Subscribe for more funny chess content, and join my Discord server at: / discord Music used in this video: Honkai Star Rail - Aberrant Receptacle #chess #ChessBut #enpassant #bongcloud
The logic of en passant is that the pawn is so hurriedly running forward it cannot defend its flank, so you slip in behind it and stab in it in the back. And since pawns have their air valves on their backs, it evaporates when you slice its back open.
@@dudono1744 then how do you explain the fact that you can wait a full minute on your clock after the pawn moves and still do the en passant? If you're supposedly catching it in motion you'd have to be doing your move simultaneously with opponent's move.
The pieces aren’t killed, they’re captured. The pawn give themselves up in exchange for the piece they’re replaced with. When there are more pieces than standard it’s a prisoner from another game.
I like to think that the pawn overstepping makes their defense go down while they recover, so pawns can still get them as the other pawn cannot defend itself from the attack, and it's only for one move because the pawn recovers
@KorD Yeah it was. The pawn only moves one square at a time. So you only have the illusion it is two squares forward, while in reality it will only get there on the next move. Now, pieces and players can be fooled by this illusion because they don't know how it works. But pawns are all in on that secret technique, so they can spot it and take advantage on it. Thus while the double move is being performed, because the pawn is actually only one square forward, not two yet, the other pawn can slay them. That's also why there is en-passan only for one move, cause on the next move the pawn is actually on that second forward square and then too far away to get captured, as pawns only capture forward
The logic of en passant: - The pawns represent a foot soldier with a shield and a pike. - Pawns cannot capture in front of them, because their shield in the forward position prevents them from capturing directly ahead. - Pawns can capture diagonally, because their pike reaches to the left or right of the shield. - As the opposing pawn tries to run passed the square where your pawn could capture (seen as a cowardly move), your pawn can capture, "in passing." - "In passing" translates to French "en passant."
One correction: Pikes are two-handed weapons, wielding them one-handed requires a lot of effort & specific technique and would be disadvantageous if done all the time; therefore, they cannot use shields & can attack forward. If you mean that Pawns are like Greek Soldiers with shields & spears, I’d agree, but they’d still be able to attack forward because they can angle the shield out of the way. Holding a shield perfectly flat in front of you at all times is for rookies, they were usually held in a more diagonal manner.
Chess, but the Princess is locked in a Tower: 1) Your own queen can't leave her "castle": she can never be more than 3 squares from one of your rooks. 2) The enemy queen needs to be "rescued": Your knights or squires (pawns) must capture both enemy's rooks and then the enemy's queen (in that order).
The pawn makes a desperado move and switches his weapon grip to reverse grip. When it's behind enemy's pawn, it'll stab the enemy from the back with reverse grip.
En passant: Opponent moves pawn past where you can normally capture. You get to the capture position, spin around and backstab the pawn, then carry on your merry way. No problems here.
En passant is literally "in passing" in English so your pawn just sees an enemy pawn running past, and stabs/shoots them in the back, therefore positioning them in the back of that pawn. Perfectly logical. What isn't logical is that pawns can only take diagonally, a weapon swings in any direction after all, so you lost the challenge turn 2 anyway
En passant is the turn based version of the pawns clashing but yours is faster than their pawn and does that anime thing where he and the opponent have their backs facing each other and one of them falls.
0:34 Arabian Prince: *you got a problem with me?* an en passant is logical because you go in front of the pawn and backstab. good thought though. simp was a gigachad today.
As a philosophy student.... No, nothing this challenge forbids is against logic. A castle moving, for exemple, doesn't violate any law of logic. It does, however, violate laws of physics A better name for this challenge would be "chess, but realistic'
Because a castle is a huge object. Queens are physically smaller than castles in real life. Now what confuses me is why a puny knight or bishop can still take a castle though
@@danielhoang289 "taking" a castle generally refers to taking control of said castle, which any piece, yes, even pawns or the queen should be able to do. The challenge was kinda stupid
the explanation why en passant is possible, is quite logical: the small passend army is marching a long distant from home, but the enemy cuts down their supply chain, before the army could establish anything, now there is a passend army without food basically in enemy territory so the passend ether starve or surrender
En passant is very logical. Enemy tries to run past your pawn, dropping their guard. Your pawn does a lariat like he's in a wrestling match, stabs the now fallen pawn, and knowing the path is now clear, advances that way. Totally logical!
