--------------

Sort:
Avatar of 1Doc
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of Spiritbro77

If you allow your defenses to become such that perpetual check is possible, you get what you deserve. Same goes for allowing a stalemate.

Avatar of 1Doc
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of wanmokewan

... o.O

Avatar of kleelof

Perhaps your time spent crying about it could have been better spent learning how you can prevent it from happening in the future.

Avatar of pentiumjs

1Doc, here's a game where a repeat US champion is losing badly and then brilliantly gives away his entire army to force a stalemate:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1089020

By your logic he's some kind of poor sport or cheater for simply seeing further than his opponent.  He did not break any rules, nor "hide" anything as your post suggested.  He outplayed his opponent, who happened to be another top-level master with the maturity to handle such things.  Were he not, he would in fact be the poor sport here.

Avatar of 1Doc
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of MeTristan

Good one. Wink

Avatar of EricFleet
1Doc wrote:

I think the rules should be changed, When your opponent keeps checking you so they won't loose is poor sportmenship.

No. It means you are a poor player and just plain whiny.

Avatar of Scottrf

I hate it when my opponent checkmates me when I have more pieces!

Avatar of alghul

@pentiumjs: Nice use of perpertual check threats and final stalemate trap by Christiansen!

@1Doc: You could take up Chinese chess instead...

Avatar of kiwi-inactive

OP, regardless it is legal and they have the right to check your king if it is on. It sure can be annoying and frustrating but that's the outcome of a poor defence. You could always offer a draw, if it is not accepted ride out the onslaught or resign.

Avatar of Nemo96

Logically its a draw because your king is never able to be safe

Stalemate on the other hand, is fucking retarded and should be abolished. It should atleast be a 3/4 win and 1/4 loss

Avatar of AcidBadger
1Doc wrote:

2 each there own I guess, But if that's the only way a person can save there self from loosing a game that's pretty bad, After all its only a Game!!! We had name for that in a pool game when the opponent would hide the pool ball so you couldn't make your shot. Dirty Pool!!! In this case Dirty Chess!!!

There are way too many posts like this on the forum already. People complaining about some type of legitimate strategy because they have some weird, idealized way they want the game to be played. "Winning on time doesn't count", "You should give me a draw if I blunder", bla bla. 

As you said; it's just a game, but since we are actually spending our time playing this game and trying to be good at it why wouldn't we avoid a loss when we can? 

Avatar of Revanth83

1Doc, I think you should stay away from this game if the rules are not acceptable to you. Your arguments are pretty idiotic, as has been pointed by others too. I often have cry baby opponents who rant at me when I get a perpetual on them. I have had people do a perpetual on me too, but I accept that as that is actually a part of the game. Please try to grow up or play something else with those kids in kindergarten. They might just appreciate your kind of thinking.

Avatar of RonaldJosephCote

                     Its like when you ask out a female and she says no. Completely unfair. But I sapose if she almost said yes, then that would be a 1/4 win.

Avatar of kiwi-inactive

3/4's win? How is that even possible?

Avatar of wanmokewan
Nemo96 wrote:

Logically its a draw because your king is never able to be safe

Stalemate on the other hand, is fucking retarded and should be abolished. It should atleast be a 3/4 win and 1/4 loss

... And how exactly would you divide that up?

Avatar of PossibleOatmeal
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of kiwi-inactive

A win or loss or draw is an outcome from a game, you can't have a combination of fractional outcomes. Though you can have multiple outcomes if you have played a series of games/formats etc.