Originally posted by no1marauder
It's been pointed out many times and in many contexts, this isn't OTB.
A feature of this site is that it automatically ends the game when there is a legitimate checkmate, which doesn't happen OTB.
There's nothing "unfair" about both players knowing the rules of a game. I think the Site Admins are correct to inform players of th ...[text shortened]... his King being in check, so I'm not being deprived of anything I actually deserve.
It's been pointed out many times and in many contexts, this isn't OTB.
I used an OTB example only to find out if you viewed OTB as a more serious form of competition than correspondence.
There's nothing "unfair" about both players knowing the rules of a game.
There is, however, something unfair about informing a player of a rule
at the precise moment when they can make a profitable use of it during a game.
I think the Site Admins are correct to inform players of the en passant rule in these limited circumstances.
So, you are just fine with the Site Admins reversing the result of a game by giving a hint in this type of position?
(last move was ...b7-b5+; neither player knows the EP rule)
To answer your question, I wouldn't. I don't want to win based on a child's ignorance of the rules; it's really not that important to me.
Let's change the situation a bit. Same kid, but now it's a time scramble with only seconds left for each side. Now, after you put the kid in check, the kid panics for a few seconds. Coach yells, "Remember EN PASSANT!" and then he plays it and beats you. Still OK with that?
If yes, I suggest you are in the extreme minority of competitive chess players. 😛