forced draw is it fair

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
Learn the rules already.

Yes, it's fair to draw by perpetual check.
Yes, it's fair to draw by threefold repetition.
Yes, it's fair to draw by stalemate.
Yes, it's fair to take a pawn en passant.
Yes, it's fair to move your rook through "check" when castling.

Learn the rules.

Richard

Game 9293458 Hell ya it's fair. I sent a message to my opponent on my last move in this game saying "well played". It's all about being a team player in clan games. And a draw is always better than a loss. Part of winning a chess game is making sure you don't fall into a stalemate or 3 move repetition draw.

IT'S ALL PART OF THE GAME OF CHESS.

"... there is no disappointment of the defeat."

Capa once said he learned more from his defeats than from his victories. I guess he didn't need to learn much, as I think he only ever lost about 25 games not counting simuls).

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
Learn the rules already.

Yes, it's fair to draw by perpetual check.
Yes, it's fair to draw by threefold repetition.
Yes, it's fair to draw by stalemate.
Yes, it's fair to take a pawn en passant.
Yes, it's fair to move your rook through "check" when castling.

Learn the rules.

Richard

Explain how to move your rook through "check" when castling.
I thought the King was the only piece that can be in "check" and other pieces are just attacked.
Is this another FIDE rule?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Explain how to move your rook through "check" when castling.
I thought the King was the only piece that can be in "check" and other pieces are just attacked.
Is this another FIDE rule?

Thats why the check is in quotation.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Explain how to move your rook through "check" when castling.
I thought the King was the only piece that can be in "check" and other pieces are just attacked.
Is this another FIDE rule?

It usually happens on a queen side castle. You can still castle if your rook crosses a line of check as LONG AS YOUR KING does NOT. Lots of people don't know that. Hope that helps.

Originally posted by moonbus
"... there is no disappointment of the defeat."

Capa once said he learned more from his defeats than from his victories. I guess he didn't need to learn much, as I think he only ever lost about 25 games not counting simuls).

... there is no disappointment of the defeat." But if I can manage a draw in a losing position there is no defeat. It's a draw. It's really a victory. Some stalemates and three move repetition draws I've gotten have given me more joy than a win. As in the game I posted above.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
It usually happens on a queen side castle. You can still castle if your rook crosses a line of check as LONG AS YOUR KING does NOT. Lots of people don't know that. Hope that helps.

Okay, I understand what he is talking about now.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
Game 9293458 Hell ya it's fair.

And if a 1900+ player is capable of allowing stalemate, why shouldn't us lesser lights make use of it?

Richard

Originally posted by tim88
by continuously checking your opponent,

Yes

Originally posted by KingDavid403
It usually happens on a queen side castle. You can still castle if your rook crosses a line of check as LONG AS YOUR KING does NOT. Lots of people don't know that. Hope that helps.

In fact, the rook moving through the attack is possible only on the queenside. However, it's also legal to castle when your rook starts out under attack. This, too, is something not nearly all players know.

Richard

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
In fact, the rook moving through the attack is possible only on the queenside. However, it's also legal to castle when your rook starts out under attack. This, too, is something not nearly all players know.

Richard

There's a little book out there entitled "Teach Yourself Better Chess" by William Hartston. It's a one page/lesson format, and isn't bad for what it is. One of the one-page lessons is learning to understand that Castling is a Rook move, not just a King move. It's a simple but important distinction.

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
There's a little book out there entitled "Teach Yourself Better Chess" by William Hartston. It's a one page/lesson format, and isn't bad for what it is. One of the one-page lessons is learning to understand that Castling is a Rook move, not just a King move. It's a simple but important distinction.

On RHP, castling is moving the King 2 squares horizontally. You don't move the Rook because it moves automatically once the King move is made. In castling the Rook involved is never given the opportunity to move through an attack. The Rook just disappears and reappears on the opposite side of the castled King. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
On RHP, castling is moving the King 2 squares horizontally. You don't move the Rook because it moves automatically once the King move is made. In castling the Rook involved is never given the opportunity to move through an attack. The Rook just disappears and reappears on the opposite side of the castled King. 😏

So then we can all claim to be amateur magicians! Unless of course you are a professional magician, in which case we still don't know for sure what you do for a living... 😉

Originally posted by Maxwell Smart
So then we can all claim to be amateur magicians! Unless of course you are a professional magician, in which case we still don't know for sure what you do for a living... 😉

I am retired and too old and feeble to work now. However, there is no magic involved. That is just the way the game is for everyone. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am retired and too old and feeble to work now. However, there is no magic involved. That is just the way the game is for everyone. 😏

You said the Rook just "disappears and reappears"

Sounds like magic to me.