Stalemate

Checkmate would still be the way to win the game if you were allowed to capture the king. Checkmate by definition means the king would be captured next move. The question is whether stalemate, also meets this criteria of the king being captured next move. It doesn't, as stalemate doesn't mean the king will be captured next move, it just means the player can't move. It could mean the king could be captured next move, but it also could not, as the examples show.

Of course not, because then anyone in a zugzwang position would just say pass, chess would lose 75% of its logic and strategy and endgame complexities. And the result would be the same anyway. If here, black said "pass"

White would pass too because if he moves again he losses, so it would end in a draw anyway.

I think the reason they reduced it by 1 move to checkmate was to avoid the aspect of players gambling and moving their king into check hoping the opponent doesn't see it. If the king could move into check, checkmate wouldn't even have to possible, so one could force a win with a king and 1 knight:

And white takes the king next move. Not only is it illogical, but chess would lose all of its thrill.

Saying "check" is not required. In tournaments it would be considered a disturbance to other games if you always said check (imagine neophytes in a K+Q vs K ending with one person saying "check" every move - with a good chance of the volume steadily increasing).

White moves first as a way of better equalizing the color distribution of players in a tournament (the first move is an advantage and you should be able to easily imagine the complaint of somebody who ended up relegated to moving second in every game of a tournament).

Chess does not allow illegal moves and stalemate happens when a play has no legal moves but is not in check. The game has to end and if the player is not in check then it is a draw. If inflicting stalemate was a win then a player might lose on time versus a lone king.

Perfectly said, but I was just clarifying that stalemate isn't always a "checkmate without a check" it can just mean that no piece can move anywhere. I keep emphasizing that because the main argument for stalemate being a win is that the stalemated side will lose if he could move. A lone king can stalemate the entire set of enemy pieces, so that is obviously false.

It would be captured.

Not those, but I have watched at least one to know that people are captured.

Saying "check" is only an unofficial "rule" that casual players erroneously think is a requirement. It is kind of like the "house rule" in monopoly that places on the "free parking" space all of the money paid in fines (luxury tax, chance, community chest). It is a very common "rule" that is not in the official rules.

No, I have not. Never heard of the movies you mentioned. I wonder why...

Any illegal moves by any piece.

As far as the king moving into check goes, players have deliberately made illegal king moves in the hope that they will not be seen and their king can be repositioned to an advantageous spot that could not be reached via legal moves. Do you really want a game with K+Q vs K to be won when the lone king moves next to the opposing king and then captures that king after the other player moves a queen instead of getting out of check? That was explicitly designated in earlier blitz rules as "a cheap shot that will not be tolerated".

No.

Also, why did you delete the top part?

Assuming Mario is from Thailand (as indicated by the flag) it is quite understandable why Mario might not have seen them.

The JFK example is more like one side going pass ... pass ... pass ... pass ... time to move.

Absolutely not. And there is a reason for it too.

The actors of those movies don't want to do every single country. It would take too long.

Thailand is a small country, with a smaller population of Thai-speakers. Because of this, Thailand is often left out when exporting movies to different countries.

First, it is not so much whether or not a movie is pirated, but rather whether or not a movie is compatible to a person's culture. I'm not much into foreign films because their style is usually a bit of a mismatch to my cultural views. I don't expect everybody to watch the movies made in my country.

Second, of your list I've only seen "Saving Private Ryan". You didn't include movies I appreciated like "Patton", "Apocalypse Now", "Good Morning Vietnam", "M*A*S*H", "Valkyrie", "Pearl Harbor", "Hacksaw Ridge", "Midway", etc. To say nothing of the unforgettable "Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter".

No, you cannot simply take the king. Touch move, however, does apply and often results in a player being forced to either: block the check with the piece they touched even though that piece will not be defended and the check will be immediately renewed; or to capture the checking piece with a more valuable piece even though the checking piece is defended. Also, generally two minutes are added to the opponent's clock and if you make too many illegal moves it is an immediate loss of game (in blitz, depending on the rule set, as little as one illegal move loses whether it is leaving the king in check, moving the knight on a diagonal, playing Bb2xh7 instead of Bc2xh7, castling after the king already moved, or any other illegal move).

Ahem.

I don't know.

You cannot take the king because it is an illegal move to leave your king in check and when an illegal move is made the rules (since you have a US flag, both FIDE and US Chess rules) require the position to be reinstated to the last legal point and the game to be continued from there with touch move active. In general the opponent of the person making the illegal move gets two minutes added to the clock. If it is a FIDE game then two illegal moves (any illegality, not just leaving the king in check) is a loss of game but there is US Chess each is a two-minute time adjustment. In Blitz tournaments often a single illegal move triggers an immediate loss of game.

Please be aware that an illegal move is not illegal until the clock has been hit and the other player's time started. Until that point, even if a player released the piece, an illegal move can still be corrected - while still adhering to the touch move rules.

Ok. I understand.