30 ( +1 | -1 )
i think condition 3 in the wikipedia entry is the answer to the question, though i am not completely sure.
since there is a piece between the king and rook (an enemy piece), i don't think castling would be possible.
did this come up in one of your games, rich?
it would be a fun move to make, all the same. :)
41 ( +1 | -1 )
Yeah, I see. When I first read that, I was thinking only of the square which the king would cross as between. Now that I think about this again, I see that of course the king will land on a square between the king's and rook's starting positions, so any enemy piece there will prevent that.
No, it did not come up in any game I played.
86 ( +1 | -1 )
The rules specific to castling are designed only to express the rules unique to the move. This idea of yours falls under a more fundamental rule, which is applied to castling under the umbrella of any move.
If you check the FIDE link you provided, and you'll see that it says:
"Article 3.1: It is not permitted to move a piece to a square occupied by a piece of the same colour. If a piece moves to a square occupied by an opponent`s piece the latter is captured and removed from the chessboard as part of the same move. A piece is said to attack an opponent's piece if the piece could make a capture on that square according to Articles 3.2 to 3.8. A piece is considered to attack a square, even if such a piece is constrained from moving to that square because it would then leave or place the king of its own colour under attack."
5 ( +1 | -1 )
It would be a cool move but...
It is clearly not legal based on:
FIDE Article 126.96.36.199.b
11 ( +1 | -1 )
ITS NOT LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thhe rook would have to pass over another piece to make the move in question.
61 ( +1 | -1 )
Pure logic suggests that if the King's target square is occupied by an opposing piece then there must be a piece between the King and chosen Rook. i.e that piece is either on g1 (in which instance it is between the King's Rook and the King) or on c1 (in which instance it is between the Queen's Rook and the King). If a piece is on the target square, castling to that square would not be legal. One could, however, castle to the opposite side provided no other circumstance exists which prohibits such a move.
The short answer to the question is NO as has been stated in a variety of fashions.
0 ( +1 | -1 )
60 ( +1 | -1 )
... about this matter, you CAN capture a piece by o-o-o, but only if you are on a GK Analysis
Board! Or at least it used-to-be possible. It may have changed, but I was surprised to actually
have personally seen it work in the past.
Other than that, as they say, #3 Wiki and #2 FIDE pretty much cover the matter. Tho that would
be a fun game alteration for skittles play, to be able to o-o or o-o-o and capture anything the
King or Rook land on (or sweep across, on b1 or b8 for eg.!?). Also "Uncastles" can add an
interesting twist as a Chess variant. A bit harder to pin that king down ...
Does the GK bit still work? Well I don't know offhand.