Go back
is this legal

is this legal

Only Chess

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

  • 8
  • a
  • 7
  • b
  • 6
  • c
  • 5
  • d
  • 4
  • e
  • 3
  • f
  • 2
  • g
  • 1
  • h


is it legal for black to take the c pawn and put white into check as both will be in check, i know it sounds silly and probably is , i was just wondering and had no way of checking

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[fen]3k4/ppp5/8/8/8/3p4/PPP5/1K1R4 w[/fen]
no, the pawn cannot take the pawn

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by irontigran
no, the pawn cannot take the pawn
thanks so much - regards Robert.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
thanks so much - regards Robert.
yeah, as when you think about it the black king would die 1 move sooner.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by irontigran
yeah, as when you think about it the black king would die 1 move sooner.
Kings never die, they are captured and then released to play again

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Wulebgr
Kings never die, they are captured and then released to play again
very environmentally friendly, catch and release only! lol

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Wulebgr
Kings never die, they are captured and then released to play again
This is only because they surrender if there's no way to escape. ๐Ÿ™‚

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[fen]3k4/ppp5/8/8/8/3p4/PPP5/1K1R4 w[/fen]

is it legal for black to take the c pawn and put white into check as both will be in check, i know it sounds silly and probably is , i was just wondering and had no way of checking
All you had to do was fire up your favorite greedy, materialistic, and incomprehensible conglomeration of accursed ones and zeros, set up the position, and see if it would let you make the move. ๐Ÿ˜‰

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Thomaster
This is only because they surrender if there's no way to escape. ๐Ÿ™‚
Typical strategy used by politicians worldwide..

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by irontigran
yeah, as when you think about it the black king would die 1 move sooner.
Well, theoretically, if this is a war, since the other king died a bit later then first, while especting his own death he could nomine the new leader of the army, no ? So even if you could do such a move, it is logical that the first king to fall is the one who lose.
Other way to explain why this isn't possible is this simple dull chess rule ; you can't make any move that exposes your king to check.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mad Rook
All you had to do was fire up your favorite greedy, materialistic, and incomprehensible conglomeration of accursed ones and zeros, set up the position, and see if it would let you make the move. ๐Ÿ˜‰
lol, i have no favourites mad rook my friend, i hate them all with a vengeance bordering on religious fanaticism, it doesn't matter how much theory i learn, how much tactics i study, how much Bangiev i can cram into a day, even two or three tempi down and the damn things have still got chances, i mean they can differentiate to minute differences, 0.1 of a pawn etc etc,
I play against my favourite little program, a java based program called supreme chess, I dont know how strong it is, but its stronger than me, time and again i get it into complications and difficulties and it always manages to squirm away like a yellow bellied son of a silicon beast that it is !

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ivan2908
Well, theoretically, if this is a war, since the other king died a bit later then first, while especting his own death he could nomine the new leader of the army, no ? So even if you could do such a move, it is logical that the first king to fall is the one who lose.
Other way to explain why this isn't possible is this simple dull chess rule ; you can't make any move that exposes your king to check.
thats what i was trying to say! ๐Ÿ˜€

Vote Up
Vote Down

I never really understood why the game wasn't played to total analilation of the oppoaing force. Isn't the mark of a great leader one who leads the troops into battle?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Is 'Checkmate' not from the Persian 'Shakmate'.

The King is Dead.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
I never really understood why the game wasn't played to total analilation of the oppoaing force. Isn't the mark of a great leader one who leads the troops into battle?
Because chess is a noble game. You annex territory and people. So, no need to slaughter them once you've won.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.