Another new stupid rule in chess

Sort:
Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

I like how when I pointed out a serious problem in his arguments, he just left. Typical

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

Too merciful. I checkmated him

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

Wow guys, one of the pro-stalemate wins people here just mentioned in another thread that PERPETUAL CHECK should also be a win! 

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

For the perpetual checker

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

I'm tempted to have Max Take on this one. I think even he would disagree with this one

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

Guys, I'd appreciate your help in this perpetual thread, which is turning out to be nothing but perpetual insanity. You'll be stunned when you see what the justifications are.

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

The thread is called "FIDE decided that repetition is not a draw"

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

UPDATE: The new justification is that since perpetual check isn't necessarily repetition, so checking the king 10 times in a row is a win

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

Their retarded logic is that if U check the king 10 times, the king is obviously never finding a safe square, while every move, the king is finding a safe square. They are basically saying that in a queen vs queen and pawn endgame, the lone queen can win by checking the king 10 times in a row.

Avatar of FBloggs
EndgameStudy wrote:

Their retarded logic is that if U check the king 10 times, the king is obviously never finding a safe square, while every move, the king is finding a safe square. They are basically saying that in a queen vs queen and pawn endgame, the lone queen can win by checking the king 10 times in a row.

So some nutcases think perpetual check should be a win.  Since when is it newsworthy that nutcases have nutty opinions?

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

Well, this was pretty newsworthy, in spite of everything that happened with stalemate!

Avatar of Pashak1989

Relax, it is just a board game after all. No one should consider chess more than that. 

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

It's not the fact that it's a board game, it's the logic behind these claims that stuns me. The lack of common sense is what shocks me, not whether they agree with the rules or not.

Avatar of MEXIMARTINI
Pashak1989 wrote:

Relax, it is just a board game after all. No one should consider chess more than that. 

Not if money is involved. 

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

Chess doesn't have alot of money in it.

Avatar of MEXIMARTINI
EndgameStudy wrote:

Chess doesn't have alot of money in it.

Fellas Fellas....if you're in the area, lemme know!

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/chess-tournament7

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

You live in wisconsin right?

Avatar of MEXIMARTINI

Yuppers!

Avatar of EndgameEnthusiast2357

What's the speed limit? 

Avatar of Pashak1989
MEXIMARTINI escribió:
Pashak1989 wrote:

Relax, it is just a board game after all. No one should consider chess more than that. 

Not if money is involved. 

 

In chess you have to be a Top 5 world class player if you want to make good money. 

If you are not one of the best players in the world you will have to survive by writing blogs and giving lessons to kids. 

 

Choosing chess as a profession in the worst idea ever. Torture yourself for years and have nothing in return.