Check out Atomic Chess, our featured variant for November, 2024.


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

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier Reverse Order LaterLatest
Rules of Chess: The 50 moves rule. Answer to a frequently asked question on the rules of chess.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Anonymous wrote on Wed, Jan 8, 2003 05:40 AM UTC:
can a pawn take a man going backwards?

Sam Trenholme wrote on Wed, Jan 8, 2003 06:14 AM UTC:
Depends on what you meant by your quesiton. <p> If you meant <em>Can a pawn, going backwards, take another piece</em>, the answer is no, a pawn can never move backwards. <p> If you meant <em>Can a pawn, going forward, take another piece that just moved backwards</em>, the answer is yes, a pawn can always take a piece which is on one of the squares immediately diagonally forward of the pawn. <p> - Sam

Chuck wrote on Fri, Oct 24, 2003 08:25 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
Good article, but the author fails to mention an important note regarding the mate with 2 knights and a bishop. If the king were to take the bishop in the example provided, the count would indeed start at 0, but it would be impossible for white to mate with the 2 knights alone. The author states that white would have another chance at mate, but given the position, he would not after his bishop is captured. A minor distinction, but an important one.

Michael Nelson wrote on Sat, Oct 25, 2003 01:15 AM UTC:
King and two Knights cannot force mate but can give mate if the opponent makes a mistake--this endgame is not an automatic draw.

KARL wrote on Mon, Apr 19, 2004 02:32 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
VERY USEFUL. HOLDING A CHESS TOURNAMENT IN SCHOOL AND ALL ANSWERS TO SOME TRICKY QUESTIONS ARE HERE INCLUDING MAXIMUM MOVES. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK

bill fan wrote on Sun, May 16, 2004 12:59 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
good, first time to know this

Anonymous wrote on Fri, Jun 18, 2004 07:52 AM UTC:
Just a simple comment on the last endgame with the pawns:
It is hardly a difficult endgame. A player of 1300 Elo would spot after 1
or 2 minutes that by playing the king to e7 and sacrificing the rook on
the bishop, wins instantly.
For anyone that is curious there is mate from the initial position in 17
moves (this is how easy it is).

Runjeev wrote on Thu, Jul 15, 2004 11:01 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
To correct Chuck's statement about the two knights and bishop example, it is possible to checkmate with two knights and a king although it is not forced mate and easily avoidable.

James Spratt wrote on Thu, Jul 15, 2004 11:33 PM UTC:Poor ★
Hi, Hans: My comment is about the 'MAJON' award entry on Chessvariants' Awards page. In my opinion, that particular award should be disavowed and the link dropped. To pay money for an award I believe is undignified, and in your innocence you are providing this obviously greedy, predatory outfit with access to your constituents. I'd call their link 'spam;' their first priority seems to be money, not chess, and I don't believe that their admiration of this wonderful website is sincere, particularly if they're charging for it. If I read your own comments correctly, you've had your own doubts about them, and unless they are providing some useful service for Chessvariants, I'd drop them. Sincerely, James Killian Spratt, m.sc.

Anonymous wrote on Mon, Aug 16, 2004 02:53 PM UTC:
What happens if a player makes a move that results in the last 50 moves having been played without any captures or pawn moves, but also gives checkmate? Is the game a win or a draw?

David wrote on Sun, Jan 23, 2005 05:51 PM UTC:
QUESTION: can a King, using the other peices (like pawns and knights) move an apponent into a point whereby the King can be the peice used to checkmate the opponent?

Larry Smith wrote on Sun, Jan 23, 2005 09:37 PM UTC:
David,

Since a King cannot move to an attacked cell, it could never attack an
opponent King.  But it can participate in the mate by restricting the
movement of the opponent King.

Robert wrote on Tue, May 17, 2005 07:04 PM UTC:
In the diagram following 'When a pawn is moved the count starts again at zero,' white actually has a forced win. What he needs to do is get his King to F8, then use his rook to capture the black pawn at F7. After black captures the rook with his bishop, white captures the bishop with his King then can queen his pawn that is at F6. He has to watch for a stalemate, but that can be avoided if he is careful. If black plays Bh7 in an attempt to free up his King, white plays Ra1 check. Black is then forced to play BG8 and then the rook pins the bishop until the white king is in position. Note, if the 50 move limit is close to being reached white can move the pawn on the H file to restart the count.

vipin wrote on Tue, Jun 28, 2005 05:49 AM UTC:Good ★★★★
I have a query that
        Is there any condition in chess where number of moves during mate
process is reduced?

Anonymous wrote on Tue, Oct 11, 2005 07:55 AM UTC:Poor ★
Just to be a jerk... on diagram 3 of course white would take the bishop - drawing the game immediatly as two knights and a king can't mate a king.

m21b21 wrote on Sun, Nov 13, 2005 01:33 PM UTC:Poor ★
I am rating(answering) the comment about diagram #3 on 2005-10-11 saying
the King should take the Bishop, because 2 Knights & a King can not mate
a
King. That is not true, 2Knights & a King CAN mate a King....

White King is in 1A, one Black Knight is in 3A, the other Black Knight is
in 2C, the Black King is in 3B. B.Knight in 2C has W.King in check.
B.Knight in 3A covers 1B, B.King covers 2A & 2B...Mate.

Moussambani wrote on Sun, Nov 13, 2005 06:56 PM UTC:
But you can't force such a mate. So it's a draw.

Doug Chatham wrote on Mon, Nov 14, 2005 02:58 PM UTC:
The fact that checkmate cannot be forced in this situation is irrelevant.

According to the FIDE Laws of Chess, Article 9.6,

The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves, even with the most unskilled play. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing this position was legal.
(Emphasis added.)

David Paulowich wrote on Mon, Nov 14, 2005 06:53 PM UTC:
'Hard choice, but not if you want to go home quickly.'

This comment refers to forcing a draw in seven more moves ACCORDING TO THE FIDE LAWS OF CHESS. Consider another position: WHITE K(a1) and B(d3), BLACK K(a3) and N(d2), followed by the moves 1.Bb1 Nb3 checkmate. The endgame K + B against K + N may be a 'common sense draw', but it allows the possibility of checkmate for either side (after some truly bad play). Thus thus such a game will not have to end until the 50 Moves Rule has been invoked and before that happens either player could forfeit the game by exceeding the time limit.


Moussambani wrote on Mon, Nov 14, 2005 11:20 PM UTC:
So, what was black's move, and white's move before that?

David Paulowich wrote on Tue, Nov 15, 2005 01:56 AM UTC:
http://www.chessvariants.org/historic.dir/shatranj.html

contains my 2005-03-08 Comment, where I amused myself by devising a complete (legal) game of shatranj ending in a 'BLOCKADE STALEMATE IN 20 MOVES'. There is really no need to go to such lengths in this discussion of possible checkmates in a K + N versus K + B ending. My 2005-11-14 Comment demonstrates a checkmate. Clearly 1.Bb1 is a ridiculous move for White, but it is legal.

As for the endgame K + N + N versus K, computer analysis proves that it is impossible to invent a legal position with a forced checkmate in two moves. Checkmate in exactly one move can happen after the lone King makes a 'ridiculous move'. That is why the 50 Moves Rule must be invoked to force a draw.


AL wrote on Thu, Feb 2, 2006 04:21 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

Jimmy Bailey wrote on Mon, Mar 27, 2006 03:31 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
Well written!

Anonymous wrote on Sun, Jul 30, 2006 12:54 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
exactly wat i was looking for

Anonymous wrote on Mon, Jan 1, 2007 02:14 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

25 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order LaterLatest

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.