In this universe white cannot checkmate black

Hi,
i think this game (lichess.org/5cqrOz5Sd07f) is obviously a draw becouse i (black) ended my time while white have no pieces to give me checkmate. However, i lost this game. Why?

Thanks

Sigh... this repeats every few days.

There is a sequence of legal moves leading to white checkmating black, therefore white wins if black's time runs out. Exactly as stated by FIDE rules which lichess follows. (lichess.org/faq#timeout)

@Duntianak said in #1:
> while white have no pieces to give me checkmate

[Variant "From Position"]
[FEN "8/8/8/8/8/2kpK3/4N3/8 b - - 9 62"]

62... Kb2 63. Nd4 d2 64. Kd3 d1=B 65. Ke3 Ka1 66. Kd2 Bb3 67. Kc1 Ba2 68. Nc2#

It's really fascinating how often this comes up and people don't realize that they can easily get mated with a knight or bishop.

I mean, checkmates using enemy pieces to take away flight squares is not exactly new, and every chess players uses this on a regular basis.

IMHO the problem is in the unfortunate phrase "sufficient material" which repeats in many of these topics. Everyone knows that you cannot checkmate with K+N against K and it's "obvious" that if the opponent has more than just a king, it can be only worse (which, like many other "obvious facts" is not really true).

In case of a pawn it may be also hard to imagine it replaced by a knight or a bishop as people are used to see the opponent promoting as the very thing they have to prevent at all costs. I wonder if it would be easier to realize that a checkmate is possible if it was an a- or h-pawn where a promotion is not necessary to arrange a checkmate.

Another hypothesis is that it requires a lot of focus to switch from the usual thinking patterns to "cooperative mode" and imagine the opponent doing their best to help you.

Tardiness has consequences.

Thanks for the replies.

When I write "in this universe" I am referring to the fact that no player with even the slightest brain would play in such a way as to create a position that could make him lose on his own. To lose, black has to work hard but actually, by playing the opposite way, he could succeed.

Now I understand how Lichess thinks. Other chess sites think differently.

Very good.

Thanks again.

> Now I understand how Lichess thinks. Other chess sites think differently.

Just to make it clear again: Lichess is following the official FIDE rules.

But yes, chess_com uses different rules (as does USCF or however they call themselves now).

Knowing that, unsportsmanlike players are entitled to play draw positions just to take a wins. I think it is what happened to me and, reading your annoyed replyes, it is what happens to many other people.

Therefore, I think that Lichess could do better to develop a good sportsmanship environment, but I'm probably wrong.

@Duntianak said in #9:

> Therefore, I think that Lichess could do better to develop a good sportsmanship environment, but I'm probably wrong.

You mean we should implement a rule different from the highest authority for chess? I don't think this is a good idea. The current rule might look stupid, but it is very clear and leaves no wiggle room for interpretation.

Where would you draw the line? There are positions that the lone piece can force a mate. How much stupidity can we assume? Where is the line? How about other highly unlikely won positions? Who would decide, and for what reason?

And talking out of own experience, it is very possible to move outlandishly stupid and arrange help mates...

There is always a point in saying that you could have moved faster before, and you lose due to bad time management rather than unfair methods. And if you absolutely want to avoid this, play with increment.

PS: yes, it is very annoying if you lose that way (how do I know...). But still perfectly legit.