I learned how to play Chess many, many years ago as a 5-year old child. Being hooked, I played in School Teams right up to teenage level. And yet, after 1000's of games, it was not until I was about 14 or so, playing in School Teams, that I discovered En Pasant!
What are other player's experience?
- Joined
- 17 Aug 08
- Moves
- 13846
I too learnt to play chess at a young age but it wasn't until my teens when I discovered en passant. It's almost like it still hasn't been fully accepted yet. Then again, trying to explain it to my 8 year old step son wasn't the easiest of tasks...
"But that's cheating!!"
"Err... no, it's a legal move.. really."
So I can't blame my elders for leaving it for me to discover. Maybe I should have done the same. 😕
Part of the game learned it when I was 12 years old. I'm amazed at people who say they played for years and weren't aware of it. What they mean is they played a bunch of other n00Bs for years who knew even less about chess than they did and nobody in their circle was aware of how to play a legal game of chess.
I agree that it should be learned with all the other rules as you are taught them. There's nothing worse than playing a player who doesn't know the rules, because he often won't believe you when you take advantage of a rule that rarely comes up like en passant. And it is a real nuisance dealing with kids in school tournaments who have not paid attention when I teach it to them. If you're going to play the game, then know all the rules!
Originally posted by AttilaTheHornIt's worse playing with people who says, and actually believes it:
There's nothing worse than playing a player who doesn't know the rules, ...
"It's true! It's rules! You are allowed to play one pawn two steps *or* two pawns one step each in the first move!"
or
"Yes, I know you checked me, but you didn't say 'check' so I don't have to care!"
or
"You cannot move any of your pieces, yeah, I won!"
or
"Sure I can change my move, I said 'Jaydoyb', didn't I?"
I learned to play from my Dad and he bought me an introduction book. It covered legal moves of the pieces, checkmate, stalemate, 50 move rule, agreed draws, 3 move repition, en-passant and had two annotated games. The Evergreen game and the Immortal game. Excellent book, unfortunately I cannot find it, else I would give it to my kids.
Originally posted by znshoI hate en passant rule. I didn't once run into inferior position on purpose by playing en passant just because it looked cool 😳
I learned how to play Chess many, many years ago as a 5-year old child. Being hooked, I played in School Teams right up to teenage level. And yet, after 1000's of games, it was not until I was about 14 or so, playing in School Teams, that I discovered En Pasant!
What are other player's experience?
>It also astounds me, especially in youth tournaments, the number of players who don't know the 50-move rule and that the count starts all over again once a pawn is moved or a capture made, and some of the arbiters in these youth tournaments don't understand it too.
>A lot of players don't fully understand the 3-fold repetition rule too, not understanding that the repetition need not be consecutive.
>In addition, there is also no such thing as perpetual check in the rules; the 3-fold repetition rule is the only one that applies here. However, a draw can be agreed upon.
>I've played about 700 games here on RHP, and only once has en passant been applied. So it doesn't come up that often, but all chess players should know it. There is no excuse for not knowing the rules.
>And while I'm on this rant, what's so hard to understand about stalemate? It's simple!
Originally posted by znshoI came to know En-Pesant when I lost a winning game due to this. Because my opponent took a great benefit by using it.
I learned how to play Chess many, many years ago as a 5-year old child. Being hooked, I played in School Teams right up to teenage level. And yet, after 1000's of games, it was not until I was about 14 or so, playing in School Teams, that I discovered En Pasant!
What are other player's experience?
I certainly did not know about it for a considerable time after I started. Fortunately I never had the embarassment of being caught out as by the time an opponent played it against me for the 1st time I knew the move. No doubt, however, there were many games prior to then when en passant could have affected the course of the game.
Originally posted by AttilaTheHornPerpetual check causes a draw either by 3-fold repetition or the 50 move rule, which comes (and is claimed) first.
>In addition, there is also no such thing as perpetual check in the rules; the 3-fold repetition rule is the only one that applies here. However, a draw can be agreed upon.
>And while I'm on this rant, what's so hard to understand about stalemate? It's simple!
I knew about stalemate very early on as it was explained to me when I was told about check mate.
Originally posted by Dragon FireYes that is true, but my point is that perpetual check does not exist in the rules. Perpetual check will eventually cause a draw (if it is claimed) but you won't find perpetual check anywhere in the rules of chess.
Perpetual check causes a draw either by 3-fold repetition or the 50 move rule, which comes (and is claimed) first.
I knew about stalemate very early on as it was explained to me when I was told about check mate.