Checkmate with Knight and King only?

Of course, KNB v K can be won, while KNN v K and KB v KB (opposite colored Bishops) can be won if the player with the lone king allows it.

But yea, inability to claim a draw by insufficient material is ridiculous

It should be a draw, due to insufficent material. You need at least a Knight, Bishop and King or 2 Bishops and King or Rook and King to mate. 😞 You can not force a mate even with 2 knights. It's impossible.
Now quit wasting my time. 😞

Originally posted by Bedingbedang
Is this possible? I didn't think it was but I'm in a game where that is all that is left on the board (well, that and the opponent's King) and the game didn't become a draw, it's still going on!

Is this possible or only a glitz in the site?

Game 3530497

ps: don't tell me HOW it's done, it's a tournament game. I'm just wondering wether it's worth playing or not.

If there was a pawn on the board then yes, the game would still be playable (the checkmate present only needs to be theoretical for the game to be continued) - In your case it is not so it is a draw and a site glitch

Originally posted by geepamoogle
Draws occur under any of the following.

1) Mutual agreement.
2) Stalemate (player to move not in check, but without a legal move).
3) Three-fold repetition of position, factoring in player to move, ability to castle, en passant, etc. (must be claimed by player to move)
4) Perpetual check (one player can keep checking the other, but not able to del ...[text shortened]... n with the help of the other player. (KvK, KNvK, KBvK, KBvKB if bishops can threaten each other)

its a draw game, you can't win by any mean

Originally posted by wessam84zidan
its a draw game, you can't win by any mean

You can't win with K+B or K+N against a sole K. Or king against king only.
It's so obvius that the system should recognize this automatically.
The system recognize stalemate automatically (you don't even have to claim the draw), so why not this situation?

It's another question if any pawn is involved...

Originally posted by FabianFnas
You can't win with K+B or K+N against a sole K. Or king against king only.
It's so obvius that the system should recognize this automatically.
The system recognize stalemate automatically (you don't even have to claim the draw), so why not this situation?

It's another question if any pawn is involved...

Originally posted by idioms
Not entirely true .. the following position is a draw (assuming the last move doesn't allow en passant) .. and it has LOTS of pawns 😉

There are many such position that are rather hard to determine programmatically however ..

Originally posted by FabianFnas
And that's exactly why I wrote, very clearly, that "It's another question if any pawn is involved..."

Originally posted by idioms
Deep breath .. I'm just poking fun ..

Timeouts, as far as I know, are always treated as a loss for the losing side.

Draw by insufficient material doesn't mean that the positional is merely theoretically drawn.. After all, one side might blunder. It's reserved for when no possible mate position exists for the given set of pieces, in order to shorten games which have been decided.

I would have thought Lone Kings and King + Minor VS King would be recognized for purposes of claiming a draw.