Should stalemating count as 3/4ths of a win?

Not all stalemates are in lost positions.

WK h8, WP h7, BK f8, White to move. White cannot possibly be losing as Black has no mating material, yet White is the one stalemated!

I said it was a help mate for black, 0-1

?

Your logic is total baloney.

First off, nothing anywhere says that you must have a legal move in all draw scenarios. This is proof here. Stalemate is a draw, and in stalemate, one side has no legal move. He also is not in check.

By your flawed logic, what you are saying is that if I go dancing around with my king and you cannot catch me, I get 1/2 a point, but if I can self-inflict no legal moves on myself without being checkmated, I should get a bonus? Horse(bleep)!

I get the same half point whether I am Black with just a king each, or Black with WKa1, WRg7, WPh6, BKh8, BRb8, with Black to move and I play 1...Rb1+ 2.Ka2 Rb2+ 3.Ka3 Rb3+ 4 Ka4 Rb4+ 5.Ka5 Rb5+ 6.Ka6 Rb6+ 7.Ka7 Ra6+ 7.Kb8 Ra8+ and once you decide to take the Rook, I am stalemated.

Plus, your proposal would be an UTTER WASTE OF TIME.

By your garbage policies, we have to sit there and make 50 moves each. Why? Because if White ever takes the Rook with the King, Black gets 0.75, while if he sits there like a reject and moves away 50 times and calls 50 move rule, Black only gets 0.5. So let's sit around wasting time making and writing (in over the board chess) 100 moves (50 for each player).

A stalemate scores the same as 50 moves to avoid such utter ridiculousness. I simply take the Rook and score it a draw on the pairing sheet and move on.

And yet here you are demanding counter-arguments? My counter argument is use your head and realize these ridiculous contortions it would create and lay off of it! Give it up! You're wrong! Move on!

Yes I didn't agree either but he or she is a nice person and that's more important.

Endgame didn't get what I posted and he's claiming that every move was forced. I sincerely hope not given that it ended 0-1.

?

You'd need to read some of my other posts to discover why.

Did White checkmate Black or else force Black to resign or run out of time? No? Then it cannot be a win for White!

Did Black checkmate White or else force White to resign or run out of time? No? Then it cannot be a win for Black!

All results not in those above two scenarios is a draw, no freaking matter how! Stalemate, Agreement, Time vs Insufficient Material to Mate, Repetition, 50 moves, etc.

Stalemates and draws are an important part of the game.
Adding to its diversity.
And it means that when one side is winning - that side still has to be alert in many situations lest he/she blunders into stalemating an opponent through laxity.
Old saying but also good saying:
If its not broken don't fix it.

Regarding 'unsatisfactory draws' and 'unfair looking wins' and 'vague rules'.
'mating material' has been an issue over the years.
With two knights only versus lone King mate can't be forced apparently.
There are 'helpmates'.
Is it a fact that if the lone King is on move he can always avoid mate regardless of the position?
Tried it just now - to set up a position where black is shuttling between g8 and h8 surrounded by the white king and two white knights with one of the knights controlling f8. White will need Nf7 or Ng6 to mate but there seems to be no way to force mate unless black 'helps' with Kh8 at the critical moment instead of Kf8.

You can also set up helpmates with knight versus bishop, knight versus knight,
bishops moving on opposite colors, but not bishops moving on same, and bishop versus knight doesn't work either as the knight can sacrifice itself?
-------------------------------
Edit: A nice person kindly messaged me that a helpmate with bishop versus knight is also possible - as a bishop could 'adjacent mate' the King that has a knight. For example: A bishop on f8 (or on h6) mates a King on h8 with Bg7#. The other King could be on f7 and a knight on f8 or f6 goes to h7 'helping' the mate.
So I added this edit and added a question mark at the end of 'sacrifice itself'.
---------------------------------------------------
Hey! Even knight versus rook has a helpmate!
But when you look at all these helpmates the side with the lone king always also had another move option before the helpmate position that makes that checkmate position impossible.

Now how about King and knight versus King and h-pawn? (or a-pawn) ...
there are positions where the knight mate can be forced!
But if the flag of the player with the knight drops -
does the side with the edge-pawn win?
I'm sure there's been some 'arguments' in tournaments about that.
And maybe the side with the knight should try to claim a win in advance because there's a forced mate of the edge-King?

Point: Draws need to be clearly and simply defined.
But without making the game rules more complicated.
There's quite a lot of rules as it is.

Any other sequence of moves leads to the same mate. The black moves such as kh8 instead of g8 delay it as long as possible. That's why white had to go to h6 first and then to g6 to maintain the opposition and make it blacks move. In fact, that manuevre is the basis behind this Endgame study:

My personal thought is that it should still be 1/2 but that in a bracket style tournament then the player who is not in stalemate should progress. Or maybe that's how it already works, and I just know nothing about chess :/

A stalemate isn't a half checkmate the same way a check isn't a half checkmate. A knight that can't move from the side of the board is a trapped knight not a captured knight or a "half captured knight". Chess is not a game of scoring points or winning "more" in some ways than others. The numbers 0 1/2 and 1 aren't really "points". They just donate game results, and there's no other result other than a loss, a draw, or a win. It's not an additive thing. What you're saying would apply more to something like Go or games involving territory points, not chess.

Hey @EndgameEnthusiast,

I found a position where insufficient material and checkmate occur at the same time.

By priority, it should be checkmate and not a draw.

I'm trying to find another position in which insufficient material occurs but it's checkmate on the next move (or next couple of moves). In that case, it's supposed to be a draw. Any help?

Yes, the endgame would drastically drop it complexity and many fantastic chess puzzles and studies would be wiped out if the stalemate rule was altered, but that's not the basis of my arguments. It's simply that it is less logically consistent for it to not be a draw. Even the puzzle in my profile Pic makes use of stalemate (and UnderPromotion and other themes as well lol).

Note 2 knights is not insufficient mating material as checkmate is possible, it just can't be forced. Not sure why they treat that the same as 1 knight in FIDE Flagging rules. If checkmate is possible in any way, no matter how absurd the moves would have to be, it should be a win or a loss if one side flags.

There are also mutual/inevitable double stalemates, such as here:

Hard to say that one side should win this dead drawn game.

Good point.
Many games involve somebody a pawn up but can it be won?
The players play it out to find out.
And the possibility or inevitability of stalemate is part of it.
And EE meant 'denote' not 'donate'

Yes - some players can't deal with a draw. That's right.
Conversely you sometimes see players spam a draw request repetitively in inappropriate positions for that - but they can be reported for that.
Or blocked. Or both.
There's also refusals to resign in positions hopeless on board and clock.
On those - I have liked to promote to up to seven knights if possible.
I think that's the most I've had.

"3/4ths of a win" 💀 what is that even mean bro??