The logic of en passant is that pawn movement is only actually one square at a time and the pawn should have been capturable if it hadn't broken the laws of physics to move twice in one turn. So it's just retribution for the crimes pawns commit against the space time continuum.
En passant is actually pretty logical. Even the name suggests that it's "while passing" --> the soldier rushes forward two squares, the enemy soldier "trips him" in the middle and kills him. While the move itself is quite special, it is perfectly logical in the simulated battle sense.
I mean the challenge was illogical in itself already. A queen *can* take a castle if she's got an army enough. Same with a king. En passant itself is logical for the reasons many have pointed out (soldier doesn't cover its flank and gets killed/taken prisoner). Horses are high jumpers. There are reasons they were taken into battle and were so effective: they move fast, are pretty meneuverable, and jump high. The advantage of riding a horse into battle is immense. I'd even say castling is logical because it represents the king running back into his castle to hide like a coward behind his walls and soldiers. What I'd agree with being illogical would have made the challenge make perfect sense. - the rooks cannot move. Though, I believe the rooks are actually representative of outpost or castle soldiers that are behind the advanced army. They're still represented as towers/castles, so that's why I say they shouldn't move. Also, the soldiers left behind to guard the castle really should be moving anyway. - a commoner soldier (i.e. pawn) being promoted to a queen. That stuff just didn't happen often if at all. Commoners were often able to move up the ranks and become knights, bishops, and castle defenders (i.e. rooks), though. - if you wanted to keep knights not truly being able to jump in, that's fine. It does kinda not make sense that a horse just standing leaps over a line of soldiers to get to the front lines. How Simp did it in this video, though (where there was at least one square gap/diagonal for the horse to "move though") makes sense and should be allowed. - double queens. This one I have to disagree with Simp on becuase while you would get kings taking multiple wives, they would often name just one queen so inheritance and bloodline didn't get too messy. The rest of the women would usually not truly be wed to him anyway but were considered his consorts. Multiple queens just doesn't quite make sense. I dunno. I don't think this challenge was well thought-out to begin with and illogical things in chess being called out need some sort of explanation as to why they shouldn't be allowed. The original poster unfortunately didn't do a good job of wording the challenge so I agree with the people who reacted with Mexican laughing guy (idk his name, you know the meme)
Edward simply teleported behind the opponent and slain him with a katana nothing personell style. He can do that because he's a vampire. It's very logical and makes perfect sense if you know the lore.
Real logic would be: "Pawns can only capture pieces directly in front of them because why would a foot soldier fight its enemies diagonally? That's a stupid combat tactic." Followed by: "Oh, your pawns can't capture straight ahead? Then I guess they won't be capturing anything, will they?"
En Pasant is logical. A pawn can only move one square so when it moves 2 squares in the first move they actually moved 1 square, cheated moving another and when it comes back to their move it becomes an accepted position.
The actual logic for en passant is that originally it didn't exist. Pawns moving two spaces was an invention of 16th century chess players to speed up opening moves, since the opening game is a lot slower without it. However, it wouldn't be fair for a vulnerable pawn to use their jump to avoid enemy attack, so to preserve this vulnerability en passamt was invented. The idea is that if this WERE a "normal" game of chess, then the pawn would have had to move one space at a time, and you would have gotten to intercept them at that position. It's actually very logical, as it allows the game to go faster and have more interesting opening theories without causing unintended behavior. From a game-design perspective it works very well, even if in practice it's usually a rare edge case
4:01 how can you say this isnt logical? Have you never heard of quantum delayed choice Experiment? Particles already done movement can change by a later decision
Notably although logic is often spoken about and applied in a prescriptive way it is ultimately a(the?) descriptive study since it's based off the relationships of real-world/ideological phenomena. So conducting a study of logic on chess one could simply say the en passant is logical since well, that's how the pawns work. But I digress, the challenge didn't make much sense to begin with and was thus unwinnable.
