But that’s the point. If the context of the question is that you’re forcing the game to be played out to mate or a claimed draw, then the stats don’t apply because those games weren’t played under these rules. The checkmate games might even be a particularly bad sample, since they are unusual.
At the very highest levels, actual played checkmates are extremely rare. Probably one game in a thousand or something like that. Trying to extrapolate from that to all games probably can’t tell you much, but I’m not sure what other approach you could take.
I have an idea: have a computer, set at the highest level, play as many games as necessary to get a sample of, say, 1000 non-drawn games (whatever sample gives us the statistical significance we’re looking for). I think that should give you a pretty reasonable approximation of what an checkmate state might look for grandmasters.
AFAIK, only the final sentence of the quoted text is true. You are not obliged to announce “Check” in any form of chess (and indeed it is usually seen as rude to do so at anything above absolute beginner level).
If in “speed chess” a player makes an illegal move that allows their King to be taken, the opponent is entitled to claim victory, but not by taking the King - the game is simply over at that point (assuming they notice and make a successful claim). In fact, if the opponent did capture the King, they might be open to the claim of an illegal move against themselves. FIDE Laws of Chess.
I agree with this entire post, except for one part. Being a Doper, I’m a natural pedant, so I must clarify that one can only claim a victory in these circumstances if a checkmate is possible. Otherwise, it’s just a draw.
And I wish people would delete the phrase “Speed chess” from their vocabulary. There is no such thing. There are, however, blitz chess and rapid chess.
Wait, so if I’m badly behind in a [del]speed[/del] blitz or rapid chess game, I can just move into check in such a way that checkmate isn’t possible, and turn it into a draw? That doesn’t seem right.
“Checkmate isn’t possible” means that there is no possible series of moves that could end in checkmate against you. So if your opponent only had a king and bishop, and you didn’t have material (such as an opposite-colour bishop) that would make it possible for you to be mated, and you move into check, then he can only claim a draw, rather than a win.
The usual circumstance where this type of rule comes up is when one player is down to a bare king, and the other player runs out of time. That is a draw, rather than a loss for the player whose time expired.
Wouldn’t a draw be declared or agreed to immediately, as soon as neither side had insufficient power to mate, or is that not an option in the faster formats?
But the situation is not that neither side has sufficient power to mate, it’s that one side has insufficient power to mate. If your opponent has no possible way to checkmate, and you commit a violation that would normally result in you losing the game, then the game is drawn instead.
Ah, I think I see. If, say, I have a king and a bishop, and my opponent has a king and two pawns, then I know I can’t win, while he still theoretically can (by promoting a pawn). But I’m not ready to concede just yet, because I might be able to use my bishop to take his pawns, forcing a draw. If my opponent then accidentally moves into check, what I get is the best I could have hoped for, a draw.
Yes, you have the idea, although your exact example would still be a win for you. There is a legal sequence of moves where you could end up giving mate, so it’s still a win. For example, he could promote a pawn to a knight, then mating positions are possible such as his king on a1 & knight on b1, your king on b3 & bishop on b2. No one would ever play that way, but it doesn’t matter as far as the rule is concerned.
Instead, consider a case where you have king+bishop, and he has king+rook. It’s possible for him to win, but there’s no way to construct a mate for you.
Just to clarify the above post: in general, King + Rook cannot force a win against King + Bishop, so it would be sensible for the players to agree to a draw in such positions.