Answers.Body: <p>A &quot;dead draw&quot; position is an endgame neither side can make further progress. It's not an immediate forced draw, meaning that the &quot;stronger&quot; side does not have to play a line that leads to stalemate or insufficient material, three-fold repetition or anything like that. However, all attempts they have to win can be stopped with an accurate defense that shouldn't be too hard to find. Eventually, the side trying to win will have to accept the draw or reach the 50-move rule.</p>
  <p>It's not always easy to draw a boundary for what counts as &quot;dead draw&quot;. The most useful definition is probably &quot;a position where neither side can win where one of the players could make the game last forever (without the 50-move rule)&quot;</p>
  <p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_(chess)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Fortresses</a> are an example of dead draw position. Positions with all pawns blocked are often, too. The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philidor_position" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Philidor position</a> is a basic theoretical dead draw. <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/12229/how-do-you-draw-in-an-opposite-color-bishops-endgame-with-two-pawns-down">Opposite-colored bishops</a> often lead to a lot of dead draw endgames.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-11T01:09:08.873Z
Answers.Text: I would add to " However, all attempts they have to win can be stopped with accurate defense", that these accurate moves are not very difficult to find, like in the examples you give. Otherwise, many queen endgames, that are theoretically drawn, but not necessarily easy to draw in practice (at any level) will fall under "dead draws".
Answers.UserDisplayName: Akavall
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-11T14:06:33.147Z
Answers.Text: @Akavall You're correct. I'll edit my answer to clarify that (otherwise any position that is not a forced win or loss is a dead draw)
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-09T06:36:05.647Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-11T14:06:02.347Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-10-11T14:06:02.347Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.Body: <p>dead draw is a king vs king, stalemate, or a position where literally nothing can happen in the position like captures and checks and a king and a minor piece vs a king.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-09T06:26:39.150Z
Answers.Text: Not necessarely. Those are "dead draw" positions but there's also some cases where the defending side has to play accurately.
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-08T19:09:49.350Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-08T19:09:49.350Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Thomas Croon
Answers.Body: <p>The answer is when neither of the players can proceed further, both players are playing fairly well but the stipulated number of moves by both players have ended when one player who must exercise onus with moves, play his pieces a queen, a Bishop or rook with moves perpetually the same moves again and again to avert a possible check, and especially stipulated time and moves as per FIDE rules have come to an end. This is a dead draw in a chess tournament.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-11-13T07:13:02.827Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-11-13T07:37:08.720Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-11-13T07:37:08.720Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: user37920
Answers.Body: <p>A dead draw is  a position in which no player has any chance of winning.</p>
  <p>Sometimes erroneously used in a position where theoretically someone could win but both players believe it is so basic and simple that neither will make a fatal mistake so the other player would win.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-09T04:09:13.717Z
Answers.Text: A curious claim; K vs KNN can result in the lone K being checkmated but the odds of the blunder are so remote the tournament rules of chess declare this to be drawn immediately. (A slight flaw perchance; I set up a chess puzzle where the final board position was the KNN checkmate position due to a sac in the corner). On the other hand, KN vs KN is not declared drawn as so and might end in dirty flagging.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Joshua
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-09T13:21:31.127Z
