Didn't think of that...
stalemate question
Sort:
mrguy888 wrote:
I hit quote to point out your error and when the page refreshed you had already fixed it.
Nasty bugger, ain't I?
oinquarki wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
I hit quote to point out your error and when the page refreshed you had already fixed it.
Nasty bugger, ain't I?
Are you the same guy who makes proof games on youtube? Because that definitely looks like one of those.
checkmateibeatu wrote: Are you the same guy who makes proof games on youtube? Because that definitely looks like one of those.
I've never heard of proof games on youtube.
I wonder if that situation ever crosses the border between hypothetical and real. If it did it should probably be distinguished from the only other kind of stalemate.
I actually think that stalemate is a good rule. The reason is that a chess player can use the compulsion to move to his advantage (for example, zuzwang). The one with the advantage executes zuzwang, and zuzwang is a technicality. Stalemate is a tool for the person at a disadvantage. Stalemate isn't just when one person has many queens; stalemate is often a tactical resort, and can be seen a lot in defending pawn promotions, and creating a desparado.
Like the person who makes those crazy positions (like rooks along a diaganol) and tries to create that position from the starting position?
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Like the person who makes those crazy positions (like rooks along a diaganol) and tries to create that position from the starting position?
Yeah I looked it up after you mentioned it; thanks.
CMFDKF wrote:
Its not my job to come up with rules, its my job to play by these rules but i have to say thats the dumbest rule i have ever heard...thats like saying if i can run under a flying spear on the battlefield i should be able to save face....oh well, take the good with the bad. I just find it odd that the person actually feels like they have saved face at that point....thought i would share my thoughts so all you veterans can laugh at the newbie figuring it out...maybe it will bring back some childhood memories:)
It does take a litle effort to plan a stalemate, so I'd say that your opponent actually has saved face at that point.
As far as running under spears on the battlefield; it might not be wise, but it sure would look impressive :)
You're definetely not alone, so don't sweat it. I just played a game where my poor king was alone, facing two rooks. Technically I won on time, practically it became a draw due to insufficient material on my behalf. Life!
If stalemate was a win, all K+p vs K endings would be won for the side with the pawn. It will turn endgame theory on its head.
Checkmate yields a greater point increase than stalemate.
There are stalemates in which the king cannot move at all, check or no check, so your zugzwang idea doesn't really work;
I hit quote to point out your error and when the page refreshed you had already fixed it.