blueemu wrote:
If the opponent has a perpetual check available, then they AREN'T losing.
One of the best chess quotes of 7/22/23.
What do you feel about players that do perpetual checks when they are losing?
Sort:
This sounds so ridiculous #1 chess isn't won by material I've seen many games where the winner was down 5+ points material it means nothing because you don't play chess for pieces you play to check mate and in a situation where I'm unable to mate but you make the mistake of falling for my sacrifice and allowing me to engage in a perpetual check then you sir aren't winning anything that is a drawn game that you may have been in a winning position of until you made a mistake that cost you the win don't be a sore lower instead learn how to prevent it. Nobody is going give you a game because you were up material if there's a way to draw that's what a skilled player is going to do if he knows he can't mate its part of the game bro has been since it was created
If there is a perpetual check available, your opponent is not losing. You’re drawing.
MaryandJuana wrote:
GreenCastleBlock wrote:
If your opponent is able to perpetually check your King, you are in no sense "handily winning." You sold out your King's security to obtain a material advantage.
I had two rooks to his one. He had a knight that was pinned on the back rank by my queen and my bishop was in play to take that knight. It just happened to be that the board was wide open, but my king was never in any danger because he could not move his pieces. He literally had to check me every time or he would have lost.
what a divvy.
For anyone who feels the perpetual check rule is unjust, it's worth remembering that there has always only been one way to prove a win in chess - checkmate the opponent. If the opponent can permanently prevent you from checkmating them, you cannot have a win. Perpetual check is such a way.
They are being smart--mic drop!
If they have perpetual check available--they are not losing.
@MaryandJuana
Play Chinese chess.
Perpetual checks are not allowed in Chinese chess.
If your opponent can draw by perpetual check he is not losing.
(Why do people who don´t accept - or understand - the rules of the game play chess?)
hermanjohnell wrote:
(Why do people who don´t accept - or understand - the rules of the game play chess?)
Good question.
Because there are not one way to do anything.
Parcheesi
Ludo
Sorry
Horse Racing Game.
Etc.
They are all different variations of Parcheesi.
hermanjohnell wrote:
(Why do people who don´t accept - or understand - the rules of the game play chess?)
Chaturanga is the original game.
People don't accept those rules.
Thus 2 branches of chess came out of it.
Western chess and Chinese chess.
If you don't like the rule in one, play the other chess of the 2 descendants.
Stalemate is a win in Chinese chess, if you don't like Stalemate.
blueemu wrote:
If the opponent has a perpetual check available, then they AREN'T losing.
I came here just to say this, and you already said it.
they're very annoying, perpetual check needs to be patched and prevented
Wolviness wrote:
they're very annoying, perpetual check needs to be patched and prevented
No....dorks like you need to be prevented from playing.
It's annoying but perpetual check is part of the game
Yes, it's part of the game, you should learn to accept it
It livens up the game--someone who launches a speculative sacrificial attack that fizzles out may still be able to draw by perpetual check.
If the opponent has a perpetual check available, then they AREN'T losing.