en passant makes no sense
Sort:
For a while I thought it was just a glitch until a friend told me about the en passant rule and it has ruined chess for me, how does being able to take a nonexistent pawn whilst simultaneously removing the adjacent pawn improve the game in any way? It goes against the basic principles of what chess even is
I told you on the other thread troll strength 1-10 is a 1.
Making a whole new thread does not increase the strength level.
Making a whole new thread does not increase the strength level.
Not trolling I genuinely don’t see the point of it when chess works perfectly without it
Ok.
The logic, as you say, of pawns on adjacent files is that they cannot pass each other without the chance to capture.
Pawns moving 2 squares was added to speed up the game.
But that have you the possibility of moving pawns past each other without the opportunity to capture, hence the en passant rule. En passant goes with the double pawn move like peanut butter and jelly. Remove one, remove the other.
But really, who wants to see the first 2 moves of a chess game as
1. e3 e6
2. e4 e5
The logic, as you say, of pawns on adjacent files is that they cannot pass each other without the chance to capture.
Pawns moving 2 squares was added to speed up the game.
But that have you the possibility of moving pawns past each other without the opportunity to capture, hence the en passant rule. En passant goes with the double pawn move like peanut butter and jelly. Remove one, remove the other.
But really, who wants to see the first 2 moves of a chess game as
1. e3 e6
2. e4 e5
If the rule was that you can take the adjacent pawn when it pulls alongside then that would make perfect sense and I could see the logic behind that, it’s the taking of the nonexistent pawn that loses me
And that your taking the pawn without replacing it
You take the pawn that moved 2 squares as if it had only move one.
It is the “Hey let’s speed this game up” double pawn move that en passant is compensating for.
It is the “Hey let’s speed this game up” double pawn move that en passant is compensating for.
We’ll they shouldn’t have destroyed the principles just cos they wanted a quicker game and I don’t see why the pawn should get an opportunity to capture
I suppose if you’ve always knew about en passant then it’s not an issue but to someone who’s been playing for over a decade without it, it like finding out that 2+2=5
Nov 17, 2021
0
#10
From Wikipedia: "The motivation for en passant was to prevent the newly added two-square first move for pawns from allowing a pawn to evade capture by an enemy pawn."
I finally understood en pessant a couple weeks ago, now it’s fun. Especially when the other person doesn’t know about it.
GeorgeReed420 wrote:
If the rule was that you can take the adjacent pawn when it pulls alongside then that would make perfect sense and I could see the logic behind that,…
Basically, that's exactly how it's meant to be. Remember, you can only capture en passant immediately after your opponent's move. Not afterwards.
I don’t see how that could be fun, be like winning a tennis match against Stevie wonder
Yes but you don’t capture the pawn, you capture the empty square where that pawn would have been if you were playing 800 years ago before the 2-square pawn move was invented, it’s just a mess
It makes a lot of sense. A ton of these posts have been created before. EN PASSANT IS USEFULLLLLL
Even though ChaseMaster69, does not know what it means. He's asking me this right now, but I won't explain because I'm busy typing this. This mini text is all a joke but it actually happened. I have no idea why I'm writing this, I'm just really bored.
Nov 17, 2021
0
#17
Think of it this way: if your pawn had made the normal pawn move of one square straight ahead, your opponent's pawn would be able to capture. But your pawn made a two-square move right through a square your opponent's pawn controlled, so their pawn can take it while it is attempting to pass through (en passant in French). Should your opponent not take your pawn while it is going past and make some other move instead, then your pawn is safe on its new square.
Nov 17, 2021
0
#18
GeorgeReed420 wrote:
Yes but you don’t capture the pawn, you capture the empty square where that pawn would have been if you were playing 800 years ago before the 2-square pawn move was invented, it’s just a mess
When you decide to make the move, you capture the pawn in passing (which is exactly what en passant means) while it's on that square. Since the game is turned based, you have to wait until the move has been made to actually decide to do it and can only complete that on the turn immediately after the pawn has moved 2 squares.
I never understood the rule either until this thread. Makes sense now