Check out Glinski's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Reverse Order EarlierEarliest
The FIDE Laws Of Chess. The official rules of Chess from the World Chess Federation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
mj wrote on Sat, Oct 22, 2011 04:46 AM EDT:
Is there really what they called board 1 and board 2? Pitty on board 2 player.

Bill wrote on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 11:50 AM EST:Excellent ★★★★★

Anonymous wrote on Thu, Oct 28, 2010 06:20 PM EDT:
question: what happen if the pawn is promoted and punch without changing the pawn with a queen? the opponent just say queen but changed only after punching the time will the pawn stays as a pawn or will it be changed to a queen? thanks

Jollita wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 09:33 PM EDT:
Thanks :)

H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 01:53 PM EDT:
Or a piece hasn't been captured.

M Winther wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 12:15 AM EDT:
He must give mate within 50 moves if a pawn hasn't moved.
/Mats

Jolita wrote on Fri, Aug 20, 2010 10:32 PM EDT:
Question; does anyone know, when all the black pieces are taken and Black king is alone on board is there a set number of moves white has to checkmate???

George Duke wrote on Sat, Aug 22, 2009 01:33 PM EDT:
http://www.fide.com/fide 
These are conservatives in f.i.d.e. photo, they have to be. Standing pat against these woodpushers is one alternative. When Mad Queen overtook Shatranj, it's hard to imagine their work was based on more than 10 or 100 CVs in their workshop. ''Mediaeval ingenuity had more commonsense than we do today.'' They cut to the quick and the heart of the matter. Evidently they were more intuitively intelligent in view how long their brainstorm lasted. Nothing namby pamby there. CVPage has broadened CV knowledge with now millions of alternative CVs at its disposal allowing for trivial tweaks. Absolutely certain is that the correct next stage of Chess is in this website's grasp, providing for multiple stamps of approval not just one. So long as it stands pat (I am addressing peripheral entities I know of too), it plays into the hands of entrenched Orthodoxy. CVPage becomes their embarrassing step-sister and sororal bastion of orthodoxy, insofar as it does not even try to hierarchize collected material. F.I.D.E. and CVPage would probably not be on speaking terms, and it serves each one's interest but shirks responsibility. Now one recent commenter-naysayer has a good point. Reform may indeed come from the top-down among players. It is the upper echelon who are sick and tired of sitting down to dinner for the same tired course. The chess master sits down to the table and extends his grasping paw to touch the same tiresome fork-Bishop, knife-Knight, and spoon-fed-Rook. Poor guy. No wonder he's hungry for new challenge. Going nuts, or gone bananas, like Fischer -- to extend the metaphor.
http://ingeb.org/songs/whatisth.html  (Enough's enough, rice pudding for supper again, like some pastchess openings' having been played a hundred thousand times.)

Anonymous wrote on Sun, Aug 2, 2009 08:18 AM EDT:Excellent ★★★★★

Tom wrote on Sun, Jul 12, 2009 06:44 PM EDT:
Your link on this page (http://www.chessvariants.com/fidelaws.html) to the
'FIDE Handbook' (http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp) is broken.

Your link should either direct users to 'http://www.fide.com/' or
directly to the PDF at
'http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/LawsOfChess.pdf'

H. G. Muller wrote on Tue, Mar 31, 2009 11:56 AM EDT:
If the Bishops are on like-colored squares, it is an immediate draw even before the flag falls, as no checkmate positions exist. Ifthey are on unlike-colored squares it is more tricky. The other rules you quote seem to contradit each other. (Isn't the second one only for blitz Chess?) In theory a checkmate position exists, but only as a helpmate: you must put your King voluntarily in a corner, your Bishop next to it to block its only escape square, and then you can be mated. This definitely does not count as a 'forced win', unless you are already in that position and the opponent can mate you in one move and it is his move. I always thought that at standard time controls forfeiting on time in KBKB* counts as a loss, but perhaps they changed the rules.

Tom wrote on Mon, Mar 30, 2009 08:46 PM EDT:
Question..
Playing a grade school tournament both players have a King and a Bishop.
Player 'W' flag falls
Is it a win (as it is possible to playout and win.. time permitting) or is
it a a draw?

