Yeah, you're not just evil, but you like wasting people's time. Not only did you try trolling them, but you also stalemated? Imagine how everyone else in the tournament will see you, "that guy who stalemated up a queen and two rooks". If this blog is real, can you tell me why you decided to stalemate, please?
I might be a bad person
Sort:
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
I think it's impressive you didn't accidentally checkmate cuz I've accidentally checkmated people with like only a queen and you had way too much material so.... Bravo👏, but checkmate next time
I don't know why I did that, also it wasn't a tournament, It was just a casual match.
Sensei-T wrote:
Yeah, you're not just evil, but you like wasting people's time. Not only did you try trolling them, but you also stalemated? Imagine how everyone else in the tournament will see you, "that guy who stalemated up a queen and two rooks". If this blog is real, can you tell me why you decided to stalemate, please?
They wouldn't resign for a long time just like my first game(You can see more at my other forum).
at1kshs1ngh wrote:
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
I think it's impressive you didn't accidentally checkmate cuz I've accidentally checkmated people with like only a queen and you had way too much material so.... Bravo👏, but checkmate next time
Okay, I never tried to stalemate before so I really didn't know what to do but in the end I did it.
wrote:
I don't know why I did that, also it wasn't a tournament, It was just a casual match.
Dang, my bad, yeah, I would say its fine in a casual match between friends or just a stranger who was talking trash
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
Indeed why not. Yes.
Point: he didn't resign.
In blitz games here I've often been up several pawns against lone King.
If whoever doesn't resign I've made several knights many times.
Regarding blundering into stalemate - that kind of thing is less likely if you're playing 5 2 instead of 5 0.
The increment gives you time to win a won game.
10 0 is a very popular time control. But 10 2 is rare. Hard to get a game of 10 2.
Be honest.
That is just a cheap excuse. You just couldn't find the checkmate 
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
learn basic endgame: rook /2rooks/rook and queen / and then you might not make stalemates
analist76bis wrote:
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
learn basic endgame: rook /2rooks/rook and queen / and then you might not make stalemates
In time scrambles with very limited time left on the clocks -
there are some ideas - make sure you are checking on every move.
Or - make sure the other king has flight squares.
Take all his pieces? That's double-edged.
Could leave him without a move.
On the other hand if you go down on time - he can't claim a win with 'mating material'.
If you have several pieces against a lone king - there's no point in 'book-studying' that -
because there's zillions of such scenarios.
-----------------------
Rook and King against King is a vital ending.
Arguably the most fundamental ending?
Maybe. There's also King and pawn against King.
Which is actually harder.
For example in certain sixth rank king situations you don't need 'the opposition' to win.
Lone queen mating lone king might be the most common checkmate though.
Maybe. There's also King and pawn against King. This is ages to learn.
he had problem to learn in a week - Rook and King against King is a vital ending,
Queen and King against King
2 Rook and King against King
each one lesson and some practice
I saw in oficial competion at very begginers kids that some cannot check mate in final even with verry high advantages because the skiped this lessons
playerafar wrote:
Rook and King against King is a vital ending.
Arguably the most fundamental ending?
Maybe.
One can argue that two rooks vs the lone king in more fundamental and more important. Also it's much easier. And I bet that the OP doesn't know that one either.
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
No worries cause eventually you will get spanked as well... Just a matter of time..
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
XiangqiZhiSi wrote:
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.
No worries cause eventually you will get spanked as well... Just a matter of time..
It already happened. He just managed to not win a completely won game.
magipi wrote:
playerafar wrote:
Rook and King against King is a vital ending.
Arguably the most fundamental ending?
Maybe.
One can argue that two rooks vs the lone king in more fundamental and more important. Also it's much easier. And I bet that the OP doesn't know that one either.
That's sometimes called the Ladder mate isn't it?
The point is you don't need zugzwang to do it.
You're right. That's a legit argument.
The point about K and R versus K is that its the minimal force needed to win on a clear board.
playerafar wrote:
magipi wrote:
playerafar wrote:
Rook and King against King is a vital ending.
Arguably the most fundamental ending?
Maybe.
One can argue that two rooks vs the lone king in more fundamental and more important. Also it's much easier. And I bet that the OP doesn't know that one either.
That's sometimes called the Ladder mate isn't it?
The point is you don't need zugzwang to do it.
You're right. That's a legit argument.
The point about K and R versus K is that its the minimal force needed to win on a clear board.
You are right, of course. My point is that mating with a single rook is probably too difficult for a 200-rated player like the OP.
Probably accidentally stalemated, 200s can’t purposely stalemate I was there at one point.
Damn, none of you guys really believe me, honestly I really don't know what you're talking about because it's pretty easy to purposely stalemate.
wrote:
Damn, none of you guys really believe me, honestly I really don't know what you're talking about because it's pretty easy to purposely stalemate.
It could be that there's no good reason to purposefully stalemate if you are completely winning. Also, considering your rating on chess.com alone, it's easy to assume that you'll most likely stalemate in positions where mate in 1 is everywhere.
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
I had my first IRL game, and I demolished my opponent yesterday. I played my second IRL game ever. I totally dominated, I was actually toying around with them doing a Queen, Rook, Bishop, and Knight sac. In the endgame I had one Queen, two Rooks, and five Pawns, they only had their king. Here comes the evil-ish part I stalemated them because why not.