Answers.Body: <p>Worst-case scenario:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li><p>Upgraded all your pawns to knights</p></li>
  <li><p>Your king is at <code>Ka8</code></p></li>
  <li><p>Your knights surround your king, so at <code>Nb8</code>, <code>Na7</code> and <code>Nb7</code></p></li>
  <li><p>Opposition knight is at <code>Nc7#</code> - <em>checkmate</em>!</p></li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T06:22:34.707Z
Answers.Text: The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hagen von Eitzen
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-08-01T14:20:36.903Z
Answers.Text: The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Lan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T08:05:55.470Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-29T08:05:55.470Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: TheSimpliFire
Answers.Body: <p>From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>(The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)</p>
  
  <p>So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.</p>
  
  <p>I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T17:21:12.280Z
Answers.Text: I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T17:21:57.970Z
Answers.Text: ...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T09:29:59.030Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-29T09:29:59.030Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Arthur
Answers.Body: <p>As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated. </p>
  
  <p>In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:</p>
  
  <p>You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-30T10:54:54.613Z
Answers.Text: Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Dennis Jaheruddin
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T14:32:55.840Z
Answers.Text: Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.
Answers.UserDisplayName: John Coleman
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T13:33:24.597Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-30T10:52:24.217Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2019-07-30T10:52:24.217Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Dennis Jaheruddin
Answers.Body: <p>From the lichess.org <a href="https://lichess.org/faq#timeout" rel="noreferrer">FAQ</a>:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).</p>
    
    <p>Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)</p>
  
  <p>Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T16:50:00.190Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-31T16:56:41.413Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2019-07-31T16:56:41.413Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: sdenham
Answers.Body: <p>By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>14E: Insufficient material to win on time:<br>
    The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:<br>
    14E1: Lone king<br>
    14E2: King and bishop or king and knight  </p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T19:15:09.760Z
Answers.Text: I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Christian Legge
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T19:24:13.550Z
Answers.Text: @scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.
Answers.UserDisplayName: eyeballfrog
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T19:26:01.060Z
Answers.Text: By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Christian Legge
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T19:35:02.493Z
Answers.Text: @scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.
Answers.UserDisplayName: eyeballfrog
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T19:50:24.820Z
Answers.Text: So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.
Answers.UserDisplayName: user3445853
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-05-26T14:34:51.483Z
Answers.Text: @eyeballfrog by FIDE rules KNN-vs-K is definitely delcared a win for the knights if their opponent runs out of time
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-30T15:20:38.753Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-30T15:20:38.753Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: eyeballfrog
Answers.Body: <p>Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T07:42:13.803Z
Answers.Text: Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?
Answers.UserDisplayName: konsolas
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T10:12:01.890Z
Answers.Text: White: King on a6, knight on b6
  Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-30T13:02:19.013Z
Answers.Text: https://www.ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq
Answers.UserDisplayName: leonbloy
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-30T14:54:32.213Z
Answers.Text: @konsolas White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere.  White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game
Answers.UserDisplayName: Cort Ammon
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T16:59:10.863Z
Answers.Text: @CortAmmon, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.
Answers.UserDisplayName: justhalf
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-08-01T14:17:15.920Z
Answers.Text: Not possible with Knight + King but with the pawns, yes. White pawns on G2, H2, white King on H1. Black king on F1. If knight moves to F2, checkmate. Basically, if there are white pieces, they can be used to corner the white king in. On could promote them to knight & bishop to corner your own king in if they aren't in the right position.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Lan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-28T20:16:12.690Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-28T20:16:12.690Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: user58697
Body: <p>I just lost an online game on time (while playing on lichess.org). I had three pawns and my opponent had just a knight. I don't understand why it's not a draw. Shouldn't it be a draw because my opponent does not have enough material to checkmate me?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-07-28T20:15:01.197Z
Comments.Text: It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Qudit
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T08:47:06.620Z
Comments.Text: Aside from the fact that you could theoretically _lose_ such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously _win_ with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!
Comments.UserDisplayName: leftaroundabout
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T16:42:15.670Z
Comments.Text: @leftaroundabout "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Acccumulation
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-07-29T16:45:05.487Z
Comments.Text: Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Acccumulation
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-07-31T01:43:36.697Z
Comments.Text: @leftaroundabout It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...
Comments.UserDisplayName: Apollys supports Monica
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-05-26T20:13:23.103Z
Comments.Text: On a deeper level, there is the concept that pieces are a blessing AND a curse. They interfere with each other and smother the King making it easier for the enemy to win with a single check. This is bigger than a special case!
Comments.UserDisplayName: BaseZen
Tags: <rules><online-chess><draw>
Title: Why did I lose on time with three pawns versus a knight? Shouldn't it be a draw?
ThreadText: # Why did I lose on time with three pawns versus a knight? Shouldn't it be a draw?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2019-07-28)
  
