🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Mar 8, 2017 06:17 PM UTC:
In the winning conditions, I see no explicit mention of checkmate. It does mention that a player without legal moves has lost. So being stalemated is a loss, and consequently being checkmated is a loss too. This would be clearer to Chess players if it explicitly said that either checkmate or stalemate is a loss to the mated player.
Declaring a winner when the game ends after each player has made 100 moves without a capture or a pawn move is unusual. The rule in Chess is that the game is a draw after each player had made 50 moves without a capture or a pawn move. Since this condition occurs mainly in games in which both players have lost sufficient mating material, I wondering about the rationale for giving the win to a specific side.
In the winning conditions, I see no explicit mention of checkmate. It does mention that a player without legal moves has lost. So being stalemated is a loss, and consequently being checkmated is a loss too. This would be clearer to Chess players if it explicitly said that either checkmate or stalemate is a loss to the mated player.
Declaring a winner when the game ends after each player has made 100 moves without a capture or a pawn move is unusual. The rule in Chess is that the game is a draw after each player had made 50 moves without a capture or a pawn move. Since this condition occurs mainly in games in which both players have lost sufficient mating material, I wondering about the rationale for giving the win to a specific side.