Chess Rules - Is it a draw? Rapid Game

It was a rapid tournament in India and I was white (not very experienced in tournament play) having 13 sec on clock and he was having few mins. it was my turn and stopped the clock called the arbiter and claimed for draw. I told him that my opponent was trying to win on time.

But he didn't accept, Later I resigned. But as per my understanding it was draw.

 I know that there is a rule under article G Quick play finishes in FIde chess rules if opponent is not making efforts to win (Ex:he can not try to win in above position) but if he tries to win on time, the can be claimed and declared as draw.

options for arbiter

1.  he can add 2mins in the clock and ask us continue, if opponent does not make effort to win, arbiter can declare the game as draw.

2. he can allow as play without clock just to see what we try... and later he can tell his decision.

Am I correct?

pls answer

he can play different moves I will runout of times

I was thinking only about time

 why not

That is different rule for different situation.  white have winning advantage , no time on clock and black does not have anything including pawn, but has time to play.

Here the position is very passive for  black. but white can attack and win his pawn, even then I wont have enough time for winning.

Here the problem is we don't have increment, at least arbiter can give us 5sec increment,

1.so that he can see if black is making any effort to win  

or else any way

2.White can comfortably win or draw...

Should be a valid draw claim. Black can't win by normal means. Rd3-d6 and take pawn or Rh3-h1-h3 etc, although the rules section you have highlighted is quickplay finishes, which is not the same as rapid. Still, it should be a simple claim.

DRAW. Arbiters should be more aware of the situation and put themselves in the players' shoes.

Thanks all

Hello JamesColeman  Quick play finishes is a general term used for short of time to finish

Under the section G3, it is clearly mentioned the game may be a rapid or Standard play without increment.

I asked above doubt to  one my friend in Germany He is a FM and ex president of a chess cub.

His answer is

Hi!
A bit of doodling with the Nalimov Tables should convince you that the
obvious R-d3-d6 wins for White...but only by a hairs breadth.

If would have been the arbiter, I would have decided "Go on and show",
i.e. playing a few moves and see what the White's winning idea is.

If he just shuffles around the h file with the rook, draw even if your
flag drops.

If he goes after the Pe6, tough luck. Too many win plans
for White to declare "Time Play".

I didn't understand what he meant by "time play"

His answer from next mail .....

"Time Play" is any attempt to win *just* on time in a position where
you have no realistic chances to win normally

Hope to hear from you.

I would recommend avoiding any tournaments without at least 2-second delay on the time control. Typically they are 5 second delay, which means you cannot lose on time in dead drawn positions.

Even in rapid, btw. In blitz it's often pure time (which I avoid) or small delay.

Well said,

yes 2 sec delay or increment could be good fix

ie that's why in chess Rules Appendix  G Quick play (mentioned above), the section G3 says, it is applicable only to std and rapid time control without increment.

but it does not care about blitz why ?

Why in the world would it be a draw? You ran out of time. Don't be a sore loser.

I'm also confused by a titled player claiming this is a valid draw. It should be a draw, when played out. But that's not a guaranteed outcome even with unlimited time because someone could blunder. Black is not incapable of winning. So it is not a draw if black wins on time.

For what it's worth, Stockfish 8, looking 30 plies (half-moves) deep, shows this is a win for White, rating the given diagram with White to move as +47 for White.

It should be clear from the diagram that the BK can't take the h6 P if the WR moves off the h-file because of 1. Rd3 Kxh6 2 Rh3#.  So it would have been interesting to quickly try to get in 1 Rd3, 2 Rd6 3. Rxe6 or 3. Kxe6 and then claim a draw with no Black Pawns on the board.

Stockfish's best line -but not necessarily Black's best time-draining, delaying tactics for both sides would have gone 1. Rd3 Rc6 2 Rd6 Rc3 3 Kxe6

But can't see anything that Black could do to save the last pawn.

Are you SURE it was not announced verbally or in print that the FIDE Appendix G you posted did not apply?  In tournaments I ran, where blitz games were used for trophy tie-breakers, I announced ahead of time that draws would only be awarded by arbitration when a clock was in danger of running out if there were no pawns on the board or it was clear the side requesting the draw could sac. a piece for the opponent's last pawn and not enough material would be left for the opponent to mate.

Note that there's no rule I know of as a USCF tournament director where one side has to play for a win.  Playing from behind and trying to draw is what should be expected when the clock's not an issue.  Maybe there's a difference in FIDE rules, but I wouldn't think it to be logical.

The point the OP is trying to make: This is an easy draw for white to hold if white wants to hold it, and so he should be "spared" from having to lose on time (because there's no way he's winning with 13 seconds OTB, without knocking the board over). 

That's the reason I recommended blitz with delays and increments, to avoid this stuff. Online pure is good, but pure speed chess doesn't work OTB. 

Bottom line though, there are many obscure rules and regulations in FIDE - I'd recommend forgetting them and focus on playing better chess. And play chess with delay/increments. 

**However, going back on topic - my opinion:

USCF has a similar rule: insufficient losing chances. If one side has an extremely unlikely chance of losing a certain position, but is under time pressure, s/he may call the arbiter, who has some discretion as to how the game will be decided. 

If the position isn't considered sufficiently drawish for the player declaring insufficient losing chances, they have their time reduced, which can be deadly. 

I would be on edge as to whether this position could be declared drawn through insufficient losing chances (given that insufficient losing chances can be used in a no-increment/delay time control, which I think it can be). a TD once told me that a 1000 would have to be able to draw against a GM, with the 1000 having like 5 secs/move, and the GM having a comfortable amount of time, which I'm hesistant to say about this position....