s

           Assad is the dictator of Syria. You should get out more instead of posting.

It means that only if you haven't read it with comprhension.

          Batgirl;  your starting to talk like Daryl Waltrip.  comprhension??   Is that like co-oppetition??   ( a compound word that combines coopperation + competition).

With the exception of Chapter 15, they could delete/alter/edit any portion of it if they wanted to, of course they wouldn't as en passant is played on the international (FIDE) level too but they have jurisdiction over every page (minus Chapter 15) which includes rule 8F5. Capturing en passant.

Given what was written here, I find rather ironic that it was deleted.

On topic : plenty of master games would be totally incorrect without the en passant rule. If they do not all include such a move, the relevant sidelines do.

Ok, I agree, lets scrap it. How soon can we implememt this? Can someone call up Erik and Carlsen on a conference line to inform them of our decision?

Hmm. I go to get a bit of work done (it's Sunday, I should've just stayed home) & when I return I find the discussion has really heated up. Cool. Carry on everyone, stir it up some more! But I am sure I read that reasoning in a chess book long ago. That doesn't make it true, I know, but it makes a world of sense. I could see almost all games being drawn without it. Think about pawn structures & how easy it would be to completely, or nearly, lock up positions not allowing pieces to have contact with the opposing side.

Niether can I. I totally agree with you.

pass me by  I like it

After reading the 55 posts so far i can come to the following  conclusions:

1.The en passant is not a meaning less move.

2.There are some morons on chess.com who carry an air of arrogance and are impatient enough not to read the note at the bottom of my first post.

3.There are some primitive persons who shun debate and healthy disscusion on chess rules simply because they hate change and want everything just to be the same.

4.They are a limited few on chess.com who carry horrible sterotypes themselves.

i Would also like to give a few clarifications:

1.Just beacuse i said brothers i am not sexist......its just a phrase or figure of speech(as i used it that is) and some people have developed a hobby of picking out pharases are labelling them as sexist and racist.Also just because i am an Indian i cannot be labbeled a sexist.

2.I didnt not post in an all knowing air .....i invited people with more knowledge on the issue to correct me and i asked a question and did not demand or order the scrapping of the enpassant(who am i?)..

3.There are a few morons who instead of elaborating....insulted.....to them i would like to say that  you are assumed to be either primitive or grand masters who would like to remain anonymous if you didnt support what you are saying with an explanation.....even a dog can abuse and there is nothing whatsoever great about it.....i can out do you in abuse

...........(to be continued)

Pot, let me introduce you to kettle...

it was not a "joke"...it was a serious comment in bad taste and for your information i do not have the habit of trolling

Well parakopatoabajnakaghagsdka I just want to say I have supported you from the start we should do a kickstarter campaign and raise money to push our change through and I am hoping my friend and brother you also join me in my tireless campaign to end the rule that says you cannot mate with K+N+N vs K this is clearly outrageous and unfair how many points have I lost because of this rule?

Or, to make it even, they should declare K+B+B a draw, just like they do with knights. it is unfair to the knight really. he works very hard too, just like his brother the Bishop who prays to Caissa every morning to allow him to change his square color, a campaign we can take up later also. Why must the bishop be comdemned to one color because of a rule that says he cannot move to a different color square we must end this tyrannical rule.

you have taken my second"question" at face value.....i do not support or even think of things like that,,,,,,what i meant to say that en passant should not be scrapped.....you have misunderstood that....it was not even a question......dont take it out of context.............it was certainly not written in an offensive tone......

You might have taken many rhetoric precautions, but :

If you do not see how the first sentence is "posted in an all-knowing air", you will easily excuse the next paragraph.

Brothers, India is a meaningless country, especially at political level, and its only probable use or value is for tourism. I do not see any use of having a meaningless country ; however on the other side I see a kind of aestetic value in it.

Am I the only one that notice a problem with this comment? Comment #10.

1. How in Naraku and all nine Norse hells is this "dramatic note" relevant to en passant discussion?

2. Yes I do. I'm quite disturbed, actually.

Yes, all it takes is a comment and another Hitler is on the way. I already reported it to admin.

Yay!

How many more morons are there going to be looking to change rules.

The reason behind en passant is simple.  Under no circumstances can a pawn get past a pawn of the opposite color on a neighboring file without there being at least 1 legal opportunity for 1 player to make a capture.

Think about it, after 1.d4 c5, White has the legal option to capture, 2.d5 he chooses not to.  Well, if you didn't have en passant, it would allow a player to move his pawn 2 squares unharmed.  So, for example, if White has no c-pawn and no d-pawn, and has an e-pawn on e5, Black has a pawn on d7.  Without En passant, you could already say that Black has a passed pawn, since d7-d5 bypasses the e-pawn.  This is why en passant came about.

So now that we have morons looking to change the en passant rule just like the idiots that want to change the stalemate rule, what's the next moron request to change rules?  Do you want to make it so that the same piece can't be moved on consectutive moves?  After you castle, if you manouver the Rook back to it's starting square, and the King back to his, should you be able to castle again?  Promotion to King?

Say, why don't we call up the NFL and tell them that we want the Shot Gun aboloished, or that punters must punt blindfold, or ban fan noise so that it sounds more like a movie theater while we are at it?

This thread is stupid!