|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Apr-02-06 |
| blingice: I'm Republican, and I think the people that want to eliminate the stalemate rule are just foolish. |
 |
Apr-02-06
 |
| al wazir: Consider this position, which I've posted before:
click for larger viewWhichever side is to move is stalemated (and yes, it is possible to reach the position legally). Now, you abolitionists, which side do you want to award a point to? |
|
| Apr-02-06 |
| weev: Perhaps the elimination of the stalemate rule should only apply to Republicans who play chess, and no one else. Chess is war, right? Win at all cost! |
|
| Apr-02-06 |
| Jim Bartle: Republicans are doing a heckuva job winning in Iraq, aren't they? They can't even define what "winning" would be. |
|
| Apr-02-06 |
| Jim Bartle: Just noticed that the lead editorial in the NY Times is titled "The Endgame in Iraq." |
|
Apr-02-06
 |
| norami: They should have a chess article entitled "The Iraq War on the Chessboard." |
|
| Apr-02-06 |
| Jim Bartle: Which would end in stalemate. |
|
| Apr-03-06 |
| PolishPentium: Any thoughts about 43 Rxa6, gang? After the Black Q moves out of the Rook's line of fire, isn't White actually standing not too badly? (possible swapping of N for bishop, another Black pawn at b5 falling, etc.) |
|
| Apr-03-06 |
| EmperorAtahualpa: LOL I love this game. Glad to see it back as GOTD! What I love particularly about the final combination is that it's totally forced, Black's king has nowhere to go! |
|
| Jun-30-06 |
| slavito2: Well played game by Larry Melvyn Evans. Bravo!!! |
|
| Oct-11-06 |
| Sibahi: <Whichever side is to move is stalemated (and yes, it is possible to reach the position legally). Now, you abolitionists, which side do you want to award a point to?> The point should be awarded to the player last moved. I suspect it's white, because black was dumb enough to put himself in this position! |
|
Oct-11-06
 |
| oao2102: Lol I agree
|
|
| Nov-30-06 |
| gauer: weev: Chess is war, right? Win at all cost!
Yes, that's what the rules say, even before they start listing them in point form: "the (primary) goal of chess is to checkmate (ie and not necessarily play to stalemate him - which only gets listed 1/2-way down in the rules, unless, of course, the player playing for stalemate can show that he really doesn' thave anything better, and is not trying to fix the gamescore as part of a bargain or the like...) the opponent". Sometimes I wonder whether I, in a TD position, might consider assigning a score of 1/2-0, rather than 1/2-1/2 to games like Pilnik v Reshevsky, being comparable to the recent Fritz v Kramnik #1 allowance. |
|
| Jan-26-07 |
| Tactic101: Reshevsky appears to often suffer from stalemate blindness every now and then. But then, you have to be on the lookout for such oppurtunities if you are the defending side. I myself nearly suffered from the same fate as Reshevsky did in this game. But, my opponent didn't see it. I got pretty lucky there. ;) |
|
| Apr-27-08 |
| LoveThatJoker: 49. Qh8+ amazingly also leads to a draw. Try it out! |
|
| Apr-28-08 |
| Petrosianic: Eliminating stalemate would be an awful idea. It would only make material more important and so encourage more conservative play (since people would no longer be as confident that they might sacrifice material and still hold the draw if the attack miscarried.) I think the people who want to abolish stalemate are under some impression that it would reduce draws. Actually, it would probably increase them, and make the game more boring all around. In addition, stalemate is a logical and necessary result of the rule prohibiting moving kings into check. In checkers, "stalemate" is a loss because that game has no rules against suicidal king moves in the first place. Stalemate is a rule for the computer age. On one hand, you have to make a move, but on the other hand you can't, so the "program" crashes. |
|
| Oct-24-08 |
| sfm: LOL. Now, can anyone tell me what the point is in playing 47.h4 if he hadn't seen it already? Sly bastard! |
|
| Nov-14-08 |
| thebribri8: Kramnik should look at this one, learn some new drawing techniques. |
|
| Jan-20-09 |
| WhiteRook48: drawing tactics are amazing.
So what was the move that would have held for Black instead of 48...Qxg3?? |
|
| Jan-28-09 |
| WhiteRook48: greatest draw, I think |
|
| Mar-03-09 |
| m0nkee1: al wazir: Nice postion... if i sacrifce my queen for checkmate should i loose cos i'm down on material? Stalemate is a great rule :) |
|
| May-28-09 |
| Hitokiri Battousai: <al wazir> I would give point to white cause black must be stupid not to win with that material.
what u want to proove is not enough.try something else |
|
Jun-09-09
 |
| hedgeh0g: <what was the move that would have held for Black instead of 48...Qxg3??> The only other moves Black can make without losing his Queen are Qg6 and Qh6. White will play Rf8 and Black has to provide his King with an escape square. The only moves available to Black are thus Qe6, Qd6 and Qb6. Keeping the Queen closer to the King for defence and attacking the White Queen would suggest to me that Qe6 is the best move. The Rook check is harmless and Black is completely winning. |
|
| Oct-24-09 |
| JamesMazur2: I played a strangely similar game at one point. I was about to win and then I fell into the same trap. I allowed a perpetual rook check, where capture would mean stalemate. Otherwise, I had mate in one. |
|
| Nov-26-09 |
| blackburne: A great game of Larry Evans no of Reshevsky |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
icon.
