Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Ever taken a pawn 'en passant' before?

Ever taken a pawn 'en passant' before?

  • Of course!
  • Yes, & got accused of cheating!
  • No / Only in Tactics Trainer
  • Can't remember...
  • What's "en passant"?

Created on July 11, 2012 | 7457 Votes | 81 Comments

Comments


  • 6 months ago

    thought_control

    There used to be no powerful queen nor high range bishop either, so all of these rules and pieces "evolved" through time.  

  • 6 months ago

    thought_control

    There is a movie called "Shatranj Ke Khilari" (The Chess Players) a film by Satyajit Ray.  An entertaining and historical film depicting the tension between India and Great Britain in the early 1800's.  They played in this old way until...   I believe you can find it on youtube. 

  • 6 months ago

    ClavierCavalier

    Look up the site's FAQs for how to post games if this is what you're wondering about.

  • 6 months ago

    tarkaswar

    can anybody post a game as an example ?

  • 7 months ago

    Popcorn179

    Actually what I'd like to ask is, what was Chess like before this rule was accepted? Are there any famous games which could have ended very differently if this rule was allowed back then. Games in which the deciding factor was or could have been a player preventing their opponent from getting that passed pawn?

  • 7 months ago

    thought_control

    "en passant" (or "in passing") rule was made only to "balance" the rule which states how a pawn may move two squares forward on its first move.

     Naturally, if you choose to move a pawn two squares, you will sometimes find your pawn sitting next to an enemy one on the same rank.  Out of "fairness" or like I said, "balance", you should have a right to capture this pawn so it does not become (quite suddenly) a passed pawn! You have only a one time opportunity to capture something in passing and so this is why you cannot capture the pawn on a later move in this way.  The pawn is captured like it had only moved one square forward with it's opposing pawn replacing it on that square.  

  • 7 months ago

    Oonland

    Egzactly, @Popcorn179.

  • 9 months ago

    Popcorn179

    So why did they introduce the rule of 'en passant'?

  • 9 months ago

    bureaucracysucks

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 9 months ago

    bureaucracysucks

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 10 months ago

    thought_control

    00diaz00 must be right because I was once checkmated this way on another internet site and I could not capture e.p.  I just thought it was a glitch.  As for my last post; I just couldn't help it, lol.  

  • 10 months ago

    00diaz00

    ok lol, just for the fun of it i will dg into the official rulebook again 2 proof my point.

    When u put the king in check with a pawn the en passant is allowed.

    But if the king cannot escape the check and is put in checkmate by a pawn the en passant is not allowed... The reason for this is because u can hit the pawn en passant AS IF IT HAS MOVED ONE STEP. Therefore en passant was not allowed when the king was put in checkmate in this fasion. This is a very old rule, just as old as en passant is...

    If u can gimme a couple of days i will find it and post it h ere with the source ;)

  • 10 months ago

    ClavierCavalier

    "Don't have time for that poojashuklacool, but I can show you my favorite mating positions... " - thought_control

    Get a life.

  • 10 months ago

    thought_control

    Don't have time for that poojashuklacool, but I can show you my favorite mating positions... 

  • 10 months ago

    poojashuklacool



    CryCryCryCryI have no proper idea about passant move.Is there anybody who can help me to understand it?



  • 10 months ago

    ClavierCavalier

    1.2        

    The objective of each player is to place the opponent’s king ‘under attack’ in such a way that the opponent has no legal move. The player who achieves this goal is said to have ‘checkmated’ the opponent’s king and to have won the game. Leaving one’s own king under attack, exposing one’s own king to attack and also ’capturing’ the opponent’s king are not allowed. The opponent whose king has been checkmated has lost the game.

    3.7.d. A pawn attacking a square crossed by an opponent’s pawn which has 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 is only legal on the move following this advance and is called an ‘en passant’ capture.

    This means that checkmate means the side has no legal moves, but en passant is a legal move whenever a pawn moves 2 to check the king and there is a pawn able to capture en passant.  If your argument was valid, it would be state quite clearly within the Laws of Chess by FIDE instead of in some obscure article that doesn't pretain to the actual playing of chess.  You have no way to back up this argument, and your attempt at using FIDE handbook isn't helping you.  Just ask any of the titled players and they'll tell you you're wrong.

  • 10 months ago

    00diaz00

    Okay so for the rulebook on fide is somewhat a bit easy written. But as u can c here: http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article

    Article 5: The completion of the game

    5.1

    a.

    The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent’s king. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the checkmate position was a legal move.

    This brings confusion about en passant. And believe me when u dig in deep into the official rulebook of fide u will find this exception :P

    I'm not joking :P

  • 10 months ago

    Loufoque

    Captured a pawn if it's my plan to gain, position, exemple double pawn on the file, or gain a pièce important. Or possible checkmat. Only if interessant for me.

  • 10 months ago

    chessninja77

    I heard that you have to pass into enemy squares, is this true?

  • 10 months ago

    marksman001

    This is what the FIDE rule book (on the web says):

    The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent’s king. This 

    immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the checkmate 

    position was a legal move.

    b. The game is won by the player whose opponent declares he resigns. This 

    immediately ends the game.

    I think the crucial thing here is to establish whether en passant is a legal move.  The following is also in the FIDE rule book:

    A pawn attacking a square crossed by an opponent’s pawn which has 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 is only legal on the 

    move following this advance and is called an ‘en passant’ capture.

    From the above, I suggest that it is perfectly legal to checkmate using the en passant capture ...and with that, I rest my case.


Back to Top

Post your reply: