Stalemate sucks and it needs to be removed

You play a close game where it's pawn + king vs. solo king. You do all the right moves up until the very last one and get your queen. Boom, stalemate. It's pretty easy to force. The opponent can't move. Why is that your problem? Stalemate should be abolished. Period.

Just to let you know: the only people who complain about stalemate are beginners. They are frustrated by the fact that they were completely winning and then by some “technicality” they don’t.

The only way to win, aside by flagging or resignation, is by checkmating you’re opponent. When you stalemate, you cannot checkmate, it’s as simple as that.

As a metaphor, consider you have a huge army outside a castle. The king is trapped inside, but you can’t get to him. You can shake your swords all you want, and he can’t move, but you just can’t kill him. You can’t lose, but you can’t win.

The stalemate rule makes you a better player by forcing you to be more precise with checkmate and not just sloppily throwing pieces around your opponent’s king. It also offers hope to the losing player in the final moments that a position can be saved.

I agree with you that I am a beginner. There isn't a gap between understanding here, but rather a gameplay limitation based on chess.com. Let me present a case to you:

 

You are at the edge of the board, say top left. It doesn't matter. You have a pawn and a king that are glued to each other. The pawn needs to reach the other side of the board. The opponent's king is two squares away from your pawn. The entire time you have to move your king and pawn towards the opponent's side. At some point you have two options: move your king to a square connecting to the pawn or move your king away from the pawn and lose it.

The opponent then maneuvers the king into a position where the only move you have left is to move your king. Of course you won't move it away from the pawn, since you don't want to lose the pawn and draw. Then the opponent moves his / her piece one space back. And then your only move is to move your king again. At some point A) you will reach the artificial 50 move limitation and the game draws, or B) you move your king off the pawn and you lose the pawn, or C) you get your pawn on the far side and get your queen. Game drawn. What do you do to break out of this situation? Please, I would love a concrete example and not some metaphor involving a castle.

Great comment and a terrible avatar to match!

What makes you think that there should always be a win if you are ahead in material? If you can’t checkmate, you can’t checkmate. End of story. The game would be much more sloppily played if stalemate were a win.

 

Is there a solution to the problem that I presented? I am genuinely curious.

Your username is funny

The problem is that it would change many endgame positions just because someone has been careless. From one of your games:

 

Apart from this, a losing side has a strategy to trick you into forcing a stalemate. If you anticipate potential traps you will generally be able to avoid it. Stalemate makes the game richer.

As for pawn up endgame, you need to know when it is a win, when it is not (it depends on whose move is it, where is the pawn and where are the kings on the board) and you need to learn king opposition technique in order to try to win when you are a pawn up, and to try to draw when you are a pawn down. In any case, without it, game would be simpler than it is today, and there is no reason to do it. It is perfect the way it is.

I guess what you try to describe is a theoretically drawn KP vs K endgame. Yes, having an extra pawn is not always sufficient to win. How is that a problem?

You did not present a problem. You presented a drawn position. The solution is to live with the draw.

I still view stalemate as an extremely flawed mechanic, but based on the overwhelming criticism, I suppose the answer is just to deal with it and avoid stalemate games. Thank you for your responses, except for @Louutah16.

Sometimes when you're losing, the only thing left to do is to stalemate.

 

It's not that bad of a rule, but it's annoying sometimes. The best thing you can do is focus and think before you move anything.

I live stalemate... Its been my last refuge a fair few times

The problem is that this rule affects a lot of things and ruins many endgame positions.

That is the thing. A novice player doesn't really understand beyond: "Damn this stalemate rule, I drew a game I was winning", but the thing is that on a higher level, if you just make it a win, it completely changes the nature of the game to be more materialistic than it is now.

People wouldn't need to calculate what kind of an endgame with a pawn up will they get if they simplify the position, they wouldn't need to think about stalemate tricks where opponent sacrifice their pieces in order to get stalemate position when they are losing etc.

Even something like this would be winning:

 

For instance, there is that endgame with the bishop of opposite color and the rook pawn that is a draw as well. By that new rules - nope, no need to think at all, just go for that endgame, you are up material.

agreed

The endgame would be SO much easier for the side up in material without the stalemate rule. You can be super sloppy and have to learn so much less. If you think that making the game easier to play is a good thing, that's your right. Most people disagree, though, so the rule will never be changed.

 

^

Kramnik investigated chess where stalemate = win
Chess still stays a draw
See Fig. 2 (b)
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf 

this topic has been posted about to death

Making another post on it won't change the rule.

Stalemate will always exist.

If you stalemate someone its your own fault for not being able to mate with an overwhelming material advantage. Blame your lack of skill, not the games rules.

Stalemate adds so much to the subtlety of the game . I understand your frustration , but as your understanding of the game grows you will appreciate this . I don’t mean this at all in a condescending way . Once you study many master games and the history of great chess games then you will find examples of incredible escapes through stalemate which can spring from nowhere occasionally . I was held to a draw in the British Rapidplay in Leeds many years ago . Three pawns up and I wondered why my opponent was playing on …. I soon found out … he sacrificed his rook and my full point turned to a dusty half point in an Instant . Stalemate will come to your rescue as much as it frustrates you . So don’t worry and learn to love the complexities of our shared game . All the best , Simon