Black wins and gets the brillancy prize.

So, if we use Go rules, why don't we consider white's pieces as "prisoners"?

Stalemate is so important in endgames. It makes a lot of otherwise lost endgames drawable. This makes chess a more interesting game, as material sacrifices won't necessarily lose the endgame.

Exactly. You can't make an illegal move no matter what nor can you be forced to. No one can legally make a move so the game is drawn.

As I read the posts, part of the problem is that many (not all) of those who wish to abolish the 'stalemate' rule are equating material or material advantage with winning.  I have won many a game were I was down material.  In addition many of the players who promote pawns are down in material before they promote.  Material in chess is not the same as points in a game.  It is closer to time of possession.  In soccer (football to those outside the US) or football time of possession is an indicator, but not the deciding factor.  Let us not forget soccer (the most popular sport in the world) has many draws, even though one side appears to have outplayed the other.
So just because you are up a pawn (ex: King and Pawn vs King) does not mean you should win or deserve to win.  You need to put your opponent into checkmate!!!  If you cannot successfully do that, you do not win.

In the 2011 Candidate's Tournament there were 27 draws out of 30 games.  If that happened in the World Cup you would see some rule changes in soccer.

Personally, I think that changing the rules to make a stalemate a win is a less drastic measure than having important matches being decided by sudden death blitz playoff.

http://www.chess.com/news/candidates-matches-scrapped-9113

There are already some rule changes in some tournaments in order to avoid so many draws. One is Sofia Rules - agreed draws prohibited. Another is scoring system like 0 for loss, 1 for draw and 3 for win. However those changes don't modify the essence of game.

I know you are being sarcastic, but  3/4 point for a stalemate seems like an idea for serious consideration.  It would be similar to wrestling meet where you get so many points for a pin and less points for winning a decision.

That means the game can have 5 different results instead of 3. "How was your tournament?" - " Well I had 2 wins, stalemated 1 game, 4 draws, was stalemated in 2, and lost 1"

Sounds better than, "How was your tounament?"  " Same as yours, no wins, no losses and 10 draws."

The stalemate just gives even more awesome sides of chess, because of all the amazing tactics there is with it.

I hate that knights move in an L-shaped pattern.  We need to change the rule so that they move in a V- or S- shaped pattern.  And anyone who disagrees with me isn't thinking logically.

If you're referring to me, I'm just being sarcastic.  I actually think it would be better if knights moved in an R-shape.

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7469

check out the 1st user comment below the articles

Looks like there are more and more of us