| |
Main
Date: 06 Oct 2008 09:58:05
From: John Salerno
Subject: Rules question
|
I posted this a couple days ago but it doesn't seem to have appeared.
Anyway, I was wondering, if you have pinned an opponent's piece to his king,
is it legal to move your own king to a square that the pinned piece attacks,
or is that still illegal?
Thanks.
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Oct 2008 07:14:32
From:
Subject: Re: Rules question
|
On Oct 6, 9:58=A0am, "John Salerno" <[email protected] > wrote:
> I posted this a couple days ago but it doesn't seem to have appeared.
> Anyway, I was wondering, if you have pinned an opponent's piece to his ki=
ng,
> is it legal to move your own king to a square that the pinned piece attac=
ks,
> or is that still illegal?
That would be illegal. The king may *_never_* move to a square
that's covered by an enemy piece, even if that piece shields its own
king from attack. The idea, I suppose, is that the king-taking piece
captures one move before its own king can be taken, and thus it takes
precedence.
|
| | |
Date: 06 Oct 2008 13:45:32
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: Rules question
|
On Oct 6, 3:14 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Oct 6, 9:58 am, "John Salerno" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I posted this a couple days ago but it doesn't seem to have appeared.
> > Anyway, I was wondering, if you have pinned an opponent's piece to his king,
> > is it legal to move your own king to a square that the pinned piece attacks,
> > or is that still illegal?
>
> That would be illegal. The king may *_never_* move to a square
> that's covered by an enemy piece, even if that piece shields its own
> king from attack. The idea, I suppose, is that the king-taking piece
> captures one move before its own king can be taken, and thus it takes
> precedence.
... That's right! And that's because checkmate ends the game. Even if
your opponent's next move would also be checkmate.
|
|
