No, not this. It's a starting position. This one. lichess.org/editor/BK1k4%2FRP6%2F8%2F8%2F5b2%2F8%2F8%2F8%20w%20-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draw_(chess)#Draws_in_timed_games
Bullet point 2
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=124&view=article
Article 6.9
Sorry, KC, but there doesn't seem to be much supporting your claim in the chess rules.
Bullet point 2
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=124&view=article
Article 6.9
Sorry, KC, but there doesn't seem to be much supporting your claim in the chess rules.
http://en.lichess.org/editor/6NK/6PP/8/5kn1/8/8/8/8%20b%20KQkq
Black to play loses on time?
I like things the way they are: if a mate is possible, then so is a decisive result on time. It may be infuriating at times, but only for one game; and it has the advantage of being unambiguous. Introducing exceptions will only confuse the issue.
Black to play loses on time?
I like things the way they are: if a mate is possible, then so is a decisive result on time. It may be infuriating at times, but only for one game; and it has the advantage of being unambiguous. Introducing exceptions will only confuse the issue.
An important issue is, what if you are about to be checkmated against just a Knight or just a Bishop? Someone will let their time run out and claim a draw in a lost position.
No mating material shouldn't win. true. We play chess here, no play time. This one. lichess.org/editor/BK1k4%2FRP6%2F8%2F8%2F5b2%2F8%2F8%2F8%20w%20- Bishop on h1? when did the last time you play you put your bishop on h1? lichess.org/editor/6NK/6PP/8/5kn1/8/8/8/8%20b%20KQkq Ka1 and Nb1? what the Knight does on b1? No mating materials shouldn't win that's true.
lichess.org/editor/6NK/6PP/8/5kn1/8/8/8/8%20b%20KQkq and if that Bishop is on h8 and you moved your pawn to g7 that is 'help mate' or 'self mate' we usually find in chess compositions.
we play chess limited by time and not play time limited by chess pieces. In order to win a game we must need at least a pawn. When you left with no 'mating material' it means only you know the game go to a draw...
Basically, we need to decide how we want a game to end where one player has only a knight/bishop and the other player had more material (winning) but their timer has expired. If we allow the knight/bishop player a victory, then we create a poor playing environment. No matter how lost a person's position is, they can simply spend their timer premoving their pieces and be rewarded with a win. This creates a dysfunctional bullet playing environment when timers are low. A player can begin sacrificing pieces or make subpar moves that are counterintuitive simply to reduce the other player's timer much earlier when a win can be gotten with only a minor piece. Thus, bullet ending become much more meaningless than they are now.
It will happen with extreme infrequency (1 in a million would likely be overstating it) that a person would 1) have more time than the opponent, 2) have only a bishop or knight, and 3) have a reasonable (non helpmate) plan to achieve victory (not a draw- as the player would have gotten the draw anyway under the old rules).
I would rather that 1 in a million (not even this many) games be adjudicated incorrectly than to play bullet in an environment where a minor piece wins. I think that this is the conclusion that has been reached many times in deciding the implementation of this rule in online play.
In short: having this rule will likely end in lower quality blitz games.
It will happen with extreme infrequency (1 in a million would likely be overstating it) that a person would 1) have more time than the opponent, 2) have only a bishop or knight, and 3) have a reasonable (non helpmate) plan to achieve victory (not a draw- as the player would have gotten the draw anyway under the old rules).
I would rather that 1 in a million (not even this many) games be adjudicated incorrectly than to play bullet in an environment where a minor piece wins. I think that this is the conclusion that has been reached many times in deciding the implementation of this rule in online play.
In short: having this rule will likely end in lower quality blitz games.
Anything to do with assuming what your opponent will play cannot be used in the ruling. The system CANNOT assume what is going to happen in a position regardless of the advantage; people blunder, that's how games are won and lost. The system must be blind to what may or may-not happen.
If people are playing with an etiquette that doesn't agree with you, there's a readily accessible block button on their profile page.
If people are playing with an etiquette that doesn't agree with you, there's a readily accessible block button on their profile page.
Just to clarify to Point #13 - jiHymas
Black to play has the chance to mate next move.
If Black's time runs out then it would be a Win for White on time. White has "sufficient mating material".
If White's time runs out, then it should be a draw because Black has insufficient mating material. True it is black to mate next move, but I don't remember a single example like this and I have been playing blitz chess online for over 15 years.
Much more likely in the current rules of lichess, is for someone with basically "insufficient mating material" of a knight or bishop left only to aimlessly move them around (especially with premoves which are not btw in the FIDE handbook), and to win on time with that single knight or bishop. This encourages basically just winning purely on time knowing full well the chances of "helpmate scenarios" are mostly theoretical in nature. By having the simple caveat of being able to "win on time", you yourself need "sufficient mating material", the endgame etiquette would be vastly improved for these cases statistically.
===================================
To point #14, Shamanics : I just don't ever remember this happening to me in over 15 years of Blitz hess - that I have this mate in one say, with a single knight or single bishop left, and the opponent's time runs out - and feeling gutted because it was "draw by insufficient material". Especially with the advent of premoves, I think it is more likely you would have premoved it, if it was happening, than this case actually happening in practice.
I think the right to have a win on time in blitz chess needs to be established only and only if the side which wins on time has themselves sufficient mating material.
Black to play has the chance to mate next move.
If Black's time runs out then it would be a Win for White on time. White has "sufficient mating material".
If White's time runs out, then it should be a draw because Black has insufficient mating material. True it is black to mate next move, but I don't remember a single example like this and I have been playing blitz chess online for over 15 years.
Much more likely in the current rules of lichess, is for someone with basically "insufficient mating material" of a knight or bishop left only to aimlessly move them around (especially with premoves which are not btw in the FIDE handbook), and to win on time with that single knight or bishop. This encourages basically just winning purely on time knowing full well the chances of "helpmate scenarios" are mostly theoretical in nature. By having the simple caveat of being able to "win on time", you yourself need "sufficient mating material", the endgame etiquette would be vastly improved for these cases statistically.
===================================
To point #14, Shamanics : I just don't ever remember this happening to me in over 15 years of Blitz hess - that I have this mate in one say, with a single knight or single bishop left, and the opponent's time runs out - and feeling gutted because it was "draw by insufficient material". Especially with the advent of premoves, I think it is more likely you would have premoved it, if it was happening, than this case actually happening in practice.
I think the right to have a win on time in blitz chess needs to be established only and only if the side which wins on time has themselves sufficient mating material.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.