4

From English Wikipedia, article 'Rules of chess':

If a player delivers a checkmate, the game is over and that player wins, no matter what is subsequently noticed about the time on the clock.

If player A calls attention to player B being out of time while player A is not out of time and some sequence of legal moves leads to B being checkmated then player A wins automatically.

If player A does not have the possibility of checkmating B then the game is a draw.

Can anyone provide a more detailed explanation what is 'possibility of checkmating' and who or what governs it? For example, I know that a king and a knight can checkmate a king with a rook. enter image description here However, I don't think a king and a knight can checkmate a king with a queen. I didn't find a single checkmate position for that case (for weakest side, of course).

So, after exactly one of players had run out of time, who or what determines if his or her opponent has the possibility of giving a checkmate? I think it's quite essential because it means difference between a win and a draw.

5

If in doubt of being able to by player B, player A now plays both sides towards a checkmate of his choice.

In your example, player A would be able to prove it if he comes to the said checkmate somehow.

I think checkmating against King-Queen with King-Knight is impossible. The shown position (with the rook being switched to a queen) is no checkmate because the queen can just capture the knight.

  • 1
    This sounds reasonable, but do you have any citation or other kinds of proof? When reading the question, I specifically wondered about whether "possible" meant "possible in any way", or "actually feasible", seeing as a player having only a Knight and King could feasibly win against an opponent with a full set of pieces only if that player suicided every single one (or placed them suboptimally). A player controlling both sides would mean "possible in any way", in which case it comes down to pretty much only the leftover pieces on the board in name, as well as the position of pawns, if any. – TheThirdMan Dec 1 '17 at 12:01
  • Just look at the "rewritten" part one paragraph above: "and some sequence of legal moves leads to B being checkmated" – Andreas Hüttig Dec 1 '17 at 14:31
  • Also "possible" in a rules set means "possible in any legal way" and as far as I know never "feasible". Rules have to be precise and if "feasible" is needed to be expressed...why write "possible" if you could just write "feasible"? – Andreas Hüttig Dec 1 '17 at 14:36

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.