2

enter image description here

Could someone please let me know why this is checkmate, could I not have captured that queen with my king?

Improve this question
2
  • 11
    For future reference, you might want to consider posting questions like this on chess.stackexchange.com. I'm not saying this Stack is a bad place for a chess question, I'm just saying there's a specific Stack that is better because (and only because) it's specific to the game. I'm sure I'm not the only person who is a member of both. On more difficult questions, it would likely be more appropriate or get better answer on the Chess stack, anyway. And you might learn more about chess there, too.
    – computercarguy
    Jan 15, 2021 at 20:21
  • Migrate to chess.stackexchange.com. Another benefit it has is animating the move history.
    – smci
    Jan 17, 2021 at 19:15

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
39

The queen is protected by the bishop on c5, i.e. the one on the dark square. Therefore you can't capture it. As the king has nowhere else to go, and no other piece can capture the queen or interpose, it's checkmate.

enter image description here

Improve this answer
9
  • 7
    Just in case: capturing the queen isn't just a losing move. It's not a move. You're not allowed to put your king in danger. Chess is very deferential to kings that way
    – Owen Reynolds
    Jan 15, 2021 at 17:57
  • 3
    @OwenReynolds I hope someone's made a variant without all these silly check rules, where you win by capturing the king.
    – user253751
    Jan 15, 2021 at 20:17
  • 11
    We wouldn't have stalemate; that means a small material advantage would be decisive way more often.
    – Glorfindel ♦
    Jan 15, 2021 at 20:54
  • 4
    @user253751 that would arguably take a huge portion of the strategy/skill that chess players tend to enjoy
    – PC Luddite
    Jan 16, 2021 at 4:22
  • 4
    @PCLuddite: I am a chess player and I detest the possibility of stalemate. It just adds more ad-hoc complications to endgames, which is not appealing at all from an abstract game theory viewpoint, because there is little structural beauty there. It is like claiming that regularly playing Chomp is intellectually exciting, or 16×16 chess is more interesting than normal chess. No, not at all.
    – user21820
    Jan 16, 2021 at 17:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .