Elementary draws

@Entuzijasta said in #10:
> This joke illustrates that implementing would not be easy even for "naked knights":
> lichess.org/analysis/6qk/8/4QnKN/8/8/8/8/8_w_-_-_0_1?color=white
> 1.Qg8 Sg8 2.Sf7# But engine sees 2 horses and stops the game before checkmate.
When/where does engine stop the game before? In analysis tab?

@Akbar2thegreat said in #21:
> When/where does engine stop the game before? In analysis tab?
That was said in context of hypothetical changes. So far this site stops only when 1 light piece remain.

@uzkuzk said in #17:
> I agree that it makes sense to discuss the rules of the game. In my opinion, a position should under no circumstances be automatically called a draw unless it is impossible to checkmate. You call the checkmating possibility irrelevant, but this is subjective. If there were players that played perfectly, they might want to call the starting position a draw since no "sensible player" would lose that for either side.
Perfect play doesn't exist and with same reason worst play doesn't either. So, one can't say that such a checkmate (with lone piece or so) is possible by sensible play.
Even a complete newbie won't lose it just because they would play some set of moves and one can't hypnotise to play exact same moves to lead to such mate.
The only possible ways such checkmate can occur is when someone is bribed, on purpose, mutual agreement or when someone is hypnotised. Other than these 4 cases, there is no other case.

@Entuzijasta said in #22:
> That was said in context of hypothetical changes. So far this site stops only when 1 light piece remain.
The site follows fide rules of if their is a possible mate the game is not a draw

the exact wording is article 5.2 b "The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can
checkmate the opponent’s king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to
end in a ‘dead position’. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move
producing the position was legal. (See Article 9.6)"

also article 9 in general deals with draws so read up www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/LawsOfChess.pdf

@uzkuzk said in #19:
> Yes, it's very hard to check to see if a win is possible for positions with many pieces, so I think autodraw is only needed for the following positions: K vs K, K+N vs K, K+B vs K, K+B vs K+B (same color bishops)

You should see the USCF rule books (current and historical). People have argued for automatic draws in many, many situations.

The chess clock has changed chess and the players. Most of the time the 1st priority goes to the clock and then to the position. A blunder in theory can happen but masters should recognise that K+N vs K+N is much more a draw then anything else. If they are still hoping to win then chess is not going to survive much longer. Automatic draws if a master is playing these odds.

If K+N vs K+N is to be considered a draw, then where do we draw the line? There are many endgames that are draws if played well, but still there is life in the position. For example, many rook endgames with one side up a pawn are drawn according to the tablebase, but plenty of people would fail to defend correctly. At what point does the chance of winning become too insignificant?

@uzkuzk said in #27:
> where do we draw the line?

Obviously, when it makes #1 angry.

Don't move the black knight and rock the black king back and forth. Let white be the engine. See if the engine can get a checkmate out of it. Zero effort on Blacks side and still white cannot checkmate.

7k/8/6KN/8/8/8/8/n7 w - - 0 1

@Toscani said in #29:
> Don't move the black knight and rock the black king back and forth. Let white be the engine. See if the engine can get a checkmate out of it. Zero effort on Blacks side and still white cannot checkmate.
>
> 7k/8/6KN/8/8/8/8/n7 w - - 0 1
6nk/5N2/6K1/8/8/8/8/8 b - - 23 12 but the mate is possible.