Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 06 Mar '09 23:32
    I was playing whites in blitz when my opponent was able to castle in the following position:



    Isn't it the rule that you can't castle when any of the squares is under attack? Wouldn't my bishop prevent castling in this case? Is there a glitch in the blitz software?

    Thanks
  2. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    06 Mar '09 23:35
    Originally posted by Pawn Rebellion
    I was playing whites in blitz when my opponent was able to castle in the following position:

    [fen]2kr1b1r/pp2qpp1/2p2n1p/8/Q3pB2/2N2P1P/PPP3P1/R3R1K1 [/fen]

    Isn't it the rule that you can't castle when any of the squares is under attack? Wouldn't my bishop prevent castling in this case? Is there a glitch in the blitz software?

    Thanks
    The "squares under attack" must be the ones the King is passing through. The King doesn't pass through b8, so your Bishop doesn't prevent Queen side castling.
  3. 06 Mar '09 23:40
    Thank you. I did not know this.
  4. 07 Mar '09 03:36
    Last response is absolutely correct. The rules of castling are:
    1. No pieces between K and R
    2. Neither piece can have moved prior to castling
    3. Cannot castle passing through check
    4. Cannot castle to get out of check

    The rook indeed can pass through an attacked sq because you do not check any piece but the King.
  5. 07 Mar '09 04:41
    Originally posted by Pawn Rebellion
    I was playing whites in blitz when my opponent was able to castle in the following position:

    [fen]2kr1b1r/pp2qpp1/2p2n1p/8/Q3pB2/2N2P1P/PPP3P1/R3R1K1 [/fen]

    Isn't it the rule that you can't castle when any of the squares is under attack? Wouldn't my bishop prevent castling in this case? Is there a glitch in the blitz software?

    Thanks
    I guess the rebellion is in not reading the rules of play.
  6. 07 Mar '09 05:17
    Originally posted by scacchipazzo
    Last response is absolutely correct. The rules of castling are:
    1. No pieces between K and R
    2. Neither piece can have moved prior to castling
    3. Cannot castle passing through check
    4. Cannot castle to get out of check

    The rook indeed can pass through an attacked sq because you do not check any piece but the King.
    FIDE added a fifth condition to prevent vertical castling (which was previously legal, as Tim Krabbé pointed out in a humourous problem). This condition states that the rook and king must be on the same rank.
  7. 07 Mar '09 08:41
    You are in good company. There was a famous Karpov-Korchnoi game where Korchnoi's rook was under attack and Korchnoi had to ask the arbiter if it was legal for him to castle. According to the great man himself "it had just never happened before..."
  8. 07 Mar '09 14:15
    Originally posted by greenpawn31
    You are in good company. There was a famous Karpov-Korchnoi game where Korchnoi's rook was under attack and Korchnoi had to ask the arbiter if it was legal for him to castle. According to the great man himself "it had just never happened before..."
    This is creepy - who is greenpawn31 (one of my unknown children?)

    on the 9th Jan I posted this:

    **********************************************

    We all had to learn sometime - some of us are still learning.

    In the 1974 Karpov v Korchnoi match this position arose.
    White (Korchnoi) to play.



    Korchnoi went to the arbiter, Alberic O'Kelly, to ask if it was OK for
    White to play 18.0-0 here. Korchnoi thought because the White Rook
    was attacked then castling kingside may be illegal.

    (Castling Kingside in this case IS permitted.)
    The game continued 18.0-0 Bxc4 19.f4 1-0.

    ***************************************

    Well at least we agree.
  9. Standard member peacedog
    Highlander
    07 Mar '09 19:05
    Korchnoi seems to have a problem with the rules on castling. Wasn’t there a game ware he moved his king, later to move it back to original square and then castle?
  10. 08 Mar '09 05:50
    I did that in a league game - it was a genuine mistake.
    If my opponent had spotted it I would have been forced to make
    a King move (touch move) and lost.

    Thread 98689