Answers.Text: @Joshua there is no rule (at least not a FIDE rule), that forces KNN vs K to be stopped
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-09T14:13:36.747Z
Answers.Text: @David There is a [USCF rule](http://www.uschess.org/index.php/Official-Rules/US-Chess-Rulebook-The-Official-Rules-of-Chess-7th-Edition-Tim-Just-Chief-Editor.html) 14E3 that rules that a KNN vs K is drawn even when one of the players runs out of time (and I suppose also when a draw is claimed). I think this _allows_ any player to claim a draw and stop the game, but I don't think an arbiter can force the players to stop if both players want to continue. Of course, the only way for someone to actually win is to deliver the very unlikely mate, as the game is drawn when time ends.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Discrete lizard
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-09T15:07:20.760Z
Answers.Text: I think a better definition would be "...a position where no sequence of legal moves can result in checkmate".  You correctly note that the term is sometimes (often?) used erroneously, but your definition fails to exclude the erroneous usage.  If there exists a sequence of legal moves that could result in checkmate, a position is not dead drawn, even if there would be no realistic chance of people playing such a sequence of moves.
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T09:14:31.997Z
Answers.Text: @supercat That's not a dead draw. That's a different concept
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T09:15:34.993Z
Answers.Text: Your "erroneous" definition is actually the most commonly used one. Thus I don't see any reason not to claim it to be the correct one.
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T17:33:26.667Z
Answers.Text: @David: Are you saying that there are positions where no legal sequence of moves could result in checkmate that are not dead drawn, or that there are positions that are dead drawn even though a sequence of legal moves could result in checkmate?  I think the latter would be true of the erroneous definition of dead draw, but I don't think it's true of the correct one.  If you disagree with my definition of dead draw, could you offer an example of a situation that would be mis-classified thereby?
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T20:00:15.077Z
Answers.Text: There are dead draws where a sequence of legal moves can result in checkmate. The Philidor position is a dead draw but both sides have sequences of moves that would lead to them winning
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T20:29:09.793Z
Answers.Text: @David: I would regard that as meeting the conditions for the erroneous usage of the term, but by my understanding of the official rules, reaching such a position would not instantly end the game.  By contrast ,if it can be shown that after the 47th move no legal sequence of moves could result in either player being checkmated, the game should be adjudicated as having ended with a draw at that time, even if e.g. a player resigned on the 49th move.
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T20:43:43.950Z
Answers.Text: @supercat: My recollection is that the FIDE laws do not use the phrase "dead draw" to refer to that concept, so I'm not sure what relevance it has to this discussion.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Kevin
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T22:07:29.530Z
Answers.Text: @Kevin: At least to me, it doesn't make sense to use the adjective "dead" to describe a position which could become "live" as a result of a blunder.  Such a definition of "dead draw" would also be subjective, based on the quality of the people playing.  What advantage is there to treating the phrase "dead draw" so expansively, rather than using the phrase "effectively drawn" to describe positions where neither side could *plausibly* win?  If the term "dead draw" wouldn't be appropriate to describe a situation where neither side could checkmate the other via any legal series of moves...
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-10T22:08:44.513Z
Answers.Text: ...no matter how badly the other side blunders, what concise term would?
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-08T19:19:09.467Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-08T19:19:09.467Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Body: <p>I heard the term &quot;dead draw&quot; a lot, but I don't know its meaning and when a position is &quot;dead draw&quot;.</p>
  
