Kill all your opponent's pieces but his king

>kill all your opponent's pieces but his king
>trap the king in such a way that he has no legal move
>since he's not in check it's technically a stalemate and ends with a draw instead of you winning
Why is this allowed?

git gud xd

I've always got rid of all their pieces and "won" that way
Now I found out those were stalemates all along

>Whites start first
FUCKING DROPPED

Does it make the game more interesting by forcing people to maneuver around it?

If the king is the only piece left and you are either too dumb to check or the other player is too god to be checked, they earn that fucking stalemate.

>play tournament
>99% of the games end up with both players repeating moves to get a draw because theyre too pussy to risk a loss
chess is shit m8

If you killed all of their pieces but don't have any pawns left you fucked up

>pros play black to draw
Shit game, indeed.

just because you did that doesn't mean it's automatically a stalemate

Are you even reading the posts?

Yes, I have drawn many a game where I had virtually no chance of winning.

But retarded noobs hate it because they can't read the board yet, and play to capture pieces instead of playing to checkmate the king.

It's done to preserve the ubiquitous nature of the rules. Placing your king in danger is an illegal move because thats retarded, and skipping turns is illegal because many tactical endgame depend on the fact that you must move something - it stems from the fact that pawns only move one way.

It is much like real life. Non nobility must be killed in battle but the leaders get special treatment. They never fight and it's against the rules to hurt them.

Because moving into check is not a legal move

yfw gender neutral xtriarch pieces

If you kill your enemies they win.

Is like 'nam all over again!

Go is a much better game

I started with Go, then went through a chess phase, and I'm coming back to Go

Are you a lesbian?

Chess has plenty of retarded rules

Yes