Applying FIDE Laws of Chess can be Interesting!

I find this situation so interesting, I need to blog about it right away! (Sorry, update on where to play chess in Singapore 2018 has to make way and wait a bit more).

I was pleasantly surprised when a fellow chess friend and enthusiast shared this interesting situation arising from the latest weekly blitz tournament at Pub X Chess meetup, just played yesterday.

Played under "5 + 3" (5 minutes initial time + 3 seconds increment with every move), White just played the move Nf7+, but his clock ran out of time. Do you know how should this be ruled under FIDE Laws of Chess (w.e.f. 1 Jan 2018)?

Just to side-track first, after 1...Bxf7 (only legal move), the winning idea should be 2.Kxf7 and not the "natural" looking 2.Bxf7??. This is because after 1...Bxf7 2.Kxf7 Kg5 (only legal move) 3.Kg7! disallows Black to cower back into hiding on the h8 square (Bishop of wrong colour unable to displace the opponent King with the Rook pawn cannot make progress).

Whereas after 1...Bxf7 2.Bxf7?? Kh7! and the Black King is returning to the safety of the h8 square/fortress. Easy for us when reviewing games not under the actual game conditions (esp. blitz conditions).

Back to the topic on applying the laws of chess, this game was declared as a draw, which was based on  natural chess instinct in all chess players. After all, Black does not seem to have sufficient material to deliver checkmate. In fact, this was also the initial judgement shared by an experienced local arbiter when I first sought his views.

However, after I pointed out to him, that I saw a possibility of a self-help-mate involving under-promoting the White pawn to a dark-square Bishop, and getting the White King into a corner to get checkmated on purpose, he agreed with my views and overturned his initial judgement. This game should have been declared a loss for White by time forfeit! Allow me to share more:

First, the relevant clause of FIDE's Law of Chess:

"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 key question here, is whether there is any legal (mathematical) possibility for Black to checkmate White. It does not matter whether the moves required to deliver checkmate are sensible or not.

Hence, a self help mate is possible. One way I did it is as follows:

How did I realise this? Because I made the  wrong judgement call in a similar situation back then when I was a student in NUS (and it had real consequences in terms of final placement of the players.) I apologised for it profusely, of course.

But I still made the mistake of thinking that the player with the superior position can always pause the clock before his own clock runs out of time and make a claim for a draw. I don't know why I had this false impression. Probably I thought the Quickplay Finishes apply. But it actually does not. It was clearly stated in the FIDE's Law of Chess as well:

"
Guidelines III. 

Games without increment including Quickplay Finishes

III.1 A ‘quickplay finish’ is the phase of a game when all the remaining moves must be completed in a finite time.

III.2.1 The Guidelines below concerning the final period of the game including Quickplay Finishes, shall only be used at an event if their use has been announced beforehand.

III.2.2 These Guidelines shall apply only to standard chess and rapid chess games without increment and not to blitz games.

"

The 5+3 format is both with increment and a blitz game. Hence, Quickplay Finishes definitely does not apply. This also means that the player with the superior position cannot make any claim for a draw when they are in time trouble -- it's just too bad and time is a real part of the game esp. in Blitz (notwithstanding there is always a chance that the opponent might accept the draw offer, of course!) 

Hopefully, with this, fellow chess enthusiasts and players can:
1. Try to learn a bit more about the FIDE laws of chess, not to encourage the exploitation of any technical loopholes, but to protect yourselves in the case of any dispute, and

2. Try to appreciate the chess arbiters more! Their decisions can be big, yet it is not so easy to get things right all the time!

In case I got this wrong, please feel free to correct me by leaving a comment or something. Thanks again for your time reading!


Yours sincerely
Ong Yujing
(a.k.a. newbie_learner)

p.s. I am interested in various aspects of chess, not just playing well, but also the laws and etiquette. Hence, right now, I am waiting eagerly for the next run of the arbiter's course ^o^