#254
It is a scientific paper and they even involved Kramnik.
The results of table 2 are unambiguous: even if stalemate is a win, chess is still a draw.
The cases you mention can just be avoided.
Like Kramnik said: there are other means to defend.
Should we get rid of stalemate?
Sort:
tygxc wrote:
#254
It is a scientific paper and they even involved Kramnik.
The results of table 2 are unambiguous: even if stalemate is a win, chess is still a draw.
The cases you mention can just be avoided.
Like Kramnik said: there are other means to defend.
"Can be avoided"... oh yeah.
First of all, neither Kramnik, nor anyone else can prove that a certain position "could be avoided".
What you are saying now is that without the stalemate rule:
Q: What is the evaluation of this position?
A: It is a draw, because this position could be avoided.
And this applies to thousands of similar positions.
Please, next time try saying something that makes more sense.
#256
They let AlphaZero play 1000 games against itself at 1 min/move.
Standard rules: 979 draws, 18 white wins, 3 black wins
With stalemate = win: 971 draws, 25 white wins, 4 black wins.
That is hardly any difference.
Kramnik:
"Stalemate=win chess has little effect on the opening and middlegame play, mostly affecting the evaluation of certain endgames. As such, it does not increase decisiveness of the game by much, as it seems to almost always be possible to defend without relying on stalemate as a drawing resource. Therefore, this chess variant is not likely to be useful for sidestepping known theory or for making the game substantially more decisive at the high level. The overall effect of the change seems to be minor."
The real results of AlphaZero and the opinion of Kramnik make more sense than your wry remark.
May 26, 2022
0
#245
kramnik's name is in the toilet:
he's really trying to save his rep, not chess.
the variants he is proposing are garbage:
castling & stalemate improve the game.
May 26, 2022
0
#246
tygxc wrote:
#256
They let AlphaZero play 1000 games against itself at 1 min/move.
Standard rules: 979 draws, 18 white wins, 3 black wins
With stalemate = win: 971 draws, 25 white wins, 4 black wins.
That is hardly any difference.
And you didn't notice the fast one they pulled there?
"With stalemate" IS "standard rules"!
They're the exact same freaking thing!!!
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Of course the results are going to be the same. They didn't change anything!
tygxc wrote:
#248
"Or how about 16/32s to the player who stalemated. But only 4/8ths to the player who got stalemated?"
++ It makes no difference. Chess is a draw even if stalemate is changed to a win.
See Figure 2:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf
If they changed the rule which side gets the win? The side that has the extra pawn, but is unable to move or the side that forced the opponent into not being able to move?
long_quach wrote:
I don't know if I said this before.
In Chinese Chess, stalemate is a win.
That's the beauty of having 2 descendants of Chaturanga.
If you don't like the rules of 1 game, you can play the other, or both.
Yes, stalemate is win.
Apr 4, 2023
0
#249
long_quach wrote:
I don't know if I said this before.
In Chinese Chess, stalemate is a win.
That's the beauty of having 2 descendants of Chaturanga.
If you don't like the rules of 1 game, you can play the other, or both.
So, if they wanted to change that in Chinese Chess, they can always point to Western Chess. Where stalemate is a draw.
Jul 12, 2024
0
#251
Hypermodernman wrote:
ab121705 wrote:
what would we replace stalemate with? what would happen in stalemate situations? how can you decide who wins?
When a king is in stalemate maybe you could do what they do in golf when a ball is in the water - they drop the ball. Why not just have the player close his eyes and drop his king somewhere random? "on the floor "right...
#252
The results of table 2 do not lie.
Read the paper: "it seems to almost always be possible to
defend without relying on stalemate as a drawing resource" - Kramnik
That's pure nonsense. Chess-wise, a sanitary paper is more informative than the pseudo-scientific paper you are posting.
Without the stalemate rule, practically everything changes dramatically.
- K+P vs K ending: always a win if the king can protect his pawn.
- K+R vs K+B: a forced win for the rook
- K+R+P vs K+R: a forced win in all cases, excluding just few.
- Countless other cases.
- You can also add some ridiculous forced wins, like this one:
Looks like a chess parody, but actually it is a forced win whith the stalemate rule dropped.