@@ThomasRowland-dl2emThere is a button to reveal one’s drawback to one’s opponent, as chess simp did in this video I think(?), but his opponent did not do so.
There is actually a drawback that says you can't deliver checks. Only ways left to win is if your opponent moves their king into check, blunders a discovered check on their turn, loses due to their own drawback, or loses on time.
That's an insane drawback. Slightly better would be that the piece you move can't check, which would at least still allow discovered checks, but even that is extremely tough.
@@nathanwasser7677 TRUST ME, this is by far one of the tamer ones and would probably be on the "Easy" scale. Some of them are absurdly impossible. There is no stalemate in this game, the game can only be drawn by 3 fold repetition or lack of material. So for this one you'd just play normal chess until you can force their king to check itself, then you win. All while the opponent has some horrible condition that prevents them from playing normal chess while you utterly obliterate them. I think the worse one I've ever gotten was "You cannot move to a square you've already moved to" so your Bishops become useless by default unless your opponent is nice enough to let you trade them, and by mid game so many squares are unusuable that it becomes basically impossible to checkmate their king anymore. And if you reach endgame it forces you to resign once you can't move. Also you can never recapture because your piece would be on a square you've already moved to. And yes Pawns are always counted as pieces which makes the challenge even dumber.
Holy smokes. It sounds like after you recaptured the black Knight with your King, you couldn't lose the game if you never moved your king again. If your king made a capture and then just stayed on the space, then your opponent could never move to that space and thus never capture your king. That was a very difficult drawback indeed for your opponent.
@@florianb2856maybe, but it's still impossible to checkmate, because if the opponent can't actually move to that square, it will never actually be "threatened"
I only just now realized; that's not a bit, that's not Simp getting a TTS for non-English words, _that's Simp speaking Itallian!_ Simp *is* the TTS, of course he uses a TTS!
That mate in 6 is actually quite hard for my engine, it spots the Nxg7 mate in 8 in 2 seconds and the Qb3 mate in 7 in 5 seconds, but takes 2 minutes to find the mate in 6
"That's an extremely longwinded way of saying {something completely different to what the drawback actually says}" No, a better way of phrasing that drawback is "Any move of a pawn that is adjacent to the King must be to a square that is adjacent to the King."
he probably came to this conclusion because he thought it would be difficult to move his king away from the pawns (though he did realise how after the match)
You summarized that pawns next to the king cannot move, but that's not accurate. With this drawback, pawns can move if they end their turn still adjacent (I.e., your king is next to or in front of your pawns).
I mean to be fair, in order to move the pawns that are in front of the king, you have to move your king in front of your pawns; which isn't that easy to accomplish.
@@GTron13 If games made it to the endgame it would matter a lot because it means your king can defend your pawns that are trying to promote. Of course, I don't think many games reach endgame in drawback chess, but if they did it would be a pretty important distinction.
@@GTron13 no, you only have to move the king next to a pawn for example if you financhetto the bishop, your opponent trades it and you recapture it with the king, you can then play f3 or h3 if necessary
Took me a long time to understand that you are right, because the only way I was able to interpret this rule for the longest time was that their moves cannot leave a square adjacent to the king empty. And it's something completely different, it's that they cannot make moves that would result in them not being adjacent to the king anymore.
0:33 "That is very long and unneccessarily complicated way of saying "the pawns next to your king can't move." - It's not equivalent. If the king is beside the pawn, the pawn can go forward (or capture a piece in front of the king). Similar if the king is in front of the pawn.
The short explanation is a much shorter one. He couldn't go for the checkmate in 6 moves because it would require moving the pawn from e2 to e4, which as you know cannot be done due to the drawback stating that he cannot move pawns that are adjacent to his king without them landing on another space adjacent to his king and of course the required pawn move from e2 to e4 would be against that rule due to e4 not being adjacent to his king when e2 is. In other words: Drawback.
@@alexandersemenov9588Yes however he voices over the video after the video in which case he can rewatch the footage and find the forced mates In some videos he does see the forced mate but in others he has no idea about until after the game (as they say hindsight is 20/20)
0:40 "the pawns next to your king cannot move" no, they can, if they land on a square that is also adjacent to the king - at least that's how I perceive the difference in the meanings
I say that because for the kings pawn to move the queen's pawn has to move forward 1 or 2 spaces Then the king moves to where the pawn was at Then the King's pawn can move 1 space forward It's a lot of work to move the pawns adjacent to the king that in most circumstances the pawns won't move (there are scenarios/openings that do allow it though)
"The pawns next to your king cannont move" would be a different, slightly more restrictive challenge. With the one in the game you can't move a pawn in front of your king, but can move a pawn behind or next to your king. After fianchettoing and castling it would be mostly normal, with the important difference that the G pawn would not be protected so the kings defence would be much weaker.
