24331 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Don't you think so ? I think is a fair rule for chess.
who says it should go?
one of the troll did
No, it should go... along with:
This is the forum for us sophisticated chess players ;D
We should just get rid of the rules entirely. That would produce more interesting games.
with the list like that BorgQueen that will be easy for the kindergarden kids to play ! lol
Yeah, 1.axd8=Q+ should be entirely possible!
that why we have what is called "chess variants"
Of course it should stay! Its vital to chess!!
why do you think is vital to have it ?
Its been in the rules forever! Idk how else people would determine what happans when you get in that situation then. Maybe they should make another game mode where there isnt!
I think it should stay, but I don't think people who disagree are trolls.
I think there is a game where you can play without the stalemate rule, but not sure what is called though.
you're right but I was talking about a particular person though.
Oh, well then why is someone complaining about it? lol. They can just play that way. Anyway, Bellomy is right and my opinion is it should stay.
I said that in another forum and got nitpicked on the "forever" word! Apparently, it was introduced in the 13th century ^_^
Hmm. What did they do before that?! (for stalemate)
My friend and I played a variant of chess where the was no stalemate. The rule was, blacks turn was simply skipped and it was whites turn.
I had him in stalemate and we decided to end the game by simply removing the pawn from the board and putting a queen in a checkmating position on the board.
It was quite silly really.
I do think that something should be done to tone down the amount of draws. I dont think that the rules should be altered, I think that something should be done about the way draws are percieved by the chess world. If draws are deemed as bad and not simply neutral, players would not want to play for draws, they would play to win.
Mate without check.
Why are so many non members on this site?
by kaynight a few minutes ago
Thoughts on people who illegally download chess books?
by kkl10 a few minutes ago
New chess boards
by RussBell a few minutes ago
10/23/2016 - One And Done
by ChessFail10000 7 minutes ago
Offloading Analysis Feature workload to User Computers
by spestival 9 minutes ago
SER...BLACK TO MOVE
by pampi_nero 12 minutes ago
SER...USE THE OBSTACLE
by pampi_nero 14 minutes ago
A game won without even one aggressive move played...
by solskytz 15 minutes ago
THE WINNING MOVE
by pampi_nero 17 minutes ago
why do they call the rooks a pig?
by GreenCastleBlock 35 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
Try the new Chess.com!
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!