  I just lost an online game on time (while playing on lichess.org). I had three pawns and my opponent had just a knight. I don't understand why it's not a draw. Shouldn't it be a draw because my opponent does not have enough material to checkmate me?
  
  **Tags:** rules, online-chess, draw
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: It's not a draw because it's possible that you could lose if you played really badly and smothered yourself with the pawns.  
  > **username_2**: Aside from the fact that you could theoretically _lose_ such a position – it should be clear it can't be automatically drawn because you can obviously _win_ with three pawns vs a knight, if you can manage to promote one of them!  
  > **username_3**: @username_2 "6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves." My reading of this is that if Player1 runs out of time, but Player2 cannot possibly checkmate Player1, then it's a draw, regardless of whether Player1 can checkmate.  
  > **username_3**: Were you using pre-moves? If you really thought that your opponent could not possibly checkmate you, there's not much downside (unless you think you can win 3 pawns vs knight under time pressure).  
  > **username_4**: @username_2 It's irrelevant whether the guy who is out of time can checkmate the other player - because he's out of time...  
  > **username_5**: On a deeper level, there is the concept that pieces are a blessing AND a curse. They interfere with each other and smother the King making it easier for the enemy to win with a single check. This is bigger than a special case!  
  
  ---
  
  ## 6 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_18 on 2019-07-28. Score: 31 | Accepted answer
  
  Draw with insufficient material is covered in article 9.6:
  
  > The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play.
  
  With a given material, it is possible to construct a checkmate (assuming your cooperation or horrible blunders), so it is not a draw.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_19**: Can you give an example of such a checkmate with a knight vs 3 pawns?  
  > **username_17**: White: King on a6, knight on b6 Black: King on a8, (promoted) bishop on b8  
  > **username_20**: https://www.ragchess.com/how-to-checkmate-your-opponent/#faq  
  > **username_21**: @username_19 White pawn on b7, black knight on a8, kings elsewhere.  White: bxa (Q), then win the King-Queen-2pawns vs. King game  
  > **username_22**: @username_21, I think we are looking for a checkmate from the side with a knight.  
  > **username_8**: Not possible with Knight + King but with the pawns, yes. White pawns on G2, H2, white King on H1. Black king on F1. If knight moves to F2, checkmate. Basically, if there are white pieces, they can be used to corner the white king in. On could promote them to knight & bishop to corner your own king in if they aren't in the right position.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2019-07-29. Score: 29
  
  Worst-case scenario:
  
  * Upgraded all your pawns to knights
  * Your king is at `Ka8`
  * Your knights surround your king, so at `Nb8`, `Na7` and `Nb7`
  * Opposition knight is at `Nc7#` - *checkmate*!
  
  So it is indeed possible to lose, thus not a draw.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_7**: The advantage of this case s that ir does not depend on where the pawns originally are  
  > **username_8**: The opposition king thought he was safe surrounded by his trusted guard of knights.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2019-07-29. Score: 9
  
  From FIDE Laws of Chess (2018 version):
  
  > 6.9 Except where one of Articles 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by that player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
  
  (The articles in chapter 5 all concern checkmate, stalemate, resignation or agreement to draw. I.e. any conventional consideration other than time that causes the game to be over.)
  
