Sali6554 wrote:
It’s stalemate, in where they can’t move.
White has a rook that can be moved, so it is not stalemate... yet. White has to keep giving correct checks until black takes the rook for it to be stalemate.
Please explain why this is not checkmate?
Sort:
bro has got to be joking hes not in check lmao
cool
Jan 24, 2023
0
#25
It's not a checkmate as the king has not been checked, fortunately you have mate in 2 at best and not a stalemate as the white still can move his rook
YanitedSamu wrote:
It's not a checkmate as the king has not been checked, fortunately you have mate in 2 at best and not a stalemate as the white still can move his rook
White can force Black to stalemate (or give up the Queen) by playing Rg4+ followed by Rf4+ and Rxf2. If Black takes the Rook it is stalemate. If he allows the Rook to stay on the board after the Queen is taken then White is in good shape.
Jan 24, 2023
0
#27
jetoba wrote:
YanitedSamu wrote:
It's not a checkmate as the king has not been checked, fortunately you have mate in 2 at best and not a stalemate as the white still can move his rook
White can force Black to stalemate (or give up the Queen) by playing Rg4+ followed by Rf4+ and Rxf2. If Black takes the Rook it is stalemate. If he allows the Rook to stay on the board after the Queen is taken then White is in good shape.
Yeah I clocked it as soon as I posted it lol didn't clock it immediately
All the squares around h1 are being attacked by blacks pawns but the h1 square itself is not.
Jan 25, 2023
0
#29
The opponent's pieces have more liberties, therefore the game is not won!
yetanotheraoc wrote:
sji24 wrote:
Check: 'Check' is essentially a position in which your a king is forced to move.
Checkmate: Checkmate is when you put the opponent's king in check and he has no other squares to move to.
Both these definitions are wrong. (Edit - Hah! You deleted this post while I was replying to it. Good, you probably just replied too quickly and realized your mistake.)
Check is when a piece or pawn of one color could capture the king of the opposing color on its next turn.
- If it is the king's turn to move, then that side must make a move to relieve the check. If they have no move to relieve the check, then it is checkmate. Relieving the check doesn't have to be a king move! Any move by any piece or pawn on that side can relieve the check: capture the checking piece, interpose between the checking piece and the king, or king flees.
- If it is not the king's turn to move, then it is an illegal position. The king cannot be captured! The king's side must take back it's last move, which was an illegal move. Then they must make a different move, one which does relieve the check (if they have one).
but what if the defender can’t find the move to respond to the check? If you put your opponent in check, and it isn’t checkmate, is it on them to find the response?
Quack, quack.
Say you make a check, there are four possibilities.
1. It's checkmate, and the opponent agrees with this. You win.
2. It's checkmate, and the opponent does not agree. You can make a claim to the arbiter, or else you can allow your opponent to keep looking for a way out until their flag falls. If it's not a tournament game, you can just go have dinner while your opponent searches for a way out of check.
3. It's not checkmate, and the opponent says (or agrees with you) that it *is* checkmate. That's the same as your opponent resigning, and you win. It's unsporting to say checkmate when you know it's not, but if you mistakenly think it is and your opponent agrees, you win. If it's later discovered that it wasn't a checkmate, you are not obligated to play on -- but you might anyway depending on circumstances, like if it's not a tournament game.
4. It's not checkmate, and the opponent doesn't admit to being checkmated, but they can't find a move to get out of check. As you suspected, it's on them to find the (any) response. Nobody is supposed to help them, and even saying there *is* a way out is help they are not supposed to get. If they can't find a way out, then eventually their clock will run out and they lose. Again, if it's not a tournament game, it's up to you if you want to show mercy or not.
Keep in mind if your opponent doesn't know how to get out of check, they are not going to know all the rules either, and are likely to think you "cheated" if you try to win without an actual checkmate. But in a tournament there will be an arbiter to explain the rules, so less of an issue.
