From: WENDELL MARTIN <wendell.martin <at> THE-MATRIX <dot> COM>
Date: 10 oct 1995
Subject: King in check

Adam Atkinson <ghira <at> MISTRAL <dot> CO <dot> UK> writes:
>I repeat, "having no moves at all" and "stalemate" are exactly the same
>thing. Stalemate positions are DEFINED as being those in which the person
>whose turn it is to play cannot move.

Jeff Mallett <jeffm <at> CRUZIO <dot> COM> writes:
>Yes!  Trust me, Pieter.  I've directed USCF sanctioned tournaments.  I
>quoted the definition of stalemate for you from the official rules of chess
>for the U.S.  What more do you want...?

Pieter Stouten <stoutepf <at> CHEMSCI5 <dot> DMPC <dot> COM> writes:
>My only point is that the word stalemate is a misnomer to say the least if
>it does not necessarily refers to a situation where the king cannot avoid
>being mated. Of course, I bow to higher authority if the USCF endorses the
>use of misnomers or redefines the meaning of words so that they become
>misnomers.

I can see where Pieter is coming from.  The plain dictionary definition of
stalemate is "any situation in which it is impossible for one of the players
to move without placing his king in check; it results in a draw." - Webster's
New World Dictionary, 1980.  Even Fred Reinfeld stated in a 1954 work,
"[stalemate] refers to a position where the King is not in check and is forced
to move into check."

However, the 1993 FIDE laws state: "The game is drawn when the king of the
player who has the move is not in check, and this player cannot make any legal
move.  The player's king is then said to be 'stalemated'."

So, it seems the definition of "stalemate" has been expanded by FIDE from its
original concept of "no moves except moving into check" to "no legal moves."

       Wendell
 wendell.martin <at> the-matrix <dot> com
  73737.1237 <at> compuserve <dot> com