I know I posted on here already but I just re-read the title this morning & laughed because I think the title is so funny & thought it'd make a good shirt to wear to a tournament. Somebody needs to print that on shirts, they'd probably sell pretty good.
Stalemate was invented by a loser
Sort:
Hahahaha
imbigbdk wrote:
EndgameEnthusiast2357 wrote:
Use my latest example then:
None of blacks pieces can move and white is nowhere near the king to hypothetically "capture" it. Why should white win here?
because this is an impossible position.. thats why
It's not an impossible position:
So why should white win here?
imbigbdk wrote:
none of those positions occur without being deliberately created by both sides. material is irrelevant as i said and in any real game the side getting stalemated is losing or its dead even occasionally. i read what you posted it just makes no sense, nobody sacrifices a pawn thinking oh its just a pawn once EVERYTHING ELSE gets traded i can still draw if it goes bad
It doesn't matter how "unlikely" the position is, the rules have to account for all positions and be consistent. How likely is smothered mate?
imbigbdk wrote:
it would not be in the slightest bit harder. if you have to move your king in check they take your king and win. treat it like any other piece. nothing to do with material in and impossible positions where ur king is somehow trapped in all 8 squares (which would never, ever occur to be clear) just make the other guy go then. in what situations are you UP a pawn yet stuck in the corner? the guy down a pawn is the one stuck against the back rank. if your entire strategy revolves around being ok giving up a pawn because youll hold a draw despite playing worse you deserve to lose
For the 5th time, stalemate does not mean their king could be taken next move or is even in any danger in the future. All it means is that one or both sides has no legal moves. A lone king can even theoretically stalemate all the enemy pieces:
Black's king is in absolutely no danger of being "taken".
1st of all the other guy couldn't move even if it was his turn, it's a double-stalemate. 2nd, the rules of chess don't change based on "actual games" vs hypothetical games. Any possible game out of the 10^1000000000+ possible games has to follow the same rules. You don't get to say "stalemate should be a win in the more common positions where the guy up a queen blunders but not in the weirder games where both sides may end up stalemated or the side stalemated isn't actually losing, that should still be a draw!"
Also, your suggestion to make the king capturable causes another interesting scenario which was brought up in a similar thread:
Here black is checkmated but if you forced black to still make a move, he can't, so this could end up being a draw by "check-lock", whereas in a normal game it is checkmate. Basically making stalemate anything other than a draw and/or changing king capture rules could turn winning positions into draws and losing positions into wins, in a very illogical way.
Well you could say that whoever moved last wins in the double case as it is the other player who is the one who can't move on his turn, but that still doesn't address my last post, making the king capturable could turn checkmate positions into draws using your logic.
So I guess white would also win this pawn endgame by getting a 2nd turn moving his King back to e6 after stalemating the black king, now that the black king can come out to c7?
That totally ruins the complexity and thrill of even the most basic endgames though lol!
Literally these
These endgames exist.
Aug 8, 2024
0
#152
checkmated0001 wrote:
Literally these
None of them is stalemate
Do you know what stalemate is?
Aug 8, 2024
0
#154
checkmated0001 wrote:
Do you know what stalemate is?
Excuse me, what kind of a stupid question is that. Everybody knows. I am saying those pictures were not stalemate. If you want to win an argument, argue with your friends that are mentally challenged because of you
Aug 8, 2024
0
#155
Ngl I think this was created by a guy who probably tilted at a stalemate lol... even if u think its stupid it's a rule so cope
Wow. The first is an FEN, just click on the three lines, click analysis, and play it through. With perfect play it is a draw by stalemate. This is a fairly well known, extremely basic endgame study. The other is stalemate, Since the white pieces have no available moves, and it is not black to play. You can tell it's a draw by stalemate by looking at the picture, and noticing the two draw signs on the top right corner of each king (the 1/2 symbols). Please stop calling people mentally challenged while simultaneously demonstrating you don't understand the subject you're debating.
Aug 8, 2024
0
#157
imbigbdk wrote:
the only one coping here is you with your sub 500 rating
Rating shaming from a 1000... Wow
Aug 8, 2024
0
#158
imbigbdk wrote:
1000? do you know how to read?
That is technically still 1000
Aug 8, 2024
0
#159
imbigbdk wrote:
1000? do you know how to read?
I might be 200-300, but I don't rate shame people
See comment #142. Black is up TWO (2!) pawns, and a bishop. (5 points total), yet has no legal moves. There have been several other positions provided in this forum alone that also disprove your claim that you cannot have your king trapped if you are up material. I believe in one position black is up a queen, rook, bishop, and several pawns and yet still has no legal moves. You also clearly did not understand what I posted, as I said that both sides will tend to cooperate in order to maintain equality in the position, not sacrificing material to hold a draw (though that can, has, and will continue to happen).