Forums

Should we get rid of stalemate?

Sort:
BarbarianGoth

Lie?  For shame.  But ya I used to think if they couldn't move you won.  I love the stalemate.  My record would be much worse if not for it.  Now I rarely draw unless I am down and mean to.  Early on you draw by mistake but if keep doing it your not finishing enough games and learning from past mistakes.  Again there are certain things you can do to increase your draw chances.  Once you get smoked its time to set up the draw. happy.png

 

varelse1
lfPatriotGames wrote:
CooIboycolombo wrote:

I would say 3/4 to the STALEMATED player and 1/4 to the one who stalemated their opponent.

Or better yet, 12/17 to the initiating player who stalemated their opponent, and 5/17 to the stalemated player.

Just to keep it simple. 

Or how about 16/32s to the player who stalemated. But only 4/8ths to the player who got stalemated?

🤔🙂

CooIboycolombo

That's what we have rn.

tygxc

#248
"Or how about 16/32s to the player who stalemated. But only 4/8ths to the player who got stalemated?"
++ It makes no difference. Chess is a draw even if stalemate is changed to a win.
See Figure 2:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf 

MisterWindUpBird

Ha ha ha ha... still never gets tired...

tygxc

#252
The results of table 2 do not lie.
Read the paper: "it seems to almost always be possible to
defend without relying on stalemate as a drawing resource" - Kramnik

tygxc

#254
It is a scientific paper and they even involved Kramnik.
The results of table 2 are unambiguous: even if stalemate is a win, chess is still a draw.
The cases you mention can just be avoided.
Like Kramnik said: there are other means to defend.

tygxc

#256
They let AlphaZero play 1000 games against itself at 1 min/move.
Standard rules: 979 draws, 18 white wins, 3 black wins
With stalemate = win: 971 draws, 25 white wins, 4 black wins.
That is hardly any difference.
Kramnik:
"Stalemate=win chess has little effect on the opening and middlegame play, mostly affecting the evaluation of certain endgames. As such, it does not increase decisiveness of the game by much, as it seems to almost always be possible to defend without relying on stalemate as a drawing resource. Therefore, this chess variant is not likely to be useful for sidestepping known theory or for making the game substantially more decisive at the high level. The overall effect of the change seems to be minor."
The real results of AlphaZero and the opinion of Kramnik make more sense than your wry remark.

technical_knockout

kramnik's name is in the toilet:

he's really trying to save his rep, not chess.

the variants he is proposing are garbage:

castling & stalemate improve the game.

varelse1
tygxc wrote:

#256
They let AlphaZero play 1000 games against itself at 1 min/move.
Standard rules: 979 draws, 18 white wins, 3 black wins
With stalemate = win: 971 draws, 25 white wins, 4 black wins.
That is hardly any difference.

And you didn't notice the fast one they pulled there?

"With stalemate" IS "standard rules"!

They're the exact same freaking thing!!!

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Of course the results are going to be the same. They didn't change anything!

lfPatriotGames
tygxc wrote:

#248
"Or how about 16/32s to the player who stalemated. But only 4/8ths to the player who got stalemated?"
++ It makes no difference. Chess is a draw even if stalemate is changed to a win.
See Figure 2:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf 

If they changed the rule which side gets the win? The side that has the extra pawn, but is unable to move or the side that forced the opponent into not being able to move?

long_quach

I don't know if I said this before.

In Chinese Chess, stalemate is a win.

That's the beauty of having 2 descendants of Chaturanga.

If you don't like the rules of 1 game, you can play the other, or both.

GeorgeWyhv14
long_quach wrote:

I don't know if I said this before.

In Chinese Chess, stalemate is a win.

That's the beauty of having 2 descendants of Chaturanga.

If you don't like the rules of 1 game, you can play the other, or both.

Yes, stalemate is win.

varelse1
long_quach wrote:

I don't know if I said this before.

In Chinese Chess, stalemate is a win.

That's the beauty of having 2 descendants of Chaturanga.

If you don't like the rules of 1 game, you can play the other, or both.

So, if they wanted to change that in Chinese Chess, they can always point to Western Chess. Where stalemate is a draw.

long_quach
varelse1 wrote:

So, if they wanted to change that in Chinese Chess, they can always point to Western Chess. Where stalemate is a draw.

I like the rules for both as they are now.

The 2 descendants have different rules, so you have 2 choices.

DrJesusPhD
Lol