MOST STUPID RULE : STALEMATE


What's really stupid is thinking you should get the win when you were stupid enough to let your opponent put you in a position where you can't.

After a certain number of pieces remain, a new chess game should start, to decide priority. Whoever is at an advantage on the other, newer game (it could be a time advantage, a placement advantage, or a time advantage) would have an advantage over their opponent in the first chess board.

It's a rule. Stop whining about it.
he know that! he just say that he dont like the rule

Seems that I chase someone around the board for 3 or 4 moves and its stalemate.....but someone chases me around for 10 moves and no stalemate. Doesnt seem to be consistant!

Seems that I chase someone around the board for 3 or 4 moves and its stalemate.....but someone chases me around for 10 moves and no stalemate. Doesnt seem to be consistant!
You should just look up what stalemate is. Your comment suggests that you don't know.

Seems that I chase someone around the board for 3 or 4 moves and its stalemate.....but someone chases me around for 10 moves and no stalemate. Doesnt seem to be consistant!
You should just look up what stalemate is. Your comment suggests that you don't know.
ROFLMAO! It amazes me how many people play chess and don't even know the rules, like the author of post 371.
Stalemate is not about number of moves. Number of moves has NOTHING to do with stalemate.
Stalemate is where the player that is to move has no legal move, but he or she is also not in check!
Examples - in all cases, it is White to move.

If you complain about the existence of the Stalemate rule, you fall into one of the following categories:
1.) Beginner
2.) Idiot
3.) Beginner and Idiot
If you complain about the existence of the Stalemate rule, you fall into one of the following categories:
...
4) Troll

Seems that I chase someone around the board for 3 or 4 moves and its stalemate.....but someone chases me around for 10 moves and no stalemate. Doesnt seem to be consistant!
That's to do with skill, not the rule.

The rule is rii2arded. Saying that it’s a nice technical thing in the game is just pseudo-intellectuals crapping out of their mouths. If you are about to lose then just choose the way you want to lose. It doesn’t make the game fun, it makes it boring. The same thing if player accidentally moves his king into harms way mid game. No safety nets, if he dies he f\|q¡n d¡es. Plain and simple. Plus that kills the definition of the word “stalemate” which means “a situation in which further action or progress by opposing or competing parties seems impossible.” Just because you’re going to lose the game does not mean you can’t move. (Didn’t know the chess community was so soft)
Hmmm, brand-new account, zero games, astoundingly low puzzles rating, yeah I'm gonna have to go with what the titled players are saying and not this
If you are about to lose then just choose the way you want to lose.
If your opponent stalemated you, he failed to win this game, which means you were not about to lose, you simply had an inferior position.

But there are no points in the rules of chess.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS IS 2023 AND VERY STUPID AND UNFAIR!!!!
Just about the win as the oponent started to run with his King....and STALEMATE..and the worse..instead to give a point to each, the game takes one out from me....PATHETIC!!!!!,,,it's like..pusinhing the startagey that you done...and rewarding the loser, looks like a communist rule this shi**.
Hey Chessonlie, please remove this background which messes with the reading....!