I've recently began playing drawback chess. While I certainly know chess, I actually haven't played a game in 15 years anymore, and I've always been a king's pawn player, so when this was the drawback to welcome me with... oof. Barely managed to get a victory though: I was always slightly behind (according to an analysis my opening was surprisingly decent, while it felt an absolutely unplayable mess to me) and even made a big blunder at one time where I got tunnel visioned into moving my castle'd king into the corner to give a targeted pawn the freedom to move (forgetting that since it was targeted it could just be taken), allowing my opponent to get a 3-piece attack on my king. Fortunately, my opponent then got way too fancy, sacrificing a knight to get access to my doubled up rooks and then moving 1 of his 3 attacking pieces (bishop) in closer to sacrifice that to 1 of my rooks after which he'd grab my other rook and get his rook into the attack which would be a certain defeat for me, but apparantly completely forgetting I could instead use my rook to grab his rook (and then a rook trade afterwards), so all of a sudden I had a backrank attack that lead to victory for me (one I nearly screwed up because the next move I misclicked, wanting to cancel my queen but instead moving it up 1 square. Ironically this did accidentally put it into position to perfectly stop the only counterattack he had available, so I still won).
Very sus simp -giving tips for the opening -explaining why he has a good position -giving a few seconds to find the checkmate -saying that it's fine to just enjoy the show -showing the beginning of the checkmate -explaining the idea behind the checkmate -explaining a game plan for the opponent's challenge Imposter ! Paid actor !
"and people who are here just *pretending* to enjoy the show" "Lone women cannot do anything by themselves" This is gold and the reason why I follow this channel... 😂
The opponent's drawback didn't stop the smothered mate. They blundered the game.
I just realized that the opponent knew his drawback!
@@theneoreformationistthat's the whole point of the video
3:45， should've sacrificed the queen on a7, if rook take, pawn take back, the opponent can’t stop the pawn
"hey guys, future simp here"
...aren't we always hearing future simp?
Ikr? This opens a whole world of opportunities
Depends on the perspective, for recording simp it's present simp, for playing simp it's future simp, for us watching it's past simp
@@ConnorMcSchrosch and for checkers Simp it's alternate Simp
@@ConnorMcSchrosch-- Hotel? TrivaSimp!
Soon we'll be 4 simps deep.
There was no checkmate in 6. There drawback prevented it.
Lol you’re right! Nice catch
Do you know each others drawbacks.
@@ThomasRowland-dl2emThere is a button to reveal one’s drawback to one’s opponent, as chess simp did in this video I think(?), but his opponent did not do so.
There is actually a drawback that says you can't deliver checks. Only ways left to win is if your opponent moves their king into check, blunders a discovered check on their turn, loses due to their own drawback, or loses on time.
That's an insane drawback. Slightly better would be that the piece you move can't check, which would at least still allow discovered checks, but even that is extremely tough.
@@nathanwasser7677 TRUST ME, this is by far one of the tamer ones and would probably be on the "Easy" scale. Some of them are absurdly impossible.
There is no stalemate in this game, the game can only be drawn by 3 fold repetition or lack of material. So for this one you'd just play normal chess until you can force their king to check itself, then you win. All while the opponent has some horrible condition that prevents them from playing normal chess while you utterly obliterate them.
I think the worse one I've ever gotten was "You cannot move to a square you've already moved to" so your Bishops become useless by default unless your opponent is nice enough to let you trade them, and by mid game so many squares are unusuable that it becomes basically impossible to checkmate their king anymore. And if you reach endgame it forces you to resign once you can't move. Also you can never recapture because your piece would be on a square you've already moved to. And yes Pawns are always counted as pieces which makes the challenge even dumber.
Seriously? They should at least rework that drawback to "can't check unless the opponent only has a king left".
Doesn't a stalemate also count?
@@WhoStoleKirya73 A stalemate ends the game in a draw.
Holy smokes. It sounds like after you recaptured the black Knight with your King, you couldn't lose the game if you never moved your king again. If your king made a capture and then just stayed on the space, then your opponent could never move to that space and thus never capture your king.