So... Simp blundered the mate in one and then realized that after the game while making the video. Although it was a great checkmate using the en passant
nahhh, En Passant is 100% logical, its just one of those cool anime move where you responded so fast to the enemy movement that they don't realize you're already attacked them, and by the time the camera pans too you already behind the enemy, they're already dead. would've been cooler if you depict your pawns as samurai instead so you can add weeb Iaido katana shit to your chess game, but a sword works too I guess
Well, I know en passant defies physics. The white pawn kills the black pawn when the black pawn is on the way to the 5th rank, yet we see it standing on the 5th rank alive and healthy. The white pawn has to move faster than light, turning back time and killing it on the 4th rank
The logic of en passant is that the pawn is so hurriedly running forward it cannot defend its flank, so you slip in behind it and stab in it in the back. And since pawns have their air valves on their backs, it evaporates when you slice its back open.
Sontaran pawns
No, you just capture the pawn while it's moving
@@dudono1744 then how do you explain the fact that you can wait a full minute on your clock after the pawn moves and still do the en passant? If you're supposedly catching it in motion you'd have to be doing your move simultaneously with opponent's move.
@@quintopiabecause IRL time is not the same as time in the chess game.
@@purewaterruler that's not logical
A commoner (pawn) becoming a queen wouldn't happen but a pawn being promoted to a knight for combat prowess makes perfect sense
bishop could also happen, though there are intermediate steps that aren't represented by chess
The pieces aren’t killed, they’re captured. The pawn give themselves up in exchange for the piece they’re replaced with. When there are more pieces than standard it’s a prisoner from another game.
"Soldier, you have performed above and beyond the call of duty, I hereby promote you to horse"
You’re probably american. Commoners can never become knights and just become normal soldiers. Only people from important families can become a knight
Only if that pawn captured something on the way
Something unexpected happened...
...he had a deep thought.
he doesn't think very often...
@@moss_yass Or perhaps he doesn't think deeply very often.
Eventually, Simp started thinking.
Chess players should not be allowed to think!!!!!
Nah, he just didn't see the mate in one during the game and scared that the viewers will point it out, so he made that "logic" up 😂
I thought en passant's logic was since the enemy pawn is moving twice the distance you kill the pawn while it is sprinting.
Or from the back
@@sol_mental pawn back shots is crazy
Retcons "Oh, by the way, I killed your pawn while it was sprinting" are not logical.
I like to think that the pawn overstepping makes their defense go down while they recover, so pawns can still get them as the other pawn cannot defend itself from the attack, and it's only for one move because the pawn recovers
@KorD Yeah it was. The pawn only moves one square at a time. So you only have the illusion it is two squares forward, while in reality it will only get there on the next move. Now, pieces and players can be fooled by this illusion because they don't know how it works. But pawns are all in on that secret technique, so they can spot it and take advantage on it. Thus while the double move is being performed, because the pawn is actually only one square forward, not two yet, the other pawn can slay them. That's also why there is en-passan only for one move, cause on the next move the pawn is actually on that second forward square and then too far away to get captured, as pawns only capture forward
En Passant is when a soldier jumps too eargaly into battle and gets immediately backstabbed by an enemy soldier
But.... Horses can jump over things in real life...
And queens can take castles, peasants can become knights or bishops, etc...
Not over people and towers, though, AFAIK.
@@Meni_Rosenfeld definetly over people, try to stand in the way of a horse and see if you can stop it!
@@That_One_Kobold new chess rule: knighs capture every non rook thing they pass thru, friends or foe.
@@comlitbeta7532New variant unlocked
That increase in message was like a flash bang
en passant = "in passing"
Your pawn killed the opposing pawn as it tried to run past.
The logic of En Passant is that the Pawn teleports behind the other pawn.
"Nothing personnel, kid."
Personnel 😭
B O N G P A S S A N T
That en passant checkmate was badass though. If anime has taught me anything, being badass is all you need.
En passant is the anime move where you move through the enemy and they keep going for a bit before falling over.
En passant is stabbing the enemy in the back, because they moved to fast without checking if the surrounding area is safe
The logic of en passant:
- The pawns represent a foot soldier with a shield and a pike.
