5 ms·
Does this imply killing the opponent is a viable strategy in chess?
by lom 5y ago
Does this imply killing the opponent is a viable strategy in chess?
- MerelyMortal 5y agoTechnically yes, but it is likely not a lawful defense to murder.
- catillac 5y agoExpanding slightly to say, “…not a lawful defense to murder in the jurisdictions of which I am aware.” :)
- Mountain_Skies 5y agoNever accept an invitation to play chess in the Idaho section of Yellowstone.
- fouc 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_of_Death_(Yellowstone) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_of_Death_(Yellowstone)
- eth0up 5y agoI surmise also to exercise caution when considering en passant in some but not all american correctional facilities. And certainly don't pronounce it with a heavy french accent if you must, as it might arouse suspicion, even if your immediate opponent seems reasonable. If you do attempt this and violence seems imminent, try saying you were just kidding and gently restore the pieces to their original position.
- im3w1l 5y agoCould it be possible to exploit differences in how death is defined? What if one were to stop the heart of the opponent, and then immediately resuscitate them?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jarofgreen 5y agoPyric victory - technically you won but the resources you have to sacrifice (your imminent loss of freedom while in prison) make it not worth while.
- anonporridge 5y agoIt would certainly get your name in the history books and secure a legacy of infamy. A high ego grandmaster on the decline may decide loss of the remainder of their freedom in life is worth the sacrifice.
- imwillofficial 5y agoYou have to be in a Stronger passion before your opponent died.
- imwillofficial 5y agoI meant “you would have to be in a stronger position upon the death of your opponent for the match to be adjudicated in your favor”
- stardenburden 5y agoDeath' Gambit You sacricifive your next dozen or so free years for the victory.
- franky47 5y agoDeep Blue vs Kasparov could have taken a very different turn.
- Natsu 5y agoYou'd assume the other person would have it decided against them for a rules infraction first.
- contravariant 5y agoOr does it mean you could win a game of chess against Death itself on a technicality?
- icelancer 5y agoFeel like you'd lose by "rules infraction"
- Verdex 5y agoNot quite. There is also a "rules infraction" where failure to adhere to the laws of chess OR the event regulations can cause you to lose. Murdering your opponent will almost definitely be considered a rule infraction. Although there might be some edge cases if the murderer was an absolute ruler of the current country. Or maybe if you happened to kill your opponent in self defense somehow.
- VenTatsu 5y ago> Although there might be some edge cases if the murderer was an absolute ruler of the current country. You mean like King Canute of Denmark, England, and Norway? [0] [0] https://wegochess.com/complete-timeline-of-every-chess-related-deaths/ https://wegochess.com/complete-timeline-of-every-chess-relat...