How is this a draw???

I though you should learn chess basic
I think you should learn basic grammar

That is not an appropriate reply to someone replying to your thread.

@ryan121 said in #21:

I think you should learn basic grammar

That is not an appropriate reply to someone replying to your thread.
I humbly apologize to him for misunderstanding from my side. I believe if he also "thinks" he was being rude after I sarcastically said "I think you should learn basic grammar" he should apologize too.

Alright @redtwitz @Kumbaya_Haha @jomega @edot12345 @jamskahler @htt49 and @ThunderClap too...I want to ask you 1 basic question:

How do you define "insufficient material"? What is this exactly insufficient material?

You have justified after looking at my original post and post at #10, but have a look at this game:

I won the game even if the opponent and I both had so-called "insufficient material" haha. I had 8 seconds to spare and the opponent timed out. Looking at the logic of previous games that I shared I #1 and #10, this should have been a draw! So how is that a win for me now?

In #10 I had a significant advantage and 4 seconds to spare but it is a draw. In this game, I had a significant advantage as well and 8 seconds to spare and it is a win for me. What is this logic? Is this "insufficient material" somehow related to the time that is spared in the end?

PS: YES! I read your blog @jomega it is mindblowing. Just a simple feedback: When you said Fide 1.45 or something, it would be better to just hyperlink that to that specific page/section :) Loved reading it. Amazed to see how deep you can go ;)

@BlackRajaWhiteWazir said in #23:

I won the game even if the opponent and I both had so-called "insufficient material" haha. I had 8 seconds to spare and the opponent timed out. Looking at the logic of previous games that I shared I #1 and #10, this should have been a draw! So how is that a win for me now?

In #10 I had a significant advantage and 4 seconds to spare but it is a draw. In this game, I had a significant advantage as well and 8 seconds to spare and it is a win for me. What is this logic? Is this "insufficient material" somehow related to the time that is spared in the end?

In this situation, Pawns can be promoted to queen or rooks, which in turn will help in checkmate. There is a possibility of 2 Queens mate, Queen-Knight mate, Queen-King mate etc...

@BlackRajaWhiteWazir i think you might be misunderstanding something

in both of the previous cases, your opponent ran out of time, but because there was no legal way for you to checkmate your opponent, you weren't awarded the win.

the amount of time YOU have remaining is irrelevant if you have no pieces and thus no way to checkmate the opponent

But in the case of #23 your opponent ran out of time but YOU had a legal way to checkmate (promote pawns) so you were awarded the victory.

insufficient material vs timeout means that if player A times out but player B has NO POSSIBLE WAY even in the most UNLIKELY CIRCUMSTANCES to checkmate the opponent, then it's a draw.

if white times out in this position https://lichess.org/editor/8/8/3K4/6n1/8/6k1/2B5/8_w_-_-_0_1 then its a win for black because, theoretically, white could corner himself and trap himself with the bishop and black could mate him. although it's almost certainly never going to happen, it is a legal sequence of moves that could lead to checkmate, so black would get the victory.

makes sense?

@BlackRajaWhiteWazir said in #23:

Alright @redtwitz @Kumbaya_Haha @jomega @edot12345 @jamskahler @htt49 and @ThunderClap too...I want to ask you 1 basic question:

How do you define "insufficient material"? What is this exactly insufficient material?

... cut
PS: YES! I read your blog @jomega it is mindblowing. Just a simple feedback: When you said Fide 1.45 or something, it would be better to just hyperlink that to that specific page/section :) Loved reading it. Amazed to see how deep you can go ;)

Thanks! And thanks for the feedback. I decided to actually quote the FIDE document to save people from having to follow a link. This gives them more continuity in reading. The links are at the bottom of the blog.

jdwhite42 answered some of your questions in #25. I'll try to answer your question about this phrase 'insufficient material'.

The phrase 'insufficient material' has multiple meanings in chess. Some points...

• The phrase 'insufficient material' does not exist in the FIDE laws of chess. See this document from 1 January 2018 or
  the FIDE site. https://www.schachschiri.de/fide_18_eng.pdf
  The concept is replaced, as it were, by rules such as 5.2.2 on 'dead position'.

• The USCF rules have two sections. '14D. Insufficient material to continue', and '14E. Insufficient material to win on time'.
  They also have something that FIDE has no equivalent: '14H. Claim of insufficient losing chances in sudden death'.
  http://www.uschess.org/docs/gov/chessrules/US_Chess_Rule_Book-%20Online_Only_Edition_v7.1-1.2.11-7.19.19.pdf

The 14D rules of USCF lay out specific endgame cases that will be draws. They are straight forward.

The 14E rules of USCF lay out specific endgame cases that will be draws when time is exceeded. An interesting one of those is 14E3. King and two knights. "Opponent has only king and two knights, the player has no pawns, and opponent does not have a forced win." Note the difference between this rule and FIDE. In the FIDE rules, there is a legal sequence leading to mate, so the game would not be a dead position, and so a draw cannot be claimed. In USCF, if no forced win then this case is a draw.

14H has its own history in USCF which I won't go into here.

• The colloquial meaning of 'insufficient material' starts with knowledge of material needed to force a mate against a bare King. People then naturally try to extend that meaning to other situations, and then run into what the rules really are.

I hope this helps answer your question on insufficient material.

@BlackRajaWhiteWazir said in #23:

Alright @ redtwitz @ Kumbaya_Haha @ jomega @edot12345 @ jamskahler @ htt49 and @ ThunderClap too...I want to ask you 1 basic question:

How do you define "insufficient material"? What is this exactly insufficient material?

You have justified after looking at my original post and post at #10, but have a look at this game:

I won the game even if the opponent and I both had so-called "insufficient material" haha. I had 8 seconds to spare and the opponent timed out. Looking at the logic of previous games that I shared I #1 and #10, this should have been a draw! So how is that a win for me now?

In #10 I had a significant advantage and 4 seconds to spare but it is a draw. In this game, I had a significant advantage as well and 8 seconds to spare and it is a win for me. What is this logic? Is this "insufficient material" somehow related to the time that is spared in the end?

PS: YES! I read your blog @jomega it is mindblowing. Just a simple feedback: When you said Fide 1.45 or something, it would be better to just hyperlink that to that specific page/section :) Loved reading it. Amazed to see how deep you can go ;)

means that you don't have enough material to checkmate... duh

@BlackRajaWhiteWazir
The learn chess basics comment is chess related. The learn grammar comment isn't.