I had this guy's King in a corner with 5 pawns, 2 rooks, and queen while he has 1 passed pawn I am waiting for him to reach end square to take with my rook which he does and take back so now he has just king and he is at my mercy. But right as that happened, it just randomly decides stalemate. Is this intended? There was no repetition here. Or maybe the coding for what determines stalemate is off? I want my hard earned victories, I'm not exactly the next Kasparov. Gotta take em where I can.
Hi,
When a player is unable to make any legal moves, the game is immediately a stalemate. I looked at the last game you played (I am assuming that was the one you were talking about) and your opponent had no legal moves to make, but was not in check. Thus, it is a stalemate.
When a player is unable to make any legal moves, the game is immediately a stalemate. I looked at the last game you played (I am assuming that was the one you were talking about) and your opponent had no legal moves to make, but was not in check. Thus, it is a stalemate.
Oh interesting, I discovered a new rule of chess. Although I can't say I'm a fan of it, a bit counter-intuitive at my level of play but at the highest level maybe its needed. Thanks for looking it to it.
I mean, if your opponent can’t move, they can’t really do any thing about it.
It's a trolling post.
The OP has 181 rated games, of which 174 are "Rapid," and 7 are "Classical."
Searching for Stalemate games:
lichess.org/@/nmcclell/search?players.a=nmcclell&status=32&sort.field=d&sort.order=desc
The last game, and the position in question is:
However, there are 4 previous games where the OP's opponent stalemated the OP ...
WSqO4fsw/white
xPpcbpR3/white
Fz2W3UwA/black
BCvrItIj/white
Point being: The OP is familiar with stalemates.
> "I want my hard earned victories"
I'm sure your previous opponents want their hard earned victories, too! (But you didn't think to ask about stalemate, then, when your opponents had you boxed-in such that they should have won. Though you probably would have if instead of a 1/2 stalemate, you got a 0-loss, even though you couldn't move, and you weren't in check, and thus not check-mate.)
Consider the question:
If you make it such that your opponent cannot move, but your opponent is not in check, how does your opponent move, such that you can then check-mate your opponent and win?
Just the basics.
The OP has 181 rated games, of which 174 are "Rapid," and 7 are "Classical."
Searching for Stalemate games:
lichess.org/@/nmcclell/search?players.a=nmcclell&status=32&sort.field=d&sort.order=desc
The last game, and the position in question is:
However, there are 4 previous games where the OP's opponent stalemated the OP ...
WSqO4fsw/white
xPpcbpR3/white
Fz2W3UwA/black
BCvrItIj/white
Point being: The OP is familiar with stalemates.
> "I want my hard earned victories"
I'm sure your previous opponents want their hard earned victories, too! (But you didn't think to ask about stalemate, then, when your opponents had you boxed-in such that they should have won. Though you probably would have if instead of a 1/2 stalemate, you got a 0-loss, even though you couldn't move, and you weren't in check, and thus not check-mate.)
Consider the question:
If you make it such that your opponent cannot move, but your opponent is not in check, how does your opponent move, such that you can then check-mate your opponent and win?
Just the basics.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.