15 Sep 08
Hi I was looking at this game 5275684. Nallapuh vs Chizza. White won on time with just a bare king. I was under the impression a bare king vs no time is a draw because white can't force mate. Even a king and bishop vs no time is a draw. If you can't force mate, it's a draw. I think this is a rule. I know this is in practice at FICS (free internet chess server) and more than likely it is at ICC. I once had king and bishop and "won" on time at FICS. It was a draw. I could have even mated if black moved his king to the corner and smothered it. I couldn't force mate though. That was the argument I got from the administrators there. How is this a loss here???
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromficsThat, however, is not the rule. This is (5.2b from the FIDE rules):
Yes but a bare bishop cannot FORCE mate. The black pieces have to cooperate.
The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent`s king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to end in a `dead position`. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was legal.
Note: any series of legal moves. If you can mate, even if you can only helpmate, it's not an automatic draw. If you cannot mate at all, e.g. with only a bishop against a bare king, it's a draw; but the addition of the knight means that it's not draw under that clause.
In the game in question, though, the flag had fallen. That's another rule. That's rule 6.10, which ends:
...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, even with the most unskilled counterplay.
In other words, yes, game 5275684 should have been a draw. Black ran out of time, but white could not have mated black under any circumstances, not even with black's help.
Richard
15 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromficsAgreed, but forcing a win is not the rule.
Yes but a bare bishop cannot FORCE mate. The black pieces have to cooperate.
A win can be claimed on time if a mate is possible with any series of legal moves even if those moves are totally inept!
Edit: I see the actual rules have already been pointed out.
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromficsI agree, the draw should have been claimed.
The site has written me back. Black lost because he didn't "claim the draw". I think he shouldn't have to. They would probably have to change all the software to make this work. Any thoughts?
That's the way in OTB game too. A game is not drawn until it is discovered and claimed.
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasI agree with you that the draw should have been claimed by black, but on redhotpawn, how would they have done that? Is there a way that I don't yet know? Sure black could offer a draw seeing that they were running out of time, but white could ignore the offer and play on surely?
I agree, the draw should have been claimed.
That's the way in OTB game too. A game is not drawn until it is discovered and claimed.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasNo, that's not true. In some cases - and this is one of them - the draw is automatic, and need not be claimed. Not just my opinion; it's in the FIDE rules. 5.2a and b, and 6.10 (and a couple of others which aren't quite relevant here), state that certain positions are a draw, while 5.2d and e state that some other situations may be drawn. In the latter case, a claim by either player is necessary (and in 5.2c, agreement between the two); in the former, no claim is needed. Stalemate and lack of mating material simply are draws, immediately after the legal move that produced them.
I agree, the draw should have been claimed.
That's the way in OTB game too. A game is not drawn until it is discovered and claimed.
(In the case of the game in this thread, the clock timeout still needs to be claimed, or observed by an arbiter; but that done, the fact that the result is a draw, not a loss, is automatic.)
Richard
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by Shallow BlueYes, but the draw situation must be discovered first.
No, that's not true. In some cases - and this is one of them - the draw is automatic, and need not be claimed. Not just my opinion; it's in the FIDE rules. 5.2a and b, and 6.10 (and a couple of others which aren't quite relevant here), state that certain positions [b]are a draw, while 5.2d and e state that some other situations may be drawn. ...[text shortened]... ter; but that done, the fact that the result is a draw, not a loss, is automatic.)
Richard[/b]
I've seen games OTB shuffling a few pieces, not sufficient for a mate by either part, without neither of the players claiming a draw (in the lower series). It is not automaticly a draw, it must be discovered first, only then it is draw by rules.
If the arbitrer were around to see it, then it is discovered by him, and it's draw. But someone has to recognize the draw before it is a draw.
15 Sep 08
The rules are known up front. We've all been on the bad side of move timeout. It's enforced equally on both sides. In football if you are down 1 point on the 1 yard line with have 5 seconds left on the clock, and the entire defense is standing near the sideline, you still lose if you don't score before the clock finishes. The clock is just as much a part of the game as anything else.