fastest stalemate

Here is the fastest double stalemate(a double stalemate is a position where neither side can move):

I know that this is the quickest stalemate possible, but I never realized they did that ON PURPOSE, and in a REAL GAME.

Wow

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

carlsen vs pewdiepie

The Johan Upmark vs. Robin Johansson game did not end 1/2-1/2, though. It was adjucated to 0-0.

That's counts as 2 moves. It's a checkmate not a stalemate. And he asked this question 9 years ago lol

i know it counts as 2 moves, i was just as speaking of what it counts as in total as well as what it counts as and how to perform the 2 move checkmate.

nothing there shows it is stalemate and i never said it was a stalemate

it is ridiciulose you say it is a checkmate not a stalemate , i can see that it is obvious

i saw he asked this question 9 years ago ,  i can read .

i don't need you to point that out for me.

i saw that he thought the fastest checkmate was 12 or 15 moves and i decided to tell him the truth.

it was asked 12 years ago

it was asked on 2007 and it is 2019

2019-2007=12

2007+12=2019

Where does he say that?

page 1 at the top

I think Rambo has a point here. It is true that Malcho talked to us about stalemates, but nobody knows what Mulcho said to Rambo. It was a private conversation on a secure WH phone line, backed up on a secret server. And it was very likely about checkmating a guy named Biden which is Mulcho's favorite topic. Only Rambo knows what was really discussed. After all, he is a forever Mulchoan!

He said stalemate, not checkmate

@winston_weng

i misread

@Arisktotle

he didn't tell me anything

he asked what is the fastest stalemate is

i didn't read it carefully and my mind replace the word stale with the word check subconciously

therefore i replaced the word stalemate with the word checkmate subconsciously.

Best practice:

(1) Write anything you like

(2) But after anyone attacks you, first check the facts

i am aware i can write anything and i did and it lead to this.

i will check the facts and if anyone attacks me because of there misunderstanding or incorrect thoughts based on sound logic , i could point them to what the facts are .

and i could say why these are the facts and than it would be up to them to continue claiming they right when the facts are not stacked in there favour.

the second part of the bullet point phrasing makes no sense considering if anyone attacked me verbially than i couldn't check the facts first after , in fact i would be able only to check the facts second.

thanks for your understanding , i mean this genuinly not sarcasticly

please work on the way you write in giving advice and think about the best way to write your message at least twice , that way what you say will make sense and than will be no odd parts of sentences such as But after anyone attacks you, first check the facts.

instead if your going to convay a message using order from 1 to the last number do it properly

the way you should have done it is

you can write anything you like before someone verbily attacks you and after and the most important advice i can you check the fact first and reply after.

i am preety sure i understand you , but i saw some other meaning to the phrase you said that could be misunderstood.

and it would be best practise :  or the best advice i can give you is:

and the best practice would be more organized andbetter if you did it like this first checks the facts instead of assuming anything , because this can lead to misunderstandings such as the ones that you had today.

My "best practice" advice is somewhat tongue-in-cheek. After all, this is a fun forum. Like you say it is always better to check your facts before talking or writing. But in cases where it is impractical to do so, you can still correct it in the 2nd round! We all make mistakes.

interesting

what cases can you come up with which prove that its not practical to always check the facts?

In any open conversation - family work, friends - someone might come up with an issue you haven't prepared for. It is sort of anti-social to tell him to wait for a reaction until you checked the facts. One practical solution is to give him a "high percentage" response which you occasionally need to correct later. For many, memory is a frail instrument.

i can see in 1 way it is anti social and another way i can't

 i am going to just accpet your answer.

i did ask for the answer and now i got it.

Bad Move