- Pawns cannot capture in front of them, because their shield in the forward position prevents them from capturing directly ahead.
- Pawns can capture diagonally, because their pike reaches to the left or right of the shield.
- As the opposing pawn tries to run passed the square where your pawn could capture (seen as a cowardly move), your pawn can capture, "in passing."
- "In passing" translates to French "en passant."
One correction: Pikes are two-handed weapons, wielding them one-handed requires a lot of effort & specific technique and would be disadvantageous if done all the time; therefore, they cannot use shields & can attack forward.
If you mean that Pawns are like Greek Soldiers with shields & spears, I’d agree, but they’d still be able to attack forward because they can angle the shield out of the way. Holding a shield perfectly flat in front of you at all times is for rookies, they were usually held in a more diagonal manner.
simp missed the checkmate in one until editing and decided to use the en passant thing to cover it up :D
goot catch :D
:D
I think he did see it, and that is why instead of Qxf5 he captured ep, which wouldn't make a lot of sense otherwise.
@@Meni_RosenfeldCapturing ep doesn’t have to make strategic sense. You just do it.
You are logical!
new "unexpected" video ending unlocked
Yes, Simp having a thought is very unexpected thing.
The challenge maker's mind is going to be blown when he sees show jumping in the Olympics.
"You may not have more than one queen"
"You cannot promote pawns"
Oh that's why.
pawns were made into bishops in history. and knights frankly. pawns can only promote to 3 point pieces would have been fine
@@anthonylulham3473 I think the point is that you may not have more than one queen is redundant.
Logic of En passant is to capture the pawn on the square behind the captured pawn. It shouldn’t defy the logic
En passant is basically the chess equivalent of the D&D opportunity attack - the enemy pawn leaves itself vulnerable by running past you
Chess, but the Princess is locked in a Tower:
1) Your own queen can't leave her "castle": she can never be more than 3 squares from one of your rooks.
2) The enemy queen needs to be "rescued": Your knights or squires (pawns) must capture both enemy's rooks and then the enemy's queen (in that order).
En passant is literally just an ambush.
It's simple, your pawn stabbed the other pawn in the back as it was running past your pawn.
The pawn makes a desperado move and switches his weapon grip to reverse grip. When it's behind enemy's pawn, it'll stab the enemy from the back with reverse grip.
En passant: Opponent moves pawn past where you can normally capture. You get to the capture position, spin around and backstab the pawn, then carry on your merry way. No problems here.
En passant is the result of time shenanigans
En passant is literally "in passing" in English so your pawn just sees an enemy pawn running past, and stabs/shoots them in the back, therefore positioning them in the back of that pawn. Perfectly logical.
What isn't logical is that pawns can only take diagonally, a weapon swings in any direction after all, so you lost the challenge turn 2 anyway
En passant is the turn based version of the pawns clashing but yours is faster than their pawn and does that anime thing where he and the opponent have their backs facing each other and one of them falls.
0:34 Arabian Prince: *you got a problem with me?*
an en passant is logical because you go in front of the pawn and backstab. good thought though.
simp was a gigachad today.
Simple. Logic.
As a philosophy student.... No, nothing this challenge forbids is against logic.
A castle moving, for exemple, doesn't violate any law of logic. It does, however, violate laws of physics
A better name for this challenge would be "chess, but realistic'
The engagement bait is peak with that one
we all know rbo missed the checkmate in 1 and claiming en passant is illogical is just a cover up. just google en passant smh
holy hell
How does taking a castle defy logic lmao
good point
@@fiendfi7119I thought it was just 'with a queen's was the problem
@@Moleoflands That doesn't defy logic either
Because a castle is a huge object. Queens are physically smaller than castles in real life. Now what confuses me is why a puny knight or bishop can still take a castle though
@@danielhoang289 "taking" a castle generally refers to taking control of said castle, which any piece, yes, even pawns or the queen should be able to do. The challenge was kinda stupid
the explanation why en passant is possible, is quite logical: the small passend army is marching a long distant from home, but the enemy cuts down their supply chain, before the army could establish anything, now there is a passend army without food basically in enemy territory so the passend ether starve or surrender
The only one queen rule isn't necessary, since pawn can't promote
absolutely unsatisfying, but logic was upheld
En passant is very logical. Enemy tries to run past your pawn, dropping their guard. Your pawn does a lariat like he's in a wrestling match, stabs the now fallen pawn, and knowing the path is now clear, advances that way. Totally logical!
