I hate en passant. There should be better solution.

     Two threads on the same subject??  http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/one-move-chess-could-do-without

Regarding the quation: Why en passant?

I have read somewhere that there was once a time when pawns could only move one step. Then when the possibility to move a double-step was introduced in the 15th century the en passant rule was included in order to prevent a pawn to move two steps without the risk of being captured.

The rule gives a nice spice to the game in my opinion.

BTW, I am retiring from navy soon.

There is a better solution. Just stop thinking and posting about it. Problem solved!

Make that four threads, lol, topic of the week.

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/how-many-use-quoten-passantquot

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/en-passant--cheater2

One of them was started four years ago...but was recently bumped.

To make you mad.

Yeah! And while we're at it, why castling? Stupid cowardly king running away into the corner while simultaneously bringing out the rook. The king should stay in the middle and fight like a man.

And what about that stupid pawn promotion rule. A passed pawn should get to the eight rank and just sit there and gum up the works. Just when I think I'm winning, the stupid pawn promotes to a queen and I lose.

Come to think of it, why have the rules at all? The pieces are attractive and fun to handle, so I think we should just move them around any way we feel like it until, maybe, checkmate happens purely by accident. That's how my 3 year old grandson plays, and it's a lot of fun. Food for thought.

Just don't play it and don't give anyone the chance to play it against you. It's a very nooby kind of thing anyway.

En passant is great! The ammount of people who dont like it or even consider it cheating is outragious. I've had more than one arguement about it (mostly with otb games with idiot friends) and i refuse to change the way I play because others don't understand the rules.