Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Elmo, did u get an answer to your question because my friend and I had the
exact same situation?

__|__|wb
bk|wk|
--|--|

wb= white bishop
wk= white king
bk = black king

I moved my wk up diagonally to the left to put his king in 'checkmate',
he cannot take my king because he would be in check correct?

Is this not a checkmate situation?

Regarding the question of whether you can move one king directly up
against
the other since the moving king would be protected by the bishop.
I see questions like this all the time from new players.
Think of it this way: What if the point of the game were to take your
opponent's king rather than put him in checkmate?
Whoever loses his king first loses the game. In the situation noted
earlier (a king that could be captured by the other king except that the
moving king is also protected by a bishop), once one king took the other
king, the game would be over. In other words that bishop would never be
able to take the other king because the game would have ended as soon as
the first king (the one supposedly protected by its bishop) was captured
by the other.
Anyway, that's a simplified way of looking at it. However, as someone
else noted, the original movement of the king up against the opposing
king
was illegal anyway. You can't put your own king in check, period,
whether
or not your king is supposedly protected by another piece that would
retake the piece that took the king.

Levi,

You are right. Your opponent is wrong. Declaring check is nothing but an
expected courtesy. Whether or not you declare check has no bearing on what
moves are subsequently legal or illegal for your opponent. Whenever you
are in check, whether or not it has been declared, you must move out of
check if you can. If you can't, then you lose -- even when you opponent
has not noticed or declared it. If you stay in check during your move,
that move was illegal and must be taken back.

No, the first-move doublestep option is only for non-capturing moves. So a
pawn that begins on g2 can only move to g3 or g4 (if not obstructed) or
capture on f3 or h3 (if an enemy piece is there).

Your idea might make an interesting chess variant, though.

As I understand the term, a gambit is a tactic in which a player offers a
material sacrifice in exchange for what he hopes is a positional
advantage. Familiar openings like the 'Queen's Gambit' involve playing
a pawn to a square where the opponent can take it. (Queen's Gambit means
the pawn offered is on the Queen's side.) But taking the pawn,
presumably, gives the gambit-player a better position. They speak of
openings such as 'Queen's Gambit Accepted,' in which the other player
takes the pawn, and 'Queen's Gambit Declined,' in which he doesn't. I
don't think I've heard of any openings in which a unit of greater value
than a pawn is offered.

'Gambit' has entered the language as a word used in general conflict
situations, for risky maneuvers like this.

My children ask the following question:

When the black pawn is in its original position and an opposing white
pawn
is two squares away diagonally, can the black pawn, on its first move,
take two steps diagonally to capture the white pawn?  Or must the first
move of the black pawn be only straight ahead?

Ryan,

Now, You got me interested to what your rating might be. Ryan, even if
you
don't have a high rating, that's fine.  We're all here for chess as a
whole. The problem is that you made a statement and now we're asking for
you to support it.

Sincerely Pete

Bill -

On its first move, a pawn may move 1 or 2 squares forward.  Or, it may 
capture, but never more than one square diagonally.

Mike,

The king may only take a piece to get out of check, as long as the piece
is not being protected by a fellow piece. Otherwise it is checkmate.

Sincerely Pete Leyva

my question is when playing can any piece jump a pawn or is it only select
pieces that can jump a pawn and make and take the other opponents pieces

In FIDE, only Knights are allowed to leap other pieces.

Of course this does not include the castling move, which involves either
the Rook 'leaping' the King or the King 'leaping' the Rook. ;-)

Brian,
11 move stale mate, only in the school of hard knocks.  Sounds like
someone is giving you a lesson in street chess.  Ignore it!
-Pete

OK, newbies here -

Opponent one moves a piece putting opponent 2's king in check.

However, opponent 2 does not remove the check on his next turn, but puts
opponent 1's king in checkmate.

Is this a win for opp 2 or did he commit an illegal move by leaving his
king in check?

Please help guys, I feel marital disharmony is imminent!

