I think windows chess is cheating.

[jlee]

lmao

 

[Vonkhan]

nice self pwnage

 

[Gibsons]

ownage of the year candidate?

 

[KeithTalent]

Haha, better recall that angry e-mail you sent to Bill!

KT

 

[FoBoT]

En Passant
The last rule about pawns is called “en passant,” which is French basically means “in passing”. If a pawn moves out two squares on its first move, and by doing so lands to the side of an opponent’s pawn (effectively jumping past the other pawn’s ability to capture it), that other pawn has the option of capturing the first pawn as it passes by. This special move must be done immediately after the first pawn has moved past, otherwise the option to capture it is no longer available. Click through the example below to better understand this odd, but important rule.

and

Castling
One other special rule is called castling. This move allows you to do two important things all in one move: get your king to safety (hopefully), and get your rook out of the corner and into the game. On a player’s turn he may move his king two squares over to one side and then move the rook from that side’s corner to right next to the king on the opposite side. (See the example below.) In order to castle, however, it must meet the following conditions:

it must be that king’s very first move
it must be that rook’s very first move
there cannot be any pieces between the king and rook to move
the king may not be in check or pass through check

Notice that when you castle one direction the king is closer to the side of the board. That is called kingside. Castling to the other side, through where the queen sat, is called castling queenside. Regardless of which side, the king always moves only two squares when castling.

http://www.chess.com/learn-how-to-play-chess.html

 

[SKORPI0]

Haven't played chess in ages. :\

 

[Platypus]

en passant is bullshit in my opinion, castling however is quite useful

edit: I don't argue en passant is legal, just that it's bullshit they added it to the rules.

 

[lxskllr]

Pic Clipped

Haven't played chess in ages. :\

I haven't either. Last time I played, I was in a weird little niche skill wise, and it made it not much fun. I could beat people who "play chess every so often" every time, but I'd lose to serious chess players just about every time. That meant I was occasionally throwing games so people wouldn't get frustrated, or getting pwned, with nothing in between.

 

[Train]

ok everyone knows castling.

But en passant? WTF you just shook up my whole world. I've NEVER seen that one done.

 

[lxskllr]

ok everyone knows castling.

But en passant? WTF you just shook up my whole world. I've NEVER seen that one done.

Most casual players have never heard of it, and it's a good way to start an argument if you try it with them :^D Have a rule book handy if you try that with a friend ;^)

 

[Raizinman]

And make sure you don't write back when the computer does an umpassant (In passing) which is another special move of the pawn under certain circomstances.

 

[irishScott]

en passant is bullshit in my opinion, castling however is quite useful

edit: I don't argue en passant is legal, just that it's bullshit they added it to the rules.

Think about it. Pawns are supposed to be foot soldiers right? Foot soldier charges headlong into the enemy line where he gets flanked, he risks getting hit in the side.

 

[Train]

Most casual players have never heard of it, and it's a good way to start an argument if you try it with them :^D Have a rule book handy if you try that with a friend ;^)

I've actually read rule books to check if there were any other special moves besides castle. Perhaps I read the wrong ones.

does this move fly in actual competition? Ive never been in an official chess tournament myself, though my brother used to play in a lot of them.

 

[lxskllr]

I've actually read rule books to check if there were any other special moves besides castle. Perhaps I read the wrong ones.

does this move fly in actual competition? Ive never been in an official chess tournament myself, though my brother used to play in a lot of them.

Absolutely. It's a legitimate, and time tested move.

 

[Platypus]

Think about it. Pawns are supposed to be foot soldiers right? Foot soldier charges headlong into the enemy line where he gets flanked, he risks getting hit in the side.

It was done to counter the move two space rule that was added to the pawn on the first move. I just think it's dumb. If you have a game with rules where pieces can move only specific ways, it's stupid to have a special exception to me. Personal opinion.

If you want to get into semantics of warfare, why the fuck is the queen able to do anything and the king is so limited? I mean I know most guys are completely owned by their women but still.

 

[irishScott]

Absolutely. It's a legitimate, and time tested move.

Yep.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_passant

This rule was added in the 15th century when the rule giving pawns the option of initially moving two squares was introduced. The rationale is so that a pawn cannot pass by another pawn using the two-square move without the risk of it being captured.

 

[irishScott]

It was done to counter the move two space rule that was added to the pawn on the first move. I just think it's dumb. If you have a game with rules where pieces can move only specific ways, it's stupid to have a special exception to me. Personal opinion.

If you want to get into semantics of warfare, why the fuck is the queen able to do anything and the king is so limited? I mean I know most guys are completely owned by their women but still.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess#History

Chess is commonly believed to have originated in North-West India during the Gupta empire,[19][20][18][21] where its early form in the 6th century was known as caturaṅga (Sanskrit: four divisions [of the military] – infantry, cavalry, elephants, and chariotry, represented by the pieces that would evolve into the modern pawn, knight, bishop, and rook, respectively).

Around 1200, rules of shatranj started to be modified in southern Europe, and around 1475, several major changes made the game essentially as it is known today.[22] These modern rules for the basic moves had been adopted in Italy and Spain.[24][25] Pawns gained the option of advancing two squares on their first move, while bishops and queens acquired their modern abilities. The queen replaced the earlier vizier chess piece towards the end of the 10th century and by the 15th century, had become the most powerful piece;[26] consequently modern chess was referred to as "Queen's Chess" or "Mad Queen Chess".[27]

 

[eLiu]

I'm sure we've established it's castling at this point.

On top of that, you may want to youtube search or google for some introductory chess tutorials to improve your game. At some point the sequence h4 ..., Rh3 ..., g3 ... was played... and that's pretty much always a terrible idea early in the game. You also play a lot of structurally weakening moves; it'd improve your game a lot to learn about piece development and a little about pawn structure.

 

[Regs]

Hah

 

[krylon]

Speaking of castling, that move is bugged in Skype

 

[shortylickens]

Fucking owned

Chess newb gets owned.
I lol.

 

[shortylickens]

It was done to counter the move two space rule that was added to the pawn on the first move. I just think it's dumb. If you have a game with rules where pieces can move only specific ways, it's stupid to have a special exception to me. Personal opinion.

If you want to get into semantics of warfare, why the fuck is the queen able to do anything and the king is so limited? I mean I know most guys are completely owned by their women but still.

Hypothetically, if the king could move like a madman and the queen was slow, they would both be basically useless. If the king is essential he cant be going Chuck Norris in there, and the queen wouldnt be good for much of anything. She'd be a slightly more advanced pawn.

 

[krylon]

It was done to counter the move two space rule that was added to the pawn on the first move. I just think it's dumb. If you have a game with rules where pieces can move only specific ways, it's stupid to have a special exception to me. Personal opinion.

If you want to get into semantics of warfare, why the fuck is the queen able to do anything and the king is so limited? I mean I know most guys are completely owned by their women but still.

Hey man relax. Don't you take it up the ass from a dick? We don't bash you. Besides, it's just chess; the rules were established centuries ago and stuck for a reason.

 

[apac]

Nomination for 2010 Ownage of the Year award.

 

[Platypus]

Hey man relax. Don't you take it up the ass from a dick? We don't bash you. Besides, it's just chess; the rules were established centuries ago and stuck for a reason.

lol.. that's a personal question but the answer is no. you mad?