I only recently learned about it. it is kind of odd move and I have yet to use it or have it used on me.
En Passant
Sort:
Same. I have not needed to use it yet, and no one has used it on me yet
Rubidium wrote:
Usually they have something to do with compositions.
Sorry, but in this posisition g7-g6 is not the only legal move. Here's an example:
You need to add a white pawn on e5 to make it work. Like this:
Well the concept of en passant is quite useful
especially in endings (to freeze opposing pawns)--so although the move itself may not be played, the idea is still there.
It also comes up whenever you need to block or stall some pawn move
eg) white playing a4-a5 in the Benoni to prevent b5 and also Black playing h5-h4 in response to h3 to prevent g4 in the Najdorf Sicilian f3 h5 line.
It would be great in the endgame(:
So a pawn eliminates the pawn with a machine gun, and the enemy King explodes because the pawn was going to run down the board.
it's a hoax!
Sounds like the chess board is becoming Nazi Germany lol
AndyClifton wrote:
it's a hoax!
hoax belongs to my top ten 4-letter words, some of which I try not to type on the public forums
" It was brought in because it was felt the two step initial move gave an unfair advantage to the defending pawn. "
More accurately, the rationale behind en-passant is to allow the two-square initial pawn move for the purpose of accelerating the game without having it used simply to avoid a logical capture. While this rule makes sense, there was great debate among the early 19th century theorists who helped solidify the current rules of chess, and non-en-passant (called "passar bagatalia"), along with free-castling were standard in Russian chess until the mid-century and in Italian chess until late-century.
Chess does have an interesting history
So i've heard.
"[...] along with free-castling were standard in Russian chess until the mid-century and in Italian chess until late-century."
Nothing beats Pam-Krabbé castling, though, which was legal by FIDE rules until 1972. 
There was more than one kind of castleing? That must of stunk to keep track of lol
Bubatz wrote:
"[...] along with free-castling were standard in Russian chess until the mid-century and in Italian chess until late-century."
Nothing beats Pam-Krabbé castling, though, which was legal by FIDE rules until 1972.
Yeah, well, that's just weird - historical but not developmental.
It was always just a theoretical interpretation of the rules, though, and never actually used in a real game, right?
"There was more than one kind of castleing? [...]"
Pam-Krabbé castling was a quirk in the rules. The former wording did not entail that the king and the rook have to be on the same rank. If now White promotes his e-pawn to a rook, and this new rook and his king have not yet moved, and there are no pieces between the new rook on e8 and the king on e1 etc., he could "castle" by moving his king to e3 and the new rook to e2. This was discovered by Max Pam and put into a puzzle by Tim Krabbé. It was even given a notation: 0-0-0-0.
I would argue that the Rook has moved though -- when it was a pawn. Is a promoted pawn a different/new peice or an existing peice with a new role?
I just caught up(: Google is a great thing(: