Single Comment

Okay, we use only Bodlaender's Forzoni text. Knight checking, as any other piece, forces King to move or someone to capture the Knight -- or otherwise void his reach (to be inclusive of cv renderings) -- but Knight cannot be the (sole crucial) final checkmater. Shak is word for Queen, Rook, or Knight attacking King. Tuk is word reserved for Bishop-check because he reaches only half the squares ever. Pawn is even more restricted, so we call it Zod. The three are just words and have the same effect except for the (any) final checkmate. If a double check occurs, there must be a hierarchy, so who actually moved last is immaterial. King cannot be checking the other King, but can disclose a check as matter of course. In Mongolian, there would presumably certainly be no retracting a Niol, and the game is drawn, though by all appearances a ''checkmate'' is occurring but for how the attacker has happened to arrive at it! If a chain of checks is broken, there can be no sustaining Shak until one recurs. Bare King, Robado, Drawn game too. [Interestingly, it is rare to be able to discover two checks at once in Cvs, possibly making triple check all together for a position; that takes exceptional oblique pieces who do not jump, like hook-mover 13th-century Gryphon and 20th-century multi-path Falcon in posited examples.]