You can't move if it's not your turn.
Forbid Stalemate etc. in Chess
Sort:
If you don't checkmate you don't deserve victory.
In early 19th century England, a player stalemating his opponent would actually lose the game on the grounds that only very incompetent players would stalemate and such players should be punished.
If you get a draw with insufficient pieces when your opponent's time runs out it is because you did not have enough material to give checkmate.
Boletus_CZ wrote:
Silentiarius, thanks for your information. I didn`t know about it.
You're welcome! 
And have you seen the way the knights move? What a scam.
May 3, 2012
0
#8
It's more or less arbitary. In Xiangqi (Chinese chess) a player who is forced to move into check loses.
To be fair though, it is harder to enforce checkmate in Xiangqi. As Sam Sloan says, if it weren't for the rule forbidding repetition of moves in Xiangqi, virtually every game would end in a draw.
Amy
ciljettu wrote:
The stalemate rule is what makes many endgames subtle and interesting.
Chess would be poorer without it.
+1
IF ANY SIDE IS NOT ABLE TO MAKE A VALID MOVE A STALEMATE SHOULD BE PUT ASIDE AND A DRAW REQUESTED
Fred_Hache wrote:
Several times, my situation, also on my chessclub, is that i can move pieces, but my opponent can't. In chess, that is called: Stalemate. In my oppinion very wrong, because i can still move pieces, and my opponent can't. So who is stronger ? You all know the answer.
If someone can't move anyway, he/she just looses the game. To me that's very clear.
Also does it happends on time. I have more pieces than my opponent and i have time left in Bullet & Blitzgames. Still there comes: draw, by insufficient pieces ??? And that while i have more pieces and time ???
So i think there is some work to do in the chessworld. The way it is now is very crooked, very, very crooked.
Fred Hache
Draw by insufficient material is actually doing you a favor. It only happens when a player runs out of time and should lose the game... but because his opponent has no material to mate him it's considered a draw.
It's impossible to have time left on your clock and enough pieces to mate and a draw by insufficient material be declared, you must not have been paying attention.
Fred_Hache wrote:
So i think there is some work to do in the chessworld. The way it is now is very crooked, very, very crooked.
Fred Hache
Yeah, but this won't happen whilst the Illuminati are pulling the strings. WHICH THEY ARE.
goldendog wrote:
And have you seen the way the knights move? What a scam.
The knights are allowed to move!?! That's It! Screw this game!
DKof wrote:
goldendog wrote:
And have you seen the way the knights move? What a scam.
The knights are allowed to move!?! That's It! Screw this game!
And don't even get me started on those bishops! "There's candy in the church van", they said...
When players play the three, two- or one minute game ? Only one thing is relevant, called: time !
If ya all got another opinion ? I do share that with you, if, if, if... it is all about the longer games. Bullet & Blitz should have to be only based on time & nothing more. (But i know: that's my opinion)
Fred Hache
Several times, my situation, also on my chessclub, is that i can move pieces, but my opponent can't. In chess, that is called: Stalemate. In my oppinion very wrong, because i can still move pieces, and my opponent can't. So who is stronger ? You all know the answer.
If someone can't move anyway, he/she just looses the game. To me that's very clear.
Also does it happends on time. I have more pieces than my opponent and i have time left in Bullet & Blitzgames. Still there comes: draw, by insufficient pieces ??? And that while i have more pieces and time ???
So i think there is some work to do in the chessworld. The way it is now is very crooked, very, very crooked.
Fred Hache