@AndrewMackney said in #43:
> < This shows a flaw in the rule I think. This should be a draw because it is impossible for either side to make progress or blunder. You can't tell if a checkmate is possible by the material on the board alone in all positions. The rule is probably the best we can do since this sort of situation is so unlikely but it is a bit broken. The only other fair rule I can think of would be to make timeout a loss every time.
>
> If chess ended with capturing the king rather than checkmate then this problem wouldn't exist but chess would be a far less interesting game without stalemates and checkmates. So we accept chess is inherently a bit scuffed and make do with this compromise solution.
I had this game recently:
As it was 5+5 there was no chance of a "dirty flag" contest but if it had, this position can only be drawn.
(And yes, I'm a fan of increment, and OP, you are the one who is choosing to play 5+0 every game)
> < This shows a flaw in the rule I think. This should be a draw because it is impossible for either side to make progress or blunder. You can't tell if a checkmate is possible by the material on the board alone in all positions. The rule is probably the best we can do since this sort of situation is so unlikely but it is a bit broken. The only other fair rule I can think of would be to make timeout a loss every time.
>
> If chess ended with capturing the king rather than checkmate then this problem wouldn't exist but chess would be a far less interesting game without stalemates and checkmates. So we accept chess is inherently a bit scuffed and make do with this compromise solution.
I had this game recently:
As it was 5+5 there was no chance of a "dirty flag" contest but if it had, this position can only be drawn.
(And yes, I'm a fan of increment, and OP, you are the one who is choosing to play 5+0 every game)