That was a very difficult drawback indeed for your opponent.
Except for Zugzwang 😂
@@hanswurst137 You dont really "capture" a King. The opponent must have only threatend the field to mate Chess Simp.
@@florianb2856 in drawback chess you do
@@florianb2856maybe, but it's still impossible to checkmate, because if the opponent can't actually move to that square, it will never actually be "threatened"
@@jaywu1951 Ahhh. Okay. Thanks.
i constantly keep forgetting enemy has drawback as well when he plays this mode lol
drawback chess but you dont know your drawback
The sudden Italian FIANCHETTO always gets me
I only just now realized; that's not a bit, that's not Simp getting a TTS for non-English words, _that's Simp speaking Itallian!_ Simp *is* the TTS, of course he uses a TTS!
That mate in 6 is actually quite hard for my engine, it spots the Nxg7 mate in 8 in 2 seconds and the Qb3 mate in 7 in 5 seconds, but takes 2 minutes to find the mate in 6
"That's an extremely longwinded way of saying {something completely different to what the drawback actually says}"
No, a better way of phrasing that drawback is "Any move of a pawn that is adjacent to the King must be to a square that is adjacent to the King."
"Your pawns adjacent to your king can only move to squares adjacent to your king".
he probably came to this conclusion because he thought it would be difficult to move his king away from the pawns (though he did realise how after the match)
drawback more like drawsideways
Thanks for the aneurysm
gottem
Gottem
You summarized that pawns next to the king cannot move, but that's not accurate. With this drawback, pawns can move if they end their turn still adjacent (I.e., your king is next to or in front of your pawns).
I mean to be fair, in order to move the pawns that are in front of the king, you have to move your king in front of your pawns; which isn't that easy to accomplish.
@@GTron13 Absolutely. The only way I can see it happening practically is if one of the front pawns are captured and the king retakes.
@@GTron13 If games made it to the endgame it would matter a lot because it means your king can defend your pawns that are trying to promote. Of course, I don't think many games reach endgame in drawback chess, but if they did it would be a pretty important distinction.
@@GTron13 no, you only have to move the king next to a pawn
for example if you financhetto the bishop, your opponent trades it and you recapture it with the king, you can then play f3 or h3 if necessary
Took me a long time to understand that you are right, because the only way I was able to interpret this rule for the longest time was that their moves cannot leave a square adjacent to the king empty. And it's something completely different, it's that they cannot make moves that would result in them not being adjacent to the king anymore.
Chess, but every time your opponent blunders a piece, you must blunder a piece of equal value.
"Your blunder doesn't matter if your opponent doesn't see it" -Magna Karls
You couldn't move the e pawn
Simp turning into agadmator was unexpected
Nice to hear you do the rare agadmator reference: extended variation
There IS a drawback “Respectful: you can’t give check”
There also IS a drawback “You cannot recapture” (and it is much easier than the one the opponent had)
0:33 "That is very long and unneccessarily complicated way of saying "the pawns next to your king can't move." - It's not equivalent. If the king is beside the pawn, the pawn can go forward (or capture a piece in front of the king). Similar if the king is in front of the pawn.
That was a long explanation of why you default took the Queen instead of going for the M6 x)
The short explanation is a much shorter one. He couldn't go for the checkmate in 6 moves because it would require moving the pawn from e2 to e4, which as you know cannot be done due to the drawback stating that he cannot move pawns that are adjacent to his king without them landing on another space adjacent to his king and of course the required pawn move from e2 to e4 would be against that rule due to e4 not being adjacent to his king when e2 is.
In other words: Drawback.
@@9nikola but there were other forced checkmates that he pointed out after it
@@9nikola ah right, not the M6, but the M7! mb
@@alexandersemenov9588Yes however he voices over the video after the video in which case he can rewatch the footage and find the forced mates
In some videos he does see the forced mate but in others he has no idea about until after the game (as they say hindsight is 20/20)
Methinks simp skipped his coffee this day.
0:40 "the pawns next to your king cannot move"
no, they can, if they land on a square that is also adjacent to the king - at least that's how I perceive the difference in the meanings
They can move but generally such a distinction only matters in end game when you need to push pawns
I say that because for the kings pawn to move the queen's pawn has to move forward 1 or 2 spaces
Then the king moves to where the pawn was at
Then the King's pawn can move 1 space forward
It's a lot of work to move the pawns adjacent to the king that in most circumstances the pawns won't move (there are scenarios/openings that do allow it though)
"The pawns next to your king cannont move" would be a different, slightly more restrictive challenge. With the one in the game you can't move a pawn in front of your king, but can move a pawn behind or next to your king.