I'm confused by:

6.10

Except where Articles 5.1 or one of the Articles 5.2 (a), (b) and (c)
apply, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the
allotted time, the game is lost by the player. However, the game is drawn,
if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player`s
king by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled
counterplay.

and

'If your flag falls and your opponent has insufficient material to win on
time, the game is a draw.
Insufficient material is when (1) one’s opponent has only a lone king; (2)
one’s opponent has only
king and bishop or king and knight, and does not have a forced win; or
when (3) one has no
pawns and one’s opponent has only king and two knights and no forced win
(§14E)'

Anonymous wrote on Sun, Aug 3, 2008 02:56 PM EDT:
in the tournement with 15 min. to each player I have checkmated my opponent. at the very moment he said my flag was fallen. The referee declaver the game a draw. Is he right ?

George Duke wrote on Sat, Jul 19, 2008 01:37 PM EDT:
Through 2006 this was an actively-Commented article. The record of inquiries for FIDE Laws: 2008 3 messages; 2007 2 messages; 2006 41 messages; 2005 27 messages; 2003-02, 39 messages. The FIDE Rules under castling, 5-1b to 5-1f are interesting and maybe not entirely unambiguous. Under Castling, once touching a Rook, you can never castle with that Rook, unless having moved King appropriately first in the maneuvre.

Doug Chatham wrote on Wed, May 21, 2008 06:01 AM EDT:
Article 9.3 of the Laws of Chess says 'Declaring a check is not obligatory.' So, you weren't even required to say 'check', much less 'checkmate'.

tom w wrote on Tue, May 20, 2008 11:05 PM EDT:
i was playing a guy when i put him in checkmate i only called check he said that the win goes to him? i cant find anything in relation to this is this true or false?

Angel wrote on Fri, Feb 8, 2008 07:49 PM EST:Good ★★★★
I was playing chess with one of my friends and I put him in check with my rook. My rook was 2 spaces away from his king. He said that if the king is in check you can move more that one space to capture the piece that put you in check. Is this legal? [Answer: no it is not legal]

bradley grimes wrote on Fri, Jun 22, 2007 07:54 AM EDT:
can a person castle when an opponent occupies a space between the king and rook even though the king is not in check.

Anonymous wrote on Sat, Feb 10, 2007 01:00 PM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
I think this is a great resource. It really taught me how to play chess. I`v been wanting to go out for the chess team, but never knew how to play. Now I can. Thank you very much!!!!!!!!!!

Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Dec 17, 2006 09:31 AM EST:
Josh asks, 'May A King Attack When it is in check?'

Answer: Certainly. Thus if your opponent's Queen moves next to your King
and checks it, your King can simply take the Queen (unless your opponent
has that checking square protected by another piece of theirs.  

Remember: Kings cannot move into check.  Nor can they castle while in
check, nor can they castle through a check. But they can certainly capture
other [unprotected] pieces while in check.

josh wrote on Sat, Dec 16, 2006 09:21 PM EST:BelowAverage ★★
May A King Attack When it is in check?

lisa wrote on Tue, Sep 5, 2006 09:25 PM EDT:
for 5 minutes game / blitz: after 5 minutes if the opponent time already finished but still doing moves, is it acceptable? thanks.

Doug Chatham wrote on Mon, Aug 28, 2006 05:16 PM EDT:
No. A king may never move itself next to the opponent's king. Period.

See the Chess FAQ for more information.


Wes wrote on Mon, Aug 28, 2006 01:04 PM EDT:
Question: can a king move himself next to the opponent king to threaten check if the 'checking king' is 'backed' by another piece?

David Paulowich wrote on Mon, Aug 14, 2006 03:22 PM EDT:
Only 'en passant capture' is limited to your first opportunity. See the 2006-08-07 Comment by Doug Chatham for a web page reference.

TheRon wrote on Mon, Aug 14, 2006 11:31 AM EDT:
Is there a rule for not taking a pawn on the first available offer[or 1st chance] IE: White pawn threatens Black pawn. Black moves another peice. White moves another piece. Is it legal for Black pawn to then take the White pawn? I seem to remember reading this at some point but am unable to find it again.

Andy wrote on Mon, Aug 7, 2006 03:25 PM EDT:

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?

No

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

Yes

also when the EN-PASSANT rule is applied on the very next go, is that the players move

Yes

or does he place his pawn remove yours then make another move?

No


Doug Chatham wrote on Mon, Aug 7, 2006 03:21 PM EDT:
bryan,

To make an en passant capture, the attacking pawn must be on the opponent's fourth row. Also, if you capture en passant, that is your move -- you don't get a bonus turn. For more information on en passant, see this FAQ page.


Gary Gifford wrote on Mon, Aug 7, 2006 12:32 PM EDT:
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.

bryan wrote on Mon, Aug 7, 2006 11:52 AM EDT:Good ★★★★
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?

bryan wrote on Mon, Aug 7, 2006 11:40 AM EDT:
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.

Stephen Stockman wrote on Mon, Aug 7, 2006 03:41 AM EDT:
Usually I try to get my king to the other side of the board just to show my opponent how strong my position has become. I think the rule should be that if you get your king to the other side of the board you WIN

Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on Sun, Aug 6, 2006 09:51 PM EDT:
too bad that wasn't the rule ha ha

Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Aug 6, 2006 04:59 PM EDT:
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.

bryan wrote on Sun, Aug 6, 2006 01:13 PM EDT:
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?

codie norman wrote on Mon, May 29, 2006 01:52 AM EDT:
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

Jeremy Good wrote on Tue, May 23, 2006 02:01 PM EDT:
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.'

cleanet wrote on Tue, May 23, 2006 01:06 PM EDT:
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

J Andrew Lipscomb wrote on Tue, Mar 21, 2006 11:38 AM EST:
If the scoresheet provided is electronic, then that's what the players use. As for personal electronic scoresheets, you'd need a way to prove that they can't also be used as playing aids, but that done, the arbiter would be within his rights to declare that an accommodation for a handicap, I would think.

Andy Horton wrote on Mon, Mar 20, 2006 12:39 PM EST:
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?

Doug Chatham wrote on Sat, Feb 25, 2006 08:43 AM EST:
Stalemate is covered in Article 10, item 3:
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!] .

Anonymous wrote on Fri, Feb 24, 2006 04:13 PM EST:Good ★★★★
why doesn't this have anything on stalemate

David Paulowich wrote on Mon, Feb 20, 2006 08:44 AM EST:
The Chess Federation of Canada HANDBOOK (1996 edition)

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.


Anonymous wrote on Sat, Feb 18, 2006 10:44 PM EST:
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.

skellious wrote on Fri, Feb 17, 2006 02:49 PM EST:
It is legal for a player to move a piece using one hand, then to bring that hand back to rest next to the other hand, before using either hand to depress the clock plunger/switch.

Matthew Montchalin wrote on Wed, Feb 8, 2006 11:17 AM EST:
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 Bagley-Jones wrote on Tue, Feb 7, 2006 06:58 PM EST:
'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

brandon wrote on Tue, Feb 7, 2006 07:42 AM EST:
obviously flag is not the term i should have used, as the 'flag' is dropped, but you know what i mean.

brandon wrote on Tue, Feb 7, 2006 07:38 AM EST:
when using a clock is it specified which hand you must use to flag? i have a friend who moves with one hand keeping his other hand constantly over the flag, is this legal?

Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on Sat, Jan 21, 2006 12:53 PM EST:
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)

Paul wrote on Sat, Jan 21, 2006 11:00 AM EST:
Can the King attack any time or only when he is in danger?

db wrote on Fri, Jan 20, 2006 11:10 PM EST:
How many moves for the attacker, when an opponent (defender) only has his king left, before stalemate?

David Paulowich wrote on Wed, Jan 18, 2006 01:03 PM EST:
The game is drawn when the players see that both flags are down - and the position on the board is not checkmate. The general idea is: you should not win a game after your flag has fallen. Not even if you can prove that your opponent's flag must have fallen first.

guest wrote on Wed, Jan 18, 2006 09:16 AM EST:
It is a player's responsibility to point out his opponent's flag-fall.

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?


🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Fri, Jan 13, 2006 01:49 PM EST:
No, player B may not capture player A's King. Player A has made an illegal move and must take it back.

Jessica wrote on Fri, Jan 13, 2006 01:46 PM EST:Poor ★
What happens when player A moves his King into a position where Player B can then capture him... therefore no one has said Check. Can player B then go ahead a capture Player A's King and win?

Tony Quintanilla wrote on Sun, Jan 8, 2006 06:54 PM EST:
Calling, 'check' is not required. Making a mistake and saying 'checkmate' does not forfeit the game.

Neil McInnes wrote on Sun, Jan 8, 2006 06:35 PM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
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.

🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Thu, Jan 5, 2006 05:51 PM EST:
He is getting it mixed up with a Pawn. Rooks do not promote to anything at all in Chess.

george dalson wrote on Thu, Jan 5, 2006 04:39 PM EST:Good ★★★★
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

David Paulowich wrote on Sun, Dec 18, 2005 09:30 PM EST:
http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/faq.html

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.


🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Sun, Dec 18, 2005 09:07 PM EST:
This person may be confusing fifteen with fifty, as well as further garbling the fifty move rule. This rule says that a player may claim a draw if fifty moves have passed without either player checking a King or capturing a piece.

