Forums

Why was this a draw?

Sort:
Ronanc001

I disagree. It's a bad rule. 

Ronanc001

It lessens the overall enjoyment of the game. Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality. Terrible rule. The objective of playing chess is enjoyment.

NervesofButter

All this time you have spent complaining about stalemate.  You could have spent that time on learning how to win the game.

Martin_Stahl
Ronanc001 wrote:

It lessens the overall enjoyment of the game. Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality. Terrible rule. The objective of playing chess is enjoyment.

 

The objective of chess is checkmate. Of course it should be enjoyable at some level, but it's a good rule and logically follows from the other rules 

SacrificeTheHorse

Qg4# numbnuts.

Jalex13
“Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality.”

No one should lose if you can’t beat them. You could have played better. As NervesofButter said, stop complaining about it and just learn how to prevent it.

What you are doing is like playing a game of soccer/football where it was 2-0 and then the opponents scored 2 goals and the game goes to overtime, then saying it’s unfair that you didn’t win.
NervesofButter
Jalex13 wrote:
“Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality.”

No one should lose if you can’t beat them. You could have played better. As NervesofButter said, stop complaining about it and just learn how to prevent it.

What you are doing is like playing a game of soccer/football where it was 2-0 and then the opponents scored 2 goals and the game goes to overtime, then saying it’s unfair that you didn’t win.

This is normal.  Its the same thing when a fan of a team will throw a fit when a call goes against their team.  But they will no have problem with a call that benefits their team.

FoxWithNekoEars
Uživatel Ronanc001 napsal:

It lessens the overall enjoyment of the game. Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality. Terrible rule. The objective of playing chess is enjoyment.

There are many puzzles containing stalemate what are for me personally very enjoyable to solve.
What is a useless technicality for you could be very important part of the game for others.

pfren
Ronanc001 wrote:

It seems abit ridiculous because its clearly not a stalemate. 2 queens v one king. He was toast!

 

What is ridiculous is white's last move (Qg8 instead of Qg4 checkmate).

Before playing this silly game, it's useful to read the rules carefully.

Oh... and if you don't like the rule, you can play Parcheesi, which has fair rules.

eric0022
Ronanc001 wrote:

It lessens the overall enjoyment of the game. Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality. Terrible rule. The objective of playing chess is enjoyment.

 

There is a reason why the rule is there.

 

Anyway, how about this game played at the beginning of this month? I'm sure a stalemate should be a loss based on your thoughts, right?

 

 

eric0022
Ronanc001 wrote:

It lessens the overall enjoyment of the game. Its let's people who should lose a game get off on a technicality. Terrible rule. The objective of playing chess is enjoyment.

 

To add, it's precisely because of this rule that enriches the game of chess. It keeps winning players on their toes consistently and allows players on the losing side (in most scenarios, the stalemated player in on the losing side) to have a chance to evade a loss. Pawn endings would have been dull without these rules.

 

I'm sure the majority of players who got stalemated become happy with their results as they would have fought for it. Only a small minority did not realise that a stalemate would be coming.

 

As your experience grows and your rating increases, your views towards stalemate are likely to change, even if at this particular time you are still not very impressed by the rule.

 

But at this particular time, in more than half of your 31 stalemates, you were on the winning side. You must ensure that the opponent's king has squares to move around (or some other pieces to move about) whilst pushing the opponent's king towards checkmate.

Lagomorph
Ronanc001 wrote:

Nah, not angry. It's just a ridiculous rule. Game was over. Everyone with an ounce of sense cam see that. You guys are just accepting of a terrible rule, you cant see the wood from the trees. Oh well case closed.

You can either play chess, or invent up some new game of your own.

Stalemate is rule dating back over two hundred years.

ScatteredWealth

If stalemate wasn't a rule, it would turn the game into capture the king. No one wants that. (Or do they?) 

TiltedDonkey

lol your opponent can't move anywhere. https://support.chess.com/article/682-what-is-stalemate

Strenngth
Capture the king is the best OTB rule ever