why shouldn’t stalemates be a win?
Sort:
Is there a reason behind stalemates not being a win? I understand that there are no legal moves but is there another reason?
Jan 23, 2021
0
#2
thatguy0773 wrote:
Is there a reason behind stalemates not being a win? I understand that there are no legal moves but is there another reason?
At the end of the day, the stalemate rule is arbitrary like all other rules in chess. To my limited knowledge, the stalemate rule has a bizarre history but was pretty much cemented in the 1800s to be a draw universally. It seems like there is a little more popularity today to explore the idea of stalemate = win (such as being able to play that variant in Chess.com).
Jan 23, 2021
0
#3
Historically, it has also been a loss for the stalemating side, in some cases. The draw is the most logical, in my opinion.
Changing it massively changes the game.
Jan 23, 2021
0
#4
There are four ways to win: checkmate, time, resignation, or forfeit.
If your opponent is not in check, but cannot legally move, the game just stops. No more moves can be legally played, checkmate is impossible, and the game just stops.
You must make the killing move and won’t be rewarded for blundering a checkmate. Stalemate is caused by poor play, and if you mess up a mate, that’s on you.
If your opponent is not in check, but cannot legally move, the game just stops. No more moves can be legally played, checkmate is impossible, and the game just stops.
You must make the killing move and won’t be rewarded for blundering a checkmate. Stalemate is caused by poor play, and if you mess up a mate, that’s on you.
Not necessarily a blunder. Many K+P vs K endgames will lead to stalemate with perfect play. Sometimes one can blunder into those if there's a way to avoid them, though, so the rule helps to make endgame theory richer and more interesting.
OP’s q is why not a win? My q is why would it?
Jan 23, 2021
0
#7
@pulpo it depends on whether or not the original position allows with the player with K+P to gain the opposition. It’s not automatically a draw with perfect play. But even if it is a draw with perfect play, those are the breaks. You can’t kill the king. Draw.
Jan 23, 2021
0
#8
NikkiLikeChikki wrote:
@pulpo it depends on whether or not the original position allows with the player with K+P to gain the opposition. It’s not automatically a draw with perfect play. But even if it is a draw with perfect play, those are the breaks. You can’t kill the king. Draw.
True, but in a K+P vs K situation, if stalemate was a win, all such games would become wins, which in my opinion, make the game less interesting and nuanced.
@NikkiLikeChikki, I know you're not advocating that, just thought my reply goes best with your post 
Jan 23, 2021
0
#9
Yeah. If stalemate were a win, it would take a lot of the thinking out of soooooooo many endgames and decrease the skill gap between players.
But thinking about opposition and how to properly push pawns. It’s too complicated! Waaah 😭
But thinking about opposition and how to properly push pawns. It’s too complicated! Waaah 😭
That's why I love so much this example by Silman. Black to move.
Jan 23, 2021
0
#12
Imagine the situation where in a battle one side has overwhelming force but allowed a much weaker opponent escape the battle. One can easily imagine a situation where one side escapes to an easily defensible position that the superior side just can’t crack. One side can’t move out of the stronghold but the other side can’t make progress. Does the side with the overwhelming forces get declared the victor at the battle?
Nope.
Nope.
Jan 23, 2021
0
#13
@melvin - the alpa zero team did just this and the number of drawn games was reduced, but not by a huge amount.
I believe it's the fault of the Brits who put in the stalemate rule in the 1800s. Traditionally winning was actually capturing the king. Checkmate is a European concept and a fairly new concept compared to how old chess is.
There are many versions of chess as the rules of changed over time. Maybe chess.com could have a turn back clock since we know the order of the rule changes. The only issue would be the castling experimentation in the 1500s because there were at least three different popular versions plus no castling rule at the same time.