Engine couldn't tell that this was checkmate even though it is !!

Looking at this the engine needs a SERIOUS overhaul.

How on earth could it not recognize that this position below was checkmate?

I've wound back the clock to show that I had 1.18 left on the clock when white's move was made, and as you can see from the text in the pic, white won 'on time' even though this position IS checkmate.

I'd expect the engine that literally has millions of games in its database to be able to actually recognize when checkmate is checkmate otherwise what's the point in playing ANY games at all.

In hindsight, maybe the engine just thinks that pawns can now also laterally take each other  

That position is not checkmate. Black can play axb3 en passant to remove the check.

Funny thread...

TheEngineIsBetterThanUrBetterThanMee

 WTF ?? (sorry for the French, but en passant is French)

I actually had to google this to see what it is. And in hindsight, you ARE correct, I COULD have taken that checking pawn.

Started playing chess more than 40 years ago but I've NEVER seen ANYTHING like en passant!!

Didn't even know such a rule existed in all those 40 odd years because I've never played a single game with anyone who has ever used it, or anyone who has ever taught it.

It's a rule that is as obtuse as hell. I'd feel fairly comfortable saying that there are probably even GM's or incredibly highly ranked players who don't know that en passant exists either.

Literally speechless here. 

 

It's only a check because of en passant

Sorry bro not checkmate

You've got to be kidding. Every high ranked, and most low ranked, players know en passant.

Many years ago pawns could only move one square on their first move, not two. This slowed down the opening as everyone had to move pawns twice to get them to the center of the board. To speed up the game they started letting pawns move two squares on their first move. This created a problem. Pawns on the fifth rank could be bypassed by a pawn moving two squares without having the chance to take it. The en passant rule was created to compensate for this. The pawn can be taken as if it had only moved one square. This must be done immediately after the pawn moves two squares. En passant can not be used after any other piece or pawn has been moved.

Yeah, when someone isn't aware of en passant, the one thing you know is that that person has never even read a beginner's chess book... :-)

I guess we probably shouldn't tell the OP about the little-known but devastating "triple-check" move...

I've played thousands of games in my time, I've also played around 2k in just the last month on this site against other players, and I've NEVER played a single game with a person who has EVER used it (and therefore probably doesn't know it). 
When that many games against that many people are played without it ever being seen, even once, I'd say that the % of people who know en passant exists is logically therefore very small, because in all those thousands of games against those thousands of players it can't be the very first time that a pawn on the 5th row has been 'bypassed' to the advantage of the player who bypassed it.

No, most players know about the move, but it just doesn't get played very often. In most cases where the move can legally be played, there's no advantage to actually playing the move, so it doesn't get played.

I'm actually curious about that I don't think there are any triple checks possible.

Yeah, I was joking... ;-)

(I have a weird sense of humor, haha)

there's en passant, axb3

"It's a rule that is as obtuse as hell. I'd feel fairly comfortable saying that there are probably even GM's or incredibly highly ranked players who don't know that en passant exists either."

Every player who has ever played in an official event--even if it's only a grade school tournament--knows the en passant rule. Many casual players, who only play other casual players, have only a vague notion of the rules, and that's fine. But once you start playing strangers, it's worth learning the actual rules of the game. I suspect there is a free video on chess.com explaining the few special rules of chess

The existence of the so-called "En Passant" rule is currently a subject of hot debate in the chess world, and indeed, the wider world beyond.  Sure, you get people in this very thread Pedantically Pontificating vaguely about "Many Moons ago the pawn could only... " yada yada.  But if it's true that "En Passant" is a "rule" known only to Elite players, say GM and above, what is it's use to the "Common Man/Woman"?

Obviously, even if those wise Forefathers of Chess did change the rules at some point, it simply proves that "rules" are changeable, mutable, and therefore, not "real", as such.

So, in theory, if enough players simply refused to "believe" in "En Passant", and as the OP pointed out there are millions maybe billions of them, the rule would theoretically simply "disappear" for all practical purposes.

Except at the Elite levels, of course.

Yeah, I'm assuming that the OP really wasn't aware of en passant, but when he makes a statement like the one quoted, it makes me wonder if we're being trolled. (I know it's a new account with a low rating, but he might be a very good troll, lol.)

Games are supposed to be fun.

If a fake "rule" exists, that I didn't know about, or am not skilled enough to properly use, and I lose ... that's not fun. 

Solution: Abolish "En Passant"!

It's a relatively new "rule", the newest in Chess by any measure, according to some less than 5 years old.

Let's stamp out this insidious SCOURGE before it can establish it's Rotten Roots in the minds of our youth!