What happens if a player leaves the room to his chamber???, for example
when Kasparov went to his room in the last Linares tournament, without
telling the referee.
please answer to purefan@yahoo.com
thanks

Thx Mike, 
I'm giving out bad advice. My appologies for the inconvience of wrong
instructions on the pawn play. 
Pete

What would you do when the pawn goes to the other side of the board?
replace it with the queen?

What do you do when all you have is pawns and your king when they have
everything but a knight and 3 pawns?

If anyone could find out what the offical ruling for this situation is I would greatly appreciate an e-mail explaining the details, or stating that this was a made up rule. my e-mail address is luciousveyl@gmail.com

Question: recently, I played a game where my oppponent claimed a stalemate
because he had only a bare king against my King Queen & 2 pawns. He said
if I was unable to mate in 15 moves it was a stalemate. I've never heard
of this - having to mate a bare king in 15 moves. Is there such a rule,
even in tournaments or speed chess or some variant?

BTW, excellent site & info.

is the page for frequently asked questions concerning the rules of chess. Stalemate is one way to draw a game, the 50 moves rule (not 15) is another. Sometimes the 50 moves count starts anew - there is a second page covering more questions on the 50 moves rule.

Some guy I was playing said that if a rook gets to the opposite side of
the
board it is turned into a queen therefore he put me in checkmate is this
a
rule or is he getting mixed up with a pawn? Thank you

Hi,

I'd like to settle an arguement I've have with my dad at chess.  I
mistakenly said 'checkmate' when it was actually 'check', there was
one sqaure to which he could move his king.  Does this forfit the game,
he
recons that it gives him a win since I declared the wrong term?

I've looked at many rule books, but can find anything yet. Excellent
website by the way!

Thanks.

White's flag has fallen but black does not notice. Black's flag falls and white points it out. With best play the position is drawn but both players have mating material (e.g. K,R vs K,B,P). No arbiter is present, but spectators know which flag fell first.

Question: what should the result be?

db, you don't understand stalemate, for info on it and the 50 move rule,
which i think you are talking about see here ...
50 move rule - http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/6.html
stalemate - http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/5.html

paul, for info on king moves, see here ...
king moves - http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/4.html
(king can move anytime, as long as it is not moving into check, king can
move to attack also, it can capture pieces just like the other pieces)

'i have a friend who moves with one hand keeping his other hand constantly
over the flag, is this legal?'

no, move piece and press clock with same hand

Playing speed chess with one hand on the chess clock, and another hand
moving the chess pieces, often results in a broken chess clock because the
players, struggling to push their own buttons down simultaneously, in
belief that they are completing their moves 'in the nick of time' break
or bend the lever(s) inside).

Christine, I think we are in agreement, here.  The whole idea of playing
speed chess, is that the flags are going to be visible to those playing
the game.

It is exceedingly bad form to cover up the dial with one's large, lazy
fingers hanging over the side of the clock so you can't even see how many
minutes are remaining.  And that goes double with covering up the part of
the dial where the 'flag' rests.  I can remember thirty years ago, there
was this one guy who had the nerve to do this, and not only that, grope
about for the purpose of manipulating the settings on the reverse of the
clock, causing one player's clock to tick faster than the other's.  At
least in the olden days, independent and neutral onlookers could be
deputized by the tournament director with all the authority necessary to
call 'flag' and end the game, once the flag had fallen.  (But ask
yourself, seriously, how would this be possible if one or both players
took to draping their huge clumsy fingers over the dial, and obscuring the
flag, let alone poising them over the buttons that need to be clicked?) 
Then, when speed chess tournaments became more popular, one of the
players, by himself, had to notice the falling of the flag, and he was the
one that had to call it out.  (I wonder if this practice varied from place
to place?)

If FIDE actually permits alternation of the hands between moving the
pieces and clicking the button, there is probably a requirement that there
be a palpable period of grace between the moment the hand approaches the
clock, and the other hand rising to tap the button.

Supplement 4. Rules for 60-minute and 30-minute Chess

Rule 5. Each player shall handle the clock with the same hand with which he handles his pieces. Exception: it is permitted to perform the castling move by using both hands.

Rule 6. The arbiter should stipulate, at the beginning of the tournament, the direction the clocks are to face and the player with the black pieces shall decide on which side of the board he shall sit.

