They are an important part of the game, but they aren't a good twist. If you got rid of stalemate, then the losing player would just resign. Nothing wrong with that in a game that's effectively over.
dudinax
joined 2 years ago
There's a whole level of players who simply weren't thinking about stalemate at the moment. They know the rule, they just weren't thinking. Trapping the king so he can't move and nothing can be done should be a win.
The first part of your comment doesn't justify the second part. But it also isn't true that it rarely happens randomly. It rarely happens randomly in high-ranked games. Bad rules like stalemate have a much stronger effect on low ranked games, which is what most people play.
Stupidest rule in chess.
The goal is to get the parents to keep the kids home from school. First, isolate the victims.
It secretly believe in ronald. It's just that I hate him and wish he weren't real.
Old Man Willow vibes
If I were married to Plaza I'd want it mentioned every time.
Isn't this a straight "eye-for-an-eye" revenge killing?
The individual electron just behaves randomly in a way that we can only predict statistically and not absolutely.
That's the non-boring part, for lack of a better expression. Quantum Mechanics only predicts the outcome for an ensemble, and that imperfectly. It can say nothing at all about the outcome for a single particle.
Why? Prosecutors dogged Clinton for 8 years.
That's only true because Kings can't move into check. This is an unnecessary rule that, like stalemate, makes little difference to high level players, but is a bad rule for low level players.