x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Why did I get a stalemate when my last move put their king in checkmate?

  • #1

    Why did I get a stalemate when my last move put their king in checkmate?

  • #2
    BassSitar wrote:

    Why did I get a stalemate when my last move put their king in checkmate?

     
    Looks like your last move was Qg3 putting the game into stalemate. Black has no legal moves. When either side has no legal moves and its king is not in check, the game is a stalemate.



  • #3

    Thank you for addressing my question and the answer still makes no sense to me. If the King cannot move then they lose. The rules of the game are flawed. 

  • #4
    I agree. There should be some safeguards in place, obscure rules or the like, to prevent such unfortunate situations.
  • #5
    BassSitar wrote:

    Thank you for addressing my question and the answer still makes no sense to me. If the King cannot move then they lose. The rules of the game are flawed. 

    The rules have been set that way for more than 175 years.

    It is a game that rewards precision.

     

     

     

     

  • #6
    You’re not wrong.
  • #7

    If it isn't check, it isn't checkmate wink.png

  • #8
    Very true.
  • #9
    BassSitar wrote:

    Thank you for addressing my question and the answer still makes no sense to me. If the King cannot move then they lose. The rules of the game are flawed. 

     

    Your last move Qg3 does not put the Black king under check.

     

    Theoretically yes, if a king is in a stalemate, any move by the king would get the king captured.

     

    However, think of it this way. Isn't it a beauty or miracle to somehow survive amongst all the enemy lines? The White rook on g6, the White queen on g3 and the White pawns. Yet the brave king is still standing. Shouldn't we commend the king?

     

    For that reason, stalemate has been treated as draws for years to punish the winning side for allowing poor play in the endgame. This outcome of draw gives the losing side another chance to fight on. Interestingly, for your info, stalemate used to be a win for the stalemating player at some point of time, and stalemate also used to be a win for the stalemated player at some point of time.

  • #10

    In chinese chess (xiangqi), a stalemate is a win for the stalemating player. And I was a victim of it.

  • #11
    BassSitar wrote:

    The rules of the game are flawed. 

    It's not just a rule to punish laughably bad players. It would actually impact endgame play quite a lot to get rid of stalemate, to the point that the strategic depth of the game would be diminished overall.

     

    As a simple example, either player to move, this is a draw:

     

    But it's only a draw because of stalemate.

    So in more complicated positions, when trying to decide whether to trade down into a pawn endgame, instead of the delicate judgement of piece activity and plans combined with calculating forcing sequences, if stalemate were a win you could just count the pieces like a drooling retard and arrive at the correct decision.

  • #12

    Stalemate exists as a final resource for the defending side.  It can provide a player with some pretty exciting tactics even if he has absolutely no chance of winning.

  • #13

    The war chest was depleted and the attacking army dispersed... God save the king.

  • #14
    if It is not check so how could it be checkmate.
  • #15
    PMI_804Ruhara wrote:
    if It is not check so how could it be checkmate.

     

    This thread had long gone stale, mate 

  • #16

    You should report this bug to the staff. If it's affecting you then it's probably affecting other people on this site as well.

  • #17

    The queen isn't checking. How can it be checkmate? Stalemate is when the king can't move and no other pieces can move, but the king IS NOT in check. Stalemate is a draw, so if you're winning try to avoid it 

  • #18
    macer75 wrote:

    You should report this bug to the staff. If it's affecting you then it's probably affecting other people on this site as well.

    It's not a bug though. It's normal Chess rules

  • #19
    BassSitar wrote:

    Thank you for addressing my question and the answer still makes no sense to me. If the King cannot move then they lose. The rules of the game are flawed. 

    That's not true. If the King cannot move, and it's in check (so it can be taken on the next move without a doubt), THEN the game is lost. But if the King cannot move and none of it's pieces can move, but it is not in check (so it CANNOT be taken on the next move), then the game is drawn, because Black can't make his move. Technically, if Black can't move, the game must end. So we decided that it is a draw. The rules are NOT flawed.

  • #20

    Rules are no flawed. Rules just are. If you dont like them you could try another game. Chinese chess is a win if opponent cannot make legal move. That is not better rule or worse rule. It is just a rule. And chess will not change it rules

Online Now