Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

No, you are not the winner. When the only moves available to your opponent
would put him in check, he has no legal move, and this is what is called
stalemate. In Chess, stalemate is a draw.

Thank you for your prompt response but that seems really unfair. You've
captured all your oppoenents pieces etc.. Its like you've immobilised
their King or you've taken their King hostage! I guess laws are laws.
What do you think...?

It's perfectly fair to make stalemate a draw, and it makes Chess a more
interesting game, because it gives someone who may have lost any chance of
winning something to still fight for. I'm sure the rule that stalemate is
a draw is in Chess because it makes it a better game and not by the mere
arbitrariness of chance.

This would be a great question to ask the FIDE:  Why is checkmate the only
win condition in Chess and all else are draws?

I'm sure that there was a great debate about this during the adoption of
the Mad Queen variant as their advocated game.  So there ought be a large
amount of data to back up these decisions.

(Or the decision could have been a form of simplication, one win condition
only and all else resulting in un-decided games.)

I appreciate all your comments. I think in this instance and only in this
instance should you add all the points of pieces captured in order to
determine the winner. Again, this instance being where the state of play
is one whereby your opponent is not currently in check but it is their
move. However, they cannot successfuly make a move without being in
check.

Doug,

Technically, you might be right.  But are those conditions applicable to
each and every game?

Resignation could be considered merely a recognition by that player of the
potential of eventual checkmate.

'I think in this instance and only in this instance should you add all the
points of pieces captured in order to determine the winner.' John, you
could make a case that the chess variant played that way would be better
than Chess, and certainly you and your opponent have the right to play
that way if you like. The only caution I would advise is that, since those
are not the standard rules of Chess, you'd better make sure you and your
opponent both agree to those rules before you start, or else someone might
end up with hard feelings after the game is over. (This reminds me of the
aftermath of the 2000 election ...)

Thank you this is interesting. I asked my chess playing partner who said,
'I do not feel like a winner if I have fewer pieces and am unable to
move. If we were to have an equal number of pieces, then I feel it would
be a draw.'

Would you agree to this?

It is possible to stalemate an opponent who has more pieces on the board
than you have.  For example, consider the drawn endgame where White has a
King on 'c1' and Black has a King on 'a1' and a Pawn on 'a3'.  If
Black moves his Pawn a3-a2 and White moves his King c1-c2, then the game
has ended in stalemate.