In other words, after white's move, black king is not in check. It is now black's move, but any move that black could make results in check. Is this a checkmate? Is there a chess term for this situation?

  • I just lost a game where I was not in check mate. My king had no moves but I could have moved my pawns. They gave my opponent the game when his Time ran out. WTF. – Kenneth pratt Oct 19 '19 at 2:00
  • @Jossie Calderon, the IM only edited the question, and specifically, he just added three tags, and nothing more. He did not ask it. – PhishMaster Oct 19 '19 at 11:08
  • 1
    @Kennethpratt, interesting, you could post that as a question, but please give more details such as where was this played and who "they" are. – itub Oct 19 '19 at 13:02
  • Putting your king in check is not a legal move as you've realized.
  • Of course, if Black has any OTHER legal moves he can and should play one of them!
  • If a side TO MOVE does not have ANY legal moves, that would be a stalemate, not a checkmate (which is delivered only by the side making the check)
| improve this answer | |
  • 10
    ...and stalemate means the game ends as a draw. – RemcoGerlich Mar 9 '14 at 9:00
  • 1
    Which means that white just screwed him/herself out of a victory. Oops. :) – Shadur Mar 9 '14 at 12:45
  • 1
    There are some endgame positions where stalemating the opponent prevents you from losing, so stalemate can be something worthy to achieve for the one who does. – chaosflaws Mar 18 '14 at 13:31

It's called a stalemate, which is a draw.

| improve this answer | |

No, if there are no more moves available to black then it is a stalemate.

If black has other pieces which have moves available to them they must move those pieces.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.