Castling into Check...

Sort:
Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola
pfren wrote:

Simply 1.0-0-0 is an illegal move, so white would normally lose in a blitz game. But as Black only has his king, it is a draw.

Not true. They say that 3.9 does not apply to speed games 'cuz players don't have time to hit the rewind button. Black's king CAN take white's king and legally declare that they won. IOW's, Black is not playing for 1/2 point here as you never are in blitz.....did u know that ?....u of all ppl ! 

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola

....and btw, I just tried to call u. I got ur girl friday.

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola
airborne53 wrote:

It's funnier when someone castles into a 1 move mate !!

...which is exactly what this is.

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola
50Mark wrote:

I think the first taken king is the loser. 

....I feel peaceful. Thx Mark happy.png .

Anyway, let's do a revisit after dawn. GN....zzzz.

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Okay, I slept kinda good & kinda not. Anyway....

Speaking of that, why can a pawn take a pawn en passant but a bishop can’t take a pawn en passant?

I know this is kinda dumb, but extending this to a rook (or horse) ?....

1. e2-e4   Rxp e.p. (...and Rook now roosts on e3 - pawn gone sad.png )

 

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola
FlyingSandal wrote:

As Scottrf posted, moving into check is an illegal move.  Doesn't matter what sort of move results in being in check. Not sure why this is even a question.

There are no true ILLEGAL moves in chess !

It's like being a bank robberer (?). Crime pays ! (....if u don't get cot).

Do u know what happens if A makes an "illegal" move & then B makes their move....while the arbiter/TD is arguing-trying to use an expired coupon @ the latte stand ?

Nothing !....the game goes on. And it happens all the time - esp in blitz !

Stuff like this cannot go controlled unless ur playing someone on a bandstand riser.

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Okay. if you leave me now ?....take something away from this.

In a game where a scoresheet is NOT required (like in blitz) ?....then there is NO SUCH THING as an illegal move.

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Here's a beautiful castle !....which begs of me as to why castling 'thru' a knight isn't always a no-no.


 ....but this is illegal ?....as white can make a case to a dumb TD that the knight cannot occupy both b1 AND d1.

 

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Which leads me to believe that castling 'thru' a knight is only illegal if the knight can occupy c1 - right ? IOW's, is there no such thing as castling 'thru' a knight check ?