24 Jan 07
Game 3034784
Help! Did RHP just allow an illegal castling move or am I overlooking a rule making this castle legal?
24 Jan 07
Originally posted by kingarthurThere seems to be nothing wrong with that castle.
Game 3034784
Help! Did RHP just allow an illegal castling move or am I overlooking a rule making this castle legal?
24 Jan 07
1 edit
Originally posted by kingarthurIt looks like a illegal castle to me. It clearly is crossing over a check of your bishop on e-4. I would stop the game and send in feedback with the game id and explain the problem. Or wait until someone else responds to this post that knows more about RHP and what to do in a case like this. It's a first one on me 😲
Game 3034784
Help! Did RHP just allow an illegal castling move or am I overlooking a rule making this castle legal?
24 Jan 07
Originally posted by KingDavid403As long as the KING doesn't pass through an attacked square it's ok. The rook can.
It looks like a illegal castle to me. It clearly is crossing over a check. I would stop the game and send in feedback with the game id and explain the problem. Or wait until someone else responds to this post that knows more about RHP and what to do in a case like this. It's a first one on me 😲
24 Jan 07
Originally posted by KingDavid403The King did not cross check, only the rook passed through an attacked square which is a legal move I believe.
It looks like a illegal castle to me. It clearly is crossing over a check. I would stop the game and send in feedback with the game id and explain the problem. Or wait until someone else responds to this post that knows more about RHP and what to do in a case like this. It's a first one on me 😲
24 Jan 07
4 edits
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveReally, I didn't know that. Learn something knew everyday 🙄 Interesting. 😉 And here I thought I knew how to play chess 😳 I at least thought I knew how the pieces could move anyway. 😳 Maybe it's time I do read a chess book. 😲
As long as the KING doesn't pass through an attacked square it's ok. The rook can.
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
24 Jan 07
Originally posted by kingarthurWhite's castling was perfectly fine and legal. Black's bishop didn't control any of the squares that the King passed through, so there isn't a problem.
Game 3034784
Help! Did RHP just allow an illegal castling move or am I overlooking a rule making this castle legal?
24 Jan 07
Originally posted by David TebbI'm not sure what is meant by control of the square. Can you please explain further. I thought my white bishop on e4 should have prevented a queenside castle by exercising control over the b1 square?
White's castling was perfectly fine and legal. Black's bishop didn't control any of the squares that the King passed through, so there isn't a problem.
25 Jan 07
Originally posted by kingarthurDon't feel bad....from Wikipedia:
Ah...I understand the rule now. That was a first for me. I thought I knew all the rules of chess.
"Viktor Korchnoi, in his 1974 Candidates final match with Anatoly Karpov, famously asked the arbiter if castling was legal when the castling rook was under attack. The answer was in the affirmative, and Korchnoi ended up winning the game. It is actually a beginner's question, since the legality of a move is basic and essential knowledge."
I believe stress was what caused Korchnoi to ask such an elementary question, since he had to be aware of it.