Well, I think he meant that during your own turn enemy Jokers have no move (so that you can never move into their check), but that whether they deliver check should be judged in the opponent's turn (after he released the piece, but before he pressed the clock, as it were).
This does not make sense to me. It sounds good but does not really clarify anything for me. It might be helpful to discuss an actual situation. In this position, black has just moved his King into the corner:
So now white's Joker moves as a King and moves to b2:
Is black's King in check or not? If not, then that's a stalemate. I do not think saying "whether they deliver check should be judged in the opponent's turn (after he released the piece, but before he pressed the clock, as it were)" changes anything. Any move the black King makes, it will then be judged that he is in check, so that move is illegal. Any move the black King makes is illegal, so the game is over. Whether it is checkmate or stalemate is determined by whether the King is in check. Am I missing something?
This does not make sense to me. It sounds good but does not really clarify anything for me. It might be helpful to discuss an actual situation. In this position, black has just moved his King into the corner:
So now white's Joker moves as a King and moves to b2:
Is black's King in check or not? If not, then that's a stalemate. I do not think saying "whether they deliver check should be judged in the opponent's turn (after he released the piece, but before he pressed the clock, as it were)" changes anything. Any move the black King makes, it will then be judged that he is in check, so that move is illegal. Any move the black King makes is illegal, so the game is over. Whether it is checkmate or stalemate is determined by whether the King is in check. Am I missing something?