Me (and all chess community) vs Chess rules : Stalemate

Hello. Recently I've been playing some chess games and "41 hours" ago, I've played a particularly unfair game:



As you can probably guess with the weird title of the topic: Stalemate. And I promoted to a rook to AVOID on purpose the stalemate but it happened still. And by being the winning side before stalemate, I didn't win any rating but my opponent +2.

After this disaster, I decided to post this topic to solve this problem forever. We urgently need to add a new rule:

> If the game ended in a draw by stalemate, the winning player before stalemate gets a refund of +1 but the losing player -1 if and only if the winning player can win the game. If he can't, both players get ±0. Applies for stalemate, 50-move rule. Doesn't apply for Draw Agreement, Threefold Repetition or dead positions (insufficient material).
> If the game ended in a draw by stalemate in online chess, the engine evaluates the position and gives the right rating win/loss for each player (+1/-1 if there's a winner, ±0/±0 if both sides cannot win).

With these new rules added, at least the winning player isn't frustrated and both players are satisfied with the game result.

Stalemate is a situation in the game of chess where the player whose turn it is to move is not in check but has no legal move. Stalemate results in a draw. Stalemate is draw so rating gain/loss should be same as a draw

@WassimBerbar So just because you do not have the Chess skill to win an easily won position the rules of Chess have to be changed ? Ha Ha.

@DerekMcGill So just because you underestimate me at winning an easily won position and draw it like everyone does, you had to post this mocker reply? Ha Ha.

And this pandemic happened to me only 14 times among 3532 games. And most of those are me trying to beat Stockfish 4 desperately getting ridiculous stalemates instead. And some of them are months ago. I was thinking at other people and all chess community blundering winning games such as this, not just me or you.

Nice find by Black to hover around a5 and give White the chance to make a mistake.

Dear @WassimBerbar ,

I understand your frustration. Most of us have experienced stalematie situations (frustrating from one point of view/lucky or even simply by puspose calculated from the other point of view - yes, forcing a stalemate can be a tactical shot, too).

Stalemate is such a HUUUUGE topic, that makes chess even more interesting and harder to master. Taking this out of the rules would be like cutting someon's arm... and legs... and head... It wouldn't be the same game anymore.

You know, you'll never forget that match. You can be angry about this match/topic for AGES, or simply accept it and take the best out of your "loss" and try to never let it happen again - also, try to use the stalemate as your own weapon in defence. It's up to you!

Have fun.

@WassimBerbar I'll just add one thing that hasn't been mentioned, about this:

"I've played a particularly unfair game"

There is nothing unfair about this. The rules were the same for both people, and were for the entirety of the game. You just played poorly, that doesn't make it unfair. Learn from your mistake, because that's what it is - a mistake by you.

So I accidentally stalemate magnus, he only loses -1 rating for drawing a random noob, whereas I get a measly +1 for drawing the world chess champion?
A draw is a draw, and seeing you had 2.5 minutes on the clock, this was easily avoidable, and that is what we call a 'blunder', you could blunder a draw up a queen, or your opponent could do the same, in the end, your argument makes no sense.

How do you plan to define the "winning" side? Add a black pawn on h7 and a white Bishop on h6, and there still exists a way to win for Black before the stalemate.