# Chess rules **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 28, 2002, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409 "2002-12-28T22:54:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![TVS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b782af/32.png) [@TVS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVS)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/1 "2002-12-28T22:54:02Z")
I was playing chess with my brother-in-law last weekend and we had dispute about the rules. He said that you could not move the King into harm’s way. I said ‘bologna’. If I can set a trap for the King, more power to me. He also said that if his Pawn can be moved to my back row, he could trade it for another piece, something that had already been captured. Horsecrap, says I. I need some help here, guys. Are these actual rules, or loopholes inserted to make it easier for beginning players to play without getting discouraged? ---
**Author:** ![Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Speaker_for_the_Dead)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/2 "2002-12-28T22:56:43Z")
Well, I know that you can’t move the king into harm’s way, or on their turn they’d just take it. That would create an interesting game… The “trade-in” rule is one I’ve used, but I’m not sure if its kosher in tournaments. A real chess player will come along soon. ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/3 "2002-12-28T22:57:16Z")
No you can’t put your king “in harm’s way.” Yes, pawns do get promoted. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/4 "2002-12-28T22:57:29Z")
I don’t know about moving the King, but your brother in-law is correct about exchanging the Pawn once it gets to your side. From [this page](http://www.conservativebookstore.com/chess/pawns.htm): > [@](#): > > Should a pawn get all the way across the board to reach the opponent’s edge of the table, it will be promoted. The pawn may now become any piece that the moving player desires (except a king or pawn). Thus a player may end up having more than one queen on the board. Under normal circumstances a player will want to promote his pawn to be a queen since that piece is the most powerful and flexible. The new piece is placed where the pawn ended its movement. ---
**Author:** ![Opus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/858c86/32.png) [@Opus1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Opus1)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/5 "2002-12-28T22:58:44Z")
Your brother is right on both counts. Kings can’t be moved into check, and a pawn that reaches the back rank can promote to any other piece (except a king), whether previously captured or not. ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/6 "2002-12-28T23:00:58Z")
You can move your king into harm’s way as long as you don’t move it into check. The exception to this, which may be what you BIL was thinking of, is that you can’t castle across a spot that is being threatened by an opponent’s piece. As for the pawn reaching the opponent’s back row, your BIL is more right than you, but not quite. If you get one of your pawns to your opponent’s back row, you can promote it to any other piece (except a king), regardless of whether that piece has been captured. It’s possible to have two queens on the board. ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/7 "2002-12-28T23:06:15Z")
Right. I thought that by “in harm’s way” you meant “into check.” ---
**Author:** ![Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Speaker_for_the_Dead)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/8 "2002-12-28T23:40:19Z")
I remember games when I didn’t notice my king was in check and he got taken… that took a looong time to end. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/9 "2002-12-28T23:41:15Z")
The only thing I{ll add to the complete answers above is a comment on “in harm’s way”. If the phrase means, “directly into check” the rules do not permit this move. A King may not accidentally commit suicide. A useful analogy might be to consider that when a player wishes to show he’s resigned, he tips his King over buit you wouldn’t say that a player who accidentally knocked his King over had immediately lost the game, would you? Of course, a King may legally move into increasingly perilous situations, as long as they are not directly into check. If “in harm’s way” merely means a move into a dangerous position, that is permitted. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2002, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/10 "2002-12-28T23:55:17Z")
It’s been mentioned that you cannot promote a pawn to a king, but you also cannot promote it to a pawn. Well, I guess that’s no promotion. You cannot put your king into check, nor can you castle if any square the king must travel through would be check. However, it’s OK if the rook travels through a square that would be subject to its capture. This is overlooked occasionally, and imagine the expression of surprise on your opponent’s face when you do castle in that position. He thought you couldn’t do it, but it’s legal. ---
**Author:** ![Orange\_Skinner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3be4f8/32.png) [@Orange\_Skinner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orange_Skinner)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/11 "2002-12-29T00:04:39Z")
As the others said, yeah, completely legit rules. And it’s possible to have nine queens on the board, not just two (If your original queen never gets taken, and you manage to get all eight pawns across and trade them up to queens). The next time you play your brother-in-law, toss some obscure chess tactics of your own into play. Call _en passant_, which is this goony French move that translates to “in passing.” Most beginners and a lot of intermediate players don’t know about it, but it’s fully kosher. It works like this. If you get one of your pawns to the fifth rank (the fifth rank from you, that is, not your opponent), and your brother-in-law moves one of his pawns into the fifth rank, so that it is next to yours, (placing it where it normally would be safe), you can capture his piece with your pawn. It only works in the fifth rank, though. Tell him to suck on that! ---
**Author:** ![milo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85e7bf/32.png) [@milo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/milo)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/12 "2002-12-29T00:12:22Z")
> [@](#): > > If I can set a trap for the King, more power to me Actual in some bastard forms of the game this is exactly how it works. Say speed chess, where both opponents have 5 minutes or less for the game. Along with the usual ways, the game can end with the capture of the king. I’ve seen games where, as a desperation move, one player will deliberately attack the opponent’s king with his own king, and then, if the opponent doesn’t see it (in the frenzy of time pressure), win the game with king takes king. - milo, who spent too much of his youth at the chess tables in Washington Square park ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/13 "2002-12-29T04:02:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Speaker for the Dead \* > I remember games when I didn’t notice my king was in check and he got taken… that took a looong time to end. Well, I think it’s been made clear here, but you made an illegal move, and the game should not have progressed as it did. If your King is in check, it is illegal to make a move which results in your King still being in check. And it’s illegal to move yourself into check, either by moving a King into harm’s way, or, say, un-pinning another piece. Also, it should not have gone unannounced that your King was in check. I don’t know if it’s an official rule, but I would refuse to play with a player who I know does not announce checks. ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/14 "2002-12-29T04:08:21Z")
