From: Larry Kaufman <lkaufman <at> WIZARD <dot> NET>
Date: 12 apr 2000
Subject: Re: Stalemate

At 11:16 AM 4/12/00 -0400, you wrote:
>At 04:00 PM 4/12/00 +0100, Nick Bardsley wrote:
>>I'm flabbergastered. This means stalemates. I would be interested to see the
>>NSR position on stalemate and how they reason that it is not a draw. I
>>suspect it will turn out to be a loss for the person being stalemated...but
>>this seems somewhat unsatisfactory - especially if the reason is that the
>>loser can only make illegal moves so he must therefore lose.
>
>Kindly construct a stalemate position which could reasonably occur in a
>real game.
>
>I do not think you can do it.
>
>Since a stalemate can never occur in a competitive game, there is no need
>to make a rule about it.
>
>Again, you are thinking about chess and are forgetting the fundamental
>differences between chess and shogi.
>
>Sam Sloan
>
     Occasionally, when giving a novice a huge handicap like 10 pieces, I
may get all my army captured.  Then he must mate my bare king with his
promoted rook, bishop, etc., and just as in chess stalemate is a real
possibility.  I believe it would be a win for the player with all the
pieces.  Certainly there's no basis to call it a draw; the Japanese rules
clearly try to avoid draws.  Whether the stalemated player loses because
his king will be taken or because he has no legal move doesn't matter.  I
believe this is the rule in Chu Shogi, the closest relevant precedent.

     Larry Kaufman