Another newbie , another stupid post
Should Stalemate be a Draw?
Sort:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Another newbie , another stupid post
Fair enough. You can just ignore this post if you want
It does not really matter. Even if stalemate is a win, chess is still a draw.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf
Should queens also be allowed to move like knights?? Inquiring minds want to know?
KnightAttack1567 wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Another newbie , another stupid post
Fair enough. You can just ignore this post if you want
It's not possible. People like you create unwanted nuisance in the community
It is what it is. Stalemate is the player's own problem from time and miscalculation. I just found a recent game I spectated:
Yes indeed, such misfortune, ran out of time. Stalemate is the only hope (other than resigning and blunders) that the player down pieces can end this game brilliantly. This is a chance to the losers to draw, but not a "mate".
Some people make posts like this because they are so unskilled that they keep making stalemates in easily winning positions.
So they want to over turn 200 years of chess to make the game easier for them. 
Oh !!!
ponz111 wrote:
Some people make posts like this because they are so unskilled that they keep making stalemates in easily winning positions.
So they want to over turn 200 years of chess to make the game easier for them.
That's not why I made this post
I am not complaining about the rule. I just want to know what other people think about it
And now you know why the "Official Rule Book" (7th edition) is 140 pages of "easy reading."
Onward Chessnuts, Leave No Stone Unturned ...... 
.