Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310

    2 knights plus king v king

    Hello all,

    I was curious and been thinking about the thread title, is it an automatic draw, ie a dead position according to:

    Article 5: The completion of the game

    5.1 a. The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent’s king. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the checkmate position was a legal move.

    b. The game is won by the player whose opponent declares he resigns. This immediately ends the game.

    5.2 The game is drawn when the player to move has no legal move and his king is not in check. The game is said to end in `stalemate`. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the stalemate position was legal.
    a. 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.
    b. The game is drawn upon agreement between the two players during the game. This immediately ends the game. (See Article 9.1)
    c. The game may be drawn if any identical position is about to appear or has appeared on the chessboard at least three times. (See Article 9.2)
    d. The game may be drawn if each player has made at least the last 50 consecutive moves without the movement of any pawn and without any capture. (See Article 9.3)
    Does the verdict change between classical/rapid/blitz, increment play v guillotine etc.

    Arbiters thoughts, anything official.

  2. #2
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,058
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Hello all,

    I was curious and been thinking about the thread title, is it an automatic draw, ie a dead position according to:
    Incorrect it is not a dead position as a mating position is possible with a series of legal moves.

    As such if the long Kings flag falls he loses on time.
    The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
    Mos Eisley spaceport The toolbox. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    Incorrect it is not a dead position as a mating position is possible with a series of legal moves.

    As such if the long Kings flag falls he loses on time.
    that is what I thought but wasnt sure so I thought I was asked. If a 10.2 was claimed by the king only player, would you award it?

  4. #4
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,575
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    that is what I thought but wasnt sure so I thought I was asked. If a 10.2 was claimed by the king only player, would you award it?
    I think that would depend on the level of the players involved. Very weak players might not know the checkmate easily avoidable and could move into a helpmate so in that case the draw shouldn't be automatic awarded. But I'm sure most competitions players and certainly most people who have heard of 10.2 would probably know that K+2N v K cannot force mate and know how to avoid it.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  5. #5
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,357
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    that is what I thought but wasnt sure so I thought I was asked. If a 10.2 was claimed by the king only player, would you award it?
    If in doubt call play on and then award the draw when a flag falls. No-one deserves to lose on time with K vs K+2N except in a blitz game. With players with four-figure ratings I would award the draw when claimed.

    I have seen the view expressed that if it's K+2N vs K in a top-level game and it's been dragging on a bit the arbiter should step in and warn the player with K+2N that if they keep playing for a win they will be bringing the game into disrepute!

    Important to remember: while K+2N vs K is an elementary draw with best play, K+2N vs K+P is a win in some positions and a more difficult draw for the defender in others.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  6. #6
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    Important to remember: while K+2N vs K is an elementary draw with best play, K+2N vs K+P is a win in some positions and a more difficult draw for the defender in others.
    I am aware of that

  7. #7
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham

    I have seen the view expressed that if it's K+2N vs K in a top-level game and it's been dragging on a bit the arbiter should step in and warn the player with K+2N that if they keep playing for a win they will be bringing the game into disrepute!
    I seem to remember reading somewhere that Sasikiran actually played on with K+2 Ns vs K before the "disrepute" rule was introduced?

  8. #8
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,357
    Quote Originally Posted by garethbcharles
    I seem to remember reading somewhere that Sasikiran actually played on with K+2 Ns vs K before the "disrepute" rule was introduced?
    I remember Gijssen commenting that a top player had played on with K+2N vs K for a while and saying that he would have used the disrepute rule in such a case had he been the arbiter. I believe this was after the rule was introduced - it was just the case that the arbiter in question did not use it. Don't recall if the player was Sasikiran or not but could well have been.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. A position with 2 bishops v 2 knights
    By Desmond in forum Games and Analysis
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 19-07-2006, 01:07 PM
  2. New Laws of Chess as of 1st July 2005
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 02-11-2005, 09:45 PM
  3. Richard J vs b1_ - Some tips for you Richard.
    By b1_ in forum Correspondence Matches
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18-09-2005, 11:42 PM
  4. Tournament Instructions
    By Alan Shore in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 05-05-2005, 10:00 PM
  5. For King & Country
    By Cat in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-06-2004, 03:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •