Yes, @EndgameStudy you've found just the same egzample with one K vs K+sideP(s) about I've talked about 20 days ago. (you also or FBloggs, I'm not sure who of you two was it)
In my measures that is obvious injustice and ilogic to give a win for the stalemating side. Thriumph of my logic through this diagram.
Of course yours too, as an ilogic of the win with insufficient material you're trying to present us.
I mentioned it again because it contradicted something in MAX's Logic specifically. He stated "insufficient material relieves both players of making any more moves". In this case, that translates to: "White can no longer win the game, as he has insufficient material, but here, he would be saying white should win, contradicting HIS own claim. It contradicts HIS OWN LOGIC
Finally we've founed out the rock where the "stalemate win(ers)" slipped.
Just the fact a forfeit could be forced on the board immediately creates flaws. How can a forfeit be forced? I knew there was something wrong with it.
This thread was originally supposed to about that stupid hand rule, that u have to do every single thing OTB with 1 hand - all that b.s.
This thread should have just been "stalemate part 2"
I should have deliberately made my arguments with at least 100 lines, and max would have to type a 5 page response LOL
What kind of car is that in your picture? How fast can it go?
Just the fact a forfeit could be forced on the board immediately creates flaws. How can a forfeit be forced? I knew there was something wrong with it.
This last sentence of you is one of my "logic" fundamentals. How you can know it? You just feel it! Logic isn't necessary equipment in solving this old chess rules question. It's enough to have basic sense for what is correct and justicefull. Your heart is the main judge in this case.
You knew there was something wrong at the very first moment! And after days of using logic and your brain gymnastic you have proved your hearts thruth. That was my point all the time lasting this discussion.
Nice. We make a good team
This is much deeper than I imagined. You thought you were just trying to prove the logic of stalemate resulting in a draw but you were actually proving something far more profound - your heart's truth. Good Lord!
I always use logic. Logic is my thing. But more importantly, COMMON SENSE
Yes common sense, if you like to use that phrase in terms of sense for justice in chess which is rooted in justice in life and simulate it. Also sense for historical developement of chess as a game invented for the good of men, to be his facility in seeking answers for the problems which are simulations of life, war... expressed in the battle of minds. Sense for all those elements needs to be part of this FEELING so I named it heart's thruth (or if you need added explanation - try synonyms for intuition), EStudy named it common sense and you FBloggs obviously have something more precise on your mind but you keep it in secret, not allowing your wisdom to be shared and inlight common people.
I have no interest in the historical context of the game, just the logic and thrill of it. The thing I like about chess is there's a piece for every possible type of movement, straight, diagonal, or L-shaped.
Yes common sense, if you like to use that phrase in terms of sense for justice in chess which is rooted in justice in life and simulate it. Also sense for historical developement of chess as a game invented for the good of men, to be his facility in seeking answers for the problems which are simulations of life, war... expressed in the battle of minds. Sense for all those elements needs to be part of this FEELING so I named it heart's thruth (or if you need added explanation - try synonyms for intuition), EStudy named it common sense and you FBloggs obviously have something more precise on your mind but you keep it in secret, not allowing your wisdom to be shared and inlight common people.
But if I share my wisdom, the common people will be as wise as me. I wouldn't want that.
My point is that there were multiple fundamental flaws in his arguments and he wouldn't address them, which is more than forfeit or resigning, it is CHECKMATE.