This silly situation again

Game 25344

This should be immediately ruled a draw by the server. There is obviously no mating material.

As it stands, my opponent had to play ...Kb7 and hit 'claim draw' just to get the draw recognized.

It is not practical to code every such position, but how about the most common three:

King vs. King
K/B vs. K
K/N vs. K

Any position with exactly this material should immediately be ruled a draw by the server.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Game 25344

This should be immediately ruled a draw by the server. There is obviously no mating material.

As it stands, my opponent had to play ...Kb7 and hit 'claim draw' just to get the draw recognized.

It is not practical to code every such position, but how about the most common three:

King vs. King
K/B vs. K
K/N vs. K

Any position with exactly this material should immediately be ruled a draw by the server.

Game doesn't show.

However as there is always the possibility of a timeout win/loss it is unlikely that the current situation will be changed. The situation doesn't arise often enough.

I am not staying I disagree, just that it may be more work than we think for something that maybe only occurs in 0.005% of games played.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Game 25344

This should be immediately ruled a draw by the server. There is obviously no mating material.

As it stands, my opponent had to play ...Kb7 and hit 'claim draw' just to get the draw recognized.

It is not practical to code every such position, but how about the most common three:

King vs. King
K/B vs. K
K/N vs. K

Any position with exactly this material should immediately be ruled a draw by the server.

Is it a major problem for either of the two players to hit the "claim draw" button?

Originally posted by adramforall
Game doesn't show.

However as there is always the possibility of a timeout win/loss it is unlikely that the current situation will be changed. The situation doesn't arise often enough.

I am not staying I disagree, just that it may be more work than we think for something that maybe only occurs in 0.005% of games played.

Oops; try this one.

Game 7285649

There should not be the possibility of a timeout win or loss from a position that cannot possibly be won or lost on the board, even with the most unskilled play. [This is also a FIDE rule.]

Originally posted by no1marauder
Is it a major problem for either of the two players to hit the "claim draw" button?

No; but I'd still like to see RHP follow suit on FIDE rules. This is an easy change to implement. Let's not have timeout losses in games where there is no mating material.

Highly recommend an RHP automatic draw for any game with insufficient material to mate, as stated in the opening thread. KvK, Kv K & N, Kv K& B

Originally posted by coquette
Highly recommend an RHP automatic draw for any game with insufficient material to mate, as stated in the opening thread. KvK, Kv K & N, Kv K& B

Are there any (ANY) situations where a Kv K & N, Kv K& B can stumble into a mate?

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Are there any (ANY) situations where a Kv K & N, Kv K& B can stumble into a mate?

P-

No. B+N and B+B are winning. N+N only if the opponent cooperates. If in any situation a pawn is present, then there is a strong possibility the result is not a draw.

Originally posted by orion25
No. B+N and B+B are winning. N+N only if the opponent cooperates. If in any situation a pawn is present, then there is a strong possibility the result is not a draw.

Ah, I thought there a situation where a Night could mate if the other guy 'cooperates' as you say.

Same for Bishop, no mate when all alone with king?

I had a guy drag an opposite color bishop game out. I messaged offer draw, he just went on. I offered again (not bothering, just 'saying' "it's a draw, offer when you realize).

Finally after 30 moves he realized neither of us would win and offered a draw.

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Are there any (ANY) situations where a Kv K & N, Kv K& B can stumble into a mate?

P-

No, there are none.

To demonstrate, try just placing the pieces on the board to form a checkmate. Even with the lone King stuck in the corner, there is always one free square:





Proof: No matter where he is on the board, the black King always has at least a 2x2 square to move around in.



The white King is capable of guarding two adjacent squares on the same rank [or file], but a Knight and Bishop can't. Thus, checkmate is impossible.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
No, there are none.

To demonstrate, try just placing the pieces on the board to form a checkmate. Even with the lone King stuck in the corner, there is always one free square:

[fen]k7/8/K1B5/8/8/8/8/8[/fen]

[fen]k7/8/KN6/8/8/8/8/8[/fen]

Proof: No matter where he is on the board, the black King always has at least a 2x2 square to move around i ...[text shortened]... uares on the same rank [or file], but a Knight and Bishop can't. Thus, checkmate is impossible.

Oh oh, I think I see a board with four black Kings on it. I'm suspecting an illegal position! Have fertility drugs arrived in chess?

Rec'd.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
No, there are none.

[fen]kk6/kk6/8/8/8/8/8/8[/fen] The last diagram with four kings...

The white King is capable of guarding two adjacent squares on the same rank [or file], but a Knight and Bishop can't. Thus, checkmate is impossible.

I see the draw, I see the draw !!!

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Game 25344

This should be immediately ruled a draw by the server. There is obviously no mating material.

As it stands, my opponent had to play ...Kb7 and hit 'claim draw' just to get the draw recognized.

It is not practical to code every such position, but how about the most common three:

King vs. King
K/B vs. K
K/N vs. K

Any position with exactly this material should immediately be ruled a draw by the server.

Of course.