My point still stands.
> There are numerous positions that by this rule should be draws that are declared lost. For instance any completely blocked position.
If you mean something like this
Then it's indeed and issue and should be fixed. Nevertheless, the game in question is nothing like it.
> And even if the above could be resolved, it'd probably be better just to implement insufficient mating material like basically every other site does.
I'm pretty sure chess.com does it exactly the same way as lichess. Because, well, it's not insufficient mating material.
Consider this with white to move
lichess.org/analysis/standard/k1K5/p7/8/8/2B5/8/8/8_w_-_-
You may add multiple pieces for black (provided they can't block the check). Say, white runs out of time, is it a draw now or what? When it's a forced win.
I've not been playing on chess.com for some time, but I clearly remember numerous forum threads exactly like this one there.
If you mean something like this
Then it's indeed and issue and should be fixed. Nevertheless, the game in question is nothing like it.
> And even if the above could be resolved, it'd probably be better just to implement insufficient mating material like basically every other site does.
I'm pretty sure chess.com does it exactly the same way as lichess. Because, well, it's not insufficient mating material.
Consider this with white to move
lichess.org/analysis/standard/k1K5/p7/8/8/2B5/8/8/8_w_-_-
You may add multiple pieces for black (provided they can't block the check). Say, white runs out of time, is it a draw now or what? When it's a forced win.
I've not been playing on chess.com for some time, but I clearly remember numerous forum threads exactly like this one there.
@lovlas It does not. The rules and moves of chess do not change (okay, change once every few centuries if you do decide to get anal). If you do not know these rules, you do not know how to play. By contrast, this is a discussion about a FIDE decision - which regularly changes, and in all cases is completely irrelevant unless playing in a FIDE rated event. So for all intents and purposes this is about a Lichess rule, which I think few would argue is making the games or site better.
@OnlyStupidNamesLeft No, chess.com does it as most of all other sites (if not literally all other sites) do and declares any game where the opponent has only a bishop or a knight as a draw.
Though again I think this is a red herring. The reason we should not have this rule is most certainly not because chess.com doesn't. They do lots of idiotic things that lichess does much better (such as by not having player notes). On the other hand we also do some pretty dumb things, like this, which chess.com does not. But neither is a good or bad idea because one site or another does/does not do it.
Though again I think this is a red herring. The reason we should not have this rule is most certainly not because chess.com doesn't. They do lots of idiotic things that lichess does much better (such as by not having player notes). On the other hand we also do some pretty dumb things, like this, which chess.com does not. But neither is a good or bad idea because one site or another does/does not do it.
@OhNoMyPants I think that if you play bullet+ultrabullet then the mating material thing matters. Personally I think the whole thing with bishops and knights is fancy because of the bishop vs pawn. The bishop side only can win in the case the pawn queening square is oposite color unless its a side pawn. Well, also all the positions like #12 (also including the same idea but without the h or a pawns or missing pawns in the middle but impossible to get to the other side, etc.) should be added as draws.
It's literally a part of the chess rules. More specific when the game ends.
It's not possible to implement a ruleset that take care of every single situation. The system we have now is the best possible and most reasonable. Is it perfect? No. Is it much much much better that what you are proposing? No doubt.
The fide rules are very simple. As long as there exist a legal sequence of moves for your opponent that lead to mate you lose if you lose on time.
It's not possible to implement a ruleset that take care of every single situation. The system we have now is the best possible and most reasonable. Is it perfect? No. Is it much much much better that what you are proposing? No doubt.
The fide rules are very simple. As long as there exist a legal sequence of moves for your opponent that lead to mate you lose if you lose on time.
@lovlas
Well, you have to agree that the lone bishop wins may catch you by surprise the first time you get it when you come from playing on literally any other chess platform. And since there are like tons of possible legally drawn positions (blocked structures + blocked bishops inside) that can be flaged as wins, it can be seen that the bishop thingy adds some confusion.
Well, you have to agree that the lone bishop wins may catch you by surprise the first time you get it when you come from playing on literally any other chess platform. And since there are like tons of possible legally drawn positions (blocked structures + blocked bishops inside) that can be flaged as wins, it can be seen that the bishop thingy adds some confusion.
Learning through pain. Mate is possible and time is out? 0. Zero. Nil. Null. Love. Nix.
Nuff said.
Nuff said.
@lovlas There's a difference between the rules of chess and one organization's guidelines for chess. Bishops do not move diagonally because FIDE says bishops move diagonally - they move diagonally because that is a fundamental rule of chess. How to adjudicate games is an organizational guideline. And it's one that constantly changes and differs between organizations. For instance on this very topic USCF and FIDE differ. And the guidelines of the organizations themselves also regularly change. FIDE (or really any other organization) being a good example there.
And once again this is all a red herring. Lichess goes against FIDE rules in a countless number of ways, and that's a good thing - because it makes it a more enjoyable place to play. It'd be pretty silly if releasing your piece on an invalid square meant you immediately lost the game, or perhaps you had to click your clock to complete your move. All part of FIDE guidelines after all. Lichess is Lichess and the rules here are those that Lichess have felt provide the best playing experience. This one rule is the everpresent outlier, which seems to persist only for sake of inertia - perhaps not dissimilar to chess.com and player notes. It's just a really bad decision in practice, probably being held up only by whoever initially thought it a good idea.
And once again this is all a red herring. Lichess goes against FIDE rules in a countless number of ways, and that's a good thing - because it makes it a more enjoyable place to play. It'd be pretty silly if releasing your piece on an invalid square meant you immediately lost the game, or perhaps you had to click your clock to complete your move. All part of FIDE guidelines after all. Lichess is Lichess and the rules here are those that Lichess have felt provide the best playing experience. This one rule is the everpresent outlier, which seems to persist only for sake of inertia - perhaps not dissimilar to chess.com and player notes. It's just a really bad decision in practice, probably being held up only by whoever initially thought it a good idea.
@Sarg0n What about mate impossible, time out and a decisive result (without resignation). Still cool and everything.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.