It's as easy as becoming a rocket scientist!
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
Sort:
a horse is a horse of course of course /
all the non-chessers call knight a horse /
except of course when they resort /
to calling it mule or pony.
The Knight's Tour (post 3057) is a good excercise. You should practice it using each square as an origin for your Knight.
Yesterday, I was making moves for a corr game and someone came up to me and said quite seriously, "You can play chess by yourself?"
Nonchessers call it a horsie rather than a horse and the weakest pieces are called prawns.
!
December_TwentyNine wrote:
akafett wrote:
Yesterday, I was making moves for a corr game and someone came up to me and said quite seriously, "You can play chess by yourself?"
So people watch you play your games in the cafe online? Interesting.
Not exactly. I had my scorebook out and my board and was figuring out my next move. But to get to the last position, I played through the game up to that point and then paused while I was thinking of my current move. It probably did look a bit odd. After I commit to a move (that is after the piece is actually moved), I record it and send the move to my opponent via text.
@ OsKay00: The best way I have found to teach someone the en passant rule is to first explain why the rule exists and then get that person to explain it to you afterwards, verbally and on the board. It is, in my opinion, the most confused rule in chess.
Jun 20, 2014
0
#2710
So I was playing a live chess game last night and then this happened: 
Not so surprising was the fact that I was losing and lost the game, but... yeah...!! This is weird! lol. There was also a move where it seemed that my pawn took his bishop from across the board. I was okay with that but the glitch cleared itself up.
Jun 20, 2014
0
#2711
OsKay00 wrote:
I was once playing chess with someone and I used the "en passant" rule to take one of his pawns that he had just moved forwards two spaces from the second rank (obviously), but he said that that was an illegal move that I had just randomly made up and he forced me to take it back. I then found the rule on the internet and he, without even reading what the rule was, let me do it.
I played that same person again a few days later and then they used their own variation of "en passant" to take my bishop, which was to the side of one of his pawns. I told him he couldn't do that and he said that I had done it to him so now he was going to do it to me too.
"His own variation of en passant" LOL priceless.
Jun 20, 2014
0
#2712
cosmicharmonic wrote:
a horse is a horse of course of course /
...
lolz
Jun 20, 2014
0
#2713
OsKay00 wrote:
@ akafett: Yes, that seems like a good way to teach people that rule.
And I agree "en passant" is probably the most confused rule in chess; I, for instance, learnt all the rules of chess when I was a child, then I stopped playing chess, but then I went back to chess a few years later and then I still remembered all the rules of chess, except the "en passant" rule, which I then thought worked by being able to take a pawn directly in front of your pawn, thouhg your pawn still moved diagonally to the side after taking the opponent's piece.
Don't tell that story to a non-chess player cause you will make them more confused and want to punch himself/herself. lol
dragonair234 wrote:
Come on... I'll teach you how the pieces move! It's not *that* complicated........
And that's only the knight (or horse)! You still have the bishop, rook, queen, king, and pawn to learn!
Non-chessers announce "Check" with the devil in their eyes as though they've just won. Then when you put them in silent check they scream "you didn't say 'check'."
-Lookit how tall's that King
-Lookit these lil pawns
-That knight's cool
-Knights are cool man
-Love me sum nites
-ever see a red & white set
-man they been plain chess since like King Arthur
-I thought you had to move them two
-ohkay then I'll move mine one
-Whoa you can't move two pieces dude
-you can't move your king like that
-Okay, two over then tha rook
-Ah man, didn't see that knight
-shhh, stupid bishop
-oppp man, there goes my Queen
-man you can't take my pawn like that
-no way man YOU look it up
-wait a, that was here, this was there and you didn't move your rook it's my move and wait, no this was def here and your knight wasn't there and your rook wasn't there I'm not in check man I moved this pawn and you gotta move that bishop that rook was over there
-I'm not moving
-man you cheat I'm not playing
-whaddya mean checkmate
Non chesser: I have a chess.com account!!!
Chesser:I thought you didn't play chess
Non chesser:Well, I use my computer...
Maybe next a neon set with pieces?
@ December: You said, "I'm going to fork him if he does that...hopefully he doesn't see the threat."
Usually if you see the threat you place on your opponent, so does he. If you know the move your opponent should make in response to your threat, then that's the move you need to plan for; not the move you hope your opponent makes in response to you.
In a game I played recently, I made a mate threat for the purpose of me capturing a Rook after my opponent's correct answer to the threat. My opponent did not see the threat, so I won. But my point is, if my opponent did respond to the threat correctly, then I would have won a Rook, which was my plan, and would have had a huge material advantage (I already had one of his bishops).
I'm not trying to tell you how to play chess or anything, just a little chess talk coming from a simple wood-pusher. 
Come on... I'll teach you how the pieces move! It's not *that* complicated........