Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site digi-g.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!digi-g!brian
From: brian@digi-g.UUCP (Brian Westley)
Newsgroups: net.chess
Subject: Re: Mate or Stalemate?
Message-ID: <508@digi-g.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Mar-85 11:49:14 EST
Article-I.D.: digi-g.508
Posted: Tue Mar 12 11:49:14 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 14-Mar-85 06:40:37 EST
References: <559@astrovax.UUCP>
Reply-To: brian@digi-g.UUCP (brian)
Distribution: net
Organization: Digigraphic Systems Corp., Mpls, MN
Lines: 33
Summary: 

In article <559@astrovax.UUCP> gam@astrovax.UUCP (Gary Mamon) writes:
>Is the following position (taken from Steinhaus, "Mathematical Snapshots")
>a mate or a stalemate?
>
>	....kBRK
>	....PnPP
>	........
>	........
>	........
>	........
>	........
>	........
>
>Black (Lower Case letters) has just moved his Knight to f7 checking the
>White (Upper Case letters) King. However, White has no legal move at all:
>none of his pieces can move. The book claims that this position is neither
>a mate, nor a stale-mate, nor another form of draw.
>
>	What do you think about this?
>
>	Rich Gott and Gary Mamon

I'd say it's a smothered mate.  According to Hoyle, if a player has no
legal move AND is not in check, the game is drawn.  The (unstated)
implication is that having no legal move and being in check is checkmate.
(This makes sense, since a player who is checkmated has "no legal move"
technically speaking).  Hoyle is still somewhat ambiguous. 

PS: anyone actually win a game by smothered mate? (check by knight &
king can't move & knight can't be captured)

Merlyn Leroy
"Quote funny nose"