no checks. stalemate wins. thoughts?
so in terms of stale ratings… no rating changes after a win/loss/draw too right? 
I don’t understand. What is the object of the game? To stalemate the opponent? Why is it not allowed to attack the king?
Alex Relyea
If the idea is that putting the opponent in check is not allowed, and that stalemating the opponent wins, then the idea sounds interesting. Perhaps Bill Brock and Jeff Wiewel can play a game here on the forums, complete with trash talk, with all of us watching.
One question. Is it allowed to put yourself in check, and if so, can you then claim a win on the grounds that it is illegal for your opponent to put you in check?
Either way, it seems as though an opening strategy like e2-e4 followed by Ke1-e2-e3-d4-e5 might be a good idea.
Bill Smythe
They say great minds think alike and I guess ours do too. I was figuring that the invulnerable king could charge up the middle and limit the other player’s activity and it would be a race to centralize the king. Further thought results in at least one counter strategy like
1 e4 e5 (stopping the king from reaching d4 and f4)
2 Ke2 Nf6 (stopping the king from reaching d5 and g4)
3 Kd3 b5 (stopping the king from reaching c4 while the Bf8 already stops the king from reaching c5 and b4)
Now the white king has blocked the Bf1 and the d-pawn meaning white has very little space. Black has more development, greater flexibility with the pawns and the b-pawn can be protected from a diagonal capture by playing d6 or d5 (where a capture would give check).
White may need to play Kc3 (the e4 pawn is protected because Nf6xe4 would be check) and then d3 to start getting developed.
no exposing of your king to check is allowed