After fianchettoing and castling it would be mostly normal, with the important difference that the G pawn would not be protected so the kings defence would be much weaker.
Look at simp being a gentleman, revealing his draw back, such a nice guy :D
Revealing the challenge makes it so much easier for the opponent.
3:08 that knight move was trapping your queen!
rook for a queen for the opponent
Does it mean your Elo is actually your winrate ?
Drawback chess but you calculate the winrate correctly.
1:00 That was Literally my first thought IDK why anyone would do anything else.
Chess but you can't capture a piece if it has less than 5 more defenders than attackers.
It's perfectly possible for pawns adjacent to the king to move as long as they remain adjacent to the king.
I've recently began playing drawback chess. While I certainly know chess, I actually haven't played a game in 15 years anymore, and I've always been a king's pawn player, so when this was the drawback to welcome me with... oof. Barely managed to get a victory though: I was always slightly behind (according to an analysis my opening was surprisingly decent, while it felt an absolutely unplayable mess to me) and even made a big blunder at one time where I got tunnel visioned into moving my castle'd king into the corner to give a targeted pawn the freedom to move (forgetting that since it was targeted it could just be taken), allowing my opponent to get a 3-piece attack on my king. Fortunately, my opponent then got way too fancy, sacrificing a knight to get access to my doubled up rooks and then moving 1 of his 3 attacking pieces (bishop) in closer to sacrifice that to 1 of my rooks after which he'd grab my other rook and get his rook into the attack which would be a certain defeat for me, but apparantly completely forgetting I could instead use my rook to grab his rook (and then a rook trade afterwards), so all of a sudden I had a backrank attack that lead to victory for me (one I nearly screwed up because the next move I misclicked, wanting to cancel my queen but instead moving it up 1 square. Ironically this did accidentally put it into position to perfectly stop the only counterattack he had available, so I still won).
seems like any rating below 400 is considered 400 on that site
You actually couldn’t play checkmate in 6 because the pawn was adjacent to your king
not sure if I'm missing the joke, but the M6 that Simp mentions is impossible here cuz of the drawback lol
2:20 there is a drawback respectful: you can't check
so the only way to win is if the opponent walks into check
This was of Simps easiests drawbacks. Ofc, he could have been checkmated, but against a low rated player it was unlikely.
I think you didn't play e4 as you realised the rules didn't allow it (you didn't miss that fact or anything)
2:20 there are literally "you cannot give checks" drawback
I love future simp
I'm absolutely certain Simp was replaced by someone else... Those thumbs are nothing like Simp's at all! (I'm joking, maybe)
Thumbs?
There actually is a drawback where you can't give checks
Isn't 4:25 mate if he goes Qa2 or am I tripping?
Edit: Duh, Kf5, nevermind
V-D=3, that's why the winrate is being written as 300%.
1:09 I never know what the f it is saying, can someone just tell me in text format?
fianchetto
fianchetto lmao
フィアンケット
That drawback was pretty easy, yeah
Video 163 of asking simp to play fps chess
Who got the Agadmator reference ;)?
incease?
mfw simp inceases the rating
minimum elo on drawbackchess is 400, entering 100 to 300 doesnt do anything
Wasn’t the M6 illegal cuz of ur drawback?
bro in one game i got you cant give checks i was like "what the ......." (i somehow won that game)
WTF!? He gave us 6 time to find the m8?🤨
666 likes... uhoh.
Edit: ok its 667 now i can like without risking summoning a demon.
Wait until he gets 6969 likes... Legend says that one can summon a succubus upon breaking that number... Or is it 69696969? Good luck anyway...
This music made me find my remote, I can finally change the channel
Very sus simp
-giving tips for the opening
-explaining why he has a good position
-giving a few seconds to find the checkmate
-saying that it's fine to just enjoy the show
-showing the beginning of the checkmate
-explaining the idea behind the checkmate
-explaining a game plan for the opponent's challenge
Imposter ! Paid actor !
"and people who are here just *pretending* to enjoy the show"
"Lone women cannot do anything by themselves"
This is gold and the reason why I follow this channel... 😂
Day 38
Chess, but the game must end in a Bishop and knight checkmate