12635 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Created on July 11, 2012 |
7764 Votes | 83 Comments
It's legal to use en passant to get out of what would be checkmate. And once someone tried to do en passant when his pawn was on my 3rd rank, threatening my pawn, and I moved my pawn 1 square forward, to make it go alongside the pawn
Mua-ha-ha-ha; en passant.
There used to be no powerful queen nor high range bishop either, so all of these rules and pieces "evolved" through time.
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.
Look up the site's FAQs for how to post games if this is what you're wondering about.
can anybody post a game as an example ?
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?
"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.
So why did they introduce the rule of 'en passant'?
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.
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 ;)
"Don't have time for that poojashuklacool, but I can show you my favorite mating positions... " - thought_control
Get a life.
Don't have time for that poojashuklacool, but I can show you my favorite mating positions...
I have no proper idea about passant move.Is there anybody who can help me to understand it?
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.
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
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
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.
43 hours ago
12 days ago
2 weeks ago
3 weeks ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!