Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need help.

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderator: Ras

User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9773
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb »

I think the whole thread is a waste of time,the rules are there and we can't change them,the rest is empty words or another variation of the classical chess game 8-)
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
User avatar
smirobth
Posts: 2307
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:41 pm
Location: Brownsville Texas USA

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by smirobth »

Mike S. wrote:
ChessMate wrote:2. Why pieces other than pawns can't capture the 2 squares moved pawn by moving into the first square . ?
(en passant).
The sense of the doublestep, or 2-squares-move of the pawns is to speed up the opening. But we don't want that a passed pawn can be created by that:
8/8/8/8/p7/8/1P1k4/1K6 w - - 0 1

Without e.p. rule, White could win with 1.b4 passing Black's a4 pawn, but that is not the purpose of the 2 squares-rule for the first pawn move. So, 1...axb3 would capture en passant here, 2.Kb2 draw.
I doubt that the ep rule was defined as it is for reasons related to the endgame. Rather I think it is in order to make creation of locked (closed) pawn structures more difficult without acquiescence of both players.
- Robin Smith
Terry McCracken

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by Terry McCracken »

smirobth wrote:
Mike S. wrote:
ChessMate wrote:2. Why pieces other than pawns can't capture the 2 squares moved pawn by moving into the first square . ?
(en passant).
The sense of the doublestep, or 2-squares-move of the pawns is to speed up the opening. But we don't want that a passed pawn can be created by that:
8/8/8/8/p7/8/1P1k4/1K6 w - - 0 1

Without e.p. rule, White could win with 1.b4 passing Black's a4 pawn, but that is not the purpose of the 2 squares-rule for the first pawn move. So, 1...axb3 would capture en passant here, 2.Kb2 draw.
I doubt that the ep rule was defined as it is for reasons related to the endgame. Rather I think it is in order to make creation of locked (closed) pawn structures more difficult without acquiescence of both players.
You may be correct Robin, but I feel it was created for many reasons, and I agree with those reasons.

Best,
Terry

P.S. I agree with the good doctor, this thread is probably just wasting space. Murat probably gave the best answer or at least the most amusing answer :wink:
User avatar
Mike S.
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:33 am

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by Mike S. »

smirobth wrote: I doubt that the ep rule was defined as it is for reasons related to the endgame.
I didn't claim that, I only set up a simple position to illustrate how a passed pawn could be created by a pawn's first move, without e.p. rule - As for the reasons, see my quote from the Oxford companion above. I think that is a reference work which can be trusted.
Regards, Mike
ozziejoe
Posts: 811
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:07 pm

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by ozziejoe »

playing street chess in californnia, i discovered that on the street you are allowed to move your king into check, and are allowed to make a move other than getting your king out of check. I did not know this rule and did not know my king was in check, moved another piece, and the guy playing me announced "oh, that was a weak move" loudly so everybody else could hear and then took my king. I am still traumatized (especially since the game was dead even)

Alas, now that I have got that off my chest, I can return someday to the streets of california......and kill that man.

best
Joseph
Terry McCracken

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by Terry McCracken »

ozziejoe wrote:playing street chess in californnia, i discovered that on the street you are allowed to move your king into check, and are allowed to make a move other than getting your king out of check. I did not know this rule and did not know my king was in check, moved another piece, and the guy playing me announced "oh, that was a weak move" loudly so everybody else could hear and then took my king. I am still traumatized (especially since the game was dead even)

Alas, now that I have got that off my chest, I can return someday to the streets of california......and kill that man.

best
Joseph
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I remember playing lots of speed games both with friends and on the streets. Often the rules flew off the board along with the pieces!

King Chop Regards,
Terry
User avatar
smirobth
Posts: 2307
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:41 pm
Location: Brownsville Texas USA

Re: Three chess rules which i can't understand . so need he

Post by smirobth »

Mike S. wrote:
smirobth wrote: I doubt that the ep rule was defined as it is for reasons related to the endgame.
I didn't claim that, I only set up a simple position to illustrate how a passed pawn could be created by a pawn's first move, without e.p. rule - As for the reasons, see my quote from the Oxford companion above. I think that is a reference work which can be trusted.
I believe the primary reason for the ep rule is to avoid locked pawns, not passed pawns.
- Robin Smith