A 'joke' study/puzzle

And before someone replies saying there is no cannilbalism in chess.

Look carefully at White's 10th move. Game 6953099

Originally posted by Fat Lady
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter56.html

6029. Castling with a phantom rook

From Mark Thornton (Cambridge, England):

‘In rook-odds games could the odds-giver castle with the “phantom rook”? For example, if White gave the odds of his queen’s rook, could he play Ke1-c1? And, if so, were the castling rules the same as if the rook were pres ...[text shortened]... e of giving odds was disappearing, without any formal resolution of the ‘phantom rook’ question.

I think that in order to settle this debate we must consult the letter of the rules.

From the RHP Help section:
"To castle, the king moves two square towards the rook, and rook moves to the other side of the king. This is all one move. You may only castle when :

* All the squares between your king and rook are unoccupied.
* The king has not moved yet
* The rook involved in the castle has not moved yet
* The king is not in check
* The king will not move into check
* The king will not move through a square being attacked"


These rules imply that the rook must be present on the board in order for castling to occur.

Or see: section 3.8 in http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article
" ‘castling’. This is a move of the king and either rook of the same colour along the player’s first rank, counting as a single move of the king and executed as follows: the king is transferred from its original square two squares towards the rook on its original square, then that rook is transferred to the square the king has just crossed."

This also implies that the rook must be present for castling to occur.

Therefore I would conclude that in such a game where you give your opponent rook-odds and play without a rook, that you cannot castle on the side in which the rook is non-existent.

Originally posted by ChessJester
I think that in order to settle this debate we must consult the letter of the rules.

From the RHP Help section:
"To castle, the king moves two square towards the rook, and rook moves to the other side of the king. This is all one move. You may only castle when :

* All the squares between your king and rook are unoccupied.
* The king has n d play without a rook, that you cannot castle on the side in which the rook is non-existent.

the rook must present in normal chess, it can be different with odds

Originally posted by greenpawn34
And before someone replies saying there is no cannilbalism in chess.

Look carefully at White's 10th move. Game 6953099

1- What the hell?

2- Do you monitor every single game on this site?

Originally posted by Maxacre42
1- What the hell?

2- Do you monitor every single game on this site?

Of course I don't.

Game 6899913

Not a bad idea that giving up the piece to catch the central pawns and
leave him 2-3 on the King-Side with the wrong Bishop.

The fact you realised the pawns were going to make his win easy makes
it good that you did something to unsettle him and make him work.

(weaker players would have waited till the pawns were on the 7th before
realising they were in trouble).

OTB and without the a-pawns perhaps it was on, but I don't think you had
too much faith the game and slipped in careless mode allowing the Bishop fork.

Close?

Go back in time to when the rules for castling and promotion were very simple...

"Castling is possible as long as the King and Rook have never moved..."

"You may promote your pawn to any piece, but it cannot remain a pawn or become a King."

Then, apply rules in the most smart-arse fashion to solve:


Helpmate in 1

Helpmate in 1 = Play a move for Black, then play a move for White that checkmates.

Another fun one ... white has forced mate in 8, but black claims a 3-fold repetition on move 4!

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Of course I don't.

Game 6899913

Not a bad idea that giving up the piece to catch the central pawns and
leave him 2-3 on the King-Side with the wrong Bishop.

The fact you realised the pawns were going to make his win easy makes
it good that you did something to unsettle him and make him work.

(weaker players would have waited till t had
too much faith the game and slipped in careless mode allowing the Bishop fork.

Close?

I was drunk for that fork, it was pretty funny.. I was getting dominated anyways, he deserved it. I think I made a losing move in another game that night too. No drunk moves from now on! You're exactly right though, I was hoping to get a draw because of that wrong color bishop and the 2-3. I would have done the same OTB, but maybe it was too early and should have found a way to trade a pawns first while he pushed his center pawns. When I looked at the game, my stupid chess engine didn't like that move, but he's always wrong. And thanks for embarassing me like that.. next time, show my brilliant 22nd move against Emlasker instead 😉

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Go back in time to when the rules for castling and promotion were very simple...

"Castling is possible as long as the King and Rook have never moved..."

"You may promote your pawn to any piece, but it cannot remain a pawn or become a King."

Then, apply rules in the most smart-arse fashion to solve:

[fen]8/8/4Q3/8/8/5kp1/7p/4K3 w - - 0 1[/fen] ...[text shortened]... e in 1

Helpmate in 1 = Play a move for Black, then play a move for White that checkmates.

Ummm...

1... Pawn h1 = White Rook

2) 0-0 mate

Originally posted by orion25
the rook must present in normal chess, it can be different with odds

but in odds do the rules of the game change? or is the only difference that a piece or two are missing?

Hi ChessJester:

The RHP Rules:

From the RHP Help section:
"To castle, the king moves two square towards the rook, and rook moves to the
other side of the king. This is all one move. You may only castle when :

* All the squares between your king and rook are unoccupied.
* The king has not moved yet
* The rook involved in the castle has not moved yet
* The king is not in check
* The king will not move into check
* The king will not move through a square being attacked"

so White to play.



can promote to a Rook



And Provided the King had not moved (we know the Rook has not),
White can Castle

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi ChessJester:

The RHP Rules:

From the RHP Help section:
"To castle, the king moves two square towards the rook, and rook moves to the
other side of the king. This is all one move. You may only castle when :

* All the squares between your king and rook are unoccupied.
* The king has not moved yet
* The rook involved in the castle has n ...[text shortened]... ved (we know the Rook has not),
White can Castle

[fen]8/8/8/8/8/4K3/4R3/8 w - - 0 1[/fen]

This is vertical ploughboy's chess

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Go back in time to when the rules for castling and promotion were very simple...

"Castling is possible as long as the King and Rook have never moved..."

"You may promote your pawn to any piece, but it cannot remain a pawn or become a King."

Then, apply rules in the most smart-arse fashion to solve:

[fen]8/8/4Q3/8/8/5kp1/7p/4K3 w - - 0 1[/fen] ...[text shortened]... e in 1

Helpmate in 1 = Play a move for Black, then play a move for White that checkmates.

Very nice joke:
1. .. h1WR black promotes to a white rook
2. 0-0 #

Hi Max.

"...next time, show my brilliant 22nd move against Emlasker instead."

Sorry but I only do losses. Anbody can win a game of chess.

It is the imaginative and brilliant ways you guys find to
lose that fascinate me.

White to play. from Game 3622829



Black is not threatneing mate. So white played 6.Kf1




And I'm happy to report that Black not did play the boring 6...Qxf2 mate.
But 6...Ke7 and went onto lose.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Max.

"...next time, show my brilliant 22nd move against Emlasker instead."

Sorry but I only do losses. Anbody can win a game of chess.

It is the imaginative and brilliant ways you guys find to
lose that fascinate me.

White to play. from Game 3622829

[fen]rnb2knQ/pppp1p1p/5qp1/2b5/2B1P3/P7/1PPP1PPP/RNB1K1NR b KQ - 0 6[/fen]

Bla to report that Black not did play the boring 6...Qxf2 mate.
But 6...Ke7 and went onto lose.

😲

I wonder if such games were played seriously.Maybe 2 friends playing a training game.Or both were drunk.Or they agreed beforehand not to win in the first 15 moves.

I mean
first player misses his queen is en prise.it happens
first player helpmates.it happens
second player misses the mate in 1.it happens
but at the same time the second player also misses he can capture the queen.That's too much.Why then did he play Qf6?