Anonymous wrote on Sun, Dec 18, 2005 07:34 PM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
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.

matt wrote on Tue, Dec 13, 2005 11:28 AM EST:Good ★★★★
i'm a recreational player, so i don't usually use a clock. what are the 'normal' times and number of moves for a regular match?

CJ wrote on Fri, Dec 2, 2005 05:32 PM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
Love it!!!

brian wrote on Mon, Nov 28, 2005 01:59 PM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
I am wondering if the scoring of a stale mate differs from a draw? I don't believe it does, but would like to confirm.

manuel wrote on Wed, Nov 23, 2005 11:27 AM EST:Poor ★
too much information for a simple person learning to play chess for the first time. i recomend to just stick to general information

George wrote on Sun, Nov 20, 2005 03:16 AM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
Lucious: In your example, after Black's move, his king is attacked by White's king. Black's move is therefore illegal (see Article 9.1).

Lucious wrote on Thu, Nov 3, 2005 08:42 AM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
I recently played a game of chess in which the two kings were two spaces away from each other. The black king tried to move so that there was only one space between it and the white king. I seem to remember once when I was playing that the white king was forced to move away. However, I cannot find this ruling in any of the websites that I have looked at.

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


lindsay wrote on Wed, Sep 28, 2005 02:48 PM EDT:Excellent ★★★★★
Very informative, and i really learn a lot, i love to play chess, i follow rules and regulation but some of my friends didnt notice their illegal moves so we fight, when we surf over the net, we found this site and right now, we are playing fair and square... THANKS,

David Paulowich wrote on Mon, Jul 25, 2005 08:53 PM EDT:
John Jackson's question can be answered by considering how you actually make a complete move in a game of chess. [1] Move a piece to another square. [2] Remove your hand from the piece. [3] Using the same hand, press the chess clock. A 'fallen flag' is evidence that you have failed to complete your move in time. Remember, there is no legal distinction between being one second over the time limit and being one hour over the time limit. Attempting to add special rules like: 'When you checkmate your opponent, you do not have to press the clock' will make a complicated mess of things.

Greg Strong wrote on Mon, Jul 25, 2005 05:24 PM EDT:
Ick. I cannot give an official answer, but I would ask this question: If the player being mated was watching the clock, and saw that the flag had fallen before mate was declared, then why did he not *immediately* say 'time up, you lose'? Or, if he did not see that the flag had fallen before mate was declared, how could he possibly say with any certainty that the flag had fallen before the mate was declared?!? My logical assessment of the situation would be that the mate should stand. But, I am not qualified to make an official ruling.

John Jackson wrote on Mon, Jul 25, 2005 01:48 PM EDT:
A speed game is being played. There is no arbiter on hand to watch the clocks. One player checkmates the other. The other player immediately says 'You're out of time and were before you 'mated me'. Does the ckeckmate stand? Of course if the second player said 'you're out of time before he was mated,the 'mate would not stand.

Chekov wrote on Wed, Jul 13, 2005 10:19 AM EDT:Excellent ★★★★★
These are the best chess rules ever. I think I'll use them for my chess club.

Tommy wrote on Wed, Jun 22, 2005 05:19 PM EDT:Excellent ★★★★★
Informative , provocative and quite interesting and helpful!!

Larry Smith wrote on Fri, Jun 17, 2005 11:18 PM EDT:
The short answer, Mike, is NO! You cannot make a move which leaves your King in check.

Mike wrote on Fri, Jun 17, 2005 05:43 PM EDT:
Question; If player one is placed into check, and has possible moves to escape mate, CAN PLAYER ONE LEAVE HIS KING IN CHECK IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO MATE PLAYER TWO'S KING IN ONE MOVE?

Gary Gifford wrote on Mon, May 16, 2005 05:11 PM EDT:
Tony is correct in that to approximated FIDE rules, when an illegal move is made in Game Courier that piece should be considered as 'touched' and would have to be moved, if it could make a legal move. A Game Courier that does not allow illegal moves is actually more kind than is FIDE. For example, in one of my face-to-face over-the-board games I placed a player's King in 'Check.' I announced check (but in official USCF tournament games such an announcement is not required and often not made). My opponent did not hear me and he then moved his Queen (but left his King in check.) Under the 'touch rule' he still had to move his Queen, if possible. So in this case he had to block the check with his Queen... and he lost his Queen as a result. A very harsh payment.

