Checkmate is stupid

A checkmate is not exactly the same as taking the king. I believe changing this rule could strongly alter the way we play. Because, if I am not mistaken, you cannot always capture the king after checkmate:

lichess.org/analysis/k6K/1rr5/8/8/8/1b3B2/8/8_b_-_-_0_1#2

Rh#7 Kxh7 and Rxh7 is illegal as the rook is pinned on b7 right? So this is a clear draw. Then if black is actually allowed to take the opponent king letting their own king in check, it is taken next move by the white bishop, so is it a victory because black did it first or a draw because at war both kings would be dead? Like in racing kings, you can have draws when you bring your king to the final square on the very next move after your opponent did it.

I don't know if this would give more interesting games to have such a variant and how to define good rules, but I find the topic is interesting.

@Demonolith said in #11:
> A checkmate is not exactly the same as taking the king. I believe changing this rule could strongly alter the way we play. Because, if I am not mistaken, you cannot always capture the king after checkmate:
>
> lichess.org/analysis/k6K/1rr5/8/8/8/1b3B2/8/8_b_-_-_0_1#2
>
> Rh#7 Kxh7 and Rxh7 is illegal as the rook is pinned on b7 right? So this is a clear draw. Then if black is actually allowed to take the opponent king letting their own king in check, it is taken next move by the white bishop, so is it a victory because black did it first or a draw because at war both kings would be dead? Like in racing kings, you can have draws when you bring your king to the final square on the very next move after your opponent did it.
>
> I don't know if this would give more interesting games to have such a variant and how to define good rules, but I find the topic is interesting.

I agree to this point...and i was actually gonna explain but you did i guess AND CHECKMATE IS NOT STUPID !!!!

@WhereDidIPutThatPawn said in #1:
> Why isn’t the aim of chess to take the opponents king? Checkmate would still be winning, but the concept of “check” is weird.... Imagine the bullet tricks of just taking someone’s king, it would make so much more sense! The only reason checkmate is a thing is because you will always be able to take the king no matter what your opponent does. So why not take the king!?!
if you are afraid of being tricked pls play games with more time like rapid or classical

No player can move twice in a row. When you put your opponent in checkmate, it's his move next, but he can't move, that's why it's checkmate. You're saying you move twice in a row to capture his king?

In Castling the King cannot move across a square that is being attacked, therefore the King cannot be Captured! In chess when a piece is captured it means that the captured piece is removed from that square and replaced by the attacking piece. This cannot be done with the King, therefore the king cannot be captured!

I totally agree with you. If the king is not taken then someone who doesn't know how to play chess but understands when the king is under "checkmate" the game is over will not know if the game was done.