Why couldn’t I take en passant?
Sort:
May 16, 2019
0
#2
An en passant capture can only occur when a pawn moving two squares (its first move) passes over a square where a pawn could ordinarily capture it. I saw nothing of this sort through the first 20 or so moves of your game.
May 16, 2019
0
#3
Look up the rules of en passant. One of your pawns can only capture en passant if it‘s on your 5th rank. Your e3 pawn was obviously on your sixth rank. If it would have been on e4 when your opponent played f4 it would have been possible to capture en passant
Yes follow the instructions 
May 17, 2019
0
#5
EnergizeMrSpock wrote:
only possible after opponents pawn makes a double step from it's initial position on the second or seventh rank
This would have made it possible in his game.
But you got the rule wrong, which is why OP couldn't do it.
May 17, 2019
0
#6
The easy way to explain the rule, which no one seems to do, is this:
You capture a pawn that's moved two squares, as if it's only moved one square.
May 17, 2019
0
#7
llamonade wrote:
The easy way to explain the rule, which no one seems to do, is this:
You capture a pawn that's moved two squares, as if it's only moved one square.
That's kinda what I wrote: An en passant capture can only occur when a pawn moving two squares (its first move) passes over a square where a pawn could ordinarily capture it.
Yet another take on this. Had your e3 pawn been on e4, then you could have captured the pawn that just moved to f4 by exf3 .e.p.
May 17, 2019
0
#9
Ziryab wrote:
llamonade wrote:
The easy way to explain the rule, which no one seems to do, is this:
You capture a pawn that's moved two squares, as if it's only moved one square.
That's kinda what I wrote: An en passant capture can only occur when a pawn moving two squares (its first move) passes over a square where a pawn could ordinarily capture it.
People often explain it more accurately than what I suggested, but if I were to explain it to a little kid, it would be akin to: "when a pawn moves 2 squares, just pretend it moved one square"
May 17, 2019
0
#10
llamonade wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
llamonade wrote:
The easy way to explain the rule, which no one seems to do, is this:
You capture a pawn that's moved two squares, as if it's only moved one square.
That's kinda what I wrote: An en passant capture can only occur when a pawn moving two squares (its first move) passes over a square where a pawn could ordinarily capture it.
People often explain it more accurately than what I suggested, but if I were to explain it to a little kid, it would be akin to: "when a pawn moves 2 squares, just pretend it moved one square"
I explain it to little kids all the time and that's what I tell them. They still need to see it a dozen times to remember it for five minutes, and then forget and need to be taught again. Eventually something clicks.
I played chess eight years before I knew the rule.
May 17, 2019
0
#11
Ziryab wrote:
llamonade wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
llamonade wrote:
The easy way to explain the rule, which no one seems to do, is this:
You capture a pawn that's moved two squares, as if it's only moved one square.
That's kinda what I wrote: An en passant capture can only occur when a pawn moving two squares (its first move) passes over a square where a pawn could ordinarily capture it.
People often explain it more accurately than what I suggested, but if I were to explain it to a little kid, it would be akin to: "when a pawn moves 2 squares, just pretend it moved one square"
I explain it to little kids all the time and that's what I tell them. They still need to see it a dozen times to remember it for five minutes, and then forget and need to be taught again. Eventually something clicks.
I played chess eight years before I knew the rule.
Well, you have more experience teaching kids than I do.
I recall one Russian (translated) chess book for beginners. It explained the knight's move in the most confusing way I've ever seen. You'd need a high school reading level just to wade through the sentence.
IIRC it was even worse than the one that is like "a knight can move to any of the squares closest to it that do not share a diagonal or orthogonal line."
Of course there is something to be said for accuracy... I told one kid that knights move like an "L" so during our practice game he moved one of them in a straight line. When I reminded him of the rule he said "I moved it like a lowercase L"
Heh. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for.
May 17, 2019
0
#12
llamonade wrote:
Heh. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for.
As I noted in another thread, I had some very smart friends in graduate school. Even so, the smartest people I've known have been some of the third graders I have coached at chess.
May 17, 2019
0
#13
I'd have said that you could have captured it but I reviewed the rules and you guys are right, Arisktotle explained it best IMO.
Sorry for my ignorance, but could someone tell me why I couldn’t take my opponents pawn en passant with my pawn on e3, on move #14.