A failed mission of the most honorable status.
0:35 Chess Simp is british, we have been bamboozled
WHY NO HAREM ????
BRO LOGIC HAS NOTHING TO DO
Taking responsibility? Strong approve.
I always saw un passant to be kinda like a backstab with a dagger
The logic of en passant is that pawn movement is only actually one square at a time and the pawn should have been capturable if it hadn't broken the laws of physics to move twice in one turn. So it's just retribution for the crimes pawns commit against the space time continuum.
Knights being able to jump is perfectly logical actually.
TBH it's kind of surprising that it took this long to have a challenge with this very obvious (in hindsight) premise.
Ends his own video to save his own pipi from the brick. Very understandable.
gotta respect the honor about the en passant
En passant is actually pretty logical.
Even the name suggests that it's "while passing" --> the soldier rushes forward two squares, the enemy soldier "trips him" in the middle and kills him.
While the move itself is quite special, it is perfectly logical in the simulated battle sense.
After boldly flouting the knight restriction *twice* Simp has the nerve to say: 'My knights are restricted so I'm down to trade them'. 2:00
Since when is it illogical for a horse to jump?
I mean the challenge was illogical in itself already. A queen *can* take a castle if she's got an army enough. Same with a king. En passant itself is logical for the reasons many have pointed out (soldier doesn't cover its flank and gets killed/taken prisoner). Horses are high jumpers. There are reasons they were taken into battle and were so effective: they move fast, are pretty meneuverable, and jump high. The advantage of riding a horse into battle is immense. I'd even say castling is logical because it represents the king running back into his castle to hide like a coward behind his walls and soldiers.
What I'd agree with being illogical would have made the challenge make perfect sense.
- the rooks cannot move. Though, I believe the rooks are actually representative of outpost or castle soldiers that are behind the advanced army. They're still represented as towers/castles, so that's why I say they shouldn't move. Also, the soldiers left behind to guard the castle really should be moving anyway.
- a commoner soldier (i.e. pawn) being promoted to a queen. That stuff just didn't happen often if at all. Commoners were often able to move up the ranks and become knights, bishops, and castle defenders (i.e. rooks), though.
- if you wanted to keep knights not truly being able to jump in, that's fine. It does kinda not make sense that a horse just standing leaps over a line of soldiers to get to the front lines. How Simp did it in this video, though (where there was at least one square gap/diagonal for the horse to "move though") makes sense and should be allowed.
- double queens. This one I have to disagree with Simp on becuase while you would get kings taking multiple wives, they would often name just one queen so inheritance and bloodline didn't get too messy. The rest of the women would usually not truly be wed to him anyway but were considered his consorts. Multiple queens just doesn't quite make sense.
I dunno. I don't think this challenge was well thought-out to begin with and illogical things in chess being called out need some sort of explanation as to why they shouldn't be allowed. The original poster unfortunately didn't do a good job of wording the challenge so I agree with the people who reacted with Mexican laughing guy (idk his name, you know the meme)
Knights jumping is not unrealistic at all. Trained horses were a ble to leap up over battle lines. That's why the knight jumping is a thing.
En pasant = you stabbed the pawn as he was running past
simp doesn't believe in the back stab
Edward simply teleported behind the opponent and slain him with a katana nothing personell style. He can do that because he's a vampire. It's very logical and makes perfect sense if you know the lore.
The decision to end the video was not logical, therefore the video had to end.
what actualy happened: he didn't see the checkmate in 1 nad decided to end the video as to no be ashamed by it.
En passant is like a rogue backstabbing so I think is fine
"domain expansion"
ah, jjk memes are making their way to Simp
Not take on Passant is not a logical course of action.
Real logic would be: "Pawns can only capture pieces directly in front of them because why would a foot soldier fight its enemies diagonally? That's a stupid combat tactic."
