Talk:Chess/Playing The Game

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

This module is within the scope of Wikibooks:Chess, a collaborative effort to improve Wikibooks' coverage of chess. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This module is rated Top-importance on the importance scale and C-class on the quality scale.

[edit] Forced Draws?

In the section on the game ending, it appears to say that the game is drawn for insufficient material, 50 moves without a capture, etc. only if one of the players declares the game a draw. I was under the impression that this drew the game whether a player declared it drawn or not. Which is it? If the first one is correct, I'll leave it as it is, if the second version is correct I'll change the wording to be clearer.

[edit] Castling

As I am new here (although not new to Wikipedia) I'll post this on the talk page. I believe it is easier for students (new chess players) to learn and remember Castling if it is said somehow differently:

A player moves his rook to the first free square next to the king, and subsequently, on the same turn, move the king to the first free square next to the rook (both king and queenside).

I also made new pictures that show this, if you don't like that you may revert the previous versions. BTW great job for the chess manual, thumbs up, keep up the good work. --5ko 01:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

In chess you should move the piece you touch. If you move the rook first it is an ambigous move. You could mean to move the rook only and you could mean to castle. Therefore you should always move the king first, two places towards the rook. In that case it evident that your move could only be castling.

I think the original way is clearer. It's easier to remember that castling starts by the king moving two squares either left or right. Irrevenant 10:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

jkanters

[edit] Regarding Kings

I've played a few casual games where we agreed that my opponent or I could move his/my King adajacent to my/his King if my/his King would place itself in check if it captured his/my King. Is this an exception to the "the Kings may not be adajacent to each other" rule? Or is our logic flawed?--SimRPGman 08:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

No it is never allowed for two kings to be adjacent. (In blitzchess it actually happens because of the hurry of the players and the first player to see it can take the others king)

jkanters

There's an error in diagram Chess_d44.png, showing a King's possible moves. The diagram shows d5 as an available move, but that square is covered by the Queen.