From: Jeff Mallett <jeffm <at> CRUZIO <dot> COM>
Date: 13 nov 1995
Subject: Re: stale mate

>If my memory serves one of the reasons for
>this kind of chess fairies were just the imprecise formulation of the castling
>rule in early FIDE rules. Later FIDE rules corrected that.

Don't Americans enjoy finding loopholes?  It seems appropriate to quote a
humorous passage from the August 1964 issue of NOST-ALGIA:


"Here comes the shocker: There seems to be nothing either in the FIDE Laws
of Chess or in U.S.C.F. Blue Book's chapter 'The Laws of Chess Explained',
which says that a pinned piece cannot move at will, even though it leaves
its own King in check.  The closest FIDE comes to this point is found in
Article 10, Check:

  1. The King is in check when the square on which it stands is attacked by
an enemy man; the latter is said to give check to the King.
  2. Check must be parried by the move immediately following.

Thus, a Philadelphia Lawyer or a chess 'sharpy' could argue: 'I have a
pinned Knight which attacks my opponent's Queen.  On my move #28 my pinned
Knight pops out and grabs the Queen.  The Fide Laws don't say he can't do
it.  True, such a move discloses an attack on my King by my opponent's
pinning piece.  Article 10-2 says only that 'the checkmust be parried by
the move immediately following.'  So, I intend to parry the check on my
next move, #29 in accordance with the Laws, and what are you going to do
about it?  I know that we have been playing all these years under the false
impression that a pinned piece cannot move out of a pin, but the laws don't
say so.'"


Jeff

-----------------------------------------------------
Jeff Mallett                         jeffm <at> cruzio <dot> com
Strategy Labs, Inc.             Voice: (408) 338-6324
                                  Fax: (408) 338-6325
-----------------------------------------------------