Mar 29, 2023
0
#33
pinned pieces giving check makes sense
so, lets say we have this position-
here, if black to move, Kf6 is illegal
you might say, the queen cant move as it exposes whites king to check
well, blacks king is already exposed to check
why is it check?
well, think about it
if it was "capture the king to win"
then Qxf6 would win for white immediately
its not, but saying black can go Kf6 because the queen cant take it because the queen is pinned is a double standard where certain pieces can attack the king and others cant
or its a double standard where one side can move into check but the other cant
just fyi
Ilampozhil25 wrote:
pinned pieces giving check makes sense
so, lets say we have this position-
here, if black to move, Kf6 is illegal
you might say, the queen cant move as it exposes whites king to check
well, blacks king is already exposed to check
why is it check?
well, think about it
if it was "capture the king to win"
then Qxf6 would win for white immediately
its not, but saying black can go Kf6 because the queen cant take it because the queen is pinned is a double standard where certain pieces can attack the king and others cant
or its a double standard where one side can move into check but the other cant
just fyi
Well, the reason why kf6 is illegal because the king would be captured on the next turn with the queen, even when the queen is pinned, so the conclusion is that you should think that you cannot move your king to a square that is dominated by the queen because it will be captured on the next move, just think that chess is a capture the king, but with stalemate rule that used to draw a game
So in chess there are 2 endgames stalemate and checkmate stalemate being a draw checkmate being a win for one person for stalemate to occur there must be no legal moves but the king is not in check. For checkmate to occur there must be no legal moves and king and is check. For this game it would be stalemate if it weren’t for your rook because the king can’t move but isn’t in check. Hope this help ☺️☺️☺️
Mar 30, 2023
0
#36
james67543 wrote:
I thought I was getting the hang of checkmate, but just played this game and thought black had checkmated white.
My thinking was that whites king could not move from this position and is therefore checkmate.
Could anyone please explain what I am misunderstanding here?
Thanks.
Fen: 8/8/8/8/2R5/6kp/5q2/5n1K w - - 0 1
lemme get this straight, that is NOT checkmate.
'check' is attacking the opposition king threatening to take it.
'checkmate' is _when you 'check' the opposition king_ but it has no legal moves.
checkmate doesn't occur when the king has no escape squares, it occurs when the king is simultaneously in check too.
also this is NOT stalemate because white has a rook.
probably a draw if it's white to move, all he needs to do is to sac his rook but not get it taken by the black queen.
considering that you're 300, i dont mind this that much but surely learn something from this!
yetanotheraoc wrote:
Say you make a check, there are four possibilities.
1. It's checkmate, and the opponent agrees with this. You win.
2. It's checkmate, and the opponent does not agree. You can make a claim to the arbiter, or else you can allow your opponent to keep looking for a way out until their flag falls. If it's not a tournament game, you can just go have dinner while your opponent searches for a way out of check.
3. It's not checkmate, and the opponent says (or agrees with you) that it *is* checkmate. That's the same as your opponent resigning, and you win. It's unsporting to say checkmate when you know it's not, but if you mistakenly think it is and your opponent agrees, you win. If it's later discovered that it wasn't a checkmate, you are not obligated to play on -- but you might anyway depending on circumstances, like if it's not a tournament game.
4. It's not checkmate, and the opponent doesn't admit to being checkmated, but they can't find a move to get out of check. As you suspected, it's on them to find the (any) response. Nobody is supposed to help them, and even saying there *is* a way out is help they are not supposed to get. If they can't find a way out, then eventually their clock will run out and they lose. Again, if it's not a tournament game, it's up to you if you want to show mercy or not.
Keep in mind if your opponent doesn't know how to get out of check, they are not going to know all the rules either, and are likely to think you "cheated" if you try to win without an actual checkmate. But in a tournament there will be an arbiter to explain the rules, so less of an issue.
THANKS!
It’s stalemate, in where they can’t move.