Pinned pieces & FIDE

You haven't refuted anything.

Originally posted by Elnore
The problem is in seeing a pinned piece as able to establish a check. A check requires being able to carry out the attack on the next move and would only require the other color's avoiding the threat or not on its move. If not, the game ends at that point.

No piece is ever under attack by a piece pinned to its King. In the case of a King, without the ...[text shortened]... tened, is a reality of play. Arguments that include capture of a King are not valid.

Elnore

The only necessary valid argument is that the rules of chess allow a pinned piece to check an opponents King. To most, this makes perfect sense and is not a cause of confusion. One could debate what the rules should be forever and never reach agreement. For example, why can't you castle out of check? There can be difference of opinion on what the rules should be, but there is not much room to debate what the rules are.

Also, the wording of the FIDE rule book is consistent with as far as pinned pieces go.

Explanations involving capturing the king are merely ways to look at it to help it make sense. If I move a pinned piece and capture your King, your King is capture before mine. This helps me see why a pinned piece can threaten an opposing king and helps form my opinion on what the rules should be. No one is suggesting you can capture the king.

A king moving into a square threatened by a pinned piece breaks an actual rule of chess. If I take your king when you move into a square threatened by a pinned piece, I am only breaking a hypothetical rule of chess. It is hypothetical because you cannot really move your king there in the first place.

Excellent post Techsouth. Can we let this topic rest now? It is utterly nonsensical ; (

Originally posted by streetfighter
Excellent post Techsouth. Can we let this topic rest now? It is utterly nonsensical ; (

Okay, one more...


This is a hypothetical converstation with my 6 year old:

Me: One important reality of chess is that the king is never captures.

6 Year Old: Okay

Me: Another important reality is that the king can never move into check.

6 Year Old: What does it mean to move into check?

Me: It means moving your king somewhere where it could be captured.

6 Year Old: Oh, that sounds easy. Since the first fundamental "reality" of chess is that the king is never captured, you don't have worry about moving into check because your opponent is not allowed to capture your king.

That about sums it up.

Not a real nice way of putting it, but it is very frustrating dealing with someone who doesn't seem to grasp the basic idea here.