Why it make stalemate when I have 2 towers and 2 queens
Sort:
I had game which end with stalemate, when on the table was mine 2 towers, 2 queens, 1 pawn and computer had a king only. I can do checkmate with few moves but game was ended with draw by stalemate, why?
It means that all of your pieces covered enough squares such that the lone king was not attacked but had no legal squares to move to. Hence stalemate.
2 rooks and 2 queens can cover enough squares to prevent a lone king from having a legal square to move to.
How would I know? Because I accidentally caused a stalemate playing a friend in my high school days. Instead of going on to win the game, I decided “punish” him by promoting four pawns to queen. Stalemate occurred when I gained the 4th queen. One of the most foolish things I ever did in chess, even I had to laugh at what occurred.
It becomes really easy to accidentally end a game in stalemate with 2 queens. I've done that at least once. That's a good reason for under-promotion. But really, two rooks is enough. I only found one of your games that ended in stalemate, but it doesn't fit your description. Your opponent had 2 rooks and a bishop against your nothing. They should have mated you, but they apparently didn't know how to do that with 2 rooks. You might try finishing that game yourself from move 22 against the computer taking the side of black (In the real game, you were playing white).
@chris_miner Yes, it was against computer
@chessarx, thx
I played chess as a child and I discovered now, that my friend`s grandpa teach us rules from the XIX/XX centaury. I start to playing chess now, from the beginning actually, what you can see from my games. Now I understand. King wasn`t checkmate but have no place to go without being checkmate, in very old rules that was actually a checkmate