Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 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

LatestLater Reverse Order EarlierEarliest
The FIDE Laws Of Chess. The official rules of Chess from the World Chess Federation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
TheRon wrote on Mon, Aug 14, 2006 03:31 PM UTC:
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 07:25 PM UTC:

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 07:21 PM UTC:
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 04:32 PM UTC:
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 03:52 PM UTC: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 03:40 PM UTC:
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 07:41 AM UTC:
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 Mon, Aug 7, 2006 01:51 AM UTC:
too bad that wasn't the rule ha ha

Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Aug 6, 2006 08:59 PM UTC:
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 05:13 PM UTC:
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 05:52 AM UTC:
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 [email protected] / or / [email protected]

Jeremy Good wrote on Tue, May 23, 2006 06:01 PM UTC:
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 05:06 PM UTC:
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 04:38 PM UTC:
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 05:39 PM UTC:
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 01:43 PM UTC:
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 09:13 PM UTC:Good ★★★★
why doesn't this have anything on stalemate

David Paulowich wrote on Mon, Feb 20, 2006 01:44 PM UTC:
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 Sun, Feb 19, 2006 03:44 AM UTC:
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 07:49 PM UTC:
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 04:17 PM UTC:
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 11:58 PM UTC:
'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 12:42 PM UTC:
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 12:38 PM UTC:
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 05:53 PM UTC:
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)

25 comments displayed

LatestLater Reverse Order EarlierEarliest

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.