Tony Quintanilla wrote on Mon, May 16, 2005 01:08 PM EDT:
Gary: Here's an odd question, related to Game Courier. Obviously, in FIDE Chess, few make illegal moves, unless it's a gross oversight. But, with Chess variants, illegal moves are not uncommon, say in Game Courier presets that are not rules enforced. Typically, illegal moves are just done over again. By tournament rules, though, the corrected move should be of the same piece, if possible, should it not? If one takes the initial move as equivalent to touching the piece? This possible confusion is a good argument for rules enforced presets in tournaments.

Gary Gifford wrote on Mon, May 16, 2005 11:18 AM EDT:
'When a player lets go of his piece but doesn't hit the clock can he take the move back?' The answer is 'No.' Also, if you touch a piece (that is yours) you must move it [if the move is legal] and if you touch your opponent's piece you likewise must capture it [if legal]. An exception is if you say 'Adjust' or say the French equivalent word. When the clock has not been hit, the move is still valid. Unfortunately the time loss is quite real and there is no obligation to point out that a person's clock is running.

eric wrote on Sat, May 14, 2005 07:21 PM EDT:Good ★★★★
When a player lets go of his piece but doesn't hit the clock can he take the move back?

Doug Chatham wrote on Wed, Apr 20, 2005 01:16 PM EDT:
No. See the answer to 'Can kings stand near each other?' in the Chess FAQ page at <a href='http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/faq.html'>http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/faq.html</a>

Puneet wrote on Wed, Apr 20, 2005 11:43 AM EDT:Excellent ★★★★★
Great question....not onle this...there occur many situations where a king placed in the 'killing' range of the other king can cause a checkmate. Are those moves allowed.

jhcsup wrote on Sat, Apr 9, 2005 08:56 AM EDT:Good ★★★★
What do you do when all you have is pawns and your king when they have
everything but a knight and 3 pawns?

Larry Smith wrote on Thu, Feb 24, 2005 04:57 PM EST:
Well, Tim, you get to watch your Queen die again. ;-)

tim wrote on Thu, Feb 24, 2005 03:03 PM EST:
what do you do when you get your pawn to the other side get back your queen but you queen gets put in a position to be killed. What do you do??

Anonymous wrote on Wed, Feb 23, 2005 04:57 AM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
Very good! Once the pawn goes to the other side of the board, you have to promote it to any other piece you want besides king and pawn. People always promote it to another queen because of its flexibility and power.

Anonymous wrote on Sat, Jan 8, 2005 07:55 AM EST:
What would you do when the pawn goes to the other side of the board?
replace it with the queen?

sannidhi wrote on Thu, Dec 30, 2004 01:45 AM EST:Good ★★★★
informative.

Anonymous wrote on Thu, Dec 30, 2004 01:04 AM EST:Excellent ★★★★★

Pam wrote on Tue, Dec 7, 2004 11:23 AM EST:
I am having a chess tournament (of sorts) for 3rd thru 6th grade at school. I have 18 kids involved so far and I have used your site as a guide to help them learn the game. Do you have any suggestions on what rules to use or leave out until they better understand the game?

Justin wrote on Fri, Nov 19, 2004 07:37 AM EST:Excellent ★★★★★
Really informative

Peter Leyva wrote on Sun, Jun 6, 2004 06:18 PM EDT:
Thx Mike, 
I'm giving out bad advice. My appologies for the inconvience of wrong
instructions on the pawn play. 
Pete

Michael Nelson wrote on Sun, Jun 6, 2004 10:31 AM EDT:
A pawn can make a normal diagonal capture on its first move but it can't capture en passant on its first move -- this is not a legal restriction, but due to the fact that a pawn on its strating square is not in the correct position to make an ep capture.

Peter Leyva wrote on Sat, Jun 5, 2004 02:45 AM EDT:
Also, a pawn can capture by rule of enpassant on its' first move.

Matthew Paul wrote on Fri, Jun 4, 2004 05:57 PM EDT:
In response to firelightdown's question, a pawn can capture on it's first move by moving one square diagonally like normal.

firelightdown@yahoo. wrote on Fri, Jun 4, 2004 05:00 PM EDT:
Okay straight to the point - Concerning a pawn, on its first move from the starting position, can it 'take' another piece? I always thought you could.

Miguel Espinoza wrote on Thu, May 27, 2004 12:15 AM EDT:
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

John Lawson wrote on Mon, May 17, 2004 05:50 PM EDT:
You cannot leave your King in check. This is covered in Article 9. Opponent 2 has commited an illegal move by failing to remove the check on his/her King. The move should be retracted and replayed.

mark wrote on Mon, May 17, 2004 05:35 PM EDT:
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!

100 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order EarlierEarliest

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.