Followed by: "Oh, your pawns can't capture straight ahead? Then I guess they won't be capturing anything, will they?"
En passant means in passing, so the pawn doesn't step up to the enemy and stabs it, but rather cuts them down while keep walking. Totally logical.
I can't believe you bs'd the night movement but couldn't figure out how back attacks make sense.
En Pasant is logical.
A pawn can only move one square so when it moves 2 squares in the first move they actually moved 1 square, cheated moving another and when it comes back to their move it becomes an accepted position.
I don't see why promotions would be illogical. A queen walking into an empty castle is also completely logical.
The actual logic for en passant is that originally it didn't exist.
Pawns moving two spaces was an invention of 16th century chess players to speed up opening moves, since the opening game is a lot slower without it. However, it wouldn't be fair for a vulnerable pawn to use their jump to avoid enemy attack, so to preserve this vulnerability en passamt was invented. The idea is that if this WERE a "normal" game of chess, then the pawn would have had to move one space at a time, and you would have gotten to intercept them at that position.
It's actually very logical, as it allows the game to go faster and have more interesting opening theories without causing unintended behavior. From a game-design perspective it works very well, even if in practice it's usually a rare edge case
Ever think that when he ends a video he just quickly finishes the game by wiping the floor with his opponent no longer hindered by rules?
4:01 how can you say this isnt logical? Have you never heard of quantum delayed choice Experiment? Particles already done movement can change by a later decision
Notably although logic is often spoken about and applied in a prescriptive way it is ultimately a(the?) descriptive study since it's based off the relationships of real-world/ideological phenomena. So conducting a study of logic on chess one could simply say the en passant is logical since well, that's how the pawns work. But I digress, the challenge didn't make much sense to begin with and was thus unwinnable.
En passent is a Pawn doing lariat. It's very logical
I thought logically, rooks cannot move. Should have been a wtf moment on move 5...
Apparently Simp never heard of backstabbing
You're bullshitting us?! It's a backstab, c'mon!! Why couldn't you give us a satisfying ending?
Sir, you can't say "I lost but I won" and just leave like that.
Queen and Bishop can't move more than 2 tiles because human running faster than horse defies logic.
En passant is literally "in passing". The pawn is captured while moving through the first square. Not illogical.
Anybody else thought this pawn was a samurai?
Horses can jump.
So... Simp blundered the mate in one and then realized that after the game while making the video. Although it was a great checkmate using the en passant
I guess it's not laws of logic, but "laws of (non-chess) tradition". Also, the queen rule is redundant to the promotion rule.
Yes. That checks out. No enpasan permitted.
This video exists solely to blueball me.
Turn on captions at 3:44
I think pawns are supposed to have spears, and en passant is running past a charging enemy and spearing them while you run
nice
Ah yes, en passant, how illogical of you.
I think more than one queen isn’t allowed cuz usually you have one set of queens in chest pieces you buy. So you can’t really have another one
Having one queen is logical, you may not have more than one queen but you may have many lovers and wifes
En passant literally means “in passing”. The name explains why it’s logical.
nahhh, En Passant is 100% logical, its just one of those cool anime move where you responded so fast to the enemy movement that they don't realize you're already attacked them, and by the time the camera pans too you already behind the enemy, they're already dead.
would've been cooler if you depict your pawns as samurai instead so you can add weeb Iaido katana shit to your chess game, but a sword works too I guess
Should added.. Bishops cannot kill 😅
So Simp missed mate in 1 and hid the evidence, very convenient
En passant is just a backstab
It's not like there is a popular sport where horses have to jump over hurdles or anything...
Well, I know en passant defies physics.
The white pawn kills the black pawn when the black pawn is on the way to the 5th rank, yet we see it standing on the 5th rank alive and healthy.
The white pawn has to move faster than light, turning back time and killing it on the 4th rank
1:38 instead of that, you also could played h3 and nove your horse to f3 later.
Your horse didn't jump, it walked to h2, then g3 then f3.
NOOO Chess Simp it was very logical because the pawn likely died of cardiac arrest being jump-scared from behind!
Knights can jump tho!
En passant is forced anyway, there was no other legal move you could've made!