1 edit
Originally posted by bobbob1056thOf course, a win is possible with cooperation.
Oh, and a win is impossible even with cooperation. But he can't force a win so most likely you'll get a draw (just don't lose your bishop!).
A draw claim would be rejected by an arbiter because it is still possible for one side to blunder so as to give the other side a forced mate.
Unlike K+N+N v. K, for example.
Originally posted by THUDandBLUNDEROf course, the game is in progress so nobody should make any further comments.
Of course, a win is possible with cooperation.
A draw claim would be rejected by an arbiter because it is still possible for one side to blunder so as to give the other side a forced mate.
Unlike K+N+N v. K, for example.
On second thought, I rarely see this rule enforced. Go for it.
bobbob 1056th says""Hey, nice game, I like it. Sometimes it tickles me to watch people who have not studied chess play the game. The moves they make can be funny for some reason. If you want to play chess for fun, don't make it a chore by studying....."This bemused quote smacks of a certain elitst attitude but maybe I just read it wrong. There are many players that could beat the better players on this site. I think any player that is bemused should attempt to play a GM then allow the bemusement to begin. We all blunder at the feet of those that know more.. I think constructive critique is more useful. Joel
Originally posted by jbacaOf course white people can win chess games...happens all the time.
I just want to know if a win is possible Im white.Game 1191046
Originally posted by THUDandBLUNDERWell, I guess the reason is that sometimes in a K+R vs. K+N/B the weaker side cannot retain the N/B due to various reasons (zugzwang most commonly) while N+N is "stable" in some sense material (the weaker side cannot lose any more pieces) and you can only win if your opponent is a complete idiot.
Agreed.
So what is the logical reason why K+N+N v. K is considered to be a draw by insufficient mating material and K+R v. K+B/N is not?
Isn't it just a matter of degree?
Originally posted by THUDandBLUNDERWith K+R v. K+B or K+R v. K+N, there are some positions where the stronger side has a forced win. Thus, it can't be an automatic draw.
Agreed.
So what is the logical reason why K+N+N v. K is considered to be a draw by insufficient mating material and K+R v. K+B/N is not?
Assuming R v. B/N is drawing, both require a blunder to win.
I'd prefer to see K+N+N v. K not be declared a draw by insufficient material. Let the guy with the lone King play for the 50-move rule.