chess rule for a novice I don't understand
Sort:
I'm picturing a position where where a piece is pinned because moving it would put the king in check. Moreover I'm picturing that that piece is protecting a piece which the opposite players king could capture. Shouldn't the other players king be allowed to capture the piece even though it is protected because the piece which protects it is pinned?
no...the king would still be in check
But the other piece could not capture the King, as it would leave its own kind exposed.
No - the King capturing the piece would be putting himself into check. Even though the piece is pinned, it exerts control over other squares. What happens when the pinned piece is no longer pinned?
I don't agree with the OP, but just thought I'd join in, because it's a rule I used to wonder about myself.
Capturing the king is not a thing in chess, you can never capture the king. So factoring it into the equation doesn't make sense.
Like this? You're asking why the white king can't capture the e2 bishop... It's a logical question, actually.
But doing so would put the king in "check"—and, legally, you're not allowed to move your own king into check.
Even when the checking piece is pinned.
See post #4
Imagine it like this:
Change the rules to "If your king is taken, you lose."
If you are put yourself in check by a pinned piece, the pinned piece takes your king.... and so the game ends. You cannot take the other king because the game already ended.
Look at it this way: whoever's king gets taken first loses. Now, look at this position:
The rook is pinned and is protecting the knight. What happens if white plays 1. Kxf1 (it is an illegal move, but let's assume for a moment it is not)? 1...Rxf1: your king is gone, and you lose - you could capture the opponent's king with your bishop, but you simply don't have time for this: your king "died".
It is interesting how different tactics in chess would be if it was the other way around: say, after your king is "captured", you still have one move to try to capture the opponent's king. Then your king taking the piece protected by a pinned piece could lead to a draw, since both kings are eliminated within the same turn. Alas, the rules aren't like this!
But the game is NOT if your King is taken, so hypothosees here are a bit uneccisary.
VicountVonJames wrote:
But the game is NOT if your King is taken, so hypothosees here are a bit uneccisary.
Actually, the logic works the same way, so thinking of it was he suggested makes sense.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Fair enough- it would be best to not invoke a rule like this, as it would change the game ding ice entirely, from capturing to taking the King
VicountVonJames wrote:
Fair enough- it would be best to not invoke a rule like this, as it would change the game ding ice entirely, from capturing to taking the King
Literally the only difference is that the game lasts one move longer as mate means the next turn the king will be taken.
Nathanhof wrote:
VicountVonJames wrote:
Fair enough- it would be best to not invoke a rule like this, as it would change the game ding ice entirely, from capturing to taking the King
Literally the only difference is that the game lasts one move longer as mate means the next turn the king will be taken.
No, capture is not obligatory in chess, he can play some other move, don't ask me why would he do it but he can.
uri65 wrote:
Nathanhof wrote:
VicountVonJames wrote:
Fair enough- it would be best to not invoke a rule like this, as it would change the game ding ice entirely, from capturing to taking the King
Literally the only difference is that the game lasts one move longer as mate means the next turn the king will be taken.
No, capture is not obligatory in chess, he can play some other move, don't ask me why would he do it but he can.
Ok, so two things change:
1) the game lasts one move longer
2) it is possible to decide to keep playing after you could have won (for unknown reasons)
Imagine this. White's pieces disappear once the king is captured. He wouldn't have time to recapture.
That's how I imagine it.
That's how I imagine it.
White king*. And same with the black pieces
Guys I'm in a serious trouble. My friends have bit akward rule in their mind. They say the King can move in all directions but when it comes to capturing a piece the King can't Capture the piece if it is in side ways to the King even though the piece isn't protected by other piece. The King can capture the piece only if the piece is in corner with respect to the King.