No. The reason for this is that for let's say the White King to 'capture' the Black King the White King would have to move one square away from it the previous turn. Kings can only move 1 square at a time (except when castling).
This previous turn's position is not legal since if you were to move the White King one square away from the Black King, you would be moving your own King into check - and that is an illegal move in Chess (here Black King could 'capture' the White King on it's turn).
But the questions idea of capturing Kings is not quite right - a King can never be captured in chess by ANY piece. If you were to say move a Rook so that now aims directly at your opponent's King ('check'), your opponent has to immediately do one of three things: a) Move his King to an adjacent square that is no longer being attacked, b) take your attacking piece (if it can do so), or c) put one of it's own pieces in between to block the 'check' (again if it can do so).
If your opponent is unable to do any one of these 3 things then this is now 'check mate' and the game is over. So the King never acutally gets captured and removed from the board, unlike the other pieces.
The original answer had this to say:
>The real question though is can one King checkmate the other King? This is a
> trick move that can only happen if no other pieces of that color are on the
>board. Lets say that the black king is the only black piece on the board, but
> the there are 2 white knights ,1 White pawn , and 1white rook. The black king
> can checkmate the white king but the white king can not checkmate the black
> king.
This is simply not correct. The Black King cannot checkmate the White King in this case because it has nothing left to 'check' the White King with. To checkmate the opponent, their king must be in 'check', and as explained above a King cannnot do this by themselves. The best the person playing black can hope for is for a 'stalemate' position.
A stalemate is where the Black King is NOT in check, but it is black's turn and there are no legal moves (ie. all the other squares around it are attacked by White's pieces so the King can't move to safety, and black has no other pieces that can be moved on their turn). This position is a draw ('stalemate' is chess terminology for a draw). When playing white in this example, you have to be careful that you always leave a valid move for black to make when you are not giving check, otherwise you hard-fought efforts are waisted by getting a draw.
So as long as you avoid stalemate white will be easily able to checkmate black's defenseless King.
The king is never permanently restricted to moving only within a certain area.If in check, a player must either move the king out of check, block the attack line with another piece, or capture the piece that is putting the king in check. A king cannot castle while in check. A player may also not castle if doing so would result in him being in check (or the rook used in the move to be under attack).A king who has been in check but is no longer in check has all the same capabilities as a king that has never been in check.
King Triton
The warden is the king and Hadley is they queen. Every other guards are other chess pieces. On the other side, Andy is the king, Red is the queen. Everyone else in the gang are other pieces. They two sides work together until conflict arise, but Andy checkmates the Warden near the end.
Jesse Jackson was standing next to Martin Luther King Jr. when he was shot.
in 2009
King on color
There is no such move, as it would be illegal. There is no way for two kings to be next to each other, as it would mean putting themselves into check.
Not in international chess, no!
The king can move one square in any direction. If it moves into a square that is occupied by another piece, it takes that piece only if the king is not endangered if it gets next to it in order to capture it.
Yes.
No , if your king is in check you can not counter with placing your opponent's king in check - you must respond to the move on your next turn by dealing with your king in check by moving the king out of check , removing the attacking piece by capture or by blocking the checking piece or you will need to concede / resign from the game . Look to the related link below regarding the rules of chess .
Yes, if the king is in check, the next move must take the king out of check. You do not necessarily have to move the king, you could take the attacking piece, or block the check by moving a piece in the way.
In chess, a king can capture any other piece except another king. Getting next to a the opposing king puts you in check because it allows your king to be taken first losing the game. Moving next to the opposing queen is the same situation unless the queen moves next to the king as some sort of sacrifice ploy.
Absolutely. The King or any other piece for that matter may move regardless of the fact that the Queen has been captured as long as the move is a legal move. Although, if your Queen has been captured and you haven't taken the other Queen, your King may not be moving for much longer as it is probably destined for a checkmate.
Move your King 2 spaces first.
Because it's against the rules.
The Queen is second only to the King in strength and power for she , with the exception of the Knight , can move like every chess piece since she incorporates the power of every chess-men's move .