[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Rules of Chess FAQ. Frequently asked chess questions.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
scott wrote on Sun, May 5, 2002 12:48 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★can a king switch places with a pawn when in check?
David Howe wrote on Mon, May 6, 2002 02:23 PM UTC:'can a king switch places with a pawn when in check?'
<p>The answer is no. A king may never switch places with a pawn, whether in check or not.
Gr8 at chess wrote on Fri, May 17, 2002 10:11 PM UTC:if your not in check, and you accidently move yourself there, not realizing that it will put yourself in check, and you take your hand off it, can you take it back, because i heard its a rule you can't move yourself into check...
Moussambani wrote on Sat, May 18, 2002 02:10 AM UTC:Yes, that move is illegal, so you must act as if it never ocurred. it's not that you can take it back, it's that you MUST take it back.
Anonymous wrote on Tue, Jun 18, 2002 05:40 PM UTC:Can a Knight jump over the other players pawns?
Anonymous wrote on Tue, Jun 18, 2002 09:03 PM UTC:yes, a knight can jump over anypiece
Chuck wrote on Fri, Jun 28, 2002 06:03 PM UTC:I believe that part of the answer to the last question is incorrect--if a player accidentally knocks over his king while reaching for a cup of tea, not only does that player not resign (the FAQ is correct on this point), the player is not even compelled to move his king (the FAQ says he is so compelled). This is clear from a careful reading of FIDE rule 7.2.
Anonymous wrote on Mon, Jul 15, 2002 10:42 PM UTC:I realize that you have said that a king cannot move within an adjoining space of the other king. But, what about this scenario: Knight protects space that king is to move, but that space is adjoining to other king. The adversary cannot take my king b/c of the knights protection, but would be able to if the knight were not protecting. Is this move legal?
Moussambani wrote on Thu, Jul 18, 2002 06:08 PM UTC:No, it's not legal. Opponent's king would take your king first and game over, so you still can't approach the opponent's king with your king, no matter how well supported
Brad wrote on Wed, Oct 9, 2002 01:41 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★I recently played a game of chess against my girlfriend. She insisted that it is legal for a queen to move like a knight as long as it does not jump over another piece. After consulting your page it is fairly obvious that this is false. My question is: are their any variations on the game where this is allowed. Do you have any clue where she may have gotten this idea? She is very insistant! Thank you.
Great question! The answer is, yes! In the Middle Ages, in parts of Europe, during the evolution of Shatranj to modern Chess, many people gave the Queen the ability to also move as a Knight (I don't know about it not leaping though). This type of Queen is now known as the Amazon and this variant as Amazon Chess. See the following page on this site: http://www.chessvariants.com/diffmove.dir/amazone.html For specific information about the Amazon and both old and new variants that use this piece, see the following page on this site: http://www.chessvariants.com/piececlopedia.dir/amazon.html
me wrote on Sun, Oct 13, 2002 05:56 PM UTC:if a king reaches the other end of the board then can u get your queen back?
No. There is no such move in the standard rules of chess. You can only get another Queen by promoting a pawn.
confused wrote on Tue, Dec 31, 2002 07:17 PM UTC:Good ★★★★Hi, I was playing a game w/ my uncle and i took all his pieces except the king, and he lept up and said that the game was a draw because all of his pieces had gone except the king. Is this rule true? Was the game a draw or could i have gone on 2 win? (with 2 rooks and a queen) Thanx
Your uncle is wrong.
<p>
A bare king is only a draw if the person who gave the player the bare king has insufficient mating material.
<p>
Sufficient mating material is a queen, a rook, a knight and bishop, or two bishops. A pawn is considered sufficient mating material because it can become a queen.
<p>
- Sam
Kristina wrote on Tue, Jan 21, 2003 03:37 PM UTC:Can a player choose to pass? During a game can a plaer skip their own turn, and have it count as a move, say if the 50 count was on for the verification of a stale mate? You may answer to kristinastoney@yahoo.ca Thankyou for your time.
i sent kristina an email, but for any other interested readers, here is the answer: <P>
to answer your question, no, it is illegal to skip your move in chess. there are no exceptions to this rule. if you have a legal move, you must choose one. if you have exactly one legal move available, then you must play that move. if you have no legal moves, but are not in check, then that is stalemate and the game is a draw.
Renee wrote on Tue, Apr 22, 2003 10:05 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★Thank you so much. I had a question and the answer was at my fingertip. I also read further and found more informative answers. Thanks again.
peoples wrote on Sun, Jun 15, 2003 05:37 AM UTC:hello, The other day I was playing chess with a friend. Soon, I had a queen, bishop, and king; he only had a king.He moved his king to the other side and said its a draw. I didn't beleive him but i didn't say any thing because he always saying how bad he is at chess and i didn't know all the rules to chess. Anyway is that true? Would be a draw or is he bull$#!*ing me? Thx
Anonymous wrote on Sun, Jun 15, 2003 08:47 PM UTC:There is no such rule about moving one's King to the other side of the board being a draw. You should have continued the game.
Anonymous wrote on Sun, Jun 29, 2003 09:34 AM UTC:In the answer to question 'Is it allowed to castle which a rook that is attacked or goes through check?', isn't the example wrong? By castling, wouldn't the King be in check? Wouldn't it be, in fact, impossible to move the rook 'through' an attacked position? Since the only position the rook goes 'through' is the one position where the King is going to end up.
'Wouldn't it be, in fact, impossible to move the rook 'through' an attacked position? Since the only position the rook goes 'through' is the one position where the King is going to end up.' Not when you're castling Queenside. Then the King ends the move on square c1, the Rook on d1. The Rook passes over b1 and the King does not. The King always moves two squares when castling to either side.
FAQ's were very helpfull
can the king take another piece example ...if the opponents queen is placed next to the king putting him in check mate can the king take the queen
If the Queen is unprotected, the King can take it. If it is an actual checkmate, then the Queen is protected, and the King can't take it.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.