dudinax

There's plenty of games that are art, but you don't typically need to spend 100s of hours to appreciate them as works of art.

After playing too many games for years, my belief is that even the best games falsely and too easily satisfy our need to succeed at something.

Someone reported that he asked Obama what he'd give to name somebody, and Obama said Blago would "have his appreciation".

Blago said "Fuck that I want money". Reporter pointed out that he probably undervalued a president's appreciation (plus he wouldn't have gone to jail).

In this case she's just on her phone.

My wife does the same thing, but she'll also say an hour in "Brad Pitt is in this movie?" "Yes, dear, he's the main character."

You'd call most people who play chess "absolute beginners". Most people would hang their king if they could and would never remember the stalemate rule until it was too late.

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.

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.

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.