I recently played against someone who is very good at chess,but he told me a rule that did not make sense and I believe to be incorrect, but I'm not sure. Here goes.
I was playing as White and he was black. Towards the end of the game, I forced him into checkmate. He immediately claimed that since his king had no place to squares to move to that it was a forced checkmate and that he had won the game by default. Is this even possible? I know chess pretty well and to the best of my knowledge, once you're in checkmate, it's game over and the color that is in checkmate loses no matter how the checkmate happens. Am I missing something or am I playing with a soar loser? Thank you in advance.
Did you notate the game? If so, post it here so that we can determine exactly what happened. Based on the explanation, it is really hard to determine what happened.
The only thing I could think of is stalemate, based on your statement "since his king had not place to squares to move to... ."
The game ends immediately when checkmate is achieved or when stalemate is achieved. In the first case, the person that is checkmated loses (as expected) and in the latter, the game is a draw.
I recently played against someone who is very good at chess,but he told me a rule that did not make sense and I believe to be incorrect, but I'm not sure. Here goes.
I was playing as White and he was black. Towards the end of the game, I forced him into checkmate. He immediately claimed that since his king had no place to squares to move to that it was a forced checkmate and that he had won the game by default. Is this even possible? I know chess pretty well and to the best of my knowledge, once you're in checkmate, it's game over and the color that is in checkmate loses no matter how the checkmate happens. Am I missing something or am I playing with a soar loser? Thank you in advance.