Tags: <draw><terminology>
Title: What is the meaning of "dead draw"?
ThreadText: # What is the meaning of "dead draw"?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2020-10-08)
  
  I heard the term "dead draw" a lot, but I don't know its meaning and when a position is "dead draw".
  
  **Tags:** draw, terminology
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 4 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2020-10-08. Score: 17 | Accepted answer
  
  A dead draw is a position in which no player has any chance of winning.
  
  Sometimes erroneously used in a position where theoretically someone could win but both players believe it is so basic and simple that neither will make a fatal mistake so the other player would win.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_6**: A curious claim; K vs KNN can result in the lone K being checkmated but the odds of the blunder are so remote the tournament rules of chess declare this to be drawn immediately. (A slight flaw perchance; I set up a chess puzzle where the final board position was the KNN checkmate position due to a sac in the corner). On the other hand, KN vs KN is not declared drawn as so and might end in dirty flagging.  
  > **username_1**: @username_6 there is no rule (at least not a FIDE rule), that forces KNN vs K to be stopped  
  > **username_7**: @username_1 There is a [USCF rule](http://www.uschess.org/index.php/Official-Rules/US-Chess-Rulebook-The-Official-Rules-of-Chess-7th-Edition-Tim-Just-Chief-Editor.html) 14E3 that rules that a KNN vs K is drawn even when one of the players runs out of time (and I suppose also when a draw is claimed). I think this _allows_ any player to claim a draw and stop the game, but I don't think an arbiter can force the players to stop if both players want to continue. Of course, the only way for someone to actually win is to deliver the very unlikely mate, as the game is drawn when time ends.  
  > **username_8**: I think a better definition would be "...a position where no sequence of legal moves can result in checkmate".  You correctly note that the term is sometimes (often?) used erroneously, but your definition fails to exclude the erroneous usage.  If there exists a sequence of legal moves that could result in checkmate, a position is not dead drawn, even if there would be no realistic chance of people playing such a sequence of moves.  
  > **username_1**: @username_8 That's not a dead draw. That's a different concept  
  > **username_1**: Your "erroneous" definition is actually the most commonly used one. Thus I don't see any reason not to claim it to be the correct one.  
  > **username_8**: @username_1: Are you saying that there are positions where no legal sequence of moves could result in checkmate that are not dead drawn, or that there are positions that are dead drawn even though a sequence of legal moves could result in checkmate?  I think the latter would be true of the erroneous definition of dead draw, but I don't think it's true of the correct one.  If you disagree with my definition of dead draw, could you offer an example of a situation that would be mis-classified thereby?  
  > **username_1**: There are dead draws where a sequence of legal moves can result in checkmate. The Philidor position is a dead draw but both sides have sequences of moves that would lead to them winning  
  > **username_8**: @username_1: I would regard that as meeting the conditions for the erroneous usage of the term, but by my understanding of the official rules, reaching such a position would not instantly end the game.  By contrast ,if it can be shown that after the 47th move no legal sequence of moves could result in either player being checkmated, the game should be adjudicated as having ended with a draw at that time, even if e.g. a player resigned on the 49th move.  
  > **username_9**: @username_8: My recollection is that the FIDE laws do not use the phrase "dead draw" to refer to that concept, so I'm not sure what relevance it has to this discussion.  
  > **username_8**: @username_9: At least to me, it doesn't make sense to use the adjective "dead" to describe a position which could become "live" as a result of a blunder.  Such a definition of "dead draw" would also be subjective, based on the quality of the people playing.  What advantage is there to treating the phrase "dead draw" so expansively, rather than using the phrase "effectively drawn" to describe positions where neither side could *plausibly* win?  If the term "dead draw" wouldn't be appropriate to describe a situation where neither side could checkmate the other via any legal series of moves...  
  > **username_8**: ...no matter how badly the other side blunders, what concise term would?  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2020-10-09. Score: 9
  
  A "dead draw" position is an endgame neither side can make further progress. It's not an immediate forced draw, meaning that the "stronger" side does not have to play a line that leads to stalemate or insufficient material, three-fold repetition or anything like that. However, all attempts they have to win can be stopped with an accurate defense that shouldn't be too hard to find. Eventually, the side trying to win will have to accept the draw or reach the 50-move rule.
  
  It's not always easy to draw a boundary for what counts as "dead draw". The most useful definition is probably "a position where neither side can win where one of the players could make the game last forever (without the 50-move rule)"
  
  [Fortresses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_(chess)) are an example of dead draw position. Positions with all pawns blocked are often, too. The [Philidor position](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philidor_position) is a basic theoretical dead draw. [Opposite-colored bishops](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/12229/how-do-you-draw-in-an-opposite-color-bishops-endgame-with-two-pawns-down) often lead to a lot of dead draw endgames.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: I would add to " However, all attempts they have to win can be stopped with accurate defense", that these accurate moves are not very difficult to find, like in the examples you give. Otherwise, many queen endgames, that are theoretically drawn, but not necessarily easy to draw in practice (at any level) will fall under "dead draws".  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 You're correct. I'll edit my answer to clarify that (otherwise any position that is not a forced win or loss is a dead draw)  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2020-10-08. Score: 1
  
  dead draw is a king vs king, stalemate, or a position where literally nothing can happen in the position like captures and checks and a king and a minor piece vs a king.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Not necessarely. Those are "dead draw" positions but there's also some cases where the defending side has to play accurately.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2020-11-13. Score: 1
  
  The answer is when neither of the players can proceed further, both players are playing fairly well but the stipulated number of moves by both players have ended when one player who must exercise onus with moves, play his pieces a queen, a Bishop or rook with moves perpetually the same moves again and again to avert a possible check, and especially stipulated time and moves as per FIDE rules have come to an end. This is a dead draw in a chess tournament.
  
  
  ---
  
  