The king, in this position, can't make a castling.
lichess.org/analysis/standard/3rr1k1/1pq2p1p/p5p1/b2pPp2/3N4/1QP5/PP2RPPP/R5K1_w_KQkq_-
lichess.org/analysis/standard/3rr1k1/1pq2p1p/p5p1/b2pPp2/3N4/1QP5/PP2RPPP/R5K1_w_KQkq_-
It can, because it has castling rights. Could be chess960. You should disable castling rights when editing the position.
...
See the part of the FEN that says: KQkq? That means both white (KQ) and black (kq) can castle in both directions. Because in that position, even in 960 it would not be possible for either color to castle kingside, when you open the game in a browser, the FEN reduces to: Qq, indicating that both colors can still castle queenside. This couldn't even actually happen in a 960 game either, but it could happen in some unbalanced variant, whereas the other rooks are in positions where kingside castling is not possible at all.
If neither side can castle in either direction, you need to put this: -
If neither side can castle in either direction, you need to put this: -
Actually thinking about this further, queenside castling for black is ambiguous in this position, even in an unbalanced variant. Which rook is it? Given that one of the rooks has obviously moved, either one of those could be the one to castle with, and the other one is blocking the way. It's impossible to tell without looking at the move list.
I get that it's not actually what happened in a real game, but this hypothetical is just a situation where it seems like, under a very convoluted set of conditions, the FEN coding can't quite capture everything. I wonder which rook it is interpreting as the one that has not moved.
EDIT: I checked, and it is interpreting the rook on d8 as the appropriate rook. But this is arbitrary based on that FEN, as far as I can tell.
I get that it's not actually what happened in a real game, but this hypothetical is just a situation where it seems like, under a very convoluted set of conditions, the FEN coding can't quite capture everything. I wonder which rook it is interpreting as the one that has not moved.
EDIT: I checked, and it is interpreting the rook on d8 as the appropriate rook. But this is arbitrary based on that FEN, as far as I can tell.
@Chessty_McBiggins It shouldn't matter so long as queenside castling rights are there, should it? Castling rights are revoked when a rook/king is touched.
@Chessty_McBiggins Funnily enough, it's possible white's king hasn't been touched yet. White might have promoted that missing d-pawn into that rook on e2... :)
@Egroegw Exactly what I was going to post.
However, I would like to add that it says this is a standard and not a chess960 game.
However, I would like to add that it says this is a standard and not a chess960 game.
"Funnily enough, it's possible white's king hasn't been touched yet. White might have promoted that missing d-pawn into that rook on e2... :)"
If castling were actually possible, then white's king has not only "possibly" not been touched, it has definitely, by definition, not been touched.
Black and white do not have rooks on the same file and rank, and yet queenside castling is enabled for both of them. That is why this position is not possible except in an unbalanced starting position. And Stockfish's interpretation of the FEN is arbitrary, is the only point I was making.
If castling were actually possible, then white's king has not only "possibly" not been touched, it has definitely, by definition, not been touched.
Black and white do not have rooks on the same file and rank, and yet queenside castling is enabled for both of them. That is why this position is not possible except in an unbalanced starting position. And Stockfish's interpretation of the FEN is arbitrary, is the only point I was making.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.