Chess rules question

[PaxNurgle]

In chess, can a skewered piece be used as a combination for a checkmate?

We have a bit of a rules dispute about this.

Say, it's the end stages, I have a queen and a bishop, black has a queen and a rook. Black king is in the corner square. white king is on the edge, two squares directly to the left of and inline with the white bishop.
Black moves a rook three squares behind and inline with the bishop and king, skewering it and preventing it from moving ("Skewered" meaning it cannot move unless the king moves first otherwise it would result in automatic check.)

(See crude diagram below, lower case letters are black pieces, upper case is white pieces.)

x x x x x x Q x
x r x x B x x K
x q x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x k

In this case, if white dropped a queen down to the square x just above and to the left of the black king in the corner, would that be a valid checkmate?

The argument is no; because the bishop is incapacitated and the king could simple capture the queen. Some say yes, it doesnt matter if the bishop cannot legally move, as long as another piece, in the case the queen is executing checkmate.

What do you think? What is the official rule in this case?

 

[Sean]

Never thought of it before. I dunno but I have a mate that's a GM. I'll email him.

And I've always known it as a pin, not a skewer.

 

[phrodeau]

The black king is in check from the white bishop. If it’s white’s move, the game is already over.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

In chess, can a skewered piece be used as a combination for a checkmate?

We have a bit of a rules dispute about this.

Say, it's the end stages, I have a queen and a bishop, black has a queen and a rook. Black king is in the corner square. white king is on the edge, two squares directly to the left of and inline with the white bishop.
Black moves a rook three squares behind and inline with the bishop and king, skewering it and preventing it from moving ("Skewered" meaning it cannot move unless the king moves first otherwise it would result in automatic check.)

(See crude diagram below, lower case letters are black pieces, upper case is white pieces.)

x x x x x x Q x
x r x x B x x K
x q x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x k

In this case, if white dropped a queen down to the square x just above and to the left of the black king in the corner, would that be a valid checkmate?

The argument is no; because the bishop is incapacitated and the king could simple capture the queen. Some say yes, it doesnt matter if the bishop cannot legally move, as long as another piece, in the case the queen is executing checkmate.

What do you think? What is the official rule in this case?

As Phrodeau points out, the King seems to be in check already....

 

[Sean]

The black king is in check from the white bishop. If it’s white’s move, the game is already over.

LOL. Well spotted, Phro. Still, the question itself with a slightly different set up is interesting. Frinstance, if the black king was one space to the left.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

LOL. Well spotted, Phro. Still, the question itself with a slightly different set up is interesting. Frinstance, if the black king was one space to the left.

Then would not the King be in check from the queen?

 

[Sean]

Then would not the King be in check from the queen?

Bollocks, OK, one space up.

 

[phrodeau]

The answer would be yes, that a pinned piece can still deliver check. The king can’t capture the queen if that puts the king in the bishop’s path.

 

[Unattached77]

Is the King in check? If yes, can it move out of check? If yes, not a checkmate. If the king is in check, and cannot move, however another piece can be moved to block the check, it is not checkmate. If the king can neither move out of check, or another piece cannot be moved to block the check, it is checkmate.

 

[PaxNurgle]

The answer would be yes, that a pinned piece can still deliver check. The king can’t capture the queen if that puts the king in the bishop’s path.

This is probably the answer according to official chess rules; I wasn't sure but wanted to clarify it.
In the situation described above, the king could theoretically not capture the queen since the piece behind the queen, "Anchoring" it if you will, is pinned/skewered, but I suppose that, by simple order of moves, if the bishop followed through to capture the king, it wouldnt matter if it was pinned since the game would simply be over.

 

[NastyDom40]

It'd have been easier to name the squares that pieces occupy.

And, skewer is threatening to take a less valuable piece when aligned (on the same file or same diagonal) with a much more valuable piece. If I get you right, here you meant the rook was pinning the bishop from moving...

In chess, can a skewered piece be used as a combination for a checkmate?

We have a bit of a rules dispute about this.

Say, it's the end stages, I have a queen and a bishop, black has a queen and a rook. Black king is in the corner square. white king is on the edge, two squares directly to the left of and inline with the white bishop.
Black moves a rook three squares behind and inline with the bishop and king, skewering it and preventing it from moving ("Skewered" meaning it cannot move unless the king moves first otherwise it would result in automatic check.)

(See crude diagram below, lower case letters are black pieces, upper case is white pieces.)

x x x x x x Q x
x r x x B x x K
x q x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x k

In this case, if white dropped a queen down to the square x just above and to the left of the black king in the corner, would that be a valid checkmate?

The argument is no; because the bishop is incapacitated and the king could simple capture the queen. Some say yes, it doesnt matter if the bishop cannot legally move, as long as another piece, in the case the queen is executing checkmate.

What do you think? What is the official rule in this case?