Rule 7. No player is permitted to cover more or less permanently the button of his own clock with one of his fingers.

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'. This immediately ends the game. [If the stalemating move was actually legal!] .

11.1
In the course of play, each player is required to record the game (his
own
moves and those of his opponent), move after move, as clearly and legibly
as possible in the Algebraic Notation, on the scoresheet prescribed for
the competition. It is irrelevant whether the player first makes his move
and then records it, or vice versa. 
[The use of Descriptive Notation or foreign versions of Algebraic
Notation
is tolerated in internal tournaments, e.g. weekend congresses.] 

Question:

Is there no future for electronic resording of chess games?  Even for
players with restricted eyesight who find written notation a strain?

Question on Stalemate: recently, I played a game where my oppponent
claimed
a stalemate
because he had only a bare king against my King, Knight,& 2 pawns. He
said
if I was unable to mate in 15 moves it was a stalemate. I've never heard
of this - having to mate a bare king in 15 moves. Is there such a rule,
even in tournaments or speed chess or some variant

The answer to your question is that your friend was wrong if he thought he
was representing the standard rules. Perhaps he confused 50 with 15. From
the FIDE laws stated on this page: 

'The game is drawn when a player having the move claims a draw and
demonstrates that at least [the last?] 50 consecutive moves have been made
by each side without the capture of any piece and without the movement of
any pawn. This number of 50 moves can be increased for certain positions,
provided that this increase in number and these positions have been
clearly announced by the organisers before the event starts.
[The claim then proceeds according to 10.13. The most extreme case yet
known of a position which might take more than 50 moves to win is king,
rook and bishop against king and two knights, which can run for 223 moves
between captures!]
10.13, etc.'

can you explain this one to me please??

(c)
    A pawn, attacking a square crossed by an opponent's pawn which has
[just] been advanced two squares in one move from its original square, may
capture this opponent's pawn as though the latter had been moved only one
square. This capture may only be made in [immediate] reply to such an
advance, and is called an 'en passant' capture.


contact me at elk1989@yahoo.com / or / red.dragonlord@hotmail.com

Just started playing again, after 10 years.

As I am now playing with new opponents (and not playing against children)
I have been introduced to new rules.

---A 15 move stalemate rule, that I now see is incorrect, I think it is a
mistake of the 50 move rule.

---But I have been told if your opponent can get his king to your side of
the board it is stalemate. Is this correct?

To the comment 'But I have been told if your opponent can get his king to
your side of the board it is stalemate. Is this correct?'

Answer: No.  Stalemate means that the person to move has no legal move. He
would have to expose his King to check.  This is not allowed.  It is a
stalemate, which is a draw. 1/2 point for each player.

As an added note, getting the King to the opposite end of the board 
has nothing to do with getting a draw.  The game would go on.

i am glad it is not a rule, but feel cheated.

i had queen, 1 rook, 2 bishops and about 4 pawns to my opponents 3 pawns.
he ran his king to the other side and claimed a draw.

the EN-PASSANT rule

i know when a pawn makes a double step from the second row to the fourth
row, and there is an enemy pawn on an adjacent square on the fourth row,
then this enemy pawn in the next move may move diagonally to the square
that was passed over by the double-stepping pawn, which is on the third
row. In this same move, the double-stepping pawn is taken

does this also happen if an attacking pawn is on the 3rd row, directly in
front of your pawn line. instead of taking the attacking pawn you double
step away from it. can your opponent then place his pawn diagonally
forward to where yours was in the 2nd row and remove your pawn from the
board?

or does EN-PASSANT only happen when the attacker is on the 4th row?

also when the EN-PASSANT rule is applied on the very next go, is that the
players move or does he place his pawn remove yours then make another
move?

Stephen wrote, in part: 'I think the rule should be that if you get your
king to the other side of the board you WIN.'  

Reply: I am satisfied with the current rules of chess; however, wanted to
point out that the condition Stephen describes [getting the King to the
other side of the board] is one of the ways to win in the game Navia
Dratp.  Of course, that game uses a Navia (female anime character) instead
of a King.