> [@](#): > > Actual in some bastard forms of the game this is exactly how it works. Say speed chess, where both opponents have 5 minutes or less for the game. Along with the usual ways, the game can end with the capture of the king. I’ve seen games where, as a desperation move, one player will deliberately attack the opponent’s king with his own king, and then, if the opponent doesn’t see it (in the frenzy of time pressure), win the game with king takes king. It doesn’t matter. That’s an illegal move and you just can’t do it. One would obviously notice it if the guy tried to attack one king with the other and–so long as he knew the rules–could simply tell the opponent that that move is not legit. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/15 "2002-12-29T04:19:49Z")
Seeing as you and your brother-in-law were discussing rules, a good place to start would be [United States Chess Federation](http://www.uschess.org). Their beginner’s page has this to say about the King: > [@](#): > > The King is the most important piece. When he is trapped, his whole army loses. The King can move one square in any direction — for example, to any of the squares with dots in this diagram. (An exception is castling, which is explained later.) The King may never move into check — that is, onto a square attacked by an opponent’s piece. & > [@](#): > > Castling > > Each player may “castle” only once during a game and when conditions are met. Castling is a special move that lets a player move two pieces at once — the King and one Rook. In castling, the player moves his King two squares to its left or right toward one of his Rooks. At the same time, the Rook involved goes to the square beside the King and toward the center of the board (see illustrations at left). In order to castle, neither the King nor the Rook involved may have moved before. Also, the King may not castle out of check, into check, or through check. Further, there may not be pieces of either color between the King and the Rook involved in castling. > > Castling is often a very important move because it allows you to place your King in a safe location and also allows the Rook to become more active. > > When the move is legal, each player has the choice of castling Kingside or Queenside or not at all, no matter what the other player chooses to do. & > [@](#): > > The main goal of chess is to checkmate your opponent’s King. The King is not actually captured and removed from the board like other pieces. But if the King is attacked (“checked”) and threatened with capture, it must get out of check immediately. If there is no way to get out of check, the position is a “checkmate,” and the side that is checkmated loses. > > You may not move into check. For example, moving into a direct line with your opponent’s Rook, when if there are no other pieces between the Rook and your King, is not a legal move. Otherwise, the Rook could “capture” the King, which is not allowed. > > If you are in check, there are three ways of getting out: > > 1. Capturing the attacking piece; > 2. Placing one of your own pieces between the attacker and your King (unless the attacker is a Knight); > 3. Moving the King away from the attack. > If a checked player can do none of these, he is checkmated and loses the game. > If a King is not in check, but that player can make no legal move, the position is called a stalemate and the game is scored as a draw, or tie. Now, if your mind is more into “officialese,” then you can check the FIDE’s [Laws of Chess](http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=EE101) and read Article 3.8. ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/16 "2002-12-29T04:43:21Z")
In blitz, the accepted way of playing is having the ability to capture the king if it remains in check. Accepted does not necessarily mean the correct way. The rule book states that if a player has less than 5 minutes on the clock and the opponent makes an illegal move, 2 minutes can be added to the first player’s time. I would suppose you’d need to stop the clock, call for the TD, and have him or her add the time on. This is what the rulebook states for regulation tournaments. I have no idea if that same concept would apply when both players start with 5 minutes but there’s no reason to believe they wouldn’t. I’ve never played competitive blitz before, though. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/17 "2002-12-29T05:20:26Z")
Also, to clarify on _en passant_ capturing, you can only do it on the move immediately after your opponent’s pawn move. The en passant capture is a fairly recent addition to the rules of chess (I’m thinking 1800s or so.) **Orange’s** explanation isn’t exactly clear, so let me try to clarify it. Imagine your normal row of pawns. They’re all on your second row, right? Now, imagine an opponent has a pawn on the fourth row, counting down from the bottom. Imagine you want to move a pawn from an adjacent column to your opponent’s pawn. If you move it one row up, your pawn would be attacked by your opponent, right? But, since this is your first pawn move, you can move it one or two squares up. Ah, you think! You’ll move it two squares up to avoid placing it in an attacked position. Sure, you can do that. Thing is, if your opponent decides it’s worth his while, he could act as if you only moved your pawn up one row and capture it. But only on the next turn. Otherwise it stays. Yeah, I know, weird rule, but that’s how it is. And it _only_ comes into effect if you move a pawn two spaces on its first move to avoid being put in an attacked position. And it’s _only_ playable on the next move. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/18 "2002-12-29T06:49:17Z")
puly: Here’s what Article 3.7d from the Laws of Chess link I posted above has to say about _en passant_: > [@](#): > > A pawn attacking a square crossed by an opponent’s pawn which has advanced two squares in one move from its original square may capture this opponent’s pawn as though the latter had been moved only one square. This capture may only be made on the move following this advance and is called an ‘en passant’ capture. ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/19 "2002-12-29T15:24:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Enderw24 \* > \*\*This is what the rulebook states for regulation tournaments. I have no idea if that same concept would apply when both players start with 5 minutes but there’s no reason to believe they wouldn’t. I’ve never played competitive blitz before, though. \*\* As one who has played in many blitz tournaments and in many blitz skittles, let me tell you that the king can be captured in blitz games. This is a fundamental difference in the rules between blitz and regulation. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2002, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409/20 "2002-12-29T15:40:36Z")
Following up on _en passant_, doesn’t the capturing pawn move forward diagonally, to where the opponent would have been if it had only been moved up one square? In other words, the capturing pawn doesn’t end up on the square where the captured pawn was actually located? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-rules/145409.md?page=2)