I mean in the early forms of chess like chaturanga, it is considered as a win. Why it isn't now? Pretty odd if you ask me.
well there is no good answer to question like that. I guess people player over several rule sets and somsettled on some. Anyway that happened hundreds years ago. If annoys you switch to qianqi where it is considered a win. or shogi where stalemate is impossible
Stalemate as a draw rule makes the game more interesting.Sometimes you can escape from losing while being down 1 or even 2 pawns,maybe even couple pieces down.If stalemate was a win,then being a pawn up in endgame would be an instant win,which would make endgames less playable than they are now :)
Alpha Zero has played some games against itself with the rule stalemate = win and the game is still draw: it does not affect decisiveness as expected.
Stalemate = capturing opponent king alive
Checkmate = killing the opponent king
Both are wins
Checkmate = killing the opponent king
Both are wins
Stalemate = draw adds to the beauty of the game
you super risky-chess
You must be Nigel Short! @delta48
@Sarg0n Well i might be Nigel Short but with minus 2000 elo lol
@Delta48 not odd at all before I get to a more based on chess explanation imagine this real world scenario.
Imagine an army sieging a castle.
The army defending the castle is too weak to attack the army sieging it, it would be suicide to do so.
The army sieging it is unable to get inside the castle to capture it!
Who wins? noone. It's a stalemate.
Imagine you trying to get a feral cat outside your bedroom, the feral cat wants to escape as well but she's too afraid of you and she hid between the radiator and the wall.
You cant' reach her and are afraid that she's gonna scratch you even if you try to, she cant escape because you are there and she is afraid of you.
Who wins? noone. It's a stalemate.
Now in chess the situation is slightly different but more or less the same.
It's not a real time game (one player has to wait for his turn in order to execute a legal move <--- very important remember that)
So in a stalemate situation e.g
white moved to a7 and now white can't do anything (because white has to wait FOR HIS TURN FIRST in order to be able to execute a legal move)
Black can not move (because yes it is black's turn but there is no legal move to be done by black)
White's turn is never to come
Nor black or white can do something in this turnbased game.
Who wins? noone. It's a stalemate.
This is sufficient I think in order to explain why it is a draw but on top of that there is also the ethical side chess is supposed to end in a draw if both players are perfect.
If a players loses it means he did less perfect moves that his opponent so he should lose.
In a stalemate both players are at fault.. in our example black is at fault for losing all his material and white is at fault for having extra material but playing a bad moves which make him not able to utilize his advantage, both players are equally "faulty" it's a draw.
Imagine an army sieging a castle.
The army defending the castle is too weak to attack the army sieging it, it would be suicide to do so.
The army sieging it is unable to get inside the castle to capture it!
Who wins? noone. It's a stalemate.
Imagine you trying to get a feral cat outside your bedroom, the feral cat wants to escape as well but she's too afraid of you and she hid between the radiator and the wall.
You cant' reach her and are afraid that she's gonna scratch you even if you try to, she cant escape because you are there and she is afraid of you.
Who wins? noone. It's a stalemate.
Now in chess the situation is slightly different but more or less the same.
It's not a real time game (one player has to wait for his turn in order to execute a legal move <--- very important remember that)
So in a stalemate situation e.g
white moved to a7 and now white can't do anything (because white has to wait FOR HIS TURN FIRST in order to be able to execute a legal move)
Black can not move (because yes it is black's turn but there is no legal move to be done by black)
White's turn is never to come
Nor black or white can do something in this turnbased game.
Who wins? noone. It's a stalemate.
This is sufficient I think in order to explain why it is a draw but on top of that there is also the ethical side chess is supposed to end in a draw if both players are perfect.
If a players loses it means he did less perfect moves that his opponent so he should lose.
In a stalemate both players are at fault.. in our example black is at fault for losing all his material and white is at fault for having extra material but playing a bad moves which make him not able to utilize his advantage, both players are equally "faulty" it's a draw.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.