stupid to carry on for several minutes or more ,when no one can win just to see who runs out of time, there would be no chess just moving as quick as possible.
Do you guys think that this game would have also ended in a draw? I had less time here than my opponent, but the opponent agreed to draw it out instead of letting me "lose on time".
This game's a draw I suppose, your opponent could have forced a win on time but at least shown some sportsmanship. Some rules can seen unfair 
but we have to have them.
Here's what I found on the Chess.com criteria for insufficient material:
i think we're going to do:
K vs ANYTHING
K+N vs ANYTHING
K+B vs ANYTHING
K+N+N vs K
i think it's a good balance.
Strange how chess servers and USCF have rules that differ from the FIDE rules.
That's why you have to know which rules apply. There are different rules for "slow" chess and blitz. There are rules that apply before the flag drops and after the flag drops, there are rules that apply when playing with a time delay and increment, and there are rules that apply when no time delay or increment is used.
I have seen a 3-0 become 3-3 and 3-4 , even a 4-0 become 4-4.But never the last 10 minutes and with 2 players down.
have you ever watched the liverpool vs inter milan game? Have you ever saw the man utd bayern game? Have you ever watched the dortmund vs malaga game? They were miracles happening in injury time, literally at the end. The thing is humans have control over football, so they can do the impossible when they can. But chess, is too logical, you can't expect a miracle in chess. Once you do a mistake, you can never come back. There will be a day where a computer would beat human. Even of the human is really good, he can only draw.
Liverpool-Milan was an epic comeback for the great Liverpool but it wasn't 3-0 the last 10 minutes and the game went to penalties.Liverpool's first goal was around 55th minute if I remember correctly.There are no penalties in chess.Maybe there should be.
Thats a very interesting idea to have penalties in chess :)
look at this post guys !!!
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/black-kight-amp-king-wins-vs-king-and-pawn
That game was played before Chess.com implemented its present insufficient material criteria. Chess.com's criteria is a compromise that incorporates FIDE Article 6.9 and Appendix G (formerly Article 10.2.a). It's not perfect, but it works reasonably well.
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article
LarissaLachache wrote:
look at this post guys !!!
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/black-kight-amp-king-wins-vs-king-and-pawn
Cool, but it can't be a draw with a pawn on the board as it can queen.
Here's what I found on the Chess.com criteria for insufficient material:
i think we're going to do:
K vs ANYTHING
K+N vs ANYTHING
K+B vs ANYTHING
K+N+N vs K
i think it's a good balance.