Which rule in chess do you find the hardest to explain?
When teaching chess to beginners we find ourselves having to explain things like how Castling and En Passant works.
Not to be redundant here, but is En Passant really the most confusing rule to explain or is it draw by 3-fold repetition>?
I think it's en passant.
Not a real coach, but I do help beginners "improve" at chess. Personally, I think that the concept that the position does not have to be repeated in succession (it could be repeated with moves in between them) is the hardest thing. Most people understand that it is a draw if the position is repeated but rarely do they remember that it does not matter how many moves apart the position was repeated.
Building on what elephantmushroom said, just pawn rules in general are kind of complicated. They can move forward but not diagonally on non-captures, move diagonally but not forward on captures, can only move 1 square except for the first move where they can move 2 squares, can queen but can also promote to a rook, bishop, or knight, and can capture en passant but only on the move right after the opponent’s pawn moves, and only if that pawn moved 2 squares that move. It’s genuinely a lot to remember
Damn it, You can't capture the King!!!
@subconscious said in #4:
> Building on what elephantmushroom said, (...)
Not that I actually said anything, but if of had said, I would say things very similar to what you did say.
Seemingly the most difficult thing of all to explain is how to spell "loser."
Threefold repetition and awarded wins despite insufficient material on timeouts
Definitely threefold repetition as a thread comes out on regular basis here on Lichess where one asks how was this draw as I didn't play same moves, etc.
Stalemate and pin.
