25 Aug 08
Theres a small part of the En Passant rule slash idea that I've always wondered about. Obviously when a pawn takes the double move forward it can be captured by an adjacent pawn as if it had only move once. One the original pawn moves again it can no longer be taken via en passant.
What I wonder about is; is there a statute of limitations on the en passant. That is, on move 1 I could play 1. e4 Then on move 50 could my opponent play 50 ... dxe3 ep. Or does it run out after the first move of EPness.
And that being said, could you fool your opponent OTB, much like Greenpawn said he did in one (un)fortunate game he had with castling.
25 Aug 08
Originally posted by tamuzipart 1: the statute of limitations is just that one move and that one move only. if the opponent doesn't take it en passant that move, the option disappears. the move has no memory.
Theres a small part of the En Passant rule slash idea that I've always wondered about. Obviously when a pawn takes the double move forward it can be captured by an adjacent pawn as if it had only move once. One the original pawn moves again it can no longer be taken via en passant.
What I wonder about is; is there a statute of limitations on the en passant ...[text shortened]... r opponent OTB, much like Greenpawn said he did in one (un)fortunate game he had with castling.
part 2: yes, you can fool your opponents that aren't paying attention in OTB play.
25 Aug 08
Originally posted by tamuziyou can only take en passant on the next half-move.
Theres a small part of the En Passant rule slash idea that I've always wondered about. Obviously when a pawn takes the double move forward it can be captured by an adjacent pawn as if it had only move once. One the original pawn moves again it can no longer be taken via en passant.
What I wonder about is; is there a statute of limitations on the en passant ...[text shortened]... r opponent OTB, much like Greenpawn said he did in one (un)fortunate game he had with castling.
25 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by coquetteI think that it would be much easier to fool someone like GP did (inadvertantly I believe) with castling. Most people that I know are aware that you must play en passant at the first opportunity or lose the option. Consequently, the player would realize that you are making an illegal move because it will be some time since he moved that pawn.
part 1: the statute of limitations is just that one move and that one move only. if the opponent doesn't take it en passant that move, the option disappears. the move has no memory.
part 2: yes, you can fool your opponents that aren't paying attention in OTB play.
However, castling illegally, like GP did, is a bit more inoccuous. If your king has been parked on his original square for a while, despite a walkabout, it will seem more natural for him to castle because it is such a common position and late castling is not at all uncommon.
25 Aug 08
Continuing this train of thought; why is it that the en passant rule was made to have a statue of limitations.
And
Can giving your opponent the opportunity to take a pawn via en passant create a tempo-gaining situation similar to forcing a queen move. IE. If they take en passant, you have that move in hand, but if they do not in that one turn you receive a healthy position due to the placement of that pawn.
25 Aug 08
Originally posted by tamuziThat's a good question. The only response I can think of is that it might be difficult to remember if ep is legal 50 moves later, particularly if notation isn't recorded. However, castling rights have no such limitation, even though it's usually impossible to prove [without notation] that the King and Rook have not previously moved.
Continuing this train of thought; why is it that the en passant rule was made to have a statue of limitations.
And
Can giving your opponent the opportunity to take a pawn via en passant create a tempo-gaining situation similar to forcing a queen move. IE. If they take en passant, you have that move in hand, but if they do not in that one turn you receive a healthy position due to the placement of that pawn.
25 Aug 08
Originally posted by tamuziI think it has to do with the logic behind ep. To my mind, the logic is that the double pawn move on the first move was meant to give it a "head start" in racing for the other side or establishing control of the middle ranks. Think of how much slower (and simpler) the opening would be if not for the double pawn opening move.
Continuing this train of thought; why is it that the en passant rule was made to have a statue of limitations.
And
Can giving your opponent the opportunity to take a pawn via en passant create a tempo-gaining situation similar to forcing a queen move. IE. If they take en passant, you have that move in hand, but if they do not in that one turn you receive a healthy position due to the placement of that pawn.
However, the rule was NOT meant to avoid a capture by "skipping" a square that it could be captured by another pawn; hence, the ep rule prevents that. So, why does ep apply only to a pawn capture? Well, I'd guess because pawns are the "structure" of a set up whereas piece are so mobile that the ep rule with regard to pieces would make it very tough to pawns to ever move 2 spaces forward in open positions.
In any case, if that's the logic, then the SOL of one move also makes sense. If the opponent declines to capture ep on the first move, there was obviously something more to the move than simply avoiding a capture.
Anyway, there you have my $0.02.
25 Aug 08
5 edits
...could you fool your opponent OTB, much like Greenpawn said he did in one (un)fortunate game he had with castling.I did not fool my opponent - I was mistaken and only when we were
looking at the game did I realise what I had done. So I legged it.
Here is the game up to where I castled.
(I'm going to try and 0-0 on this pgn mover just to see if it will let me).
My opponent resigned.
As for missig things OTB - I've seen all sorts.
People taking their own pieces is actually quite common.
The best has to be the King & Queen starting off on the wrong colour.
See:
http://chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=47
This actually happened.
I do have a moving GIF showing the game on site but it might not
work on some computers.
Here is the game (swap Black's King & Queen).
R.Burns - A.Lawrence-O'Reilly
1.d4 d5
2.e4 NF6
3.Nc3 dxe4
4.f3 Bf5
6.Bg5 Nbd7
7.d5 0-0!!
8.Qd4 exf3
9. Nxf3 Bxc2
10 Bb5 e6
11 Be3 exd5
12 Qxa7 mate
Edits: would not let me 0-0.