English Chess Forum

Am I right in thinking that, inplicitly rather than explicitly, a situation of bare kings is immediately a draw?

(I ask because of the last move in Gashimov-Wang Yue, which presumably should not be there.)

Yes. Bare Kings is immediately a draw.

JustinHorton wrote:Am I right in thinking that, inplicitly rather than explicitly, a situation of bare kings is immediately a draw?

(I ask because of the last move in Gashimov-Wang Yue, which presumably should not be there.)

The last "move" was Ke4......

Could this actually have been placing the (White) king in the centre of the board to formally indicate the draw (as seems commonplace nowadays)??

Matt Mackenzie wrote: The last "move" was Ke4......

Could this actually have been placing the (White) king in the centre of the board to formally indicate the draw (as seems commonplace nowadays)??

That is almost certainly correct.

When using a DGT electronic board, you have to register the result by placing the White and Black Kings respectively on e4 and d5 (White win), d4 and e5 (Black win) or e4 and e5 (Draw).

Hence you should always be suspicious of a game score which apparently ends with a strange looking Ke4/d4 by White or Ke5/d5 by Black.

However, that doesn't explain the finish of Rapport v Ynojosa at the World Junior Championship, a game much discussed at http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=2276. Ynojosa played 143 ....Kxf5, leaving only the Kings on the board, and Rapport apparently played 144 Kd5. This last move has been removed in the PGN file at http://ecc2008.chessdom.com/wp-content/ ... ycc_r7.pgn

I can't find a specific game score, but I've seen a few instances of playing down to one minor piece each with no pawns, then the pieces being exchanged - in such a case the last capture is superfluous because as soon as KB vs K or KN vs K is reached it's already a draw by insufficient material, but the move has been recorded as part of the game anyway.

This thread also reminds me of the (probably apocryphal) story of two old blokes playing on for ages with bare kings. The arbiter tries to tell them it's a draw but one player says "He's been known to blunder before!".

In part IV of 'My Great Predecessors' (p.236), Kasparov quotes a nice story by Mikhail Tal about Fischer at Zurich 1959:

"In his game with the oldest participant, [...] Barcza, Fischer did not have any advantage but, not wishing to let his opponent off with a draw, he played on to the 103rd move. [...] even after only the kings were left on the board, Fischer made a further two moves!"

Tal goes on to describe how Barcza was so exhausted after all this he could hardly get out of his chair, but Fischer wanted to go back to the beginning and analyse. At this point, Tal quotes Barcza as saying, "Look, I have a wife and children. Who will feed them in the event of my untimely death!"

It's a funny story, even if honesty forces me to admit that my database and collections of Fischer's games have the game finishing on move 95 with Fischer (Black) having a king on a4 and a pawn on a5, while Barcza (to move) has just a king on e3.

Indeed, the Fischer-Barcza "bare kings" tale is an urban myth - but the point is, of course, it was exactly the sort of thing you could imagine RJF doing!

I saw Chris Ward and an opponent at Hastings once play on with bare kings (it was a joke).

Of course no other result than a draw is possible, but surely the game is not actually finished (technically) until a flag falls, 50 moves are made, the players agree or there is a three fold repetition?

Mike Gunn wrote:Of course no other result than a draw is possible, but surely the game is not actually finished (technically) until a flag falls, 50 moves are made, the players agree or there is a three fold repetition?

Not so. Article 5.2 (b) of the FIDE Laws of Chess states that "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)". Article 9.6, incidentally, says exactly the same thing; I'm not sure why it needs stating twice.

Mike Gunn wrote:I saw Chris Ward and an opponent at Hastings once play on with bare kings (it was a joke).

Of course no other result than a draw is possible, but surely the game is not actually finished (technically) until a flag falls, 50 moves are made, the players agree or there is a three fold repetition?

No. Rule 5.2b says "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." and goes on to say "This immediately ends the game."

Oh, right (thanks). I should have know that.

I suppose everyone here knows the old tale about Alekhine in a French cafe, watching two beginners playing on with just bare kings??