Upon googling this I came across two sites referencing those moves:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoPurpleDragons
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/geurt16.txt
Apparently they claim that there was a rule loophole which said "The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent's king*. This immediately ends the game."
Later they added * = with a legal move, since players were able to technically play the combination you provided.
Why not not play 1.Qxf7#! ?
Why not not play 1.Qxf7#! ?
Because 1.Qxf7?? isn't checkmate. 
Am I missing something? You can't play Qxf7#. The queen can't even get to the square on move 3.
Am I missing something? You can't play Qxf7#. The queen can't even get to the square on move 3.
That's the point, but the rules previously stated that you only needed to checkmate your opponent, but the rules never said that the move had to be legal, so they had to change the rules to add that clause
jaja that is hilarous. fisher and kasparov sitting on their respective chairs to play the WCC. everyone expecting fisher's and kasparov's firsts moves. after move 2 everyone waits for fisher response....... 3. Qxf7#. fisher extends his hand to shake.........................
N out the window is actually the Bichslaap variation of the Schmidlap Maneuver:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-schmidlap-maneuver
The rules for movement of the Queen already prevent this move sequence, even without the addition of "...with a legal move...". This is nonsense.
Why not 1.axd7? Not only did the rules not specify that checkmate must be executed with a legal move, but also that legal moves must be made at all. Was there a rule stating specifically that we could not play 1.e4 e5 2.N out the window B in your pocket?
I hate whomever decided that the variation at the beginning of this post was playable, and whomever revised the rules to account for it.
1axd7 isn't checkmate. even as an illegal move.
The rules for movement of the Queen already prevent this move sequence, even without the addition of "...with a legal move...". This is nonsense.
Why not 1.axd7? Not only did the rules not specify that checkmate must be executed with a legal move, but also that legal moves must be made at all. Was there a rule stating specifically that we could not play 1.e4 e5 2.N out the window B in your pocket?
I hate whomever decided that the variation at the beginning of this post was playable, and whomever revised the rules to account for it.
1axd7 isn't checkmate. even as an illegal move.
Oh, thats right. I did say that it was checkmate, didn't I? The answer is no, I did not. Why not read the rest of what I wrote?
Or read the rest of the thread.. If it is an illegal move then it can be disputed -- only -- while the game is going on. Therefore, the only way 1axd7 would work during said rules was if it checkmated the opponent and ended the game (it does not).
so what you're saying is....you're gonna light my country music award on fire?
Well maybe he wanted it to be suspenseful?lol
so what you're saying is....you're gonna light my country music award on fire?
No, he stated that you'd set the country music awards on fire (metaphorically) with your catchy ditties.
OR perhaps a player could, under the old rules, claim checkmate when there is none. For example, 1.#. Its checkmate, so it can't be disputed. Hogwash. The rule revision is worthless.
Not really. 1.# wouldn't prevent the opponent from playing any legal move, so it wouldn't be checkmate under any rule system.
If this "loophole" was truly exploitable, the most logical opening would not have been the one given in this discussion, but rather Bc4 AND Qxf7 as a single move. Its a one-move checkmate in every game.
LOL...
Why not just 1. e6 Qxf7# on the same move if we are doing away with legal play?
^ Just covered.
"Doh"!!! Homer Simpson 2009
This must relate to the "Mate ends the game" rule. There was more ambiguity than that also. For it was also stated that a Move is not complete until: A. The piece moved is released and B.The clock is punched.
So mate ends the game but When is it Mate? When the piece was released? Or the clock punched?
***
I had exactly this thing occur in a postal game when a lazy opponent said "IF ANY, THEN" so I took his queen with my king which was illegal but was "ANY" and his "THEN" move took my king out of check. I gave a forcing conditional sequence to Mate to "end the game".
All of this not to try winning the game, but because it presented a unique opportunity to finally clarify several rules in postal chess, involving the finallity of mate, and the strength of a forced Conditional Sequence. And the opponent had several ways to nullify my mate claim and resume the game. Since he professed to be an attorney, I thought he would immediately grasp the implications and the winning arguement; and we would all be better off. Perhaps he was not so good a public defender after all, as he didnt see either one and wrote back with some name calling. So I just ended up pretending like he made the proper response and resigning it. Really too bad since the game ended up fairly well publisized on the net and in several d-bases online, being from the 1st National Team Championship of USA postal Chess. It could have finally set a precedent. (But on the bright side, my team won it :)
N out the window is actually the Bichslaap variation of the Schmidlap Maneuver:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-schmidlap-maneuver
But of course. Did it even need to be said? It's not like we all haven't learned every variation of the Schmidlap Maneuver. It's the only opening played by GMs today.
Greetings everyone and thanks for maintaining this nice community.
I'm not much of a chess fan myself, maybe an occasional player from time to time.Recently though, something I read online caught my attention and I needed an expert explanation since I couldn't find the answer. Someone posted the following story online:
"There used to be a rules loophole in chess consisting of the following moves: (white open)
1. e4 e5
2. Bc4 Nc6
3. Qxf7 (checkmate)
I know it is an move illegal for the queen but since it's already a checkmate the players cannot argue about it. Of course they changed the rules after that
"
Can someone explain who this was possible? Of course They queen cannot move to f7 but since I don't know the official chess terms what does the x in "Qxf7" stand for and why would someone put a rule stating that you can't argue about a move that led to a checkmate?
Please enlighten me