  So your time ran out, and your opponent can checkmate you through some legal series of moves, which means you lost.
  
  I do not know that Lichess folows the FIDE laws, but it seems like a reasonable assumption in this case.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_10**: I wonder what the effect would be if the rules were changed so that a player who noticed the opponent's time had expired could take over the opponent's pieces on his own time and win if he manages to achieve a checkmate before a draw occurs based on number of moves, repeated position, or mutual time expiration; good sportsmanship would imply that players should resign when their time expires unless they had reason to believe that the opponent would have some difficulty achieving checkmate under such conditions, but a player whose opponent does not resign in such circumstances...  
  > **username_10**: ...should simply checkmate the opponent without complaint (since any difficulty in doing so would demonstrate that the opponent's failure to resign was reasonable).  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_11 on 2019-07-29. Score: 6
  
  As others mentioned, you cannot get the draw because you can still get checkmated.
  
  In fact I have actually seen this kind of position get lost in practice, as follows:
  
  You are on Ka8 and have just played a7 pawn (knight, rook or even bishop have very similar effect and could be obtained via promotion), opponents king is on Kc8 or Kc7 and opponent plays Nb6#
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_11**: Already mentioned the other pieces, but updated to clarify they would need to come to promotion. As I emphasize the practical aspect I focus on pawn as you would rarely want to avoid promoting to a queen.  
  > **username_12**: Nice example. You can even set up the position so that the pawn move to a7 is the only move which avoids losing a pawn (N on c8 keeping an eye on a pawn at e6, K on c7 holding back a pawn on c5). In a blitz game with time running out, something other than a perverse desire to self-mate could lead to such a blunder.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_13 on 2019-07-31. Score: 6
  
  From the lichess.org [FAQ](https://lichess.org/faq#timeout):
  
  > In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9).
  >
  > Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has pieces that could block the king.
  
  I assume that the statement in the second paragraph is being used as the basis for ruling this as a timeout rather than a draw (and, as others have pointed out, this would be a correct call in this case.)
  
  Perhaps it is worth noting that, in general, it is computationally infeasible to determine when a player cannot win, and furthermore, an automated system cannot yet be expected to identify all such cases that are obvious to an experienced player, so it must be expected that lichess will use tractable rules such as those quoted.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_14 on 2019-07-30. Score: 4
  
  By USCF rules, you wouldn't have.King + Bishop and King + Knight are defined to be insufficient mating material unless that side can demonstrate a forced win (all forced wins are very short, so this isn't hard to do if it exists).
  
  > 14E: Insufficient material to win on time:  
  > The game is drawn even when a player exceeds the time limit if one of the following conditions exists:  
  > 14E1: Lone king  
  > 14E2: King and bishop or king and knight
  
  The presumed rationale behind this is that avoiding checkmate from that material combination is so trivially easy that a win on time is the only realistic way to win.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_15**: I'm not doubting that that's what the rule says, but mating with K+N is possible if the opponent has pieces that can block king movement.  
  > **username_14**: @scatter There are checkmate positions in KNN vs K, but that's still declared a draw even in FIDE because they cannot be forced and are trivially easy to avoid. The same principle is (presumably) at play here.  
  > **username_15**: By what rule? The only insufficient material rule in FIDE I'm aware of is the one that says it's a draw if there's no legal series of moves that can lead to checkmate.  
  > **username_14**: @scatter Huh, I suppose FIDE doesn't prevent a player in KNN vs K from insisting on playing out the inevitable 50 move draw. Strange.  
  > **username_16**: So yes by USCF rules it would be a draw, by FIDE rules it's a loss. And Lichess follows FIDE rules.  
  > **username_17**: @username_14 by FIDE rules KNN-vs-K is definitely delcared a win for the knights if their opponent runs out of time  
  
  ---
  
  